Day 4: Politics

On April 20, 2010 the Deepwater Horizon Oil Well exploded in the Gulf of Mexico. Wednesday (Day 4) of last week marked the one year anniversary of this horrific disaster. When significant events like this occur, it is important that we as citizens do not forget about them. In this case it is especially important since the affects of this disaster are still devastating the environment, specifically the ecosystems of the Gulf.

Below you will find a series of graphs and maps that help to explain the events the followed the explosion and the subsequent oil spill. Assess how effective the response was to this disaster. Did the government do a good enough job based on the following data? Don't be afraid to hold the government accountable for anything you find to be sub-par. Remember that the oil well was rapidly leaking into the ocean from April 20-September 19. Based on what you read and evaluate below, write a persuasive essay that either backs or criticizes the government response to the BP oil spill. 250-500 words. HAVE FUN!

As of June 22, the Unifed Command identified these resources employed to respond to the spill:

• Total response vessels: 6,300
• Total boom deployed: more than 6.7 million feet (regular plus sorbent boom)
• Oily water recovered to date: more than 25 million gallons
• Dispersant used to date: more than 1.345 million gallons
• Oil reccovered to date: 13.5 million gallons
• Overall personnel responding: more than 37,000
• 17 staging areas are in place and ready to protect sensitive shorelines, including: Dauphin Island, Ala., Orange Beach, Ala., Theodore, Ala., Panama City, Fla., Pensacola, Fla., Port St. Joe, Fla., St. Marks, Fla., Amelia, La., Cocodrie, La., Grand Isle, La., Shell Beach, La., Slidell, La., St. Mary, La.; Venice, La., Biloxi, Miss., Pascagoula, Miss., and Pass Christian, Miss.

Here is some of the criticism towards the response:

A month after the accident, the Obama administration came under increasingly sharp criticism for underestimating the size of the discharge, for the lack of transparency in its response efforts, and for being too easy on BP and the oil industry. Scientists have been especially critical of the Administration for not forcing BP to fund and make publicly available more data from subsurface analysis of the leak, aerial surveillance of the ocean surface, the extent and impact of the subsurface oil plume, and the fate and impact of chemical dispersants. Scientists criticized the EPA for not releasing its finds from offshore water sampling, and they questioned why NOAA was so slow to investigate the magnitude of the spill and the damage it is causing.

Government critics point out that BP also has ties to the Department of Energy. Steven Chu was the head of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory at the University of California, Berkeley, when the Lab received the bulk of a $500 million grant from the British oil giant BP to develop alternative energy sources through a new Energy Biosciences Institute. Dr. Chu received the grant from BP’s chief scientist at the time, Steven E. Koonin. Dr. Chu is now the Secretary of the Department of Energy, and Dr. Koonin, who followed Dr. Chu to the Energy Department, now serves as under secretary of energy for science. No one has accused Dr. Chu or Dr. Koonin of direct conflict of interest or questioned their scientific credentials, and the Department of Energy has no direct responsibility for the cleanup. Dr. Koonin is recused from all matters relating to the disaster because of his past ties to BP.

Day 3: Sports

Please click the following link if you need to reread the San Quentin Tennis article from ESPN.com. San Quentin Prison Tennis.

Now that you've read the article, break it down. Then, we'll watch this video.



First ask yourself, "What perspectives are presented in Alexa Pozniak's article?" Once you know this, ask yourself, "What perspective from the article do I most closely identify or agree with?" THEN, write a 250-500 word blog that outlines ONE of the perspectives within Pozniak's piece. In other words, discuss the perspective that you agree with the most and provide evidence to justify your thoughts and feelings.

**Make sure that your opening statement is clear and presents the focus of your blog (i.e., the top down approach). As always, make connections between your opening statement and key details from the article that will support this statement. HAVE FUN!


No matter what side you argue for, make sure that you provide specific examples that will help you prove your argument and persuade the reader in your direction.

Day 2: Art and Advertising 

Titled Arc, Richard Serra

Without getting into a debate over "what is art?" I'd like you to consider the practicality and function of public art work. Although you may not find public art work to be functional or practical at first, but think about a piece that you may have seen before. Did this piece make you think? Did you originally notice this piece?

Can anyone think of a few pieces of public art that are around the city of Pittsburgh or Oakland? Think about it for a few minutes a write down the locations and a brief description of what they look like. Then consider what function each piece may have.

Let's discuss these for a few minutes.

Now let's discuss a few piece that were very controversial that one of them was taken down all together. One piece is from CMU and another was once in NYC. First, we'll deal with the NYC piece since it brings about an extreme case in the debate over the practicality and functional purposes of public art pieces.

"Titled Arc" was extremely controversial and it took years to rid it from public view. The following PBS article explains.

Walking to the Sky, Jonathan Borofsky

"Walking to the Sky" is another controversial public art piece. Here is an article that voices some concerns from CMU students. After reading this article and considering the points being discussed about public opinion and public consideration being taken into account for works of public art, argue for a side; are you for art that pleases the majority or are you more for art that makes an impact or proves a point regardless of public perception. 250-500 words. HAVE FUN!

DAY 1: MUSIC

Pink Floyd is one of the most socially significant bands in the history of rock and roll. Not only do they have a unique sound, but their ability to reflect on the human condition with such pinpoint accuracy has made their music timeless. One of their most famous songs, Another Brick in the Wall speaks to generations young and old because everyone can relate to teachers with power trips and the desire to question authority.

After listening to the song, think about what is really being said. What does it mean to be another brick in the wall? What's the wall? Why is being a brick that makes up this wall not a good thing? What other messages are being transmitted through the song's lyrics and it's music video. Give this some thought. They may be more behind the wall than you think! 250-500 word minimum.

Day 4: Politics

One way to learn about politics that is usually designated to the older crowd and found in a much older medium than most information today is through political cartoons. These are not only funny but also very informative. They are typically very biased and provide a satire of government and foreign policy situations.

Below you will find some recent cartoons that discuss some hot-button issues. Look these over and do your best to interpret their messages. Figure out what each cartoon's bias is and what information is being provided.








After reviewing and interpreting each cartoon, pick the one you find to have the most convincing or compelling argument. Write a persuasive piece (250-500 words) that discusses the aspects that make this particular political cartoon so persuasive.