Mindset Paper

It's been a long time since I've added anything to this blog. I started it in Junior High, and I'm now a 21-year-old Sophomore in college. I recently had to write a one-page paper for an engineering class, and I figured I'd share it.

Carol S. Dweck’s paper “The Perils and Promises of Praise” discusses two kinds of mind-sets that can develop in people. The first is a “fixed mind-set”. People with this mind-set view intelligence as an intrinsic ability: something that a person is born with and it can’t be changed. They are more concerned with validating that intelligence than with expanding it, and this leads to pursuing challenges that require little effort because the show of effort indicates to them a lack of this intrinsic intelligence. This is a downward spiral for students in any field of study: their handicapped growth keeps them from opportunities that would only help them develop more and more, and they get stuck on the idea that they can only perform at a fixed level. Dweck juxtaposes this mind-set to a “growth mind-set.” With a growth mind-set, a person believes intelligence is “malleable” and can be developed with effort and practice. These people tend to perform better with difficult or new tasks because they view the task as something that they can personally do given enough time, effort, and help. Students with this mind-set will perform better in the long run because they don’t quit when given what seem like problems that they are currently incapable of solving.

            I see the difference the difference between these two mind-sets as the same as the difference between success and failure. In general, I think that most people in their early years set their sights high: they want to achieve great things. As they go through life, their course of development and the influences that guide them lead them into these different mind-sets. Those that develop a fixed mind-set limit themselves in their opportunities. To be successful, a person needs to move towards a goal knowing that it is the choices they make, the opportunities given, and the time and effort made that get them there and not any inherent trait that they are born with. I certainly recognize that “natural” talent and inclinations have an influence on performance, but these do not have to determine the long-term behavior. My own mind-set is very much a growth mind-set: I take difficult courses and relatively “high-risk” challenges in large doses because I know it gives me the opportunity to be better. My first year of college I failed a math class, and I had always gotten A’s in school up to that point. I didn’t quit school or change majors after that; I retook the class the next semester knowing that I needed to try again, maybe with a different approach and a different teacher, to be successful. This attitude also extends into my perception of others: I really do believe most people have a very similar potential. What determines relative success is the individual choices made and the opportunities afforded, not whether a person is “smart” or not. This perception also reaches into my interpersonal relations. I try not to look at individuals or groups and think that I don’t have the potential to “run with them.” Maybe at the moment I can’t compete with or interact on a non-superficial level with someone who has more fully mastered a problem-solving skill, an athletic ability, social influence, or any other ability that can be learned, but I don’t cut myself off from that as a future possibility. I try to limit how much I definitively categorize my own personality and others’ personalities because I know that people can change, and they will change for the better if they can be helped. A person with a negatively-impactful personality trait really can adjust their behaviors. For example, a person with poor timing of comments in conversation can, with the right opportunities, guidance, and desire to improve, become better at recognizing when it is best to speak and when not to speak. By practicing a growth mind-set and helping others do the same people within my social sphere are much more likely to make progress in whatever they choose to pursue.

The Crucible

I wrote these "mini-essays" in response to questions about possible themes for the play, The Crucible by Arthur Miller.

1. What is the significance of the title?

In The Crucible, the challenges faced by the characters grow more dramatic and losses become more ruinous as the tension rises. The situation “heats up”, giving rise to the name of the play, The Crucible. Characters such as John Proctor and Giles Corey are continually horrified by the injustices upon the best of their neighbors, such as Rebecca Nurse, because of the fear created by the incriminating stories of a few girls. The tests faced by characters are not only external: they are internal. John Proctor has to mentally battle his past sin of adultery. Because of this, more pressure is put on him to be “Christian” as others, like Governor Danforth, interrogate him in the final scenes of the play. John, not wanting to be hypocritical, finds it difficult to both unveil the truth about the supposed witches while not unveiling his past acts. In the end, he tries to use his act of adultery with Abigail Williams to compromise the integrity of her testimony against the citizens of Salem. This event shows how far this war in John's head raged. The problems in Salem spread because of the unwillingness of those in positions of authority to attribute mundane happenings to natural causes. Governor Danforth is unwilling to change his ruling even when supplied with blunt truths about the accusers, such as the untrustworthiness of the Thomas Putnam and Abigail stealing Reverend Parris's money.

2. How does fear fuel conformity?

Throughout The Crucible, the townspeople of Salem conform to fear because of social pressures. The group of girls who accuse others of witchcraft are originally threatened into that position by Abigail Williams. Abby tells them of the death of her parents at the hands of natives which gives her a way to frighten the other girls into obeying her. After this, Abigail later places the blame on Tituba, a slave from Barbados. Because Tituba could not defend herself in any way, she admits to signing a contract with the Devil, but she also names a few others who she saw with the Devil. She does this because it will lessen the blame on her by spreading the source of evil onto others. When the group of girls threatened by Abigail sees this, they name others such as Sarah Good, Goody Osburn, and Bridget Bishop in order to excuse themselves. This makes the girls appear as victims of evil instead of as evil-doers. It creates a shield for them, making them all impervious to future attacks on their name and integrity. Instead of just admitting to their actions at the beginning of the play, they throw coal into the fire of fear and cowardice by spreading the blame. The consequences for the actions might not have been as extreme for the other townsfolk if they had just been brave enough to tell the truth. The fear first placed upon the girls by Abigail Williams erased all chances of reason prevailing and spread the fear throughout Salem like leaves spreading the initial sparks of a forest fire.

3. How does language create reality?

Language can create a reality when the language is more desirable than the actual reality. The chain of lies initiated by the girls in Salem quickly leaves the original truths of the play far behind; it is forgotten that he girls were dancing in the woods when they shouldn't have, that characters such as Rebecca Nurse are righteous and trustworthy, and that Abigail Williams deserted when her goal, being with John Proctor, was dashed against the rocks with his condemnation of the authoritative figures of the town. All of these truths are ignored because their acknowledgment would not be beneficial to characters such as Danforth, Abigail, Thomas Putnam, and Reverend Parris. Danforth would not be able to exercise his authoritative powers to the desired extent if he had taken all the evidence into consideration. The trials would have been shorter and less important in written history. Abigail's name would not be “white in the village” and she would not be able to be with John Proctor if she had not drawn attention to the oddities that she called witchcraft of others. Thomas Putnam and Reverend Parris wanted the land and property of others; they supported the accusations against Giles Corey and John Proctor because they increased the chances of them gaining land and wealth. The language supplied by these accusing characters provided combined with the judicial power of Danforth and the other judges gave no chance to the characters seeking real justice and truth. Their language created the reality that they thought was most beneficial to them.

4. What is the significance of a name?

The value of one's name in The Crucible is why the characters choose to either place the blame on others or take the blame. When Abigail Williams retaliates with the phrase, “My name is white in the village,” she is indicating the importance she places on her standing among others. She is willing to accuse innocent bystanders of crimes punishable by death only to protect her name. All of the characters in the play who accuse others to excuse themselves show how they put the value of their own name over the lives of their own neighbors. Even the people who do not put their names before others show extreme concern over the defiling of their name; John Proctor is the example for this. In the final act of the play, John is very unwilling to physically write down his name to testify of sins that he did not commit. After being continually informed of the penalty, which is death, for not signing his name, he signs; but in a last-second decision, John decides his name is worth more than his life. He rips up the paper and argues that he judges witness that he signed the paper was good enough evidence. Rather than be known as a man who sinned and repented and have the association of evil passed down through his family, John stands up for himself and defends his reputation as an honest man. He, like Abigail and the other accusers, puts a name before a life, but, unlike the accusers who protect their names by sacrificing others' lives, it is a name that he is protecting by sacrificing his life.

Oedipus Rex

I wrote this for my Honors English class. I think that it's pretty thorough.

Oedipus Rex, a Greek tragedy, tells the story of how an admired king, Oedipus, suffers a harsh downfall after learning the truth about his birth and his parents. Oedipus follows the path of a tragic hero which starts with being in a position of authority, highly respected, and depended on, but having a fatal flaw or hamartia, usually hubris, which causes tragic and horrible deaths. Others try to convince the hero that he is doing something wrong, but the hero refuses to accept responsibility. In the end, the hero finally sees the error of his ways and tries to fix things, but it's too late and the tragic hero endures a bitter life afterward. Oedipus takes all of these steps, making him a tragic hero.

Oedipus meets the first requirements of a tragic hero because he is noble, powerful, and respected. This can be seen near the beginning of the story when a priest says, “Great Oedipus, O powerful King of Thebes! You can see how all the ages of our people cling to your alter steps...” (ll. 16-18) The people obviously love Oedipus and are depending on him to save them. He had saved them before from a sphinx and they expect him to liberate them from the plague on the city which, ironically, was also caused by him.

A hamartia is the next step on Oedipus's journey. He is very proud, self-righteous, and firmly believes that it couldn't possibly be him who is at fault. He thinks very highly of himself and shows it in his words, “And therefore I have come myself to hear you – I, Oedipus, who bear the famous name.” (ll. 7-8) In another instance, Oedipus puts himself above others by saying that he has suffered more than they have – “I know that you are deathly sick; and yet, sick as you are, not one is a sick as I. Each of you suffers in himself alone his anguish, not another's; but my spirit groans for the city, for myself, for you.” (ll. 62-66) Here, Oedipus is trying to make himself appear more loving and kind than he his. Earlier, when Oedipus was wandering his way to Thebes where he would become their leader, he was shown to be so prideful and stubborn that he would not allow a king to tread the path between them first. Oedipus's fatal flaw is hubris.

Oedipus is warned throughout the story that he is to blame and that he needs to fix it. The first time is by the augerer, or seer, Tiresias who tells him, “I say that you are the murderer whom you seek... I say you live in hideous shame with those most dear to you. You cannot see the evil.” (ll. 347, 351-352) Tiresias is referring to how Oedipus unknowingly killed his father, the previous king and the one Oedipus would not let go before him on a path, and married his mother. Oedipus, being very arrogant, accuses the prophet and Creon, his brother-in-law, of conspiring to take the throne. The city continues to suffer because of Oedipus's ignorance – “Now our afflictions have no end, now all our stricken host lies down and no man fights off death with his mind; the noble plowland bears no grain and groaning mothers cannot bear...” (ll. 172-176)

Having ignored and denied all accusations, Oedipus finally reaches a point of reconciliation. A messenger arrives in the city and tells Oedipus how he, Oedipus, was abandoned as a child by the previous king, Laius, his father. A shepard adds this this testament by saying that he was the one who found the child and later recognized him for who he was as Oedipus murdered his father, Laius. In response to this enlightenment, Jocasta, Oedipus's wife and mother, kills herself. When Oedipus discovers this he gouges out his eyes fulfilling another prophecy. He begs Creon to cast him out of the city – “I pray you in God's name, since your courtesy ignores my dark expectation, visiting with mercy this man of all men most execrable: give me what I ask—for your good, not for mine... Drive me out of this country as quickly as may be to a place where no human voice can every greet me.” (ll. 1377-1380, 1381-1382) Oedipus had finally realized his sin, but it was too late. The city suffered, Jocasta died, and he lost his sight.

Oedipus reached the end of the path of a tragic hero when he left Thebes. He began as a powerful, beloved, and influential king and was diminished to a blind sinner. Oedipus Rex conveys the fact that even the greatest and most powerful can fall and are not perfect. The Greek gods had total control of Oedipus's life and he could not escape it. Oedipus is an ideal example of what a tragic hero is.

Mesopotamia & Egypt

This was the first essay that I had to write for my AP World History class.

Mesopotamia & Egypt

More than 5,000 years ago, two of the earliest civilizations began on the continents of Asia and Africa. “The land between two rivers”, Mesopotamia, was built between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers in modern-day Iraq. In north-eastern Africa, Egyptians settled along the Nile, one of the longest rivers in the world. These two groups had some similar cultural and social aspects, but they also had some differences. Both used new technologies to improve their lives. While there were differences in classes for both peoples, distinctions in social divisions were more prominent in Mesopotamian history. Egyptian and Mesopotamian lives were based around temples and religion.

The Mesopotamian and Egyptian people were able to create such great civilizations because of advancements in technology. One of the biggest ones was the domestication of plant and animals. It allowed for more people to be fed through the efforts of less people. Populations rose quickly as families were able to successfully raise more children. In Egypt, farmers depended on the flooding of the Nile to grow their crops. Mesopotamians built dams and dug channels for irrigation. As the production of food rose, they needed a way to keep track of everything. The Sumerians in Mesopotamia invented a language written into clay tablets that became cuneiform writing. Egyptians used picture symbols called hieroglyphs and wrote a cursive script on the first kind of paper, papyrus. These kinds of writings were used for economic purposes, art, and religious objects. Metallurgy was developed by Mesopotamians, and both the Egyptians and Sumerians made pots and bricks out of baked clay. As things were being recorded, we were able to examine other social and cultural attributes of these two civilizations.

As agriculture took hold of the the ancient world, men became more dominant because they were better able to cultivate land. Consequently, women became less important. As the first governments were formed, it was men who were at the head of them. Even as women diminished in social standing, social classes appeared as certain landowners gained more wealth and power. Hammurabi's Law Code in Babylonia shows the difference in rights of people: “1. the free, landowning class, which included royalty, high-ranking officials, warriors, priests, merchants, and some artisans and shopkeepers; 2. the class of dependent farmers and artisans, who were legally attached to land that belonged to king, temple, or elite families and who made up the primary rural work force; 3. the class of slaves, primarily employed in domestic service.” (The Earth And Its Peoples, pg. 38) But things were not exactly the same down in Egypt as they were in early Mesopotamia. Women in the royal family are shown in tomb paintings with their spouses. They are shown as having dignity and affection, even if they they weren't as powerful as their male counterparts. Documents from ancient Egypt describe how women could own property, inherit from parents, write wills, and control their dowries. There were Egyptians who had more power than others, but no formal class structure appeared. At the head was the king and important officials, then lower officials, local leaders, priests and professionals, artisans, and wealthy farmers, with peasants at the bottom of the chain. The Egyptians most likely used peasants, who were paid, to build their huge pyramids and other large structures, while Mesopotamians had slaves to work for them.

Egyptian and Sumerian civilizations were centered around their temples and religion. The Sumerians believed in gods that controlled and symbolized forces of nature. These included Anu of the sky, Enlil of the air, Enku of water, Utu of the sun, and Nanna of the moon. The Sumerians built temples, such as ziggurats, devoted to gods that could have high walls, plazas, multiple chapels, shrines, and other various rooms. The priests attempted to appease the gods in order to gain their favor. They believed their gods controlled the natural disasters that occurred and the people feared them. Likewise, Egyptians believed in many gods that embodied parts of the world. Ra was the god of the sun, Osiris of the underworld, and the people associated the king with raising the dead and the symbolism of the sun god. The huge pyramid tombs with innumerable treasures are a testament to how Egyptians viewed the afterlife. The pharaohs would be carefully mummified and entombed with food, water, gold, and his servants to help him in the next life. Egyptian art depicted parts of the journey to the underworld made by the dead and the events that occurred there. Religion and the temples that were used to accommodate it played an important role in the ancient world.

Everything accounted for, Egyptians and Mesopotamians had many similarities with a few differences. They used advanced tools and ideas to their advantage. Social hierarchies separated people, but not as much in Egypt. Most importantly, religion and temples served as the basis for communities. Ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt started what lead to the ideas, laws, systems, and values that we have today.

Something New

I've had a hard time lately coming up with something to blog about. I've looked at others and saw that they've done stories that they just add to each time and I thought I'd try something like that. This is my attempt to create some interesting story. It was bitterly cold. The vicious winter storm had tumbled over the mountains like the end of a river cascading down a waterfall. It had come quickly and with tremendous sound. The wind that whipped past the tall evergreen trees, threatening to knock them down, brought a sound which made Tarin wonder if the top of the mountain had broken off and was sliding down the slopes towards him. He heard a sound from his right. Merick was yelling as loud as he could to him, but he couldn't make himself over the sound of the wind. Merick gave up and started forward again, motioning for Tarin to follow him. They still had a long ways to travel. The pass in which they were traveling by horse was winding and treacherous. Tarin's own mount had stumbled frequently in holes and over rocks that were hidden by the snow. Tarin looked up again as he heard Merick trying to tell him something. He was pointing at something. To Tarin's left was a space carved out of the side of the mountain that was shielded from the onslaught of the storm. It wasn't quite deep enough to be considered a cave, but it was large enough to house Tarin, Merick, and both of their horses. Tarin nodded to Merkick and started pushing a path through the powder towards the inviting cover of the "cave". He quickly dismounted once out of the snow and lead his horse to the back of the cave. He turned to see Merick doing the same. "I can't wait until we get back to Therald's Hold so I can chew Carter out for this," Merick grumbled. A week ago, Merick and Tarin had set out to find an artifact that had supposedly been hidden in the ruins of a decrepit monestary high up in the Algion Mountains. When Tarin and Merick had arrived at the described place they found nothing but a few broken pillars and knocked over walls. There had been nothing of significance whatsoever there. The week of traveling through rough land had been for nothing. With heavy hearts, Tarin and Merick had begun the return journy. That was five days ago. The tempest had slowed them considerably, lengthening their trip substantially. What had been planned as a two week endevour was now turning into a three week one. They weren't even half-way home. Tarin watched as Merick attempted to make a fire. Merick's cold finger's fumbled over his tools. There was a spark and a small flame appeared in front of the two weary adventurers. As Merick put away his tinderbox, Tarin worked to keep the fire alive. He added small sticks and twigs to it and saw the flame grow a little larger. "That's not going to last long unless we can get some more wood," said Merick. "Look for some under the juniper and pine trees; it should be dry there," he added as Tarin left to search for fuel to feed the fire. The biting wind slashed at his face as he re-entered the storm. He saw a large pine tree with low branches not far up the slope opposite of their camp and began moving towards it. The heavy branches laden with snow dropped their load on Tarin as he pushed past them. The sudden weight on his shoulders and head surpised him and he stepped back tripping over the tree's roots. He landed on his back in the knee high snow looking up at the white sky. After struggling to get back up, he shoved his way back through the stiff foliage and began hacking at the dry, dead branches in the inner part of the tree with his hatchet. With armfuls of the dry fuel, Tarin made his way back to where Merick was waiting. He saw Merick grinning at him as he dropped the wood by the cave wall. He glared back and sat down on the ground next to Merick. Merick had unsaddled the horses and pulled out the sack that contained their meal for that night: a half loaf of bread and a few strips of venison. Merick took out a small pan from the saddlebags and began to fry the meat. Tarin ate a broken roughly torn piece of bread as Merick tried not to burn the rest of their meal. When the meat was done, they sat down to eat. "What do you think Carter wanted us to get?" asked Merick. "I don't know," replied Tarin. "He just called it an 'artifact.'" "Well I hope it was worth sending us through all of this," Merick said waving his hand at the storm. After slowly eating their small meal with frozen fingers, they laid out their bedrolls between the tied-together horses and the fire. The slowly dying fire cracked and popped as the red-yellow flames ate at the sap in the wood. They both still wore their heavy cloaks as they pulled the rough wool blankets over themselves. Tarin slowly closed his eyes while following the path of the falling precipitation. He wrapped his hood over his eyes and ears and fitfully fell asleep.

The Black Death-How Different Were Christian and Muslim Responses?

This is the essay that I wrote for Geography. I noticed that I've only been blogging about what I've done, am doing, and plan on doing when I looked at some of my friend's blogs. I haven't really put up anything that I have written. I typed this up on Utah Write and got a perfect score of 30 on my first try. I was surprised with myself.

Hundreds of years ago, a plague swept over the known world. The Great Plague, Great Pestilence, and Black Death were a few of the names that it was given. In the Background Essay, it states that, "the plague killed between 25 and 45% of the populations it encountered." It was played a huge role in the history of the 14th century. There were three bacterial strains of the plague; all of them were deadly. According to Document 2, the mortality rate was 31% in Europe, 33% in England, 25-33% in Egypt, and 33% in Syria. About one third of the population in most places was killed or affected by the plague. People reacted differently to the plague. Although Europeans and Middle-Easterners both had similar beliefs, they behaved differently with the plague.
Christianity was the predominant faith in Europe. Europeans acted in "depraved" ways and were "more inclined than before to evil and wickedness". (Document 6, William Dene) The people of Europe saw the plague as the end of the world and did not care for what they did. Document 6 explains that workers rebelled and abandoned their work, priests looked for benefices where they could receive larger stipends leaving places unserved, and the people were "not thinking of death nor of the past plague nor of their own salvation..." Europeans didn't pay much attention to authority or to the law. In Strasbourg, citizens accused the Jewish population of poisoning the wells. Even though the town council of Strasbourg attempted to protect the Jews from the people, the townspeople burned many Jews alive after they (the Jews) had confessed to the sin. In Document 7, it says, "The Jews were guilty of this crime as all around was said, by poisoning wells at this same time." Gabrielle De Mussis, a "chronicler" who lived during this time period, says in Document 4, "We know that whatever we suffer is the just reward of our sins." He believed that the disease was a curse from God due to the wickedness of the people; he thought that the people could be saved if they repented of their sins.
East of Europe, in the South-West part of Asia, the population reacted to the plague by drawing closer to their religion. "Prayer for lifting the epidemic is abhorrent because the plague is a blessing from God; at the least, a Muslim should devoutly accept the divine act," states Muhammad Al-Manbiji in Document 4. Al-Manbiji saw the plague as a blessing from God; he said that praying for the end of the plague was abhorrent. The predominant faith in the Middle-East at that time was Islam which means "Submission to God". (Background Essay) The people in the Middle-East thought that they should accept the plague as the will of Allah (God). They acted in a calm manner. Micheal Dols, a scholar, wrote in the Princeton University Press, "The is no evidence for the appearance of messianic movements in Muslim society at this time that might have associated the Black Death with an apocalypse," which is found in Document 10. They might have even become even more diligent and faithful in accordance to the plague. Document 9 states, "...the people fasted for three successive days...assembled in the Great Mosque until it was overflowing... and spent the night there in prayers... they all went out together... carrying Korans in their hands." All the people of Damascus prayed together. Jews went out with Christians; there was no segregation.
Both Christians and Muslims had similar beliefs. Both religions are monotheistic and believe in the same God. Document 5 compares the non-religious explanations for causes and preventions of the Black Death. Both Europeans and Middle-Easterners thought that it was caused by miasma or astrological events such as shooting stars or the alignment of multiple planets. The both believed that building fires and drinking solutions of Armenian clay would help prevent the plague. While they had similar beliefs, the two faiths did not act similarly. You can see in Document 3 that the people of Siena, Italy (Europe) were "stupefied by seeing the pain." They abandoned family members, dug mass graves, and avoided each other all in fear of coming down with the malady. On the other hand, Middle-Easterners in Damascus were terrified. They became scared when they saw the effects of the plague. The fact that they saw so many die may have been the reason that they drew closer to their faith. The were scared, but they acted with more acceptance most Europeans. If you return to Document 4, you can see the difference. While Christians in Europe saw the plague as "the just reward of our sins", Muslims in the Middle-East accepted the plague as "a blessing from God."
As you can see, the Muslim and Christian faiths both had some similarities and differences in how they reacted to the Great Pestilence. Both had similar beliefs, but what they did in accordance differed. Europeans bluntly saw the plague as the Apocolypse and the people did what they could to avoid the plague. Muslims in the Middle-East accepted the plague as a blessing and turned towards God. The reactions of these two cultures, faiths, and areas may reflect the nature of their standards, beliefs, and thoughts.

A Tale of Two Cities and More

I have not posted in more than 2 weeks. I've forgotten, procrastinated, and fallen asleep before doing this. This is me writing two weeks worth of blog in less than 20 minutes.

I've been getting really behind on A Tale of Two Cities. Right now, I'm only on chapter 14 in book 2 and should be done with part 2 by now. I think that there are more than 30 chapters in book 2. I need to do some serious reading.

Something that I've noticed is that the book really isn't all that hard to understand. It was a little like understanding Shakespeare for me. I read it, thought about it for a second, and then moved on. I've heard a lot of people say that they have no idea what is going on. These people are either ahead or right where they are supposed to be in reading and maybe that has something to do with it. I don't really understand how others can't understand it. It seems pretty simple to me. There are parts where the wording takes some thought, but they are not very numerous. It just takes a little bit of thinking to figure out what Mr. Dickens is saying.

I've been able to maintain my grades pretty well this term. I've got all A's right now except for an A- in math. It's just barely an A- though and it will probably go up nearer to the end of the term. Geography has been a new class for me this term. I've enjoyed it, and it hasn't been to much of a strain on me. I enjoy being in the class, learning the subjects, and, sometimes, the assignments. Computer Technology has been another new class. It's fun, but I already know most of the stuff that we are learning. I can attribute that to growing up with computers and my dad being a computer person. I'm just doing it because it is required to graduate and I want to get it out of the way.

I just recently got an email from my science teacher with the results for the Science Olympiad competition at Westminster. My partner and I got 1st Compute This! (These events are explained in earlier posts). When we took the test, I had forgotten the paper that is required for each team to participate in an event. While my partner started on the test, I halfway across campus to the gym, where our stuff was, got the paper and ran back. That was kind of annoying, but it surprisingly didn't take too long. My partner had only finished a few questions, so I started making the graphs that were part of the test. We had to use Mac laptops which were a pain. It took so much of our time just figuring the layout of the computer. We didn't know a lot of the commands and where the programs were and had to figure them out. I was really surprised that we were able to finish everything, but, when we were finished, I felt like we had done really well. We actually did do very well,but this competition was just a practice and we weren't able to earn any medals or anything.

For Storm the Castle, we got third. I was okay with that because the competition was run right. The event supervisors were supposed to make a counterweight that fit inside of a 15X15X15 cube. They didn't and the weight was too tall. When our trebuchet fired, the weight hit the bottom of it because we had built it for a 15X15X15 counterweight. I wasn't too worried about this though; it was just a practice competition and what we did didn't change anything.

I wasn't able to get all my blogging in right now, but I will finish it up tomorrow for sure.