B. Franklin, “Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind, Peopling of Countries” (https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-04-02-0080)
M. Crèvecoeur, Letters from an American Farmer (pp. 66-105) (https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/letter_03.asp#:~:text=The American is a new,–This is an American.)
F. Zeh, An Immigrant Soldier in the Mexican War (pp. 3-11, 45-59)
Answer one of the following questions in 400-500 words:
1. How do Franklin and Crèvecoeur assess the relative importance of genealogy and environment in shaping the experience and fate of immigrants to British colonies in North America during the eighteenth century? [Note that you are asked to describe and analyze the differences or agreements between the two authors, rather than trying to explain the origin of that difference/agreement.]
2. Compare Zeh’s experience of immigration to the U.S in the nineteenth century, as he describes it in the assigned excerpt, to the experience of Andrew the Hebridean in the colonial period, as described in Crèvecoeur’s fictional account. How do the two authors differ in their representation of the kinds of obstacles and challenges a newcomer faces. [Note that you are not being asked to speculate on why the two experiences being described might have differed.]
• Make sure that your argument appears clearly in the first paragraph.
• Support your argument exclusively with evidence from the assigned texts.
• Consider the entirety of each reading assignment in making your argument –
showcase your grasp of the reading by reaching beyond obvious examples.
Avoid lengthy introductions; get to the point.
Do not waste your word allotment on lengthy quotations. Try to break up quotations, and to incorporate them into your own sentences.
Make sure you understand the meaning of every word you choose.
You need not include a title page or an essay title.
You need not use footnotes or endnotes. Whenever you quote from the assigned reading or refer to a specific moment in the text, simply indicate the page # from the original text (rather the pagination of the Reader) in brackets after the quotation or after the closing punctuation of your sentence.
Do not refer to these documents as novels (even though one of them is indeed a work of fiction).
Essays should be double-spaced, proof-read, and submitted by 5 pm on Friday February 11.
Late papers will be penalized by one partial grade (e.g., a B becomes a B-). No papers will be accepted after Tuesday 2/25 at 5 pm.
1. make a clear argument;
2. provide compelling evidence from the texts;
3. show a good grasp of the texts
4. are clearly and correctly written.
Pluses and minuses reflect how interesting, original, or insightful the argument is.
B papers do some but not all of the four things listed above
C papers do no more than one of the four things and may show some misunderstanding of the texts
D papers don’t make sense and are sloppy and perfunctory
Bias in the Main Stream Media
Bias in the Main Stream Media.
This paper will examine the bias of the Main Stream Media (CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS) when it comes to covering and reporting on a Democrat President and a Republican President. The topic analysis content must be at least 6 pages, plus the title page and reference page (8 pages total). The paper must include a single introduction paragraph and conclusion paragraph, as well as a title page and reference page. References should be APA formatted. The body of the paper will be split up in APA level headings according to sub points of the topic and analysis. Minimum of 6 peer-reviewed sources that are less than 5 years old both in-text and on the reference page. Also, include the biblical implications on the chosen topic.
Essay Help “>Essay Help
Statistics – spss
This exercise in close reading asks you to compare assigned texts from the Course Reader and to formulate and Statistics – spss.
Conduct and report the appropriate statistics using the data provided as one would for a Results section an academic journal. References are not necessary. Be sure to report the means, group sizes, and standard deviations of the discrete variables in a table and to make a plot of all the significant effects. Perform and report three sets of analyses, each testing all of the three relevant null hypotheses about the fixed effects (There is no main effect of rating condition; there is no main effect of attractiveness; there is no interaction between rating condition and attractiveness): 1. Two repeated-measures Analysis of Variance, one over raters (F1) and one over rated individuals (F2) with rating condition and attractiveness as discrete predictors. 2. A standard multiple regression model with rating condition as a discrete predictor and attractiveness as a continuous predictor (ignoring the random effects of rater and rated individual). 3. A linear mixed model with rating condition as a discrete predictor and attractiveness as a continuous predictor and random intercepts for both participant and rated person (as we want to be able to generalise the results beyond the 40 raters and the 20 rated individuals). Are the results of the three analyses similar? If not, explain (in non-technical terms) why not. Which analysis is more appropriate to the data? In layperson (non-academic) language describe the results and summarise the answers to the following questions referring to the three hypotheses tested: Does the knowledge that the rated person will hear their rating (and perhaps be hurt) lead participants to give higher (or lower) ratings (pity effect)? Is the date rating affected by the attractiveness of the rated person? Does the pity effect disappear (or maybe get stronger) for very attractive people? Explain how the results of these analyses affect your interpretation. (2000 words maximum)
Essay Help “>Essay Help
Let us consider a law requiring motorcycle riders to wear a helmet as one example. My position is that individuals should not be allowed to engage in the unsafe activity of driving a motorcycle without a helmet. Some people complain about the “nanny sta
Let us consider a law requiring motorcycle riders to wear a helmet as one example. My position is that individuals should not be allowed to engage in the unsafe activity of driving a motorcycle without a helmet. Some people complain about the “nanny sta.
check the files!!!! pls BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU READ Data or other objective evidence Remember this is a law class.
Legislation aimed at protecting people from themselves concerns the individual as well as the public in general. Protective laws are just one example of such legislation. Should individuals be allowed to engage in unsafe activities if they choose to do so?
Let us consider a law requiring motorcycle riders to wear a helmet as one example. My position is that individuals should not be allowed to engage in the unsafe activity of driving a motorcycle without a helmet. Some people complain about the “nanny state” imposing too many restrictions on people’s activities, and certainly, in general terms, it is preferable to allow people the liberty and freedom to do what they choose, without interference by government. But when in exercising that freedom, individuals pose a risk of serious harm to others and an economic cost to society it is society’s right and obligation to reduce or eliminate that risk and cost through the passage of laws. If there is an accident involving a motorcycle the risk of bodily harm to the motorcycle driver is much greater than if he had been wearing a helmet. But it is not only the driver who is injured in this situation: the other driver involved in the accident is also injured, at least emotionally. Family members of both drivers may suffer injury. Health care costs are likely to be greater if a non-helmeted driver is in an accident. Thus, more scarce health care resources are consumed, driving up the overall cost to all. The cost to both insurance carriers will be higher, and with the increased risk from non-helmeted drivers premiums for other drivers may go up. The motorcycle driver without a helmet is just not like the “lone ranger” out on the prairie alone. The ranger can do whatever he wants without harming others. Not the motorcycle driver.
From the legal perspective, riding a motorcycle without a helmet is not one of the “fundamental rights” that governments can restrict only under limited circumstances pursuant to the Due Process Clause of the Constitution. Instead, so long as the government has a rational basis for requiring the use of the helmet, the requirement should pass the Due Process hurdle. That rational basis is set forth above: the government has a legitimate interest in reducing harm and costs and requiring motorcycle riders to wear helmets is a rational step towards that end.
The Equal Protection Clause should also be considered, for a law requiring only motorcycle drivers – and not all drivers – to wear helmets treats motorcycle drivers “unequally.” But, again, governments cannot make different rules for “similarly situated” individuals. Motor cycle riders are not the same as car drivers because the former are more exposed than car drivers and therefore more susceptible to injury in the event of an accident. Therefore, a law requiring only motorcycle drivers to hear helmets does not violate the Equal Protection Clause.
Essay Help “>Essay Help
Essay Help “>Essay Help
Solve one of the worldsgreat problmes,Read Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal”, and write a “Modest Proposal” of your own in which you ARGUE for a way to solve one of the world’s great problems- such as sharing the worlds wealth, reversing the greenhouse
Solve one of the worldsgreat problmes,Read Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal”, and write a “Modest Proposal” of your own in which you ARGUE for a way to solve one of the world’s great problems- such as sharing the worlds wealth, reversing the greenhouse.
Read Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal”, and write a “Modest Proposal” of your own in which you ARGUE for a way to solve one of the world’s great problems- such as sharing the worlds wealth, reversing the greenhouse effect, or eliminating terrorism, etc.
Essay Help “>Essay Help