Read “Catholic Social Teaching on Immigration and the Movement of Peoples” and then listen to the song “Why Do We Build the Wall” by Anias Mitchell. The first link is the article:
Link (Links to an external site.)
Also:
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/immigration/catholic-teaching-on-immigration-and-the-movement (Links to an external site.)-of-peoples.cfm
The next link is a youtube video of the song I want you to listen to. Please remember to listen to it in the context of the reading.
Why We Build The Wall (Links to an external site.)
Then address the following questions in your essay:

1. What does “the Wall” (the border wall) symbolize?
2. What is its function?
3. What is the relationship between the symbolism/function of the wall and issues of poverty and inequality?
4. What is the relationship between the Church and issues of Social Justice such as migration?
   Again, this is to be a one to one-and-a-half page double-spaced type written reflection (no more-no less [this range does not include references]). This is a SHORT written assignment so be judicious in the words you use. Please use courier 11 point font and make sure you cite and reference your sources. When referencing your sources simply type a one inch line below the final line of your reflection and then put the references there. For an example, please see the syllabus.
   Here are five sources which address the current issue of immigration and some particularly on the issue of family separation. The first (although slightly dated-three years) is very useful in making a fact-based argument about immigration. Although some of these links are opinion pieces, it important to note that the material is nonetheless grounded in data. Certainly, other sources can be employed, simply make sure that those sources stick to facts/data rather than anecdotal evidence. As I wrote in the email earlier. Feel free to use these or not.
   https://www.tolerance.org/magazine/sources-ten-myths-about-immigration (Links to an external site.)
   https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/06/how-you-can-fight-family-separation-at-the-border.html (Links to an external site.)
   https://www.npr.org/2018/05/29/615211215/fact-check-are-democrats-responsible-for-dhs-separating-children-from-their-pare (Links to an external site.)
   https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-the-trump-administration-got-comfortable-separating-immigrant-kids-from-their-parents (Links to an external site.)
   https://www.hopeborder.org/faqs-family-separation (Links to an external site.)
   https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/what-asylum-seekers-meet-when-they-try-to-cross-legally (Links to an external site.)
   This link at the bottom of this list is from a program that aired on 6-20-18 on PBS. The papers are due tonight at midnight. Let me take this opportunity to remind everyone how important it is to consider multiple sides of an issue. You might consider looking at this question that addresses at least two sides of a very complex issue. . . “how does one balance efforts to maintain border (national) security with stated positions that our nation stands up for and supports human rights?”

Reflective Papers:
Unlike the discussion board which is a dialogue between the entire class, reflective papers are essentially a dialogue between the individual student and the Professor. Reflective papers, as indicated above, meet goal three of the course. As such, reflections should incorporate textbook based learning with the selected reading/video/podcast/audio clip. The intention of reflective papers is to encourage thinking and dialogue about the “bigger picture” of a person’s education, focusing particularly on how this course, the liberal arts, the Catholic intellectual tradition and Catholic social teaching fit into this bigger picture, thus a discuss/question concerning the relationship of the outside and textbook materials and at least one of the following: a) The liberal arts tradition; b) The Catholic Intellectual tradition;c) Catholic Social Doctrine; and d) the mission of Thomas More College is expected.
Reflective papers are to be between one and one-and-one-half pages in length using courier eleven point font. This length does not include the references which should be provided at the end of the reflective essay. The references should be separated from the written material with a one-inch line that is left-hand justified. For example:

Paul, John II. (1992). Ex Corde Ecclesiae: Apostolic Constitution of the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II on Catholic Universities. Libreria Editrice Vaticana: Rome.
BTW-This reference should be provided in your first reflective essay. As you will see from the rubric, DO provide citations and references using Chicago style (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. but no do not get too caught up in the details. What is more important for our purposes is the content.

Reflective Paper Rubric-5 Criterion
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Critical thinking
Entries “critique” society, one’s understanding (or lack of understanding) of an issue and/or one’s own cultural bias (ethnocentrisms) concerning an issue or material.
5.0 pts
Developing Critic
Entry clearly demonstrates an ability to critique issues form multiple vantage points employing sound reason and logic.
4.0 pts
Synthetic Thinker
Entry shows evidence of making connections between issues/material in ways that are beyond the obvious. Reason and logic are also employed in the processing of material particularly abstract, controversial material/issues.
3.0 pts
Analytic Thinker
Entry shows evidence of dissecting issues/material in ways that are beyond the obvious. Reason and logic are also employed in the processing of material particularly abstract, controversial material/issues.
2.0 pts
Beginning Analytical Thinker
Entry shows initial signs of “grappling” with complex and controversial issues that moves beyond commonly held assumptions.
1.0 pts
Ethnocentric Thinker
Entry does not reflect an attempt to move beyond one’s own way of thinking about an issue. Entry fails to acknowledge differing vantage points.
0.0 pts
No entry
5.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Presentation
Entries are characterized by a professional and academic standard. Standard rules for grammar, syntax (sentence structure), diction (word choice) are observed.
5.0 pts
Academic
Entry exhibits conscientious and masterful use of grammar, diction and syntax. One or two insignificant errors are acceptable and is within the required range.
4.0 pts
Articulate
Entry has only one or two errors and these errors are noticeable in some way that detracts from the reader’s ability to draw meaning from the text and is within the required range.
3.0 pts
Acceptable
Entry has only a few errors and these errors minimally detract from the meaning of the entry and is within the required range.
2.0 pts
Readable
Entry has numerous errors but is readable and/or is outside the required range.
1.0 pts
Illegible
Entry is characterized by numerous grammatical, syntax and diction errors that seriously detract from the meaning of the entry and/or the entry is outside the required range.
0.0 pts
No entry
5.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Use of Evidence
Entries are grounded in sound, logic, theoretical orientations and/or reputable scientific evidence (i.e. reputable sources are used).
5.0 pts
Reasoned and Scientific
Entry demonstrates use of reason and reputable evidence of two or more sources supporting claims made AND disputes counter evidence based claims.
4.0 pts
Developing Scholar
Entry has two or more reputable references that support claims made.
3.0 pts
Burgeoning Scholar
Entry has sufficient reputable evidence to support claims and points made, but is lacking in breadth or depth.
2.0 pts
Beginner
Entry contains one or more outside sources but these are superficial, not specifically relevant to the issue and/or is not reputable.
1.0 pts
No Evidence
Entry is posted but fails to incorporate evidence to support claims and/or is purely substantiated on one’s own “opinion.”
0.0 pts
No Entry
5.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Openmindedness, humility and collegiality
Entries must acknowledge alternative views (where appropriate) of issues within a spirit of respect and desire for academic and personal growth of one’self and coursemates.
5.0 pts
Professional
Reflection illustrates an ability to engage in thought that is grounded in civility. Reflection acknowledges diverse points of view through the lens of interest of personal growth for all parties. These reflections DO acknowledge alternative points of view.
4.0 pts
Semi-professional
Reflections demonstrate a willingness to engage in thought and shows evidence of entertaining differing vantage points on a equal footing with one’s own.
3.0 pts
Developing
Reflection respectfully acknowledges the vantage points of others but maintains an emphasis on one’s own view. The position of others are simply given “lip service.”
2.0 pts
Beginner
Reflection reflects an attempt at thinking beyond one’s own position. However, the reflection barely mentions other positions.
1.0 pts
Unaceptable
Reflection shows clear evidence of self-centered thinking and/or is simply a report of pertinent material.
0.0 pts
No Entry
5.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Substance
Reflections are question focused. Are these questions addressed/answered?
5.0 pts
Thoughtful Reflective Essay
The reflection clearly indicates an effort to dig deeper into the issues raised by answering focused questions.
4.0 pts
“Getting close”
Reflection clearly is thoughtful but is lacking on one or more key elements of addressing the question(s).
3.0 pts
“Kinda”
The reflection addressed the question(s) but only superficially.
0.0 pts
No Entry
5.0 pts
Total Points: 25.0