Task 1 Oral Defense Questions Flashcards
Describe how the content of the team presentation was changed as a result of group discussion
Our presentation was changed while we were figuring outour chosen solution. At first we were more towards the first solution which was to return autonomy and land to Hawaii, however we concluded that the process of doing that would be too complicated. So, keeping in mind that we wanted our chosen solution the most preferable option, we switched out chosen solution to solution 2, reparations because it was easier to implement since it would only require Native Americans to fill out a form if they would like reparations for the impacts that the U.S. have made on their lives.
How did the group decide to use (student) perspective/lens/conclusions into the overall presentation
Phillip’s individual report covered the historical lens of America’s annexation of Hawaii. So, using his research we were able to give thorough contextualization to introduce our topic. In our presentation, we explained how life in Hawaii was before annexation, and what overall led to the U.S. to take over. This helped us later on to introduce our argument.
Camilla - Camilla’s individual report covered the political view of America’s annexation of Hawaii. Using her research we were able to identify how self-determination played a role during this Annexation. For example, in the presentation we explained how the Indigenous people were not recognized for their rights by the U.S., and this has led to the exploitation of Hawaii for economic purposes
Ella - Ella’s individual report covered the environmental lens of America’s annexation of Hawaii. Using her research we were able to recognize the negative environmental impacts that the U.S. had on the Hawaiian Island. For example, in the presentation we mentioned how the fuel leaks in the Red Hill facility and how it can damage the water supply and be a threat to health
Pari - Pari’s individual report covered the social lens of America’s annexation of Hawaii. Using her research we were able to discover how this annexation played a role in the loss of Native Culture. For example, in the presentation we mentioned how christian missionaries tried to convert native Hawaiians to Christianity, and that ultimately led to Hawaiian traditions to be forgotten
Give one specific way that your thinking changed as a result of learning about (student) findings?
Phillip - My research was mostly a positive outcome since I studied the economic lens of this annexation. However, reading Phillips’ historical report on this annexation, I realized that the overall story of how Native Hawaiians and the island were treated and in order for this annexation to take part was negative. For example, reading Phillips individual report made me aware of how America took advantage of their agricultural land for money
Camilla - My research was mostly a positive outcome since I studied the economic lens of this annexation. However, reading Camillas political view on this annexation, I realized that the way that indigenous people of Hawaii were robbed of their right to self govern after this annexation was negative. Reading Camillas’ individual report made me aware of how unfair this annexation was politically.
Ella - My research was mostly a positive outcome since I studied the economic lens of this annexation. However, reading Ellas environmental report, I realized that the way the Island was impacted was overall negative. For example, the Red Hill water situation was not only an environmental problem, but also a health crisis caused by fuel leaking, and that changed my perspective about the outcome of this annexation
Pari - My research was mostly a positive outcome since I studied the economic lens of this annexation. However, reading Pari’s social lens on this topic helped me realize that the way the traditions of the Native Hawaiians were lost was negative. For example, the Native Culture of the Hawaiians were slowly lost as American missionaries tried to convert them to Christianity. This changed my perspective on the outcome of this annexation.
In the future, what change would you make to your group norms, and how would you expect that to improve the team presentation?
In the future, I would suggest making clearer roles and responsibilities within the group by assigning specific tasks to each team member and setting deadlines for ourselves so we can have better work efficiency. This will help improve the team presentation by minimizing confusion and allowing for more focused contributions from each team member.
Reflecting on your colleagues’ work, which one had the greatest impact on your overall understanding of the problem your group identified?
I believe that Pari’s individual report had the greatest impact on my overall understanding because she studied the social aspect of this annexation, and I thought it was very important to know how the indigenous people thought of this annexation and we used this information to come up with solutions that would benefit them
In what way did you improve your ability to work with a group as a result of this project?
I think that this project bettered my collaboration skills. I learned how to actively listen to my teammates’ perspectives, value their input, and find common ground when making decisions. It also provided opportunities for me to contribute my own ideas to the group as well.
What is an example of a compelling argument from one of your peer’s individual reports that made you think differently about your team’s solution or conclusion?
A compelling argument that made me think differently would probably be my own research from my individual reports because I studied the economic view point of this topic and overall I found that this annexation had a positive outcome, however, reading everyone else’s report in this group made me think differently about what this annexation truly meant for Hawaii
What is a way in which your team’s resolution makes you think differently about your own individual research?
My research was mostly a positive outcome since I studied the economic lens of this annexation. However, in our team’s resolution I realized that the way that indigenous people of Hawaii were robbed of their right to self govern after this annexation was negative and that’s how my perspective changed from seeing this annexation as an economic success to a political, social, and even environmental problem
What was the strongest counter argument from one of your peers’ individual reports that made you think differently about your team’s solution or conclusion?
A strong counter argument that made me think differently would probably be my own research from my individual report because I studied the economic view point of this topic and overall I found that this annexation had a positive outcome. In our team’s resolution I realized that the way that indigenous people of Hawaii were robbed of their right to self govern after this annexation was negative, reading everyone else’s report in this group made me think differently about what this annexation truly meant for Hawaii
Having finished your project, what if anything do you consider to be a gap in your team’s research that, if addressed, would make you feel more confident about your conclusion?
A gap I believe would be that we could’ve added in a futuristic lens in our research. This would support our argument stronger by showing different ways to better achieve these problems that the indigenous people faced back then so that in modern day, annexation can be done fairly and be overall positive for everyone
