Prompt 7

Part 1:
Theme park corporations should allow all people to have an equal chance of obtaining a job so the parks can be more diverse and not exclude anyone with strong self-expression.
Individuals promoting self-expression are being banned from working in various theme parks. To stop this, the parks must be accepting of every applicant.
The theme park human resources department needs to fix their appearance guidelines in order to hire people with many different looks and styles.

Part 2:
The author of the article, Surveillance under the USA PATRIOT Act, made his point very clear to his audience. Firstly, the author states that, “Congress reversed course because it was bullied into it by the Bush administration…” By saying this, the author implies that he is not a fan of the Bush administration or of the new policies. I believe the thesis statement is the first sentence, “Just six weeks after the September 11 attacks, a panicked Congress passed the “USA Patriot Act,” an overnight revision of the nation’s surveillance laws that vastly expanded the government’s authority to spy on its own citizens, while simultaneously reducing checks and balances on those powers like judicial oversight, public accountability, and the ability to challenge government searches in court.” I believe this to be the thesis statement since we were taught that the statement begins with a problem and ends with the solution. Here, the problem is the September 11th attacks while the solution is the revised surveillance policies. I think the author should have expanded the problem a little bit more. It was a long sentence that we could have gotten lost in. Also, I don’t feel that his opinion is shown that strongly throughout.
The author defined the controversy in his ‘Why Congress Passed the Patriot Act’ section. The section explains the background of the surveillance policies as well as why they are revising them. Defining the controversy includes the history of the controversy and background necessary to understand the issue. The key terms in this article are the different policies and amendments; the author explains these throughout the article. The author explains the history and background in a very academic voice, yet it is underlying that he does not favor the new policies.

Part 3:
My Core II paper had some mistakes that could have been corrected, yet still I am confused about some. On my first page, I stated my research question “Is it justifiable for the parks to be preventing self-expression in its employees?” You commented on it, “Yes. It is justifiable but is it legal?” I don’t believe it is justifiable. I think that that is a personal opinion and the whole subject of my paper. Other than that, I understand why I was marked off for my mistakes. I think in total, I did fairly well on my paper dealing with the specificity. I need to improve on my citations. Overall, I am happy with my grade and I can take some things with me to make my Core III even better.