Student 1 (Synthesis Essay)

Whether to use nuclear power is a debate that touches on environmentalism, Taiwanese independence, and politics, with equally strong pro-nuclear and anti-nuclear opinions. Everyone in Taiwan has a stake in this issue. Based on the sources, I acknowledge the limitations of nuclear energy but believe Taiwan should make use of it in the short term.

One important reason against weaning off nuclear energy in Taiwan is that it’s unrealistic to rely on energy sources purchased from other countries, due to the cost and distance involved (Hoie). In the past, submarine cables took “16 billion NT to construct [...] and it took 13 years to do so” (Hoie). This highlights the challenge in time and cost that relying on energy from neighboring countries would involve.

In addition, although nuclear power currently makes up only 8% of Taiwan’s power consumption in March 2023, the flipside of this means Taiwan relies heavily on fossil fuels for electricity (80%) (Liu). This generates concerns for the environment, along with Taiwan’s unstable energy sources that include a mix of natural gas (Liu). Not to ignore the other concerns about reliance on nuclear energy, but at the same time consideration needs to be given to the immediate concern of environmental degradation.

There is also an argument for the democratic side of the issue. People on both sides of the nuclear energy issue agree it’s democratic in nature and should be up to the people (Freschi). As it is, in 2018, nearly 60% of voters when asked were against entirely phasing out nuclear power (Liu). This makes clear that if one means to listen to the people, at least some nuclear power should stay.

Another important concern for reliance on nuclear energy in Taiwan stems from Japan’s infamous nuclear accident in 2011 (Freschi). Taiwan, having many earthquakes and being much smaller in area than Japan, would struggle in the event of a nuclear catastrophe such as Japan’s. Indeed, an earthquake near a nuclear power plant reminded Taiwanese people of just this (Freschi).  In addition, in wartime with China, nuclear power plants can easily be knocked down (Turton). Taiwan’s reliance on nuclear power is therefore both an invitation to natural catastrophe and a vulnerability in the case of war.

However, these are largely concerns about the future, about things that may or may not happen. Perhaps it’s precisely because of this that the people voted against phasing out nuclear power in 2018, as mentioned above. In addition, we must acknowledge fossil fuels have “dangerous side effects” and nuclear energy plays “an important role in maintaining [Taiwan’s] democratic independence” (Freschi).

Based on this, there are valid concerns about reliance on nuclear energy, but reality limits what alternative energy sources Taiwan can use at the moment. Although in Taiwan we may disagree on the best and most viable energy source for our country’s future, it’s important to consider the sensibility of phasing out nuclear energy too fast and without reliable alternatives.

Student 2 (Argumentative Essay)

Ever since the Scientific Revolution and the Age of Enlightenment, the scientific method has been praised as if it is the pinnacle of human invention. Nearly all fields of science in most places have adopted and standardized this sequential method introduced by a small group of European intellectuals. To put it shortly, the scientific method entails two major presuppositions. First and foremost, the theories formulated must be based on the “law of universal causation” (Okon). This law requires the assumptions in any scientific studies to be deterministic and non-accidental. Secondly, the scientific method necessitates the methodical approach following a six step process: (1) Question (2) Hypothesis (3) Experiment (4) Observation (5) Analysis (6) Conclusion (American Museum of Natural History). These two conditions are necessary for the formulation of a proper scientific research based on scientific method. However, there are innumerable fields of sciences in which these conditions can barely be met. So the question remains, is scientific method really among the best ways of performing research? From the evidence from various expertises and fields, scientific method is clearly an overrated method that does not apply to all types of research studies. 

Primarily, the scientific method involves the condition that all assumptions should be deterministic and non-accidental. Yet, there are many fields in sciences that are barely possible to make such an assumption. For instance, in social sciences, it is not possible to control the settings in which certain events occur, unlike the more traditional “hard sciences” (Okon). Hence, there will inevitably be confounding factors and randomness that severely affect the outcomes of a social science experiment due to the sophistication of the social environment. Therefore, the scientific method’s “law of universal causation” would not be applicable under many cases as the fields fail to address all the confounding factors that cause certain events to occur. Hence, it’s not the best methods to apply in many scientific fields, in social sciences, such as psychology, political science, and social investigations. 

It is similarly crucial to address the second presuppositions, that the scientific studies follow standardized the six steps processes. It is essential to note that depending on the fields that one is studying into, the circumstances and influencing factors differ. Hence, it is logical to assume that the experimental approaches may differ as well, so the one-sized fit all approach may not be applicable for various sciences. This is the case in sciences aside from social science as well. For instance, when studying genetics, the expert stated that, “Figuring out a species’ entire genetic code, for example, generates enormous collections of data. Scientists who want to make sense of these data don’t always start with a hypothesis” (Singers). This indicates that not all scientific approaches begin their study with the six step process. Some might gather data to find the patterns first before working on the research questions and hypotheses. Therefore this condition is not applicable for all cases as well. 

Given that two presuppositions of scientific methods can’t be applied to numerous fields of sciences, it is logical to assume that the scientific method may not be the most ideal way to perform research. 

Yet, some proponents of scientific methods might argue, “The scientific method has been a long-standing tradition that effectively demonstrated the causal relationship in certain fields.” (Britannica). However, it is noteworthy that the scientific method was introduced by a group of European scholars specializing in certain fields of expertise. For instance, the founder of the scientific method, Galileo Galilei, focused on astronomical observations (Britannica). Therefore, it’s illogical to assume that the methodology adopted for astronomy, chemistry, physics are going to work as well in other scientific fields. The fields of psychology and social sciences emerged much later during the Age of Enlightenment. Yet, scholars still chose to stick with the scientific method specifically purposed for certain fields of sciences. Hence, considering that the foundations of scientific method is skewed in the paradigms of certain fields, it is not ideal to apply these approaches onto sciences that are vastly different. 

The scientific method, despite its historical applications, shouldn’t be the most ideal way for approaching scientific studies. The two conditions of social sciences, the law of causations and the methodological approaches have been proven to be inapplicable for many fields of science. Furthermore, since scientific methods are introduced by the scholars with skewed paradigms toward certain fields of science, it makes the scientific method less likely to apply to fields that vastly differs from the traditional scientific fields, such as physics, chemistry, and astronomy. Whether or not the scientific method is eligible as a standard for science has been a topic of contention for years. It is crucial for the scientific community to note that the scientific method isn’t the holy scroll of science, but one of many scientific approaches that can be adopted.

Student 3 (Argumentative Essay)

In Susan Sontag’s essay “One Culture & the New Sensibility,” she argues that “the purpose of art is always, ultimately, to give pleasure,” (p.53). Written in the context of the 1960s, when classical artistic boundaries were dissolving, Sontag’s claim reflects a broader cultural shift away from the intellectual, moralistic function of art and toward an appreciation of art as a sensory and aesthetic experience. While her argument that art’s purpose is to give pleasure has a compelling foundation, it ultimately oversimplifies the complexity and diversity of art’s functions. Art, as I argue, serves to provide pleasure and challenge, reflect, and provoke thought in ways that transcend mere sensory enjoyment.

Sontag’s claim that art’s ultimate purpose is pleasure is rooted in her critique of the over-intellectualization of art. In her essay, she criticizes traditional artworks for reducing the meanings and messages of the works, arguing that this approach detracts from the sensual experience of the artworks themselves. For Sontag, art should be appreciated for its form, texture, and impact on the senses. Sontag states “Sensations, feelings, the abstract forms of sensibility count…not the idea, analysis of and extensions of sensations,” (p. 48). This perspective emerges in response to the prevailing modernist critical frameworks, which often prioritize the deeper "meaning" behind a work of art, sometimes to the detriment of the viewer’s sensory engagement. By claiming that art’s purpose is to give pleasure, Sontag seeks to elevate art's sensory and emotional aspects, reminding us that art is, above all, something to be felt. 

Adding on, to challenging social norms, art also serves as a medium for personal reflection and self-expression. This function of art, while sometimes pleasurable, often involves the exploration of complex emotions, trauma, and inner conflicts. For artists themselves, the process of creation may be less about pleasure and more about exploration and/or self-understanding.

Susan Sontag’s central claim that the ultimate purpose of art is to give pleasure offers a powerful critique of the over-intellectualization of art criticism, reminding us of the importance of sensory engagement. Art serves not only to delight but also to provoke, challenge, and reflect the complexities of the human experience. In this sense, the purpose of art is as varied as the forms it takes and the reactions it elicits, encompassing far more than pleasure alone. 

Student 4 (Rhetorical Analysis Essay)

It is 1980, and the election is approaching. Life is still ever hard for the black man, and political author James Baldwin knows and utilises this to his advantage in his political essay Dark Days. In a stroke of genius, Baldwin utilises a personal narrative and specific word choices to sell a untasteful thesis to a doubtful audience.

“I hit the streets when I was seven,” Baldwin begins, and the audience is already leaning an ear towards his intimate tone. From “I went to school in Harlem(p.2),” and “When I was growing up(p.7),” to “My mother asked me (p.6),” there is certainly no lack of anecdotes that Baldwin soothingly tells the audience. He slowly draws his readers in unwittingly, bridging the distance between them by telling the secrets of his life.

By the time he starts to include his audience into his sentences, they are already too absorbed into his stories to notice. After talking about the education he received from his elders, Baldwin generalizes that “a child” knows that love is in the harsh beatings he receives. Then, with subtlety hidden as a breath of fresh air, he begins again that “[e]very human being” is born to be civilised. We’re all the same, he tells his audience, and they nod. Even the most hesitant reader cannot argue his written experiences.

But Baldwin has something to say, and after he’s dangled his fishing bait, he’s ready to reel them in. We are not in fact the same, He tells us. He has shifted from ‘I’ to ‘we’, and now it is time to draw the dividing line in ‘us’. 

“The doors opened for white people,” he tells us, but they “were not opened for blacks. Not then, not now.” (p.7)

And what choice does his audience have but believe him? With all the personal knowledge he has, he clearly is not lying. How could he? The truth is all there. 

From the very first sentence, Baldwin had drawn his audience in with his intimate storytelling. From the first paragraph, Baldwin had established his credentials. In the final paragraph, we the audience is ready to fall into his wise hands. 

The strategic placing of his thesis at the end gives Baldwin the opportunity to make his bold statement. “The reality...nor for others.” he tells us, and it is only in this final concise paragraph that his claim is valiantly stated. Content and trusting of Baldwin from his smooth stories, his stubborn audience accepts his conclusion.

As a black writer defending black people in a still racist society, Baldwin knows he must climb a hill to convince his audience, who are disinclined to listen to him. He ascends a slow slope of anecdotes, giving himself credibility to make the bold claims and divisions which represent his swift descent. A master of pronouns, Baldwin has convinced all.

Student 1 (Comparative Literary Analysis; full text with citations linked here)

Both Parable of the Sower by Octavia Butler and Ministry for the Future by Kim Stanley Robinson are a book responding to the issues of climate change, but they have different angles with different strategies. Parable of the Sower happens in a dystopian world damaged by climate change, social collapse, and inequality, focusing on the journey of the protagonist, Lauren. She has the ability to feel others’ pain, Lauren tries to adapt to the environment in the chaos by creating a new community, “Earthseed” based on her own concept “God is change.”Through Lauren’s story, Butler warns the potential consequences of climate change and also the importance of adaptability and flexibility to build a better future. On the other hand, Ministry for the Future is set in a future where climate change gas already has been heavily progressed in large-scale and global solutions in needed to save humans. The story follows the Ministry for the Future, which is an international organization dedicated to saving the rights of future generations and preventing the effects of climate change. Robinson’s story talks about climate change on a global scale, focusing on political, economic, and technological relationships with climate change like, geoengineering, and carbon taxes. While Robinson’s Ministry for the Future responds to climate change more realistic and logically, I find Butler’s Parable of the Sower a more applicable response to the circumstances I’m growing up. This essay will explain why I think Butler’s response is more applicable. 

In Parable of the Sower, Butler writes from the perspective of the early 1990s, when climate change science was still developing. The first IPCC Report in 1990 predicted a rise in global temperatures of about 1.1°C between 1990 and 2030, but they were still based on a narrower range of data. Some environmental issues were taken seriously such as air pollution but global climate issues was still not as detailed or was not a big deal as it is today. The story talks about climate change and its consequences, but it has not much detailed scientific explanations and it focuses more on the emotional and psychological parts of climate change. The environmental science is in the book since the setting is in a world with extreme weather patterns, resource shortages and social problems, but Butler doesn’t go deeper into the details of the science itself. This lack of detailed scientific explanation shows the state of climate change science at that time, when it was less understood focusing more on the visible, immediate effects of damaged environments. Instead, Butler puts the spotlight on the psychological impacts of living in a world damaged by climate change. Lauren’s ability to feel others’ pain, shows the trauma caused by the world collapsing which originally was led by the climate change. Her journey is very emotional as she tries to survive and make a new community based on her belief “God is change. “ In this world, the consequences of climate change are very personal. Family falling apart, the death of loved ones, and the trauma of living in dangerous environment are all outcomes of environmental and social collapse. 

In contrast, Ministry for the Future, written in 2020, shows the more developed climate change science of today, where its better understood. The book talks about climate change more scientifically and logically, while it warns us that “Everyone knows, but no one acts”. It discusses details of economic systems, and engineering solutions like managing radiation, carbon capture technology, and international organizations to address climate change. Robinson connects the political and technological elements related to climate change, showing concerns about how humans might prevent or fight climate change. Robinson’s focus is not really on the emotional and psychological responses of people but on the importance of global and political way to address climate change. The emotional responses of the characters in Ministry for the Future are not the main focus. Majority of the time it was used to tell the urgency for action rather than explain the psychological impacts of climate change.

While Robinson’s detailed scientific narrative gives us a better understanding of climate change, Parable of the Sower shows something different and more applicable. The emotional depth makes her perspective on climate change feel more applicable to today’s world, where not many people have responsibility for their own environment and the affect of climate change is noticeable in many communities. Both approaches are very different, giving a powerful warning to adapt not only technologically.

In my home country, Japan, the impact of climate change is becoming increasingly obvious, with rising temperatures, more often natural disasters, and odd weather patterns.　For example, in recent years, Japan has been experiencing severe heat waves during the summer as well as typhoons and floods. This summer, I realized how hot Japan’s summer is. I lived in South East Asian countries since I was born, for over 12 years and I can say for a fact, that Japan’s summer is worse in terms of comfortability. 

In 2019, typhoon Hagibis (東日本台風）caused massive flooding leading to hundreds of casualties. Also, Japan’s agriculture has been affected directly from rising temperatures and unpredictable weather, with crops like rice becoming more vulnerable to heat. Traditional rice-growing regions that spreads from the north of Japan, Hokkaido, to the south of Japan, Okinawa are facing odd rainfall patterns. While the Japanese government has been trying to reduce carbon emissions and switch to renewable energy sources, there are major problems with making these actions meaningful. Politics over fossil fuel dependency, economic pressures, and reliance on nuclear power have not made major progress in addressing climate change. To sum up, Japanese governments are focusing on profits just like in Ministry for the Future. “They do care about the environment, but their main focus is on protecting the economy.”As of now, Japan is still relying on coal and natural gas heavily with large-scale investments in green technology compared to other countries.This is similar to the challenges seen in the Ministry for the Future, where political and economic power struggle when solving big global issues. The strategies Robinson emphasized might seem like it would work in real life, like how it seems to work in the book, but they might face more challenges.

In contrast, a local, adaptable response, similar to “Earthseed” in Parable of the Sower seems to be relevant in Japan’s current climate situation. Many local communities in Japan have already started to adapt to climate change with multiple solutions, such as building up disaster preparations, stable infrastructure, and having local agricultural practices that are more suitable to climate change. For example, farmers have been improving agricultural facilities such as temperature control inside greenhouses to mitigate the heatwave and also improving varieties that are more tolerant to temperature increases and odd rainfall patterns. Japanese companies, such as Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group have been adapting to climate change through sustainable strategies that balance both risks and opportunity by considering a change in their marketing and risk management. These localized, community-based actions are based on the understanding that adaptation is important, especially in areas where large-scale national policies are slower to take effect. These local efforts show the adaptability and sufficiency emphasized in Parable of the Sower where Lauren creates a new community based on flexibility and survival when facing a collapsing society. In terms of Japan, while global situations like carbon coins and geoengineering may play a role in slowing down climate change, responses like community-based disaster preparation, agriculture-conscious climate, and sustainable developments in local companies offer more immediate and noticeable ways for people to cope with the realities of climate change. Large global situations often seem far away from us or out of reach, however after looking at Japanese local, adaptable actions this makes Butler’s response more applicable. 

In conclusion, both Parable of the Sower and Ministry of Future show strong responses to climate change, and each author show different perspective that was shaped by the time of its writing. Butler, writing in the early 1990s, used a dystopian world with climate change progressing, focusing on the adaptation and the social impact of climate change. Her narrative expresses the importance of personal and community adaptations to survive, emphasizing on flexibility, and creating new community that aligns a lot in today’s world. In contrast, Robinson writing in 2020, shows a more scientific and logical approach with more global narrative addressing the technical, political, and economic elements to fight climate change in a bigger scale. Robinson’s approach gives us a better understanding of the global issues, leaning towards the institutional and technological solutions, which feels far away from me right now. Given the reality of climate change, local communities are vulnerable to climate change and effects from it, Butler’s focus on adaptation and community based solutions feels more applicable to the circumstances around me. Parable of the Sower gives more hopeful path in a world where political and economical actions often slow solutions. Butler’s perspective on building communities from the ground, like the efforts being made in Japan today, gives practical solutions for coping with climate change. Eventually, both authors responses are valuable, but Butler’s response on adaptability feels relevant to me and my generation.

Student 2 (Comparative Literary Analysis Flash Essay) 

In societies with hierarchies, authorities often exploit their power for personal gain, and those in a higher social class tend to disdain the others due to their abilities to control them, which is particularly shown in the nobles' attitudes toward the servants in King Lear and the relationships between divine figures and mortals in The Odyssey. This raises a question: can one utilize intelligence or moral wisdom to challenge seemingly immutable authorities?

In both Homer's Odyssey and Shakespeare's King Lear, power dynamics are evidently portrayed. For instance, Poseidon, the god of the sea, uses his power to create obstacles and prevent Odysseus from returning home for years. On the other hand, Edmund, the illegitimate son of the Earl of Gloucester, calls himself "bastard" and "the base", while Gloucester mistreats and disrespects him due to his birth. 

Still, power doesn't make one invincible. For example, Lear foolishly disowns Cordelia and hands his power to the two sisters, leading to the occurrence of the entire tragedy. Thus, those who possess power without wisdom provides opportunities for people combat them. Odysseus, without divine power, uses his cleverness to outsmart the gods, such as the Cyclopes who look down upon him. He also makes his way home without dying. Underprivileged characters also successfully retained their moral and beliefs in King Lear. In particular, Cordelia forms an opposing force against her sisters and Edmund after being banished, and Edgar stays beside his father despite being mistreated.

Considering how the two characters remain in King Lear are both nobles, how it is Athena, the god of wisdom, who guided Odysseus through his journey, and also how the rhetoric is only accessible and exploitable by the educated individuals or the privileged, it is arguable that power dynamics are not challengeable. However, it should be noted that those cases provide evidence on how wisdom is greater than power itself. For instance, the downfall Edgar goes through due to the schemes of Edmund makes him not only the son of the Earl but also has given him a new identity of a beggar. Observing almost the entire event, he gains insights into the exercise of power and the relationship between people in different classes.

Cordelia, Edgar, and Odysseus, despite having negative conditions, challenge the authorities and retain their morals. Therefore, apart from solely focusing on the pursuit of power, as it is most likely immutable, people should instead improve their intelligence.

Student 3 (Single Literary Analysis Flash Essay)

Power, blindness, and ultimately death – these themes are echoed in the classic tragedy King Lear, where Shakespear explores the concept of power and its misgivings through Lear. In this, Lear’s pursuit and exercise of power eventually dooms himself. Physically, this doom is his ultimate death, and emotionally, it is his betrayal and loss. The exercise and pursuit of power results in a “blindness” that causes his dooms. His continued exposure to power has caused his judgment to deteriorate, and his submission to flattery clearly demonstrates his lack of judgment. The results of his “blindness” causes his ultimate death and inflicts harm upon the people around him.

This blindness that comes from power can be shown in Lear’s age. His growing age represents his continued use and pursuit of power, which results in his bad judgment and madness, and ultimately his doom. In Shakespeare's time, the system of government was a monarchy, where power runs within one family, according to an in class discussion. In the early beginning, Lear, naturally and without hesitation, orders, “Attend the lords of France and Burgundy, Gloucester”(I.i.33). Ordering Gloucester to attend to France and Burgundy is an evident act of Lear's power. So, we can conclude that Lear has been a king, or at least been royalty, all his life, and thus always had power. In his time as king, he has obviously pursued and exercised power, and as his age increased, the cumulative effect of his actions grew. And as this continual relationship with power grows, the bad judgment from power also does. Goneril observes, “You see how full of changes his age is; the observation we have made of it hath not been little”, and Regan replies, “’Tis the infirmity of his age. Yet he hath ever but slenderly known himself”(I.i.339). Clearly, Lear's family members have noticed his deteriorating judgment, with his instability being prevalent since he was young. We can conclude that with age and the constant exercise of power of the king, it has made him become unstable and “blind”, as in making bad decisions. “Infirmity of his age” can also hint to the time Lear lived in or his generation, hinting that his generation, the powerful and old, is unstable in their decisions as well. Growing old represents the cause of having power. This connects to the reason that in his exercise of power, he dooms himself because of his bad decisions. 

Blinded by power, Lear succumbs to flattery. This represents a pursuit of power, specifically, the pursuit of feeling powerful. During the activity we had on Friday the 27th, Jamie and Jonathan commented that pursuing his daughters "affection" is still a pursuit of power. He fails to get what he supposedly wants, love, and he accepts the insincere flattery to maintain his sense of control and power. Goneril sweetly claims, “Sir, I love you more than words can wield the matter, Dearer than eyesight, space, and liberty”(I.i.60). Goneril praises Lear not as a father, but as a king or higher being, such as a god. Lear accepts this praise, and gives her a huge chunk of land. In contrast, Cordelia bluntly states, “My heart into my mouth. I love your Majesty According to my bond, no more nor less”(I.i.102). Cordeila says she loves Lear based on the fact that she is his daughter, not as a higher being. She is genuine – “my heart to my mouth” – and would not flatter and praise just to get land. Lear is taken aback by this, and shouts, “Hence and avoid my sight!—”(I.i.139). Blinded by the need to feel powerful, Lear disowns her because she did not abide by giving him the sense of power that he wanted. He accepts Goneril’s flattery because it made him feel powerful, while discarding the sincere words of Cordelia because they fail to do so. This obvious pursuit of power dooms him to cast away the only daughter that truly loved him. 

In a similar fashion to Cordelia, Kent is banished for speaking the truth. When he opposes the banishment of Cordelia, Lear tells him off and banishes him too. Kent tries to reason, “What wouldst thou do, old man? Think’st thou that duty shall have dread to speak When power to flattery bows? To plainness honor’s bound”(I.i.168). He calls Goneril and Regan speeches insincere “flattery” and defends Cordelia’s simple and truthful remark of love. However, Lear takes this advice badly and shouts at Kent, “Thy banished trunk be found in our dominions, The moment is thy death. Away!”(I.i.201), banishing him from the kingdom. Both Cordelia and Kent spoke the truth, and they were casted away, since they failed at making him feel strong and mighty. This evidently shows Lear’s “blindness” or misjudgment that came from power, and his pursuit of feeling powerful. With this pursuit of feeling powerful, he casts away the genuine people around him, dooming himself to be surrounded by schemers.

These schemers include Goneril and Regan. They strip away Lear's knights and cast him out into the woods, dooming his living situation. By pursuing power, casting away the truthful people around him and trusting flattery, he allows himself to be at a point of paradoxical weakness, where others can attempt to pursue his own power. Lear’s use of power allows others to pursue it, which dooms himself. Goneril observes, “You see how full of changes his age is; the observation we have made of it hath not been little”, and then concludes, “If our father carry authority with such disposition as he bears, this last surrender of his will but offend us”(I.i.350). They are afraid that Lear’s temperament would lead to their ultimate banishment, so they step up to take Lear's power away from him to keep their own. Lear’s misjudgement and use of power has given Goneril and Regan a reason to take away his power. And with Kent and Cordila missing, the eldest sisters have fewerless obstacles to do so.

So, Goneril and Regan take away Lear’s power. Lear asks, “With five and twenty, Regan? Said you so?”, and Regan replies, “And speak’t again, my lord. No more with me”(II.iv.253). Goneril first takes away 50 of the Lear’s Knights, and then Regan takes away 25 and locks him outside. With Kent and Cordelia gone, the eldest sisters have less obstacles preventing them from casting away Lear. They ultimately succeed, where Lear is locked outside and left on his own with the Fool in the wilderness.

When he is without power, Lear realizes the truth. In this climax, Lear shouts at the winds. Only when he is away in the wilderness, without any form of status or power, does he come to the realization that Cordelia was right all along, and that Goneril and Regan have been deceiving him. Some may argue that this scene doesn’t show that Lear sees the truth, but that he purely exhibits that he is insane and mad. On October fourth, Anna brought line 11 during our discussion, which states, “When the mind's free, The body's delicate: the tempest in my mind”(III.ii.11). It was discussed that this represents Lear’s madness. However, even though his actions are abnormal, they still hold a sense of truth of his situation. Screaming at the winds, referencing his eldests daughters, Lear declares he is “your slave, A poor, infirm, weak, and despised old man”(III.ii, 20) and “a man more sinn’d against than sinning”(III.iv, 19). Here, Lear sees himself as a weak, powerless man, not a king anymore. He understands that he is without power, unlike when he was oblivious to his daughter's schemes. His blindness is temporarily lifted and he knows what his state of being is. This contrasts the blindness he had in the first scene, and undoubtedly shows that the pursuit of power has the ability to warp a person’s judgment. 

However, the brief moment of truth in the wilderness is shattered when Lear decides to get back the kingdom, with the help of Cordelia. And after getting help in the French Camp, Lear wanders to the aftermath of Gloucester’s attempted suicide. He, again, is disillusioned from this pursuit. He announces, “No, they cannot touch me for coining. I am the King himself”(IV.vi.102). As a result of the pursuit of getting the kingdom back, he is, again, disillusioned. Having regressed from this truthful state in his escape in the wilderness, he now believes he is king again, even though he evidently is not, showing how blindness comes from power.

All of the blindness that came from exercise and pursuits of power results in Lear’s ultimate demise, his death. This striving for power leads to a war between France and Britain, as in Goneril, Regan, and their allies against Lear and Cordelia. They could’ve lived peacefully in France, but they did not, and this resulted in their demise. Cordelia, young and foolish, and Lear, disillusioned and mad, lose to Goneril and Regan. In act five, scene three, they are captured, and Cordeila dies due to forced hanging. Lear dies because he realizes that his actions in pursuing and exercising power has caused the people around him to die. The messenger delivers, “Edmund is dead, my lord”(V.iii.354), and Albany responds, “For us, we will resign, During the life of this old Majesty, To him our absolute power”(V.iii.363). Here, Albany declares Lear as king. However, Lear doesn’t respond as one may expect, instead he mourns, “And my poor fool is hanged. No, no, no life?”(V.iii.69) and cries, “Do you see this? Look on her, look, her lips, Look there, look there! [He dies]”(V.iii.374). When Albany declares Lear as King again, he doesn't celebrate or rejoice. He, instead, thinks about the people he hurt, Cordelia and the Fool, realizing his actions have caused their death. He, tragically, dies because of guilt for his actions.

Prompted by the messenger, he realizes that he is just like Edmund, aspiring for power and hurting people around him. Edmund and Lear both aspire for power, and both fall to their demise because of it. Edmund was a bastard and did everything he could to get power and land. In the end, he dies at the hand of Edgar, whom he hurt by pursuing power. He, like Lear, regrets his actions in his dying breath. “Some good I mean to do…Quickly send— Be brief in it—to the' castle, for my writ Is on the life of Lear, and on Cordelia”(V.iii.291). Edmund regrets the people whom he hurt when trying to get power. Here, we can infer that Shakespeare uses Edmund as a parallel character to Lear. The intention of using the message of Edmund's death as the main event causing Lear's ultimate death shows these characters are undoubtedly connected. Lear’s dealing with power leads to the death of people around him, and eventually his own, regretting the results of his action. 

Some may argue that instead of regret, his age was the leading factor of his demise, since Lear states that he was on the "Unburden'd crawl toward death"(I.i.40) in the first scene, indicating that he was already close to death. This point is understandable, but we must keep in mind that it is also possible that he could’ve died at any point, and that Shakespeare chose this specific event leading up to his death. His last speech included mourning about Cordelia and the Fool, and his last words exclaim, “Look on her, look, her lips, Look there, look there!”. Shakespeare uses anaphoras to emphasize Lear’s loss and mourning for Cordelia, evidently implying her death played an important role in his death. Lear also reproaches himself by questioning “Why should a dog, a horse, a rat have life, And thou no breath at all?”(V.iii.370). He metaphorically questions why he is living while Cordelia and the Fool are dead, clearly guilty for his actions. 

Lear’s pursuit and exercise of power leads to his ultimate doom. His life long exposure to power results in his deteriorating judgment, and this, and his pursuit of feeling powerful, causes him to cast away the genuine people around him and surround himself with schemers. Only when he is without power, in the woods, he realizes the truth of Goneril and Regan and Cordelia. However, this brief moment of truth is shattered when he tries to pursue power again, and this results in his ultimate doom, his death. Through Lear, Shakespeare presents a tragic tale of how the pursuit of power and its use can lead to one's own downfall and the demise of those around them. Lear's fall symbolizes humanity's fatal flaw in its insatiable hunger for power, with its inevitable consequence of tragedy.

Student 1

All over the world people are worried about the coronavirus. There are many people dying from it, and now we do not understand the coronavirus. There are already many countries and cities closed. The schools should close.

If we close the schools, all the students will study at home, and that is a good choice to protect all of us. If someone in the school has coronavirus, it will be very dangerous for the people in school. There are about 30 students in one class, they all sit together, and some of the students don’t put on masks. Many students will touch the same thing, like door handles, so it is easy to spread coronavirus. If we study at home, we can protect ourselves and protect others.

Some people think we should not close the schools. People need to maintain their lifestyle and everyone needs to keep healthy. If we don’t close the schools, it will be very dangerous, because if someone in the school has coronavirus, it is easy to spread coronavirus. We should still close the schools, because if the schools close, people can still keep learning and working on the internet, and if we study at home we can protect ourselves and protect others.

It is hard to study at home, the internet might be laggy and there are many things at home that can bother you. Our lives are more important. We should close the schools and protect ourselves. What do you think?

Student 2

We need to take a mask to go to school. There are many people with coronavirus, so why should we go to school? It’s good to go to school because we need to keep learning, and if you stop the classes you need to spend vacation time to go to school. Some students will go to other places and get coronavirus, that will be more dangerous for us. Besides these reasons, our teachers will not have jobs, and they won’t get money to maintain their lifestyle. That makes me think we need to go to school in this dangerous time. But I think the sun will rise, and we will be better for the coronavirus.

Some people think we should close the schools. If someone in the school has the coronavirus, it will be very dangerous for the people in school. People might not have jobs. They won’t have any money to maintain their lifestyle, and we can’t keep learning. That is worse and dangerous for school. Teachers and office workers can go to work, some students won’t go to other places and get the coronavirus. We can see our classmates on workdays, and keep learning.

The coronavirus makes everyone afraid. Some movie theaters are closed, and many people are scared to get close to each other, just like strangers. The crowded town becomes an empty place. But I think if all people stay healthy, and take care of themselves, we will get better.

Student 3

Because of the coronavirus, teachers and students are scared. I think schools should close. It will show they care about our lives. Here are my reasons:

First, lives are more important than studying! Teachers and students are nervous every day. Also, teachers can use the internet to teach us. If one student gets the coronavirus, many students and teachers will get the coronavirus and that is very bad for everyone. Students at home still need to learn! And don’t play outside! Be safe.

Some people think schools should close, but not close too early, and I think this idea is right. But if schools don’t close early, maybe students or teachers will get the coronavirus, and that’s very dangerous. If schools close, everyone will be safe and healthy. Everyone will not be scared every day.

Our lives and our health is very important, so I think schools should close. Teachers, students, and everyone else needs to care about it!

Student 1

The first time I saw “Starry Night,” I was surprised, but I also felt cold and sad. In this painting, most of the parts are dark blue and black. Only stars and the moon are bright. It makes a strong contrast. Clouds are in special shapes, and it makes me feel unreal.

It’s very cool, and I wonder what he thought about at that time. After I read the story of “Starry Night,” I finally know why it is so special.

The artist who drew “Starry Night” is van Gogh. He had many masterpieces when he was in a psychiatric hospital. “Starry Night” is one of them. He was unhappy and insane when he drew “Starry Night,” so that’s the scene he saw in the sky.

“I don’t know anything with certainty, but seeing the stars makes me dream,” van Gogh said. After I understood more about van Gogh’s story, I looked at “Starry Night” again. I know more about his feelings at that time. When he stared at the beautiful stars, the dark night was also shiny. 

Student 2 

This is an essay about The Selfish Giant by Oscar Wilde. I wrote it in three parts: a summary, the parts I liked, and the part I didn’t like.

I wrote a summary of The Selfish Giant by Oscar Wilde. The giant builds a wall after the children play in his garden because he thinks the children are annoying. After the children leave the giant, he looks at the snow and feels bored, because nobody wants to play with him. In the end, the giant breaks the wall and the snow disappears many children come inside his garden, but he is too old, so he dies. I think it is an interesting book, if you have a chance you can try to read The Selfish Giant. 

I liked the book very much, because it was interesting to read. I liked it when the giant died, because the giant was annoying. I also liked it when the giant broke down the wall, because it was very cool. I liked more parts than I didn’t like. 

There was one part I didn’t like. I didn’t like it when the giant built the wall, because the giant was selfish. This bad part didn’t make the book bad.

This was an essay about The Selfish Giant by Oscar Wilde. I liked this book very much. It was a good book.

Student 3

John Singer Sargent was ruined by a portrait of a famous girl, but one day he and his friend were on a boat to see the scenery, and he saw some little girls in the garden, and he planned to paint what he saw. The painting turned him into a successful painter. 

In this painting, there are two little girls in white dresses, standing in a garden, and both of them are lighting up a Chinese paper lantern. 

I think this picture is very interesting, because the colors in this picture are very cute. It makes me feel comfortable, and the whole picture is very dreamy. 

Student 1

Does playing video games make kids smarter, and how can kids learn by playing video games? Some educational games let kids practice how to do things, and make them smarter. Letting kids play on-line video games can help them learn how to communicate with other players. Doing tasks with other players can help kids learn teamwork.

Some educational games can let kids practice how to do things, and make them smarter. If kids play CodeMonkey, they can learn how to program code to make a monkey get bananas. If kids play PoGamo, it can help kids do exercise to expand territory and build their empire. If kids play Chinese Chess, kids can learn how to plan and execute a plan. It’s sure kids can learn a lot of things by playing educational games.  

Letting kids play on-line videogames can help them learn to communicate with other players. Some kids communicate to build things in Minecraft. Some kids communicate to fight zombies in LifeAfter. Some kids communicate to trade things in LifeAfter and Minecraft. A lot of kids communicate in on-line videogames. 

Doing tasks with other players can help kids learn teamwork. When we do a bomb disposal task in some dungeon of LifeAfter, someone is in charge of finding the correct line to cut and pass to other team members. In the shire tournament of LifeAfter, different camps fight each other for the championship. During a global geological disaster in LifeAfter, every player tries to do everything to save the world. We airdrop coolant and build giant walls. There are many teamwork activities in videogames. Kids can learn so much by playing them.

Student 2

There are approximately 8 billion people in this world, and out of those 8 billion, I am a lucky person who has developed the talent of being bilingual. To be bilingual means that I can speak two or more different languages. It's not just a fantastic talent to have; being bilingual also comes with plenty of benefits and advantages, such as having a better job, being able to translate the language for people who aren't bilingual, and being able to speak two different languages, which for me are Mexican Spanish and English. 

To begin with, being bilingual comes with several assets when trying to find a job. Finding a job is way easier for bilingual people because they can speak two different languages without having to struggle as much as a non-bilingual person will. Most people who aren't bilingual just get a job and get paid less than a bilingual person, while bilingual people get paid more since they can speak 2 languages and are able to communicate with any person who might speak a different language than English. So being bilingual gives you better opportunities for getting a job that you would like and you can get paid more for the amazing talent of being bilingual.

My dad is bilingual so when he goes out to find a job he has higher expectations to get a good paying job. He usually gets a job in Tennessee since there is a higher ROI there than Texas, and because he is able to translate, so he gets better contract offers there. My dad gets paid way more than my mom is,since she isn’t bilingual, so it's better when my dad goes to work so we won't get behind on our bills, payments, etc. So being bilingual can have some good benefits than not being bilingual. 

Secondly, being bilingual also comes with being able to translate to other people who don't speak Spanish or English. There are approximately 50 million people in the U.S. who don't know how to speak Spanish, so being able to translate is a really good thing. One time I was in a Mexican airport, coming back from Cancún, and there was a guy who didn't speak Spanish, so the airport workers asked if I could translate for him. Later he came back thanking me since I helped him reach his flight in time and he said “you have an amazing future ahead of you. Those words really inspired me to work hard to accomplish my goals. 

Last of all, the talent of being bilingual is such an important thing that a person can be given. The ability to speak both languages is such an amazing thing since you can speak to anyone who is bilingual without having trouble. Bilingual is an advantage to life since you can speak to anyone you want since the most common language is English, so even if you're in Mexico there can still be people who speak English. Having the talent of being bilingual is something that I try not to take for granted since not many people can have this amazing talent.

In conclusion, being bilingual is a good thing, since it comes with all these advantages. Bilingualism is also a fun ability to have since not many people have that ability. Bilingual isn't just a talent but a cool feature to have. I plan to use this ability for the rest of my life, and never take it for granted. As you can see, being bilingual is the best thing a person can learn and have for their future. 

Student 1

For me, growing up bilingual wasn’t always as easy as it is now. I had to learn English from a very young age, since I only spoke Spanish. I'll start by telling you my experiences with learning English, and how I came to understand the language, along with the hardships that came with it.

I would slur most of my words, and I'd get irritated when I couldn’t speak appropriately. For example, when I was at daycare I would talk to my teachers in Spanish, but when I'd have to talk to my peers I couldn’t pronounce my words, and none of them could understand my English. It was hard till I got home since I'd only get spoken to in Spanish. I’d tell my mom about my complications, and it led to me getting put into speech therapy. They would talk to me, but it was challenging to even hear what they’d say. Most of the words came out as incoherent sounds, and I couldn’t read their lips which made it even worse. It only got worse from there, since they wanted me to start reading more and learn the alphabet. I got very frustrated each time I went to therapy, but I started to improve with my understanding of the language. I could pronounce easy words like ‘be,’ ‘and,’ ‘a,’ and ‘yes’ after a good week of back to back sessions that were as long as 4 hours. They eventually noticed I had learned most of the alphabet, so they gave me a verbal quiz. It was much better than when I started, but I still had to continue my lessons.

Fast forward a year, and they released me from speech therapy, and I had become a lot better with the understanding of the language. It was much easier after a certain amount of time, and it was easier to talk with multiple people at the same time since I had become much better with the language and understanding of it. These experiences are what came along with learning English and how to speak in the language.

Student 2

As my family and I were pulling up to our driveway, my father was telling us, "We have a surprise for guys."

We all paused in silence as he continues, "We're going to Cancun." My brothers and I yelled quietly in excitement, this was the first trip that we'd gone to that we had to go on a plane.

A few months later, we were getting on a plane ready to take flight. I was so excited. It was the first time I'd ever gotten on an airplane. A few hours later we had landed and we were headed to the hotel. As soon as we got to the hotel I realized this was going to be the best time of my life. The hotel was massive at least thirty pools in the park itself and it was next to the ocean. The rooms were also fantastically amazing with beds softer than clouds and pillows that are even softer it was one of the best periods of sleep I've ever had in my life. Every day we went to a different pool that was around my hotel, we also had a buffet of drinks and food. We could drink our beverages which we could customize in the pool, which was amazing because you wouldn't have to miss out on any family fun. 

Finally, it was the last day we were excited because we got to see the rest of our family and sad because we had to leave our hotel. We rode a taxi to the airport where we got on the airplane and left Cancun, and got delivered to Mexico city where our truck had been staying for a few days. We reconnected with our family and we finally reunited.

Student 1

In a haunted house, there was a spooky vampire. A girl called Anna went to the haunted house. She looked inside, and it was very dirty, with a lot of spider webs. She saw them and she ran away. She went to her house and found her dad.

She and her dad went back to the haunted house. They went inside, went up the stairs, and they saw a vampire, witch, skeleton, bat, and spider. Anna’s dad was not scared, but Anna was very scared. But she didn’t want to give up, she wanted to stay with her dad. They kept going to look for things. Then they found a box of candy and chocolate. They were happy. But there were spiders inside the box. 

Student 2

Today was our school’s Grade 5 field trip day. Today we went to Leofoo Village. Our class was in the first bus. The inside of our bus had our classmates and four Class 505 children. But today was rainy, so we wore ponchos and boot covers. We went to raft. We played on the raft 4 times. We went to eat spicy chicken and ice cream. It was very yummy. Today was a good day. 

Student 3

A child called Terry had a friend called Bear. One day Terry was playing with his ball in the morning. His ball got lost in the forest. So Terry went inside the forest, but when he found the ball it was already night, so he stayed in the forest. 

The next day, his friend Bear wanted to play with Terry, so Bear went to Terry’s home. But when Bear went to Terry’s home, he didn’t see Terry, so Bear went to look for Terry. 

When Bear went inside the forest to find Terry, Terry walked out of the forest. The Terry told Bear why he went in the forest and what he found in the forest. They played together again.

Student 4

Today, I met a mysterious man named Mr. Cookie. We went to a place. Then we got chased by a huge ant, and Mr. Cookie’s head got eaten. That was because Mr. Cookie’s head was tasty, but my head was not. The ant finished Mr. Cookie’s head and felt full, but Mr. Cookie felt happy, because he could buy a new head. 

Mr. Cookie and I went to a candy store to buy a new head. We felt good, because I could eat the candy and Mr. Cookie could buy a new head. The store was on Jupiter. We walked to the store. 

Mr. Cookie got the new head and I got a lot of candy. We all felt happy. Then we went to the Sun, because Mr. Cookie’s head needed to get baked and I wanted to be warm. 

Student 1

I want to buy many flowers. When I grow up, I also want to buy cookies. I will also buy a dog. I will play with my dog. The dog will be cute. I will play with my mom. I like her. Sometimes I don’t like my dad. My dad is very noisy. Sometimes I am also noisy. My mom is not noisy. 

Student 2

Dear Mom,

I am in Japan now. I like when you cook. I will feel happy when you cook. My favorite food is curry. You make me feel happy. I love you. 

Love,

--------------------

Student 3

My dad lives in Zhubei. He is a soldier. In one month, my dad will come back and he will take me to his home. I will play with my dad. I will play ball with my dad in his home. I will feel happy.