1.The study of history tends almost naturally to compartmentalize events or trends as we’ve seen: Reconstruction, the Progressive Era, the Roaring Twenties, etc. But be that as it may, select one the periods we’ve examined this semester that you believe was the most difficult and trying one for the American people and their government. How well do you believe that they coped with challenge? Could anything have been done differently? Who were the leading and most outstanding personalities of the period that you’ve selected?
2.From Abraham Lincoln to Barack Obama, a variety of men have held the office of President of the United States. Some of them have been enormously popular, others have been ineffective, low key, or simply maintained a lower profile. One thinks of Republican Calvin Coolidge during the 1920’s. Which one of them stands out from the others, and why? What were his particular achievements or failures? Does the American public ever expect more than any president can realistically deliver?
3.It’s often said that we live in the “information age” – we can hit “enter” on our computers and almost any information, from NFL scores to a biography of James K. Polk is instantly available. Yet in reality, the “information age” also turns out to be the “uninformed age:” in recent years, a number of surveys repeatedly confirm that present-day American college graduates, even from top-tier schools, know much less about U.S. history than their counterparts of earlier generations did. Why should this be the case? How could earlier generations – who, like the instructor’s parents, simply read books with few illustrations, had no TV or internet or online history courses- have been so much better informed than the “information age?” Having studied the past in which they lived, during our course this semester, what were they doing right at that time that we seem to be doing wrong? Or is this all simply longing for “good old days” that never were? What do you think?
- American history, as we’ve seen, is often punctuated by periods of reforms, sometimes on a pretty grand scale, all of them claiming to be “progress” of one kind or another. Yet good intentions do not necessarily equal good results, as the recent repeal of the No Child Left Behind school reform indicates. In looking back on the reform movements we’ve surveyed this semester, which of them would you say was the most successful? At the same time, which was the least successful or wrong-headed? Why do you believe this was the case? Did the reformers miscalculate in some way? Did they underestimate their own abilities to make positive change? Or was their own perception of “the problem” they sought to address inaccurate or incomplete?
There were a few criminological markers that specialists used to attach Gacy to the killings. A portion of these include fiber investigation, dental and radiology records, utilizing the disintegration procedure of the human body, and facial recreation in recognizing the people in question. Examiners discovered filaments that looked like human hair in both Gacy's vehicle and close to the slither space where the bodies were covered. Notwithstanding these hair tests, examiners additionally discovered strands that contained hints of Gacy's blood and semen in a similar territory. Blood having a place with the unfortunate casualties was found on a portion of the filaments, which would later straightforwardly attach Gacy to the wrongdoings. The filaments in Gacy's vehicle were broke down by measurable researchers and coordinated Piest's hair tests. Besides, the inquiry hounds that verified that Piest had been in Gacy's vehicle showed this by a "demise response", which told examiners that Piest's dead body had been within Gacy's vehicle. Out of Gacy's 33 known exploited people, just 25 were ever indisputably distinguished. Huge numbers of Gacy's unfortunate casualties had comparative physical portrayals and were accordingly difficult to distinguish by absolutely asking people in general. To recognize the people in question, examiners went to Betty Pat Gatliff, a pioneer in measurable science and facial reproduction. Facial reproduction is the way toward reproducing the facial highlights of a person by utilizing their remaining parts. Certain facial highlights, for example, facial structures, nasal structure, and generally speaking face shape can be helpful in recognizing an injured individual even long in the afterlife. By utilizing these highlights, and with the assistance of program, scientific examiners can make a picture of an individual's face, which is instrumental in distinguishing unfortunate casualties after their bodies have rotted. Facial reproduction should be possible in a few measurements. Two-dimensional facial recreations is utilized with skull radiographs and depend on pre-demise photos and data. In any case, this isn't really perfect on the grounds that cranial highlights are not constantly noticeable or at the correct scale (Downing). So as to get a sensible and progressively exact delineation of the unfortunate casualty's face, a craftsman and a measurable anthropologist are generally vital (Downing). Three-dimensional facial remaking is finished by figures or high goals,>GET ANSWER