4th Reading Exam Preparation - Mr. E's Forum: 2006-2007

Date: Dec 2, 2006

4th Reading Exam Preparation

Date: Dec 6, 2006

For any of you who are interested, we can discuss the questions here or you can post your thesis statements or examples of some of the supportive evidence here as well. On Question #1, Hamilton and Jefferson should be pretty easy to figure out concerning Jackson, although Jefferson did bounce around on his ideals once he became president. What do some of you think of Washington? He's a Federalist... On Question #2, some of the effects of the market revolution were obvious, like those that were technological and industrial, but how did these changes affect women, workers and farmers? You might want to mention the Lowell Mills, the creation of unions and how farmers moved westward for more land. Think you can all dig up specifics on these? For Question #3, you should check out the Zinn packet that I gave you (both of them) and also the forum thread down on the list comparing both. The basic idea is that we did move west (obviously) but Zinn's objection is to the way we did it (means) and the textbook claims that the end result was more important (ends). Know what I mean? Consider the details on the Mexican War, how it began and why, how it was fought, and finally what impact it had. Question #4 is pretty direct. Wise or futile? On the wise side, something had to be done. All of this new land was taken and everyone was salvitating over it. The Constitution screwed up the process with the 3/5 deal and Clay's previous compromise was a very tight balancing act. On the futile side, the Fugitive Slave Act didn't make any friends in the north. That really got Garrison, Brown and Douglass going.

So what are your thoughts? Want to discuss any of these or try out any thesis statements?

Date: Dec 7, 2006

Apparently no one wants to prepare for the exam tomorrow?

Date: Dec 8, 2006

4th Reading Exam

Question 4.

Immensely split political desires amongst Congress regarding the ripening of California‘s annexation, boundary issues around Mexico and Texas, and northerners‘ strong opposition to the fugitive slave law, as well as Henry Clay’s fading political career were factors that made the Compromise of 1850 a futile attempt to push the slavery issue out of sight.

Date: Dec 8, 2006

question 2 thesis-

The movement from a subsistence to a market economy moved Americans toward becoming a society of dependent consumers. This change greatly affected farmers in the urbanization of their society, laborers in the formation of workers' unions, and women, who gained the opportunity to work outside of the home.

question 4 thesis-

The Compromise of 1850 was a wise attempt to balance the North and South in their disputes over slavery. It was a fair effort for both sections in that it ended the slave trade, created the Fugitive Slave Act, and established popular sovereignty in the new territories. It accomplished what it had originally intended to do, perserve the Union from a splitting, although it further divided the North and South over slavery.

Date: Dec 8, 2006

Alex Z. wrote:

4th Reading Exam

Question 4.

Immensely split political desires amongst Congress regarding the ripening of California‘s annexation, boundary issues around Mexico and Texas, and northerners‘ strong opposition to the fugitive slave law, as well as Henry Clay’s fading political career were factors that made the Compromise of 1850 a futile attempt to push the slavery issue out of sight.

I hope you two get this in time. This is a very good thesis, Alex. Be sure to have enough evidence to support all four points made here. There is one point though - it was not a boundary dispute between Mexico and Texas, but NEW MEXICO and Texas. It's a big difference. The other thing I quickly wanted to mention was that although you are correct that these four issues were very important in 1850, Clay did attempt to address them in the Compromise. In other words, what you seem to be arguing isn't that he didn't address them, but that how he did so in the Compromise of 1850 was ineffective. Know what I mean? So, for instance, should California not have become a free state or should the Compromise have not included it? Think about it. What was futile about the compromise? That it even existed or that it existed and was ineffective and should have been constructed differently?

Date: Dec 8, 2006

Amanda wrote:

question 2 thesis- The movement from a subsistence to a market economy moved Americans toward becoming a society of dependent consumers. This change greatly affected farmers in the urbanization of their society, laborers in the formation of workers' unions, and women, who gained the opportunity to work outside of the home.

question 4 thesis- The Compromise of 1850 was a wise attempt to balance the North and South in their disputes over slavery. It was a fair effort for both sections in that it ended the slave trade, created the Fugitive Slave Act, and established popular sovereignty in the new territories. It accomplished what it had originally intended to do, perserve the Union from a splitting, although it further divided the North and South over slavery.

Amanda, thanks for two very good theses. For the first one (#2), are you centering your thesis on the fact that farmers, workers and women all became consumers? If you are, then the first sentence is compliant with the rest. If not, it seems to be that you're talking about two different concepts, such as the the formation of unions and the impact on women working. The urbanization of farmers is a confusing concept if taken literally. Farmers themselves didn't urbanize but they did cause the urbanization of society. They were directly affected, however, by technological innovation, right? The reaper and thresher and the cotton gin proved that. See what I mean? On the second thesis (#4), you phrase it well and make an interesting point: that Clay wasn't trying to stop the division of the nation, he was only trying to prevent a war. If that's the case, then you should use some specific evidence to support that claim, which I think is a brilliant one. Clay had no intention of solving every issue on slavery. No one could do that. He only meant to prevent the dissolution of the nation. That's what you're saying. Back it up and it will be a powerful essay. Thanks!

Date: Dec 8, 2006

Question 2

The market economychanges the lives of many with more rights for women, unions, more production for farmers and labor laws. There were also negatives to this change with unsafe work places nd conditions, people became dependent on other also farmers lost their land.

Question 4

Slavery was the most controversal issue in the 1800's and with the Compromise of 1850 it was a wise effort to help with this issue. It had laws and acts that favored the north and south in both ways, trying to balance out the differences and maintain equality for both sides.

Date: Dec 8, 2006

Kelsey wrote:

Question 2 - The market economy changes the lives of many with more rights for women, unions, more production for farmers and labor laws. There were also negatives to this change with unsafe work places nd conditions, people became dependent on other also farmers lost their land.
Question 4 - Slavery was the most controversal issue in the 1800's and with the Compromise of 1850 it was a wise effort to help with this issue. It had laws and acts that favored the north and south in both ways, trying to balance out the differences and maintain equality for both sides.

Kelsey, the phrase 'the market economy' is a bit confusing, because it was not a 'thing' in itself. You could refer the the changes that a growing market economy had on the nation instead. It also solves the verb tense problem you had with the word 'changes' in your thesis. More directly, though, you didn't state what those changes were. This is one of the most common mistakes made by AP students. If you are making a claim, state specifically what you mean. For instance, the sentence, "There were many powerful effects from World War II on American society' is not a thesis statement. You would have to state exactly what those effects were, why they were significant, what caused them, what impact they had, etc. Know what I mean? I like how you divide the thesis into the positive and negative consequences, but you need to reword the sentences themselves. The sentence concerning the negative consequences is confusing. What specifically do you mean? Remember also to have all verbs agree with each other.

For the second thesis, why not simplify and say that the Compromise of 1850 was a wise effort that addresses the controversial issue of slavery? You would then have to state how and why it did this wisely. Your second sentence is a rough definition of what any compromise is, but what about this one specifically. If you say that it achieved a balance of divisive issues and an equality between both sides, how specifically did it do this and what impact would that balance and equality have?

Date: Dec 9, 2006

Question 2 Thesis:

The movement from a substinence to a market economy had multiple effects on American society, including farmers, laborers, and women. However, they all became more independent in their fields of work, and were able to expand their production of goods. Some advantages include the increase of the United States' economy and the decline of being totally dependent of foreign countries. Some disadvantages were the increase of sectionalism between the North, South, and West, and the increase of slavery throughtout the South and West.

Question 4 Thesis:

The Compromise of 1850 was both a wise effort to balance sectional differences as well as a futile attempt to push the slavery issue out of sight. The issue overy slavery was causing sectional differences, so to try to preserve the Union, the Compromise of 1850 was created. However, the Compromise was made to please each side with the slavery issue, so it wasn't really dealing with it, rather just putting it off. As long as slavery was neither banned throughout the whole U.S. nor specifically allowed, there were still going to be disputes over the matter. It had to be on way or another, not just made to please each side, which pushed the issue away.

For question 2, I tried making my thesis not be as specific as my other ones the make it extensively long, so i summed it all up for how it affected the 3 different people. In my essay I'm going to explain how they were independent and produced more goods, as well as some more effects.

For question 4, I feel that the Compromise of 1850 was a little bit of both. I don't know if I can put that, or if I need to pick a side. If so then I'll redo the thesis to support one of them.

Date: Dec 10, 2006

Q2: What effects did the movement from a subsistence to a market economy have on American society, including farmers, laborers, and women? What were the advantages and disadvantages?

Thesis: During the 19th century, American economy moved from subsistence to a market economy and fluctuated the wealth to farmers, provided more jobs for laborers, and gave women the opportunity to take part in American economy. One particular advantage of the Market Economy includes greater self-sufficiency in American society. However, as a result to the economy reformation the southern plantations grew as well and unfortunately so did slavery.

______________________________________________________________________________

Q4: Was the compromise of 1840 a wise effort to balance sectional differences or a futile attempt to push the slavery issue out of sight? Defend your position with supportive evidence from the antebellum period?

Thesis: The compromise of 1850 may be considered a wise effort in order to balance sectional differences (to some extent) because the compromise included much time and thought in order to appeal to the American people’s wants. However, Henry Clay’s compromise settled only a portion of the slavery issues for about 10 decades before the Civil War and may be considered an attempt to push the problem of slavery out of sight. No matter what the American peoples’ desire, human-bondage is immoral and degrading to not only the slave but his master as well. The proper way to deal with the slavery issues includes ending the business entirely, rather than pushing it aside and trying to make the impossible happen; everyone happy.

_______________________________________________________________________________

(I dont how well my thesis is. I feel as though it should be more specific. But I'm afraid to make it too long. Its already long as it is. I need some input!!)

Date: Dec 10, 2006

Tanya wrote:

Question 2 Thesis: The movement from a substinence to a market economy had multiple effects on American society, including farmers, laborers, and women. However, they all became more independent in their fields of work, and were able to expand their production of goods. Some advantages include the increase of the United States' economy and the decline of being totally dependent of foreign countries. Some disadvantages were the increase of sectionalism between the North, South, and West, and the increase of slavery throughtout the South and West.

Question 4 Thesis: The Compromise of 1850 was both a wise effort to balance sectional differences as well as a futile attempt to push the slavery issue out of sight. The issue overy slavery was causing sectional differences, so to try to preserve the Union, the Compromise of 1850 was created. However, the Compromise was made to please each side with the slavery issue, so it wasn't really dealing with it, rather just putting it off. As long as slavery was neither banned throughout the whole U.S. nor specifically allowed, there were still going to be disputes over the matter. It had to be on way or another, not just made to please each side, which pushed the issue away.

For question 2, I tried making my thesis not be as specific as my other ones the make it extensively long, so i summed it all up for how it affected the 3 different people. In my essay I'm going to explain how they were independent and produced more goods, as well as some more effects.

For question 4, I feel that the Compromise of 1850 was a little bit of both. I don't know if I can put that, or if I need to pick a side. If so then I'll redo the thesis to support one of them.

Tanya, one of the central themes of building a 'market economy' in the US at the beginning of the 19th century is how interdependent each area of productivity became, not the opposite. What are they becoming independent from? Also, when you state that the US economy is increasing, why is that a good thing? France, for instance, had Europe's largest economy in the 1600's but its workers (peasants) lived a horrible existence. I really like the structure of your thesis, though, and with those few minor adjustments it will be very strong.

On the second one, don't get cause and effect mixed up. It still could have been a wise attempt that had somewhat futile consequences, if you know what I mean. It's hard for it to be both wise and futile at the same time in its consequences. Also, you are misinderstanding some key issues in the compromise. Remember, NO ONE was talking about ending slavery. That's just simply out of the question at this point. The compromise didn't even touch that one. It was simply about the new territories, the slave trade in DC and the fugitive slave law. Know what I mean?

Date: Dec 10, 2006

kathryn wrote:

Q2: What effects did the movement from a subsistence to a market economy have on American society, including farmers, laborers, and women? What were the advantages and disadvantages?

Thesis: During the 19th century, American economy moved from subsistence to a market economy and fluctuated the wealth to farmers, provided more jobs for laborers, and gave women the opportunity to take part in American economy. One particular advantage of the Market Economy includes greater self-sufficiency in American society. However, as a result to the economy reformation the southern plantations grew as well and unfortunately so did slavery.

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

Q4: Was the compromise of 1840 a wise effort to balance sectional differences or a futile attempt to push the slavery issue out of sight? Defend your position with supportive evidence from the antebellum period?

Thesis: The compromise of 1850 may be considered a wise effort in order to balance sectional differences (to some extent) because the compromise included much time and thought in order to appeal to the American people’s wants. However, Henry Clay’s compromise settled only a portion of the slavery issues for about 10 decades before the Civil War and may be considered an attempt to push the problem of slavery out of sight. No matter what the American peoples’ desire, human-bondage is immoral and degrading to not only the slave but his master as well. The proper way to deal with the slavery issues includes ending the business entirely, rather than pushing it aside and trying to make the impossible happen; everyone happy.

_______________________________________________________________________________

(I dont how well my thesis is. I feel as though it should be more specific. But I'm afraid to make it too long. Its already long as it is. I need some input!!)

Kathryn, take a look at my comments to Tayna on interdependency and the new economy. Remember, self-sufficiency IS subsistince. The economy was moving in the other direction completely. You might have a touch time proving a more equitable distribution of wealth. Farmers, for instance, became more economically controlled by railroad companies that owned the land and controlled the rate prices for transportation. Many had to take huge loans just to buy the land and the machinery was also very expensive at the time, meaning that those who owned the most land could grow the most food and reap the most profit.

See what I said about Tayna's 1850 thesis as well. No one wanted to end slavery. This was not a feeble attempt because it didn't do that. No one wanted to end slavery period, escept for the few radical abolitionists (which is one of the reasons they WERE so radical). Lots of time and thought doesn't make something justified either. Much time and thought also went into the 'liberation' of Iraq and much turned out differently than carefully thought out plans included for. What specific issues within the compromise were wise? That should be the central theme of your thesis, if that's the direction you'd like to take.

Date: Dec 10, 2006

See Katie, we are other halves...I think we have basically the same idea for question 4.

And I'm having the same problem with the specifics problem.

But I'm sure that whatever you write for the test will be fine.

Date: Dec 10, 2006

Mr. Everett, I meant that the U.S. was becomming independent from other countries. They starting producing their needed items within their own country. Okay, I get what you're saying about question 4. So I'm probably leaning toward it being a wise attempt then. But could I also mention that it had futile consequences? I wanted to say it was both because I thought it displayed consequences in both areas. But I see how it can't really be both considering the issue at hand. And I think I may have contradicted myself at the end of my thesis.

Date: Dec 11, 2006

Question #1

The Founding Fathers - Washington, Hamilton, and Jefferson - would asses President Jackson’s democratic views, reaction to the nullification issue, support for expansion, and attack on the Bank of the United States based on their involvement with the beginnings of the issues at hand and their political ideology and actions.

---

I will discuss:
Washington's desire for unity and a central government based on his involvement in the forming of the nation and the similar political standings he and Hamilton shared. I will also mention the Jay Treaty when discussing expansion.
Hamilton's elitist social opinions (supporting the wealthy), his desire for a central government that overrules the states, and the fact that he created the National Bank.
Jefferson's initial utilization of the so-called Spoils System, favor for state's rights over federal power, disapproval of the central government expanding, and his rivalry with Hamilton.

Date: Dec 11, 2006

Question 4. thesis - attempt 2 (two)

Immensely split political desires amongst Congress regarding the ripening of California‘s annexation, boundary issues around New Mexico and Texas, and northerners’ strong opposition to the fugitive slave law - as well as Henry Clay’s fading political career, thus resulting in short-lived compromises - were factors that made the Compromise of 1850 a futile attempt to push the slavery issue out of sight that, in respect to its apparent purposes, should never have even existed.

---

I will discuss the contrasting desires of those in the North and those in the South:

- North: restriction on slavery’s expansion, abolitionists’ opinions on blacks’ rights

- South: expansion of king cotton (slavery, for their economy’s sake), ___

…as well as their shared desires:

- California (gold)

I will also discuss the idea that the Compromise of 1850 was Henry Clay’s last chance to make a difference, and that in trying to help a failing Union, he compromised to far on both sides, saving nothing but time.

Date: Dec 11, 2006

Looks good in both questions, Alex. If you could summarize one central characteristic behind each founding father, it would better integrate itself to your thesis, instead of leaving it vague and then explaining in the following paragraphs.

Date: Dec 11, 2006

i know noone can help me with my thesis now, but my internet hasn't been working well so i figured i'd still post to get the 5 points.

Thesis #3: The textbook and Zinn accounts of "Manifest Destiny" and the Mexican War were in great ways very different. Zinn was against Manifest Destiny and the War because he felt the Mexicans were deprived of what was theirs. The textbook account is on the pro side of these events because it believes they aided us into merging into our great country we have today. The textbook is more accurate on its views when it comes to the topics of Manifest Destiny and the Mexican War because we wouldn't have the great industrialization we have today without these historic events.

I will discuss Manifest Destiny and how much land we gained from it

I will discuss the occurances of the Mexican War and what we gained from it.

I will dicuss how much our nation has advanced industrially.

Thesis #4: The Compromise of 1850 can be recognized as a good effort to balance sectional differences, but it was mainly a futile attempt to push slavery away quickly because it further divided the North from the Southm and the North got the better side of the deal.

I will discuss how the Northerners opposed the Fugitive Slave Law so that split them from the South

I will discuss how the Northern states began to industrialize because of the delay of hostilities for 10 years

I will discuss

Date: Dec 11, 2006

cross out the last "I will discuss.."

Date: Dec 11, 2006

Exam. 12/11/06

2] The movement from a subsistence to a market economy had large effects on American society, such as changes in wealth, food, and government. With a subsistence economy, people obtain life’s necessities by self-provision. This means that they relied mainly on themselves and nature. To obtain wealth, people used natural resources in order to make a profit. Their food was either grown or hunted, and they made things by hand. Homes were made from trees, and there was a short supply of goods. Women had to work extremely hard in the home and in the mills. Society in America would soon change drastically, though, because of the soon to be Market Revolution.

The Market Revolution was a major movement in history. The market economy was completely different from the subsistence economy. In the market economy, the exchange of goods relied mainly on supply and demand. This is unlike the subsistence economy, where the government decided how much goods were to be supplied. Farmers in the market economy had the benefit of growing more crops and getting an equal amount of something in exchange. This made them want to cooperate more with the government. Laborers in the mills also made beneficial exchanges, which gave them an opportunity to make more of a profit.

4] The Compromise of 1850 was a wise effort to balance sectional differences because Henry Clay and Stephen Douglass created it to balance out free and slave states. The Compromise divided Texas at its’ present day borders, made popular sovereignty for certain territories, admitted California as a free state, abolished slave auctions in the District of Columbia, and enacted a Fugitive Slave Law.

During the antebellum period, sectionalism was a major issue. There was dispute between slave states and free states, and slavery in general. With the Compromise, Clay and Douglass were willing to fix that problem by balancing out the number of the free and slave states. By admitting California as a free state, they balanced out the states.

There were to be no more slave auctions, because they wanted to try to end slavery slowly but surely. This was a way to not put pressure on the slaves or slave owners. Clay and Douglass wanted to end sectionalism so that the country would function more effectively without disputes between different people.

Giving Texas it’s present day borders helped the United States settle some dispute with Mexico. During the Mexican War, Mexico wanted Texas. So the Compromise made it so the United States and Mexico benefited from the deal.

Having popular sovereignty within certain territories allowed the people to have a say in the government. This proved that Clay and Douglass weren’t trying to push the slavery issue out of sight, because they wanted to see what the people wanted.