*How did the three items you read differ?
*What does the author want me to remember or learn from this passage?
*What is the most important information in this passage?
*What is the most important information in this passage?
*One question I had about what I read was...
In a few days, come back and comment on somebody else's comments. Remember, keep it school appropriate and academic.
This must be completed by 11:59, Saturday, October 1, 2011
This must be completed by 11:59, Saturday, October 1, 2011
33 comments:
The article talks about myths that most people believe to be the truth and 100% accurate, such as most of the colonists supported the Tea Party. The other two sources were from people who were actually there and participated in the Tea Party.
The author wants me to remember that information, even if the general public believes it to be true, sometimes isnt accurate. The most accurate accounts are primary sources, like the 2 we had to read. That is how we separate myth(article) from truth (actual accounts).
The most important information in this passage is that most Americans didnt have a problem with the level of the taxes. Instead, they had a problem with being taxed without being properly represented in Parliament.
One question I had while reading was if people knew who took part in the Tea Party and didnt agree with it, why didn't they speak out?
The three articles differ from one another by little facts. They all are about the boston tea party and dumping tea and some people dressing up as indians. but the article by joshua wyeth said that there was only hours of preperation and the comic also just shows spontaneous action to dump tea. the third articl however by david kinnison has people from maine coming down and have been knowing about the plan for this.
the author want me to remember that the main idea was true, but in different accounts that there maybe little bits of facts skewed to make it more interesting.
most important information in this passage is that the amount of tea that was dumped 10000 lbs and that noone was hurt or killed during this.
one question i had while reading is was this planned over a period of time or just a spontaneous act.
I think that the author makes a point to have us remember how the people went about this. Every article mentioned how they dressed up as indians, how they promised nno harm to the owners to the ships, and how this was strictly confidential and was not to be talk about afterwards.
The three articles differ fom eachother with small details because of the diffferent points of view. each story had the same basic overview but smal things changed with who was telling the story. Some were more general account and some, such as George Hewes was very in depth and showed the mechanics on how this all came together.
-In the article written by Ray Raphael it talks about the different myths on why the Boston Tea Party happened. In the articles written by Joshua Wyeth and David Kinnison it explains what it was like to be one of the "Indians" on the night of the Boston Tea Party. Also, it talks about how they all agreed to stay together. They knew the consequences if they were to get caught, but it didn't matter to them because they wanted to prove something to England.
-The author wants me to remeber that everyone has different views or reasons on why the Boston Tea Party happened but you could never be 100% that one person's belief is accurate. Also, it could be a combination of many people's beliefs. The only way you would know is if you read the information from a reliable source, like from one of the "Indians" on that night.
-The most inmportant information in this article is that tea was the target of the colonists. It states,"Tea was an easy target, a symbol both of Parliament's arrogance and a crumbling social hierarchy" (Ray Rapheal). The colonists realized that the tea was associated with Parliament, so by getting rid of it, it would hopefuly cuase Parliament to slowly fall and in return give the colonists more freedom.
- One question I have is that if they all switched to camomile flowers, as Dr. Thomas Young did, what would England do? Would England tax the camomile flowers, too? Another question I have is that did the colonists know that the tea was infested by Chinese fleas? If so, why did they continue to drink it?
comment on Brian's comment-
-I agree with Brian's answer to the third question. It states," Colonists countered that they were more than willing to tax—and rule—themselves (Ray Rapheal). The colonists didn't care if they paid taxes, however, they thought that if they were paying them they should be represented. They didn't think it was fair for them to get no representation.
One article talks about different myths on why and how the Boston Tea Party happened. The other two are about people who actually experienced the Boston Tea Party as dressed up Indians. To them they knew that they could be killed but taxation without representation just made them crazy.
The author wants me to remember that everyone has different opinions about the Boston Tea Party even though some of them may not be true or some might be combined of many different views of that night. Not everything is 100% true.
The most important thing in this article is that the tea run by the British was an outrage due to the tax that the colonists had to buy British tea so Britain could get more money. The colonists main reason was to get rid of the tea without paying for it.
One question I have is did the colonists realize that the tea that they drank was infected by chinese fleas or did they just like it?
I agree with Marissa on how the colonists despised the British for having a Monopoly on the tea. It enraged the colonists that they paid for the tea while Britain got all the money.
1.)The three articles that I read were all very similar but were told from different viewpoints. “Debunking Boston Tea Party Myths” was posted on the internet by someone who wanted to clarify myths that have come up about the Boston Tea Party. The other two articles, however, were written by actual people on the ships that participated in the dumping of the tea. These people lived during the time and in my opinion are easier to believe than someone who posts something on the internet in their spare time.
2.)The author wants you to remember that not everything you hear is accurate. This is a reoccurring theme in history, but in this situation he addressed 3 things that are often incorrect about the Tea Party. First, the dispute was not about higher taxes it was about the Colonists’ rights to self govern. Second, the Tea Tax was minimal and barely felt by the Colonists. Lastly, the actual dumping of the tea was not what unified the Colonists it was the punishments that brought them together.
3.)I think the most important information in the passage is that the punishment is what united the colonists not the actual tea dumping. Parliament gave Boston a very severe punishment for dumping the tea into the harbor and even people from other colonies were unhappy. They came together and formed the Continental Congress. The Continental Congress consisted of 55 delegates from 12 colonies working together as one. This is what brought the unity not the actual tea dumping.
4.)One question I had about the reading was whether or not the East India Company was ever reimbursed for their lost profits?
I agree with what Rob Brito said about it being important that no one was killed or injured during this event. In the account by Joshua Wyeth it says, “We boarded the ship moored by the wharf, and ordered the captain and crew to open the hatchways, and hand us the hoisting tackle and rope, assuring them that no harm was intended them.” It is important that no one was hurt because they were able to show Brittan that they weren’t happy without hurting people.
The first article tells about whether or not the colonists supported the Boston Tea Party or not. It also gave reasons to not support it. The other two articles on the other hand are accounts of people who were involved in or were part of the tea party.
The author wants me to remember that though many people would want the tea act repealed and to boycott any unrepresented acts against them, many didn't want to be part of the tea party for it involved destruction of property, anyone involved might be prosecuted or heavily fined for such actions, and it resulted in the closing of the Boston port.
The most important information in this passage is that not everyone in Boston encouraged or celebrated the Boston Tea Party nor supported it.
One Question I had while I was reading is why if the colonists don't want to be taxed or want the tea tax gone, do they not support the Boston Tea Party?
To answer Brian's question,
The people were to afraid of the fact that the other colonists would be outraged for saying something to stop the tea party.
The articles thalk about myths that people actually wanted to believe was true. For instance, the colonists were on board with dumping the tea in the harbor. It was there people who dressed up and looked like Indians.
The author wants me to remember that just because there's a piece of information going around and gets on the newspaper that its not necessarily true. Only the people that started or who are involved know the truth.
The most important piece of information from the passage was how the tea was taxed. Because dumping the tea into the harbor to make a point to the British was a step leading to the Revolution.
One question I had was who came up with the idea to dump the tea in the harbor?
- I think that the author wants me to learn that everything I thought I knew about the Boston Tea Party (its causes and its outcomes) is most likely based on myth. It is important to remember that the idea of unified patriotism within the colonies I had been taught about was not quite the truth.
- I think the most important information in this passage was the fact that enormously public figures at the helm of the revolution, such as George Washington and Benjamin Franklin, publicly disagreed with the actions of the patriots at the tea party. It is a common misconception that events like the tea parties were approved and orchestrated by these men, so its important to know their real opinions.
- One question I had about what I read was, was the East India company ever reimbursed or paid back for their destroyed cargo?
The three articles differed by some of the information that was told in them. Everyone has a different myth/side of the story they want to tell so facts are changed around, taken out, or added into the story.
The author wants me to remember the main idea on what happened during that time. And the important facts. If multiple myths tell the same fact/facts then it is most likely true and should be remembered.
The most important information in the passage is what happened with the tea and the taxes and how everyone such as the colonists reacted towards it. It is important to know what went on. and what everyone did to one another.
One question i had about the readings were, there are so many different sides of the story and so many different myths, so what actually happened? and what are the true facts?
The three articles differed because each have different details from who was involved to how they prepared to dump the tea. The other articles were about people who experienced it while the other one talks about the myths people believe.
The author wants me to remember that not all myths and things told publicly are true and not everyone believes the same thing.
The most important information in this passage is that no one dumped tea because they felt like it, they dumped it because of the crazy tax on things they all use daily. The colonists did it to prove a point and stand up to the British government.
Two questions I had about what I read is if colonists didn't like the tax, could there have been other ways to handle it? and Was this a spur of the moment outrage?
The tree items I read differed very little. The article, "Debunking Boston Tea Party Myths," was strictly informational and throughly explained what caused the Boston Tea Party. but in the other readings they didn't exactly mention the cause of the tea party. They told their story of what happened through their eyes. But in George Hewes account of that night he incorporated every single little detail of his view of that night while Joshua Wyeth just summarized his experience.
they want us toknow what really happened that night. they wanted us to have a truthful account of what happened free of propaganda or added infromation.
I think the most important information in the passage would be the descriptions of all the planning that went into that night and the risks those people took for their country.
One question I have about the reading was why didn't the british ships that surrounded the port fire at the rebels on the tea ships?
I agree with Marissa's questions, what would england do? How would it have altered the revolutionary events that took place?
The three articles differ because the account by the Impartial Observer and John Andrews say, although there were meetings before the Tea Party there wasn't much preparation for it. However the article by Ray Raphael says there was more preparation due to colonial unrest.
The author wants me to learn that the Boston Tea Party wasn't done because of taxes being raised, in face they were lowered, but because the colonists didn't like not having a say in how they were taxed.
I think the most important information in this article is that the Boston Tea Party wasn't done because of taxes being raised it was done because the colonists didn't have a say in how taxes were enacted.
One question I had is was the tea really infected with Chinese fleas or was that just American Propaganda?
The three items I read differed in the sense that two of them were coming from the people dressed up as Indians in the act, and the other one coming from someone telling about the myths of the act.
The author wants me to remember that the general story of the Boston Tea Party was the same, but there are little twists to it, depending on who's telling the story. This is very similar to the Christopher Columbus situation, and how not all stories about him are true.
The most important information in this passage is the reason why they performed this act and the relationship it stirred up.
One question i have about reading is, did other people after hearing about the tea party perform other acts like this but on different imported goods?
K.Biblekaj
Who came up with the idea to dump the tea in the harbor?
- The answer to this question is John Hancock assembled and came up with the idea of the Boston Tea Party.
The three items I read differ. The article by Ray Raphael talks about 3 myths about the Boston Tea Party which were that the dispute was about higher taxes, tea taxes were an onerous burden on ordinary Americans, and dumping British tea unified the patriots. The account by Joshua Wyeth stated that he only had a few hours notice of what was going to happen of the dumping of the tea overboard. The Massachusetts Gazette account talked about the meetings that were held after the first tea ship arrived.
What the author wants me to remember from this passage is that there are many accounts of the Boston Tea Party which all have different views. You can't always believe that what you read is what truly happened when this event occurred. Also, these accounts have people's opinions in them as well as how they saw the event.
The most important information in this passage would be that the Americans didn't celebrate the dumping of the tea; they found it an act of vandalism. Americans shunned the event for 50 years.
One question I had about what I read was why would the Boston Tea Party have to be told "playfully" in order to be in textbooks?
I agree with what Rob Brito thought was important in the passage in that noone was killed during the dumping of the tea. This seems unusual because of how much killing went on back then and because of how much tea was dumped overboard.
The three sources differed greatly, Debunking the boston Tea Party Myths by Ray Raphael basically disputes all of the accounts of the boston tea party that most people believe to be true. Basically he says that what people beilieve to be true are 100 percent false. The accounts of witnesses of the tea party are very different as they talk about what it was like to be an indian on the night of the tea party The author wants me to take away from this passage that when we learned that the Boston Tea Party Was celebrated among the colonists when trufully it was seen as an act of vandalism and a kind of stupid idea that lead to a harsh retaliation by the British that lead to a long war that caused many Americans to perish. The most important information from this article is that not everyone in boston and in the government supported the acts of the patriots and many thought it was uneccesary and rash.
One question I had about what I read was why it is presented by many textbooks as something that was celebrated when many facts point to it as something different.
Answering Rob Lazzaros question, I do not think that the Company was reimbursed for the tea because if they were i do not think that it would have caused so much of a problem and wouldnt have lead to so much anger.
The article is about what myths surround the Boston Tea Party and whether they're true or not. The two sources are statements from people that were actually apart of it, and recollected the events from it.
The author wanted me to learn from this passage that some common myths about the Tea Party are false.
I think the most important information in this passage is that the patriots didn't want to show off the Tea Party, since it started off a war with the British.
One question I had while reading this was what the colonists would have done if the taxes for imported tea were actually raised instead of lowered.
-The three items I read differed because one of the differing accounts simply told how a spectator witnessed the Sons of Liberty disguised as Indians. Another account was from one of the participants of the Boston Tea Party, describing the pride he has for what had happened. Lastly, the original article explains various viewpoints of the Tea Party, and emphasizes on the myths that correspond with the Boston Tea Party.
- From the passage, the authors wants me to remember to not always believe what most people may think. You have to research the subject matter from a reliable source, such as these articles. This is presented because the article thoroughly proves a few myths about the Boston Tea Party wrong.
-The most important information in the passage is that the Patriots were not unified from dumping the British tea. In the article, it explains how the punishments from the Intolerable Acts brought Americans together against Britain; not the Boston Tea Party.
-A question I had was, did the Sons of Liberty think beforehand that not all the Patriots felt as strongly as they did to dump the tea or did they act on it randomly?
- I agree with Rebecca's question, "there are so many different sides of the story and so many different myths, so what actually happened? and what are the true facts?" because there are so many different possible events that could have occurred during the Boston Tea Party and each of the articles that I read had a different perception of the event. This makes it unclear to find out what really happened that day.
1.The two accounts of people who were there both say that some people dressed up like Indians and that they dumped tea.In the article written by Ray Raphael it talks about the myths of why the Boston Tea Party happened.
2.The author wants me to remember that the Boston Tea Party had different views and reasons why it started and that not all the information that we hear about the Boston Tea Party match up with the views of the people who were there.And that though we were not witnesses of it, it is more accurately described by someone who was there.
3.I think the most important information in this article was that they didn't have a say in how the items where being taxed and that was one of the reasons for the Boston Tea Party.
4.If the people knew that they were drinking tea that had Chinese fleas would they still drink it?
-The first article mainly described events leading up to the Boston Tea Party and misconceptions about why it actually happened. The other two were first hand accounts of the tea party, describing it how they remembered.
-The author wants me to remember that such historic events like the Boston Tea Party, may not be fully accurate and contain several myths even if it is excepted to be true by the public.
-The most important information in this passage is that 100% of all colonists actually supported it and that the cause of the tea party was not actually because of high taxes.
-One question I have is why are historic events, such as this one, changed by the public to make them more appealing. I have noticed a pattern of this throughout few accounts so far in the year.
The articles barely differ. the only difference i found is one article saying the preparation took no time while another states how people from Maine came down to Boston so in this article, the writer obviously tried showing how a good deal of preparation was made.
i think the author mainly wants me to know how important the Boston Tea Party was as well as the fact that tit was a catalyst for the spark of the Revolution.
As i said, the most important info in this passage is that the Boston Tea Party was a catalyst for the beginning of the Revolution. Also, the fact of how patriotic the colonists were, not allowing British tea in to the point where they swept it off the shores at the Boston Tea Party, is another main idea in these articles.
the question i had while i read are where do they get all these sources and which articles can i trust.
I personally have to disagree with Rob Brito about what he thinks is the most important piece of info in this passage. the reason why is because that wasn't the point of the articles. there were more important areas that he could of spoken of like the patriotism of the colonists as well as their determination too.
The article “Debunking Boston Tea Party Myths” by Ray Raphael is an in-depth analysis of the Boston Tea Party through a historian’s investigation of the event. It is a synthesis of various primary source documents, of which the facts were sorted out and the truths presented by Ray Raphael. In comparison to the personal accounts of George Hewes and Samuel Cooper, who were involved in the Boston Tea Party, I think the article is more believable because it comes from a historian who researched the facts of the event, but a personal account can differ significantly from one to the next, leading me to be hesitant when deciding who to believe. Therefore, I disagree with Rob Lazzaro, who thinks a personal account is more believable.
The author wanted readers to understand that the Boston Tea Party was indeed a step toward Revolution, but not because of the British. The step toward revolution was influenced by the Americans themselves, who used Britain’s taxes, which were reasonable, to blow up a bigger situation—and ultimately fuel the revolt. I think by this time Americans wanted to be an independent nation all along.
In the personal account by George Hewes he states, “No attempt was made to resist us,” when describing the rebel colonists as they dispose of the tea into the harbor. I wonder why the colonists weren’t stopped.
The articles differ because two of the three were from the point of view of the people who dressed as indians while the third was about why & how it happened.
The author wants me to remember how there are multiple views on the Boston Tea Party
The most important information in this passage is how the colonists used tea to go against parliament.
One question I had while reading is, how did the people take charge who did if others disagreed?
"Debunking Boston Tea Party Myths" was posted by Ray Raphael in order to reveal the truths of the myths about the tea party. However, the other 2 articles were told from primary witnesses of the tea party, which were actually people that were at the event.
The author wants me to learn that not everything you hear is whats all it is about, meaning that there might be more to the story that is not told, or that some of the stuff told is a lie. He is trying to teach me to learn to pick out the facts and not listen to fake ideas or opinions.
The most important information discussed in this passage would be the reasons behind the Tea Party. It wasn't because there were taxes on the tea, it was because they had no representation in how they were taxed and treated.
One question i had about what i read was - did English Parliament think that the colonists were being represented by them since they were Englishmen themselves?
I partially disagree with Claduia's comment, "The author wanted me to learn from this passage that some common myths about the Tea Party are false."
I believe he didnt want to say that all myths are false, its that he wants the readers to be able to distinguish between myth and truth.
Hi Pags
The three things that I read that differed were that two of them were coming from the people in the act, and the other one coming from someone telling about the story of the act.
The author wants me to remember the main idea on what happened during that time. And the important facts. If multiple myths tell the same fact/facts then it is most likely true and should be remembered.
most important information in this passage is that the colonists speaking out against the taxes on their everyday necessities.
My question is how do the articles differ so much. Why exaggerate?
Post a Comment