comparative literature

comparative literature
please write more comparative literature .
Chinua Achebe – Things Fall Apart (Africa)
Jane Austen – Pride and Prejudice (Europe)
William Faulkner – As i Lay Dying (the Americas)
Paule Marshall – Chosen Place, Timeless people (The Americas)
Abdelrahman Munif – Cities of salt (middle East)
Michael Ondaatje – Running in the Family (Asia)
William Shakespeare – King Lear (europe)
The notebook consists of three to four entries for each work.the entries will consist of your observations, commentraies, assessments of the works, and can include connections to the present time and to the various works of the semester. Plot summary is not to be part of the Notebook, though you can present for one entry an overview of questions or considerations that arise from a particular reading, the entries are not rough notes, but complete short pieces of writing.

 

Language Development

Language Development
“Objective:
The journal article report will reflect discovery and interpretation of pertinent topics related to language development. It should address how language develops and how it can be fostered or impeded by instructional strategies, teacher’s action, materials, or the child’s environment.
Purpose:
As professionals, good teachers read and reflect upon professional literature relevant to their teaching. This activity is designed with two main purposes: to demonstrate use of the professional literature of teaching; and, to create a knowledge base for the development and importance of language and strategies for fostering it.
Format/Directions:
Open with an opening paragraph about the journal article topic and its relevance to language development. Write synthesizing the articles content, identify major points and noting any consistencies or inconsistencies presented in the ideas.
Suggestions:
This assignment should represent personal beliefs about the article’s content, and should be concise and well-written. Include your own ideas about how the articles ideas can or cannot be implemented in the classroom. Avoid simply recapping the article. “

Read and response

Read and response
Session ONE:
1. Carefully read the Attendance policy, located in your curriculum.
2. Read Chapters 1, 2, 3 and 12 in Juvenile Delinquency.
3. Complete four (4) activities from your text. Write out your response to the questions
under Critical Thinking. Prior to beginning this portion of the assignment, read and
follow the “Guidelines for Weekly Activities from the Text” in your curriculum.
From Chapter 1 (select one)
• Case Profile: Aaliyah’s Story
• Policy and Practice: Orange County’s Family Keys Program
• Policy and Practice: Increasing Social Control over Juveniles and Their Parents
From Chapter 2 (select one)
• Focus on Delinquency: Shaping Delinquency Trends
• Case Profile: Jamesetta’s Story
• Focus on Delinquency: Adolescent Victims of Violence
From Chapter 3 (select one)
• Focus on Delinquency: Diet and Delinquency
• Focus on Delinquency: Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
• Focus on Delinquency: Disruption Behavior Disorder
From Chapter 12 (select one)
• Policy and Practice: Head Start
• Focus on Delinquency: Public Support for Delinquency Prevention
• Policy and Practice: Blueprints for Violence Prevention
BOOK: JUVENILE DELINQUENCY
theory, practice, and law
BY, LARRY J. SIEGEL / BRANDON C. WELSH

Natural plant products as anti-cancer drugs could fenugreek provide a future treatment?

Natural plant products as anti-cancer drugs could fenugreek provide a future treatment?
Your CW task is to create a web page based informative resource. You will be given an individual title and you should research the topic area in good text books, journal review articles and original research articles as well as appropriate level and validity web based material.
All of the CW titles are in the form of a QUESTION. You need to create a resource that provides a reasoned argument to answer this question. In doing this you must introduce the different aspects of the topic (basic mechanisms of cancer biology) moving from more basic and fundamental background information towards research evidence to support your argument to answer the question.
In the meantime you should be beginning to research and prepare your CW using Word to write text, select appropriate diagrams etc.
Remember that, as with ALL work, you MUST NOT copy material directly from any source. Read sources, make your own notes and then construct your text IN YOUR OWN WORDS by synthesising information from a variety of sources. Remember as you go along to keep a record in your text of your reference sources –do not consider that you can simply add these in later on.
The basic rules for the CW are:
1.You should restrict your web resource to 6-8 pages of content, plus title, reference list and quiz pages in addition.
2.The references you use must include textbooks, review articles, original research papers and web sources. You are RESTRICTED to 5 original research articles. A guideline to the total number of references to be used is 10-15.
3. Use these sources effectively. You are expected to include some well chosen data from selected articles in your work.
4. The text component of your work (including Figure legends and words associated with tables) should not exceed 2000 words.
5. You can insert Figures and Tables, either from sources or created by yourself, but the former must be referenced correctly.
6. You can also insert video clips and create hyperlinks. Use these facilities wisely and sparingly. Ensure that what you are including or linking to here is at an appropriate level and enhances your work.
7. You are required to include ONE quiz of 6 to 10 questions and ONE activity eg matching terms with their definitions. You need to produce these quiz questions yourself.
9. Remember your target audience- you should be pitching the level and style of your work to be appropriate to be an informative resource for other students at your stage of study ie final year undergraduates on a Bioscience programme. You must explain concepts and pathways simply and clearly; define unfamiliar terms and avoid over-complex detail.
10. Remember that you are on a Cancer Biology module, not Clinical Medicine, nor Radiography, nor Nursing. You must focus on the SCIENCE that underlies your topic- eg signalling pathways, mode of action of therapeutic agents, biochemical principles of diagnostic tests etc NOT lists of medical terms etc.
Just work on 3 page coursework, no need to do web-page creation

Literature

Literature
Rhetoric 1—Fall 2014
Essay Topics and Instructions for Essay #3
“In Jose Saramago’s novel Blindness, situations and exchanges echo philosophical ideas found in Thomas Cathcart and Daniel Klein’s book Plato and a Platypus Walk into a Bar. For this synthesis essay, pick a passage (or passages) from Blindness that exemplifies (or exemplify) one philosophical idea and write a clear, well-organized, well-argued essay in which you synthesize the philosophical principle of your choice with action or events from Blindness. Your essay should be at least 2500 words. (Put the word count at the end of your essay.) Support your essay with short quotes designed to support your argument. In this essay, be sure to include some material from Blindness that we did not go over in class; delve into the text for your own, unique examples.”
Your essay must include: (for each omitted, the final essay grade will be reduced by 1/3)
o A Works Cited list
o Correct Formatting

linguistic

linguistic
Explicit per formatives and implicit per formatives are there any context that only explicit type must be used, and otherwise that the discourse damage?
(please change the title to be more academic)
This is the structure for writing:
– Introduction
– Literature review (8 resources )(a page)
– Research questions
– Hypothesis (prediction)
– Methodology – how you will collect the data (the client would like to use questionnaires and interviews)
– Results
– Limitation

Analyze one painting by Manet in detail

Analyze one painting by Manet in detail. Feel free to refer to other works by Manet or other painters in the course of your analysis.
*Do not use a general topic, students have to think out of a narrowly defined subtopic from the general topic. 1. Students will write one short (700-800 word) research questions over the course of the semester. Rather than repeating what was said in class, students should explore in depth a narrowly defined subtopic from the general topic. Due to the short length of the assignments, unnecessary biographical information should be avoided. Students must draw upon at least two print and peer-reviewed secondary sources in developing their analyses. Please use MLA style for all references. 2. Objectives for the Research Questions: In completing the research questions, students will:  gain an in-depth knowledge of an aspect of European cultural history  locate primary and secondary sources  integrate the research of others into their own research  produce a short, tightly structured analysis of a narrowly defined topic 3. Rather than repeating what was said in class, students should explore in depth a narrowly defined subtopic from the lists on the syllabus. Due to the short length of the assignments, unnecessary biographical information should be avoided. 4.Students must draw upon at least two peer-reviewed and/or print secondary sources in developing their analyses. •Please use MLA style for all references. –

Try to demonstrate your thesis step by step. •Think of a development with a beginning, a middle and an end. •Logical transitions from sentence to sentence –the paragraph as irreducible unit of meaning 6.The purpose of the introduction is to catch your reader’s interest and to frame the analyses to come. •Try to: –contextualize your analyses –indicate the stakes of the argument –lay out at the main lines of inquiry •Somewhere in your introduction, your reader should be able to discern a topic sentence. 7. In your conclusion, try to synthesize – without simply repeating – the essence of your argument. •Avoid turns of phrase that you have used in the body of your text. •If possible, try to prolong organically your conclusion by offering something new at the end of your paper. 8. Try to find the best word (the clearest and most precise) possible. 9. Look for images and turns of phrase that crystallize your idea. •Vary your syntax and lexicon. –Variety of sentences (simple/complex) –Variety of nouns –Variety of verbs 10. Any chunks of language of six or more words, either in a row or with breaks, should be cited (placed in quotation marks) and referenced. 11. –Long citations • Citations of 2-3 lines or more should be separated from the body of your paragraph by a blank space and should appear without quotation marks in either a smaller font or a narrower margin. –Short citations • Citations of less than 2-3 lines of text should be integrated directly into your paragraph within quotation marks. *Please see MLA guidelines for more details on citing sources. 12. Remember: Do not use a general topic, students have to think out of a narrowly defined subtopic from the general topic. And at least two print and peer-reviewed secondary sources are important in your analyze. Avoid biographical.

Analysis of “Ragtime By E.L.Doctorow”

Analysis of “Ragtime By E.L.Doctorow”
Maximum 3 Pages Analysis of “Ragtime By E.L.Doctorow”
– At least 9 quotes with explanation
– Pick a theme to write about, but it must have argument
– Pretend you are teaching someone who have read the book roughly, so teach him something might be missed (Go into detail)
Total About 5 Paragraphs:
– Introduction (Not research paper, needs to relate to the story and find a argument and make a thesis)
– 3 body paragraphs
MUST DO in each paragraph:
a. Relates to the thesis
b. Have 1 Argument
c. About 2-4 quotes with explanation (Total 9 quotes)
d. Come up with a little conclusion at the end of each paragraph
– Big Conclusion of what you have written
P.S. Requirement Might Change.

watch and analysis

watch and analysis
Part 1: Watch and Analysis
In this Assignment you will have an opportunity to view five slides. After viewing all of the slides, choose the one that most closely represents your desired career field. Then, describe and analyze what you viewed according to the following directions. Each paragraph should be a minimum of 3-4 sentences.
•Click here to view the slides.
Describe and explain what you viewed. Answer the following questions in your response:
•Was this individual professional?
•What made the individual professional (consider attire, communication skills, presentation of self, etc.)?
•Were there aspects presented that were not professional? If so, please describe.
•Include any additional thoughts.
Part 2: Personal Reflection and Connection
•What is the appropriate attire for an individual in your profession?•Note: you may want to research this by talking to those in your profession or researching appropriate attire for your profession as this may differ from what you viewed in the scenarios. Click here for a brief overview of what is not appropriate attire in the majority of career fields.
•Describe what makes someone a professional in your field. Use research and/or reflect on your personal experiences and what you know about your profession (or the profession you will work in).
•What behavioral attributes do you practice that identify you as a professional (review the Week 1 content for ideas)?
•What attributes, such as attire, communication skills, and presentation of self, do you possess that make you professional?

Ortega We know a lot of things that we do not realize we know.

Ortega We know a lot of things that we do not realize we know. (He gives material you can use for this in chapters 2, 3, and 4, including specific examples you can use, for example when he explores what we mean, but don’t usually realize we mean, by ou
The second paper is on Ortega, The topic is “We know more that we realized we knew”.
Book to be used is Some Lessons in Metaphysics, ISBN# 9780393005141. Information for the paper must come from chapters 2, 3 and 4 of the book. Essay it must be 4-5 double-spaced pages long.
(Again, don’t “fulfill” the requirements with, e.g., extra-wide margins or extra-large font.) And, again, it needs three parts, as follows.
The first part is a short introductory paragraph that states a point Ortega makes, and that states whether you will agree or disagree. The point can be any point he makes, as long as he gives a number of reasons why it’s true (since, as you will see below, the first half of the paper is made up of his reasons or evidence for this point). The point need not be a quote. This first paragraph will look something like this: “I agree (or disagree) with Ortega when he says that the moon is made of little mice.” You must either agree OR disagree, but not both. And you must state his point as a full sentence, so that your reader knows exactly what the point is. If you say, “I agree with Ortega about the moon,” that doesn’t help your reader, as Ortega may say many different things about the moon, some of them not involving mice at all.
The second part takes up the first half of the paper, and consists in Ortega’s reasons why his point is true — his evidence or back-up or support for his point. The reasons can come from anywhere in the book — the same few pages, or from various places spread through the book — as long as they’re reasons or evidence for that same point, and as long as there are enough of them to fill half the paper. Even if you disagree, you must still give his evidence in his part, giving him a fair hearing, just as in a law-court where both disagreeing parties get to speak. You must explain his reasons in your own words. You may use a few short quotes with the page numbers in brackets after the quote, though these should also be explained in your words.
The third part is your own reasons why his point is true if you agree, or why his point is false if you disagree. If you agree, your reasons must be different from his. I would recommend that you forget about his reasons, and imagine you are explaining to a 10 year old child with a big vocabulary why she should believe you. The grading will be based on just two things: the quantity and quality of the reasons, and how well the reasons stay focused on the single main point. Anything else (e.g., background information about the philosopher, good reasoning supporting other true points) does not contribute to the paper.