Not that you guys are dummies. Far from it. It's just the title of the video you'll be watching for this week's blog. Let's call it..."Articles of Confederation For Those Previously Unfamiliar With This Document".
I will say, this guy (who you should remember from last year's hand signals for the Bill of Rights) is a little zany. He uses some strange illustrations and voices (but if you recall so do I). Don't let his weirdness deter you from the really good information he's giving you.
In the comments section this week, use your 100 words to discuss which part of the video was the most informative/cleared up a confusing section for you/was the most interesting etc.
PS-Ignore every time he mentions "the exam" or "multiple choice" or "New York state exams" etc. He made this video for kids at a different school. That part does not apply to you obviously. Do not ignore, however, his clear explanation of the AoC...because, you know, it's the point of the blog.
PPS-At the end of the video he chooses to use a phrase he could have done without. I wanted you to know that, unlike the Jamestown article from first semester that contained a curse word I was unaware of, I am aware of his poor choice of words. Some of you may not even notice it while you are watching, and it probably is not as bad as the Jamestown word, but I wanted you to know I'm aware of it. I'm still assigning this video because of all the great content, his funny teaching style and how well it fits into our current class topics. If you think you might be offended by it or don't want to hear it, stop the video at the 12:00 mark. You will not need to tell me whether you did or did not watch the whole thing. Don't include your opinion on the phrase in the blog etc. Just handle this with maturity please. Thanks!
This video helped me understand everything about the Articles of Confederation a lot more. The part that helped the most was about federalism. I understood it okay after reading about it in the book, but this made it clearer. I like how he listed everything that the Articles of Confederation didn't have because that made a big difference in some situations, and it was all pretty important to have. This helped me realize why America needed to amend the articles to make everything work out better. Just watching the video in the first place was really informative because it explained everything pretty simply. The most interesting part of the video to me was just all of the analogies that he came up with and used. Those were another way to help me understand everything even better. I also liked the video because of the visuals. I mean the book has pictures and everything, but the pictures and things that were used in the video were helpful as well. I really liked the video and overall just learned more. After watching it I definitely understand the Articles of Confederation more, and it all makes more sense to me. (197)
ReplyDeleteWell, this man was quite different. I think it was interesting how he said that America didn't have a good view on government because of the way England treated us, which is true. His analogies were...interesting, but I liked them because it definitely made it easier to understand. There are a ton of "bad" things to the Articles of Confederation. It didn't have a lot of things that are in our government today (army, money, no control of commerce, etc). I now understand way better why it had to be changed and all the things it did and didn't have that was needed to be a successful government. (109)
ReplyDeleteps- that monkey girl thing scared me!
That video was a little to strange for my tastes. If the guy had left our the inapropriate parts the video would have been so much better. The best part of the movie in my opinion was near the end when he explained Shay's Rebellion. That was probably the most explanatory part of the movie (it was also funny when he put up that strange picture and did the scream). Overall it explained the subjects we talked about well, but I got the idea when I first read it in the book. The video helped though as well. I now see even better how terrible the articles were and why the colonies limited government so much.(101)
ReplyDelete*Seriously, that was too strange for my tastes. My mom thinks 5x as much.
This helped me understand the Artles of Confederation a whole lot beter then I did before. I liked how he made the things he was teaching very easy to understand(even through he was a little weird). One of the things that helped me the most was his explanation of Federalism. It never occured to me that the government was so week, because of how England treated them. It makes sense that they didn't want someone to take control of everything, and rule their lives like England did to them. I also liked his explanation of the how the Shay Rebellion pretty much ended the articals.(106)
ReplyDeleteThis guy explains the Articles of Confederation really well, even if he uses really weird analogies. I finally realize how little power Congress actually has over the Colonies and how badly we needed a new system of government. There are several things now that the government can do that they weren’t allowed to according to the Articles of Confederation. Also how impossible it was to amend the Articles because you needed all 13 states to agree. Luckily Shays Rebellion happened, and it forced the Constitutional Convention to meet and form a new system of government. And now we have the Constitution of the United States of America. “The Articles of Confederation sucked because the Feds were too weak.” (118)
ReplyDeleteI think the part that was most informative was how the colonist split the power into so many different places. So many in fact that is almost impossible to get any one Bill through the different powers and to become a law. This information clicked when he showed the paper example with the word, Power on it. I understood when he ripped “the paper of power”. It showed how they split the powers to the different places and how much they did give. The funniest part of the movie was when the man put up the weird picture and had the voices screaming in the background. Also his explanation of the government seeing Shay and his mob then calling his “dad” helped me understand that to get help they had to ask other states to go help another state.(139
ReplyDeleteThe video was great. It cleared up/helped me the most with Federalism. His analogy with the lady and her boyfriends made some sense, and what helped me the most was the demonstration with the piece of paper. Before that I kind of just skimmed over it, although we weren’t suppose to worry about the “going to be on the exam” part it spiked up my senses because I knew I wasn’t focusing on that but now I understand it completely! To me the most interesting part was the Northwest Ordinance of 187 because he made it sound weird and he put a peculiar analogy with it. (106)
ReplyDeleteThis was an interesting video considering it had some weird creature in it. The part that got my attention was the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. There were very good props and other ways of remembering things in this video. This video series is very different than all the other videos. This video helped me understand the Federalists. I liked the power thing when he ripped the paper in half which meant dividing the power. I agree that the choice of words at the end was unnecessary. The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 was a big thing in our country. This video was a good video and had funny things like the monkey thing.(112)
ReplyDeleteI like that guy! He may be kinda weird but he knows how to make a point. His analogies were umm interesting but they were good and very easy to remember. The one that seems to stick in my head the most would be The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly. It was a good way of showing the the AoC had its good parts, Northwest Ordinance of 1787, which was much and only gave the government the privilege to grow the nation. Meaning, make purchases like the Louisiana Purchase and in a sense grow and move the people of America. Next comes the bad. There is a good list of the bad parts of the government but the main one seemed to be the bad structure of the Articles. The Articles of Confederation gave most power to the states mostly because the founding fathers of America thought if giving the main government more power than it would eventually lead back to the way it was before the Revolutionary War with King George III. So, everyone being afraid of strong government, the states were given mega power and probably could have declared that they were their own country and government could do nothing about! The government was stuck with just one legislature branch and because of everyone afraid of having too much power; they had a Congress with only 13 members. Only 1 member per state. They would never agree on anything considering you needed 9 out of 13 votes to make a law. And what’s even worse is that you need 13 out of 13 to amend the AoC. If it weren’t or Shay’s rebellion we could have been stuck in that crappy government until we would go bankrupt and who knows where we would be now. I say we use the Articles of Confederation as fire wood. (309)
ReplyDeletemaybe fire paper?!? :)
DeleteThat guy is a little different in the way he teaches. I think it kept my attention more than some of the other videos we watch. His views about the Articles of Confederation are somewhat like mine. I think the government needed more power than it had. It should have a stronger government than state because they are one nation. With the states having more power than the government each state is like its own country. That’s not what I think of when I think if a nation that is untied. His information was good and I likes the part with the toy story alien.(105)
ReplyDeleteAfter watching this video, it helped me understand the Articles of Confederation a whole lot better. The part that had helped me the most was about the federalism and Shays’ Rebellion. Now I know why the government was so weak, because of how England were treating them. The guy’s analogies were interesting, but it made it easier to understand them better. I liked how he separated the Articles of Confederation into the good, the bad, and the ugly. There were a lot of bad things to the Articles of Confederation and there were barely any good things. Now I understand why they had to change the Articles of Confederation. Another thing that was interesting was that monkey girl or whatever she was. When the video screamed from seeing her, I screamed!:) (132)
ReplyDeleteThe video was very interesting. It described the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation. I liked the demonstration of how the Articles of Confederation split the power. The most interesting part of the video was the part that he used a singer’s story to describe the Articles of Confederation. I found this interesting because it showed the colonies breaking off and starting over. There was another interesting moment in the video that intrigued me was the good, the bad, and the ugly. I thought this was interesting because he explained the Northwest ordinance of 1787 was the good part. The bad part was the rules that kept the Congress from many things that they needed to have power over.(119)
ReplyDeleteThis video has to be one of the weirdest ones for the blog I've seen but it actually made sense. The Tina Turner analogy was very different but he put it in a very easy to understand way. England restricted us from having a good idea of what government should be so we tried to start from scratch. There were more bad things than good obviously that came from the constitution. I had never really thought of the issues about the 9 out of 13 and the 13 out of thirteen to change things or to vote on laws. The 13/13 would be very hard to get with the stubbornness of Americans.
ReplyDelete(113)
DeleteThis was very different to say the least, but I think that’s part of what makes it all so memorable. His crazy analogies and different methods of teaching make what we have covered in class much more clear. My favorite and most informative analogy that he used was the good, the bad, and the ugly. He made it clear that The Articles of Confederation were very weak. It only had one good thing which was the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 compared to the myriad of bad things which included the government not being able to impose taxes, the lack of one regular army, the enormous debt, and the inability to control the states. The ugly was of course Shays’ Rebellion. I think the way he put it summed it up very nicely in stating that Shay’s Rebellion was like the match to set The Articles on fire. This all being said I understand the Articles of Confederation much better now.
ReplyDelete[160]
This video made things easier to understand. Even though it was...um...interesting. I liked it, and I think the thing that stuck out to me the most was the good, the bad, and the ugly. This helped show that the articles were weak, which to me is a good thing. The good parts seemed to me the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. But there also were bad parts including the enormous debt and not to mention the way the power was given out. I also thoroughly enjoyed the expanation of Federalism, that cleared a lot up for me. Overall, it was a good video. (105)
ReplyDeleteFor pretty much all of the video, I understood what he was talking about. After reading the chapter a few times and taking the reading quiz, as well as the blog last week, I pretty much know everything there is to know about the Articles of Confederation. So, I decided to look at the video from a different perspective. I thought about if I was someone who was shown this video, without know anything about the Articles of Confederation before watching, or that the Articles even existed. I figured the most important part would be the very beginning when he tells us about how many people believe that there is only the Constitution, and how most people don’t even know about the Articles. Before this chapter in our books, I had no idea that they existed either. If he hadn’t told us right off the bat that they were two separate documents, I would have been confused the entire time, trying to figure out what he meant. I think that little bit of information would have really helped someone understand what he was saying from the beginning. (188)
ReplyDeleteI really learned from the video. I thought that the articles did a lot of good things. The only good thing was the northwest ordinance. The articles gave the federal government absolutely no power. Imagine if a country did invade while the articles were governing. If it did happen there would be no America. Shays rebellion was a key example of the weakness of the articles under it bunch of angry farmers almost captured a whole state. If farmers could do that imagine what a formal trained army could have done? The AoC was not a pair of training wheels. It was a one way ticket to the death of our nation.
ReplyDelete(112)
To be honest, this man didn't clear anything up for me. Unfortunately, his "illustrations" confused me. I was very distracted by his many voices and pictures in the background.. Especially the the mom's having a baby one? But if I had to choose one thing I understood a little bit more, I would have to say federalism. This may not have helped me that much, but it was definetly better than reading our text book. I wasn't really sure was federalism was when we read our book. But this man did a pretty good job explaining it. I did like how he related some things to things we would understand though. (117)
ReplyDeleteLike everyone else, I do agree that that guy is pretty weird, but I did learn a few things. The concept of federalism was cleared up to me. The Ike and Tina Turner analogy helped me. Also it helped when he tore the paper that said “power” on it to show how the power was split. The quote “The Articles of Confederation sucked because the Feds were too weak” stuck with me too. That’s about the easiest way to describe why the Articles of Confederation didn’t work. I like how he said that Shays’ Rebellion was like the match that caused the Articles to be completely done away with. I have to go with Jo on this one. Some things he said really made me confused and didn’t make sense to me, but I DID learn something. {137}
ReplyDelete~1DirectionNiall4eve:)~
I liked the video a lot! (Yes the guy was a little weird, but I think you need that every once in a while.) The video simplified things down to where a dummy could understand it, hence the title. I must say though that the video didn't really elaborate a lot on what happened during Shays' Rebellion. Also I was quite confused the one point about the northwest ordinance of 1787. Also I was a little disturbed at around 10:15, it scared me quite a bit. Mainly I liked the video, I hope we can see more of him. Though I hope they aren't as weird. (106)
ReplyDeleteI think this guy has a creative,yet sensible teaching style. I can see how he got the three parts, good, bad, and ugly, but I think he missed a part. I can see where he comes from saying that the good part of it all was the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. I can also see where he comes from when he says that the AoC were too weak. I mean cmon we didn't even have an equal system between the states. And yeah, Shay's Rebellion was pretty ugly with all the fighting. But I think that after Shay's Rebellion came a beautiful side shown as the Constitution. Think about it, because of all these different factors that happened at the time, the three different parts came together to create a new part that outweighs the rest. Because of the other three parts we now have a stronger government that is here to protect us. Sure it's not the greatest at the moment, but it's better than what we had under the AoC!
ReplyDelete