2nd Hour 1/30 Padlet by Matthew Swastek https://padlet.com/mswastek/564xew93h295 Made with a little mischief en-us 2017-01-30 12:37:31 UTC 2017-01-30 13:42:34 UTC hello@padlet.com group 2-Bailey, Kasra, Amjad, Darian https://padlet.com/mswastek/564xew93h295/wish/150206414 1. The information given was censored and simplistic.  It did not seem as if he cared much about the students as some left to make fun of other peers.
2. The effects of the comparison shows that though the teacher shields the students from the classroom, they will go off to the real world and will be exposed no matter if they are prepared or not.
3. The speaker shows a neutral but accurate attitude. "And the Stone Age became the Gravel Age, named after the long driveways of the time". (Collins).
4. The text itself does not make much of  question, but with the style of teaching that the reader sees, the reader tends to make the questions themselves and asses the piece and the text in general.
5. The teacher cares for the students and wants to protect them from the negative past but carries this out in the wrong way. Protection in the way that he is carrying it out is generally lying. From the beginning what the history teacher was teaching was not accurate to the nearest extent as everything was simplified down. The history teacher would not reveal the event as an attack on the country with thousands of deaths but more as an accident with a plan that might have slightly hit another building. 


]]> 2017-01-30 13:12:55 UTC https://padlet.com/mswastek/564xew93h295/wish/150206414 Group 4- Caroline, Jessica, Jackson, Hannah https://padlet.com/mswastek/564xew93h295/wish/150206538 1. The approach that the history teacher takes includes teaching students that about historical events that aren’t necessarily helping students, as he is putting the students to an overall disadvantage by refusing to teach his students how the real world works. The history teacher attempts to protects his children’s “innocence”, when in reality these students are not exactly “innocent”.
2. The effect of juxtaposition with the history teacher’s skewed version of events and the following description of the children paints a powerful message on how history can often repeat itself if taught incorrectly and with obvious bias. In the historical examples that the author outlined, they were all essentially instances where one party had the upper hand and used their advantage not to make other people rise up to be equal, but rather to subjugate and oppress them. With the juxtaposition, the author is using slight irony to show not only the effect a teacher’s words--both said and unsaid--can have on children but additionally to show that good intentions doesn’t guarantee good outcomes. 
3. In general, the speaker has a somewhat condescending attitude towards the history teacher. This is because the speaker makes the teacher seem misguided in his actions (calling the Ice Age the “Chilly Age”), as if he’s trying to make it seem like children’s innocence doesn’t have to be protected like the history teacher thinks it does. Because of this, it is clear that the speaker means to use the poem as an example of why students need to be taught the truth and why they don’t need to be shielded from the harsh realities of the world.
4. This poem proposes both an argument and a question. The narrator of the poem explains that the history teacher uses his interpretation of discretion to protect the innocence of his students by falsifying the not-so-glorious aspects of history. This notion is a metaphoric argument that lying is tolerable when it is protecting individuals from the cruelty of knowing the truth. The history teacher fails to recognize the value of truth as a whole, and the effects that his decision to hide this information may have on his students. The last line of the poem is a question that poses guilt araised in the mind of the history teacher. 

“while he gathered up his notes and walked home
past flower beds and white picket fences,

wondering if they would believe that soldiers

in the Boer War told long, rambling stories

designed to make the enemy nod off” (Collins 1).

He questions whether or not his students will believe the fantasies that he has created in disguise of the true stories of world history, in turn questioning whether or not his decision to keep this information to himself is the correct one.
5. We feel as though the attitude of this history teacher is overly protective and almost coddling when it comes to the students. He lies for the students’ own “innocence,” unaware that that innocence could most likely be better preserved if students knew the actual issues behind the historical events and learned from it instead of being told a lie. In our opinion, protection becomes lying when it goes to the point that you are doing it for the idea of innocence and intentionally warping the truth in an effort to preserve it. It’s not so much a matter of intent, since you can still want to protect children while lying, but the degree to which you lie can matter in that distinction. Regarding 9/11, he would probably say that construction workers wanted to remove a tile from the Twin Towers as fireworks went off in the background. 



]]> 2017-01-30 13:13:29 UTC https://padlet.com/mswastek/564xew93h295/wish/150206538 Group 1- Sam, Brendan, Joe, Jookta https://padlet.com/mswastek/564xew93h295/wish/150206586 1.The history teacher's approach towards teaching is censored as he doesn't reveal the correct information regarding historical events. 
2. The effect of juxtaposition in that description was that the teacher, while feeding the students incorrect information, they will still be exposed to the real world. While the teacher softens what occurred in the real events, the students will still go into the real world and be mean to the other kids.
3. The speaker's attitude is supportive of the teacher's remarks. For example, the speaker states, "Trying to protect his students’ innocence
he told them the Ice Age was really just
the Chilly Age..." In this quote the speaker is supportive of the teacher as he says the teacher is trying to protect his students.
4. The speaker is arguing whether or not teacher's should keep details from their students in order to protect their innocence. 
5. I think the teacher, while he's doing the wrong thing by feeding the students incorrect information, he's just trying to protect his students from the realities of historical events. Protection becomes lying when information becomes skewed in a way where the information is incorrect and the speaker knows it's incorrect. I believe the teacher would lie to the students as he has lied about past events. The teacher would censor most of the details that occurred that day and replace them with lies. ]]> 2017-01-30 13:13:42 UTC https://padlet.com/mswastek/564xew93h295/wish/150206586 Lisa Lipin, Emilie Haji-Sheikh, Kikee Michalos, Jared Perlin lipin_elizabeth08 https://padlet.com/mswastek/564xew93h295/wish/150206875 1) He softens the truth of bad times, making them more child friendly so as to not impact his students' innocence.
2) He does not really mean that they will go to the playground but that they will enter the real world. Since the playground and the real world are contrasting in one's mind, this is juxtaposition.
3) The speaker doesn't really support this style of speaking, as shown in the lines: "while he gathered up his notes and walked home
past flower beds and white picket fences,
wondering if they would believe that soldiers
in the Boer War told long, rambling stories
designed to make the enemy nod off."
This shows how the teacher himself is just walking home and wondering if his methods are even working.
4) We believe the poem is asking the question "Is this teaching style really effective?"
5) Our attitude is that this teacher is being far too protective. By changing even the names and the entire events, he may be protecting his students now but in the long run he is hurting their chances in the real world. A little protection is nice, but this is just going too far. He might not be able to mask 9/11 as well because it is more recent and affects students today much more. He might change the motive or intent of the attack to make more child friendly.]]> 2017-01-30 13:14:42 UTC https://padlet.com/mswastek/564xew93h295/wish/150206875 Group 3: Haley, Cooper, Cameron, & Izzy https://padlet.com/mswastek/564xew93h295/wish/150206966 1) The teacher sugar coats and tends to put emphasize on simplicity rather than honest harsh truth.
2) Students perspective is screwed based on the information they were given, a false representation of history.
3) Doesn't support his style of speaking. He tries to protect his students innocence, but in turn life will propose them with obstacles that will deteriorate their innocence.
4) His tone represents a sense of unsureness, almost as if he is asking the reader the question if the kids can learn to decipher honest truth vs. half truths.
5) Anger. Although the protection of innocence had been important to the history teacher, that compromises the knowledge and perspectives of the young children. All of his protection is lying, and in some ways comes across as insincere. The history teacher would sugar coat the events of 9/11, saying that after this event the number 911 (calling for safety) was invented. ]]> 2017-01-30 13:15:01 UTC https://padlet.com/mswastek/564xew93h295/wish/150206966