English 10 Blogging Rubric

The following rubric is being used to assess your blog comments and responses and to assign you a numeric score towards your fourth quarter average.  If you have any questions about it, please ask them by posting them as comments.

Qualities Assessed	Excellent (5 points)	Proficient (4 points)	Developing (3 points)	Unsatisfactory (0-2 points)
Comprehension: the extent to which the response exhibits sound understanding and analysis of the assigned task and text.	-exhibits in-depth understanding by providing thoughtful reflection that cites strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis	-exhibits a  reasonable understanding by providing a sensible reflection that cites implicit and relevant textual evidence to support analysis	-exhibits a simple understanding by providing a basic reflection that may mention textual evidence but does adequately support analysis	-exhibits confused or incomplete understanding by providing minimal or inaccurate reflection that does not use textual evidence to support analysis
Analysis: the extent to which the assigned text is examined as the a basis for interpretation and discussion	- reveals what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text	-reveals what the text says literally as well as conclusions drawn from the text	-makes  superficial connections between the task and text -may rely on summary of text	-reveals minimal or no examination of the chosen texts -references to the text are vague, irrelevant,  or unjustified
Development: the extent to which ideas are elaborated using specific and relevant evidence from the text	-develop ideas clearly and fully, making effective use of valid reasoning and a wide range of relevant and specific evidence	-develop ideas clearly and consistently, with valid reasoning and adequate reference to relevant and specific evidence	-develop some ideas more fully than others, using some reasoning and some evidence from the text	- are incomplete or largely undeveloped, hinting at ideas, but reasoning is flawed or off topic
Writing: the extent to which writing is clear, coherent, and appropriate to communication with peers and others (e.g. teacher) in an academic setting and on an important academic topic.	-use language that is fluent and original, with evident awareness of audience and purpose - demonstrate control of the conventions with essentially no language errors	-use appropriate language, with some awareness of  audience and purpose --demonstrate control of the conventions, exhibiting occasional language errors	-rely on basic vocabulary, with little awareness of audience or purpose --demonstrate partial control, exhibiting several language errors	-use language that is imprecise or inappropriate for the audience or purpose, or that is incoherent -demonstrate a lack of control, exhibiting frequent errors that make comprehension difficult

Nazi Propaganda

DIRECTIONS: Read the quote from Adolf Hitler's book, Mein Kompf, and the THINKQUEST article following it on Nazi propaganda during World War II, and look at the coresponding pictures below. Then post a comment discussing importance of propaganda to Germany's government and its war effort. You may wish to consider questions like, why was it important for the Nazi's to use propaganda? What were the specific purposes of Nazi propaganda? Would the Nazi party have been as successful without its use of propaganda?

Once you have posted a comment, you are to reply to at least three other classmates’ original comments and one other classmate’s responses. Students that do not complete this during class may do so for homework.

Nazi Propaganda

"All propaganda has to be popular and has to adapt its spiritual level to the perception of the least intelligent of those towards whom it intends to direct itself."

-Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf ("My Struggle"), Vol. I

As Germany prepared for and carried out World War II, it implemented a variety of forms of propaganda. This was necessary for several reasons, but primarily to serve two main Nazi agendas. It was important to convince the public to fight and that it was necessary to fight. German had just recently gone through a power struggle establishing the Nazi Party as superior over the socialists, but it still lacked enough political support to go to war. The main body of German propaganda consists of material increasing or fueling the wartime effort. Also, Hitler and many of the higher Nazi leaders harbored racism and wished to begin the extermination of races they deemed inferior. Although there was some discontent between the German Jews and other Germans already, it was still necessary to convince the German population that action was necessary against them. This anti-Semitic material formed the second main body of German propaganda.

German wartime propaganda utilized a variety of forms in its delivery. Much of the propaganda was implemented through the recently invented radio, as well as through speeches from the main Nazi leaders. Posters and other visual material were also widely circulated and vital to the persuasion. Much other visual and printed material, such as books and leaflets, was only circulated to specific groups, such as Nazi party members or soldiers. However, almost all the propaganda was spread though a variety of media.

As it was to the Americans, production was extremely important to the Germans. This poster (top, at right), which reads as “You are the Front!” advertises the significance of labor and production. Germany, which maintained a highly mechanized army of tanks, required additional production in order to combat the Allied forces. Posters like this, which demonstrates the importance of labor, were extremely common after the beginning of the war, when increased production really became necessary. Once the Reich leaders realized that their current forces would not be enough, the push for additional labor war strengthened. Other posters of a similar type often portrayed a union between soldiers and workers, or urged workers to “do their part” in the war effort while displaying graphic scenes of battle. Posters of this type often displayed muscular men at work, because masculine strength was thought to inspire confidence. This type of propaganda, also known as production or labor propaganda, was a sizable chunk of the German propaganda effort.

Posters such as this one (second from top), which advertises a paper drive, were also very common and were related to production propaganda posters. These types of posters urged German citizens to conserve materials for the war effort. Although this poster specifically concerns paper, many drives were organized for a variety of materials. During the war, many materials that would have been commonplace and easy to produce during peacetime began to get scarce. Posters such as these prompted the viewer to help give to the Nazi cause. Like the production and labor posters, many conservation posters also displayed images of battle and urged the average person to “do their part.” When they did not show battle, conservation posters, such as this one, often depicted contributors cheerily giving to the war effort, pleased at being able to aid their government. In most cases, however, German citizens were reluctant to give up their luxuries. This type of propaganda is often titled “conservation propaganda” and was especially common in America and Germany during World War II.

This poster and those of its kind (third from top), which suggests that spies are listening, were not particularly common in wartime Germany. However, they were important to the propaganda effort. Posters such as these implied that spies were everywhere and would hear any gossip or loose talk about the war effort. Although this was of no particular importance to the Nazis, as most citizens knew very little about troop movements and military plans, it also served another purpose. The implication that spies were close and listening in also helped to bring the reality of war home to most people. In most cases, this served to make the public work harder and be more careful about conservation, two of the main other reasons for propaganda. As long as the public felt threatened, they would obey commands that would, in their eyes, remove that threat.

This poster (fourth from top), which reads “One People, One Reich, One Führer,” was a piece of one of the most important parts of the German propaganda. By establishing a rudimentary worship for the Führer (Leader) that was almost mythological, Adolf Hitler was established as the absolute head of the government and to some a semi-deity. This inspired the public to work harder and do more for the Reich, having been convinced by the Führer propaganda that the war was a sort of holy quest or crusade. The Führer worship also helped instill pride in Germany and the Reich among the German population. This type of propaganda was also heavily reinforced by speeches and radio broadcasts. Goebbels himself often spoke about Hitler, and did his part in his speeches and propaganda to continue to glorify him. Other posters, and many of the books distributed to party members, showed Hitler being adored by the public, especially by the German youth. Other images depicted him in settings meant to imply nobility or honor; for example, several pictures were taken of him outside with his dog. Also, Hitler had many portraits painted of him, which further serve to glorify him. This type of propaganda was very important to the Nazi cause in that it defined the Führer as an embodiment of all the good of the Nazi Reich. This not only glorified the Reich, but also persuaded many people to further follow its commands. This helped in the war effort and also generated pride in the German nation and the Reich.
Posters like this one (fifth from top), which advertises the Nazi film “The Eternal Jew,” served to dehumanize the German Jews. The film “The Eternal Jew” itself compares the Jewish people to rats. By dehumanizing Jews, the Nazi leaders began to prepare for Hitler’s “Final Solution.” The Nazi leaders knew that when the deportations began it would be much easier for the German people to watch friends and neighbors shipped away if they associated them with rats or with age-old stereotypes about cheating with money. The propaganda was able to play off the existing racial difficulties in Germany has well as to enhance the original nationalistic pride of the German people that they were somehow chosen or holy. Anti-Semitic propaganda was common in wartime Germany, and often depicted Jews in league with communists or another hated group causing harm to Germans.

This picture (sixth from top), which depicts a supposedly innocent German citizen paying a Jewish man as the he sprays lies onto him, comes from a humor booklet circulated among the Nazi party, called Die Brennessel. Propaganda of this type is very rare among examples of wartime propaganda, and is almost exclusively found in World War II. This is probably because propaganda that demeans races or political groups, other than the enemy, does very little to boost or aid the wartime effort. However, propaganda of a type very similar is much more common than thought today, and comes to us in the form of political cartoons or political advertising. Political cartoons often demean or mock groups based of stereotypes or prejudices. Although the purpose of these cartoons is undoubtedly different from the German anti-Semitic propaganda, many comparisons can be drawn between the two. Both, and all of this type of propaganda, use humor to make a point, and exaggerate stereotypes of the group it wishes to demean. Although this propaganda is rarely used heavily in wartime, in peacetime it becomes extremely important. Political cartoons very similar to those in Die Brennessel and other Nazi publications can be found in almost any newspaper or magazine published today.

German propaganda was extremely important to the course of World War II. By taking control of the media and only printing or broadcasting Nazi material, the Reich was able to effectively flood Germany with its propaganda. This, combined with the genius of men like Joseph Goebbels, created one of the most potent barrages of wartime propaganda in history.

A Promise for Better Futures

Read the TimesUnion.com article below, then post a comment in which you claim the Promise will be successful or unsuccessful, offer evidence from the article as well as outside information to support your claim, and logically connect the evidence to your position.

Once you have posted a comment, you are to reply to at least three other classmates’ original comments and one other classmate’s responses.  Students that do not complete this during class may do so for homework by 9:00 PM on Tuesday, May 8, 2012.

A Promise for Better Futures

Albany Promise to announce major initiative for children attending the poorest schools

Times Union Copyright 2012 Times Union. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

By Scott Waldman

Published 11:25 p.m., Sunday, May 6, 2012

Page 1 of 1

ALBANY — The odds are stacked against them the day they are born.

The children who live in Albany's poorest neighborhoods are less likely to meet basic academic standards in English and math, less likely to finish high school and college, and less likely to pass their Regents exams.

They are more likely to become pregnant teenagers, more likely to miss school for unexcused absences, incarceration or suspension, and more likely to feel suicidal, according a report by a new educational consortium.

On Monday, the partnership, which is made up of 60 different stakeholders, will announce a major new effort to turn around the educational outcomes for the poorest children in Albany. Years in the making, it will target children in Arbor Hill, West Hill and the South End. The Albany Promise, as the group is calling itself, will draw on existing resources and a bundling of private donations, as well as state and federal grants, to help poor children receive the same opportunities in and out of school as their middle- and upper-class counterparts do.

Partners include the Albany school district, the city, the State University of New York, The College of Saint Rose, and many area nonprofits and businesses.

"We are going to work together to make sure every child, every step of the way, experiences success and nobody is left out," SUNY Chancellor Nancy Zimpher said.

She said Promise recognizes that this is a monumental task, one too vast to be accomplished by any one entity.

The Albany effort is partially modeled on Project Strive, a cradle-to-career effort Zimpher helped create that has expanded to sites around the country, and the Harlem Children's Zone, a New York City initiative that provides education as well as social and health services for children from birth until they enter the workforce. SUNY will create similar initiatives in other cities across the state.

The neighborhoods targeted by the new effort are the places in Albany where plywood covers many windows, where businesses have fled and where children are in need of a brighter future. They are not just at the epicenter of the city's poverty; they are also home to 9,000 children under age 18, including 2,500 under age 5, according to the new report produced by the consortium.

And the challenges faced by children in the city's poorest neighborhoods are profound. A quarter of Albany's children under 5 live in poverty, but in the neighborhoods targeted by the new effort, that number climbs to 60 percent, the report states.

The program is open to all children and families in the affected neighborhoods, regardless of where they attend school. Goals will be to prepare children for kindergarten, competency in core subjects, transition to high school, graduation from high school and entry into college or the workforce.

The goal is to create a pipeline of support for kids, mostly through uniting existing agencies, said Linda Jackson-Chalmers, assistant superintendent for community relations for Albany schools.

"It's a concept in order to support students in a successful life and career, it takes a whole village," she said.

Albany Promise will cost $500,000 to $750,000 annually and will eventually be housed at the Trinity Institute headquarters. The consortium has already raised $200,000 from private and corporate donors, including SEFCU and Turner Construction.

The first step will be to unite the city's diverse array of existing afterschool programs by bringing in leaders to decide on a narrow focus and common set of goals. Transportation will also be expanded to broaden participation by children in existing programs. There will also be more outreach to those who will be affected by the effort, said Barbara Smith, city councilwoman and a co-founder of the Albany Family Education Alliance.

Inspired by the Harlem Children's Zone, Smith and other concerned citizens and parents created a Baby Institute, where expectant mothers are prepared for the birth of their first child, and an after-school program focused on literacy.

"It's clear that fixing education and improving outcomes is not a simple proposition," she said. "It's very complex. We need different kinds of expertise focused on different aspects."

Smith said one of the priorities of the new effort will be getting input and participation from those who live in the affected neighborhoods. She said the Promise effort wants to create summer learning activities and access to extracurriculars that wealthier children experience throughout their school years.

Monday's announcement will include leaders in education, community, business, government and philanthropy and will be held from 9 to 11 a.m. at Giffen Memorial Elementary School. A second launch event will be held from 6 to 8 p.m. at Albany High School.

The Higher Price of Higher Education

Students, Your Loan Interest Rate Is About to Double

By Kayla Webley | Time Magazine Online, March 20, 2012

Prepare yourself: on July 1, as many as 8 million college students will see their interest rates on federally subsidized student loans double, from 3.4% to 6.8%. According to the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, that increase amounts to the average Stafford loan borrower’s paying $2,800 more over a standard 10-year repayment term for loans made after June 30.

It’s worse for those students who take out the most money. Those who borrow the maximum $23,000 in subsidized student loans will see their debt load upped by $5,000 over a 10-year repayment plan and $11,000 over a 20-year repayment plan.

With the deadline looming, college students last week delivered some 130,000 letters to Congress, urging legislators to keep the interest rate at 3.4%. Like many things in Washington this election year, the issue has become a partisan battle. President Obama and other Democrats have urged Congress to act to extend the low rate (Democrat Representative Joe Courtney of Connecticut has introduced legislation that would stop the rate hike), while Republicans favor allowing the rate to return to 6.8%. Even the cost estimates vary: Democrats predict that keeping the rate at 3.4% for one additional year would cost about $3 billion, while Republicans say it would cost nearly $7 billion. (Mark Kantrowitz of FinAid.org estimated the cost at $5.6 billion for one year.)

At the outset, doubling the interest rate seems like a really bad idea. The percentage of student loan borrowers in default is on the rise as student debt outpaces credit card debt. Students are already graduating with a record-high average debt of $25,000. And last year, for the first time ever, the total amount of student loans taken out topped $100 billion, and the total outstanding student loan debt is expected to top $1 trillion this year — also a first.

But the increase isn’t quite as devastating as it has been portrayed. To start, the 3.4% rate has been in effect only for one year. The rate decrease was passed by Congress in 2007 when Democratic legislators made good on campaign promises and passed the College Cost Reduction and Access Act. After the law passed, the interest rate on subsidized loans fell each year until reaching 3.4% this year — the same year it was set to expire.

Second, 6.8% is still a pretty low interest rate. Sure, 3.4% is better, but when compared with private student loans, which average 9% to 11%, and credit cards, which can have interest rates as high as 30%, 6.8% doesn’t sound all that alarming. (The interest rate for unsubsidized Stafford loans remains at 6.8%.)

The fact is, Congress is still dealing with a tight budget, and footing the bill for an interest-rate reduction is an expensive proposition. According to Kantrowitz, even in 2007, when the budget was more flush, legislators backpedaled on their campaign promises and cut the rate only on subsidized Stafford loans, rather than on all federal student loans, once they discovered how expensive it was to reduce the interest rate.

In the worst-case scenario, keeping the rate at 3.4% would create a vicious cycle. If the government put up the billions required to keep the rate low, they would likely be forced to turn elsewhere to tighten the belt. One of the potential targets, according to Kantrowitz, is the Pell grant, which is relied on by low-income students and has already sustained cuts. “Cutting Pell grants to maintain a low interest rate doesn’t make any sense,” Kantrowitz says. That’s because cutting grants would essentially force students to take out more loans, thus increasing their debt load. “If that happened, the government would essentially be taking away money from students with one hand and giving it back with another,” Kantrowitz says, adding that, in the end, allowing the interest rate on federally subsidized Stafford loans to return to 6.8% is the lesser of two evils.