Reading Response 9

I have to say I am sorry for not having the availability and time to post this response. But after reading the articles that we were provided and actually having gone to class today and hear Nasser speak in person via Skype or group session, I have to say I am actually a little perturbed by the responses to the questions that we were given. Though this response should pertain to the article. I have to say that I thought the meeting and the results that we got from it were very biased and one side focused. I mean absolutely zero disrespect for him, but many indicators by the answers that he gave seemed in a majority, opinion set instead of factual and educative supported. I believe, in all honesty that these set ups that we have with the Skype sessions hit a plateau to an extent. We are told to bring in note cards and questions for the speaker who is going to present to us for the day. although I do like to hear someone give their side of the story to an audience, I find it very unnerving that we create the class and setting for those days under the basis of a biased response to factoids and note cards style of approaching a solution to the problem. I am not going to give a name of the student that aggressed a very important point today in class in terms of apartheid settlement, but this pros a much better question than that which is offered by factoids to reach a conflict resolution. I think debating with the speaker has brought in an element that I didn't expect. And although it can be disrespectful to the guest past a particular point, a productive meeting can be gathered from such classes. Just an idea...