Reflective Journal Response. The rubric for evaluating your reflective writing is in the public folder. PLEASE NOTE: I cannot access the rubric from home either. Sorry. Also, I have to publish the post, so if it doesn't show up right away, don't worry.
Required Response #1 - Respond to the following prompts: (Due by Tuesday 3/14)
Did the Versailles Conference process enhance your understanding of the political, social and economic issues facing the world in the aftermath of the Great War? What aspects did you find particularly engaging? Was negotiating difficult? (If so, what might this tell us of the circumstances facing nations who were truly invested in the process?) Were problems left unresolved? What questions or issues were left unaddressed? What would you change? What other issues would you like to raise in the post-conference class discussion?
Keep in mind, I am looking for quality responses that satisfy the requirements of the rubric. Length is up to you.
2 comments:
The Mock Versailles Conference did in fact help me to understand the issues facing the world after the Great War. I was especially intrigued how any of the big three could just veto any proposal that they didn’t like. This created many problems when it came to negotiating, and in a vote on the floor, it was ultimately impossible to pass an amendment if one of the big three disagreed. For instance, when trying to pass an amendment for the reparations committee, France often vetoed, and even though all other countries agreed, the vote failed because of one of the big three overriding. The many alliances made often created problems. Often, many countries would back other countries without any personal gain, just because of who they were against. Because of things like vetoes and alliances, many committees went on much too long. The territorial resolutions for Africa for instance, were still undecided for so long that we had to move on. In revisiting it, the continent was haphazardly turned into a wildlife refuge because no one could agree on anything. It was issues like this that took away from the realistic feel of the mock conference. If I could change certain things, I would have given more time to discuss matters like African Territories, reparations, and Japan’s imperialistic threat. Some of these issues were just passed for the sake of time. All in all the experience was great and for the most part a well representation of what it was like when the Versailles conference took place.
Overall, I thought the Versailles Conference simulation went very well. This was because a lot of hard work was put in by all the participants in every nation. I believe I gained a greater understanding of the events that followed the aftermath of the Great War from this experience because it allowed me to look at all aspects of the treaty. From the political standpoint I was able to see what each country truly wanted and how they were going to play their cards to get what they wanted. This was interested because it was seen that once you give even teenagers power, they backstab, cheat, lie, and do whatever it takes to ensure that they are being take care of. I believe this is very similar to real politics because it is much too often seen that these things go on in the American government. Socially it was seen that the delegates from each nation wanted the security of the people in their nation. They fought for more money during reparations making sure that the people of their country would be taken care of. And last but not least, economically it was definitely seen that all nations were interested in their personal benefit from the war, either in reparations or land gain.
I found the debating on the floor very engaging. Delegates from each country got to exchange blows on important topics that would ultimately be drafted into the Peace. This was difficult because all eight different nations wanted different things, they all had different desires and needs. This made things complicated because each delegate and overall committee had to try and fulfill all these wants while appeasing the "Big Three" and ensuring that their plan would not be vetoed.
The only problem that I see as unresolved was the distribution of land in Africa. This was, in our treaty, to be turned into a "wildlife preserve" which I find to be entirely out of character and a cop-out. It seemed that as the conference dragged on into the six plus hours that people were becoming restless and ready to vote for anything just to end it. This could be very similar to real life where delegates can do the same thing just to be able to get out of a meeting or conference. I found it interesting how much more intolerable people can become after being forced into a room that is cramped for six hours.
In the post conference class discussion I would like to address the fact that this was very similar and definitely a positive experience. I would like to also make changes to make this a more delightful experience for later "conferences"
It was fun.
Post a Comment