Premium Writing

In this assignment you are to do a critical analysis of a public speech. This is NOT a
report or “play-by-play” account of what the speaker said. Rather, you will analyze the
speaker in a similar manner in which I would evaluate YOUR presentations.

This assignment is a formal paper and must follow MLA guidelines. The paper should
be 3 to 5 pages in length. At least 3 FULL pages – that means you must go to the
very last line on page 3….papers shorter than the required length will have points
deducted. The paper should be double-spaced, standard 1” margins, and use 12
point Times New Roman type. Please note: you cannot reuse papers that have been
written for other courses, doing so will result in a grade of 0.

This paper is to have three sections:

The Description – This section is to be an introductory paragraph and is less
than 5% of the paper’s length and must give information about the speaking
event or video you chose (who, what, where, when) and introduce the paper.
For example, you might say something like, “In this paper, I will analyze…”

The Analysis – This section consists of two parts: analysis of three
theoretical concepts of public speaking (ie: eye contact, support material,
vocal delivery, etc.) that were positively used by the speaker and an analysis
of three theoretical concepts of public speaking that were not used effectively
by the speaker. This section allows you to do a micro-analysis of the
speaker/speaking situation. You are evaluating them on what they did well
and did not do well….NOT a book report on what they said. Also please note
that items such as poor sound quality or camera work are not considered an
element of “public speaking” – things that are out of the speaker’s control
should not be counted against them for this analysis.

Divide this section into a paragraph for each positive (3 paragraphs) and a
paragraph for each negative (3 paragraphs). Don’t mix and match in the same
paragraph – it becomes difficult to follow your writing when the ideas are
combined into single paragraphs.

The Evaluation – In this section of the paper, you need to make an argument
as to whether the speaker was successful/good overall or not. You must
make a decisive argument that they were either successful or not – do not
say “both.”

Make your analysis as complete and detailed as possible. Cite the text and what you
have learned throughout the semester to justify the points and conclusions you
make. Citing the text is an excellent way to support the points and conclusions you
draw in this paper. (make sure to cite the textbook properly in a Works Cited page
using MLA format! You can find a full citation of the textbook in the course syllabus if
you are having trouble finding all necessary info in the ebook) If you do not pull
information from the textbook and properly cite it throughout the paper, you
automatically drop a letter grade.

Down below is the link to the speech and name of it that this paper needs to be based off of and the link to the textbook so you can cite things in the essay. You don’t need any other outside sources, just the textbook.

Link and Name of Speech: Amy Cuddy – Your Body Language May Shape Who You Are
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ks-_Mh1QhMcAmy Cuddy
Link to Textbook: https://www.macmillanhighered.com/launchpad/spkguidebook8e/21216729/Home#/ebook/https://www.macmillanhighered.com/launchpad/spkguidebook8e/21216729/Home#/ebook/ (Let me know if you can’t access it)

1. The detailed description of an artwork’s formal components, such as scale, material, line, color, tone, and composition.
2. A thoughtful and well-reasoned claim about how these elements come together to produce a particular visual or symbolic effect. Such a claim, among other things relate to the particular mood the art object evokes, the symbolic significance of the chosen subject matter, or even the artist’s attitude toward the act of art making itself.

You will submit the completed written public relations plan. It should contain all of the main elements of the final product. The required format of this artifact should be 12 point Times New Roman font, double-spacing, 1 inch margins, and properly cited references. There should be a table of contents page listing all of the main elements including the itemized contents of the appendices. Each of the main elements should be separated by page breaks and identified with appropriate headers. It is recommended that the table of contents links to the respective main element sections.
This milestone will be graded using the Plan Rubric.

Use the document uploaded to conduct the full written PR campaign plan! Remember that it is crucial in making a point on what Society wants to do to make a change. The PR campaign is for the people and needs to be addressed as making change.

If the business of education might be defined as an enlargement of experience to what extent is your youth and community work practice liberatory?

Choose ONE of the following prompts (A or B) and address the prompt on the discussion board.
Prompt A: In your text (pp. 285-291) four approaches to how the brain represents concepts are discussed. Briefly describe each one and explain which one YOU think is the most valid explanation and why you think it is the best one.
Prompt B: In chapter 10, the author describes the Imagery-Perception debate. Based on your understanding, what is the connection between imagery and perception, and what does your own experience tell you about your ability to use mental imagery.

book : Goldstein, E. B. (2014). Cognitive psychology: Connecting mind, research and everyday experience. Cengage Learning.

It is a particular genre with its own goals and purpose (which you can read about on the prompt). Do not make the mistake of writing this paper in the same fashion as other basic research papers you may have written in high school or other courses. The distinguishing feature of a literature review is that it focuses on the qualities of each source as well as the key information each asserts, and then compares the sources against one another to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge on the topic in the field as a whole.

Think of it this way: when individual researchers or institutions conduct a study or research project, they are working as individual entities. They have a question they’re trying to answer or idea they’re trying to prove. This requires them to focus on a very narrow idea, which is only a tiny piece of all there is to know about that subject. Each individual article or study that someone publishes is like a single puzzle piece. Each contains important information, but it’s only a small part of the bigger story. This is where you, the writer of a literature review comes in. It’s your job to take all these individual puzzle pieces – the published articles or studies – and put the puzzle together. You take all the pieces and connect them in the right way, so that someone who reads your literature review can see the whole picture.

This is why literature reviews are so important – they pull together the important knowledge from multiple sources into a bigger picture, so we, the readers, can see the larger pattern. Think about how different it is to look at a finished jigsaw puzzle compared to looking at a pile of mixed up pieces! All of the pieces are there, but it’s difficult to understand what they mean until they’re connected in the right way. Once they are, you can see the big, beautiful picture that they compose.

In order to do this as a writer, you’ll need to briefly explain each piece of the puzzle, so we can “see” it, then connect all those pieces together so we can see that bigger picture. You’ll do this by introducing each source clearly, summarizing its main points and key contributions efficiently, and then explaining how it connects to the conclusions of the other sources. Did some of your sources reach the same conclusions on the research subject? Did any of them contradict one another? Did some of your sources focus on slightly different aspects of the topic, and how do those different aspects influence each other, or help us form a larger understanding of the subject? You’ll do much of this work in the “Current Research” section of the paper.

In the “Discussion” section of the paper, you’ll explain the big picture of the finished jigsaw puzzle. Tell us what the finished puzzle looks like. A finished puzzle is more than just the sum of its parts – we see something bigger than each individual piece. So, tell us what we can learn from looking at all your sources together, as a collective, in the right way. What is the current state of knowledge on this topic? Is there consensus? Disagreement? Do experts seem to have discovered everything important on the topic and settled any questions? Or is the subject new and mostly undiscovered; is there much more that researchers still need to investigate? Based on your answers to these questions, you should recommend where experts should focus future research. What questions are still unanswered? What is the most important or promising area that we should focus our attention on? ( I have papers with sources that might help)

This assignment is two parts:

Part One:
Reflect upon your experience with presentations in your educational career. Considering the information and resources in this module, would you deem those presentations as “effective” or “ineffective” uses of the presentation medium? How could those presentations have been improved using new technology and principles? Cite specific evidence to support your position.

Part Two:
Then, compare your experiences and reflections to your classmates’ posts.

I have included a detailed description of the order in the Word document. Please include peer-reviewed journal article sources that include research done on the Attentional White Bear Effect (AWB), and relevant sources of that topic. Also, include the sources used please.

Answer all parts of the question presenting evidence you observed from your viewing of the session. Your responses should be 2 pages in length.

1. Identify 4 of the top 10 basic helping skills the theorist used in their session with the client. Present examples of how the theorist utilized these skills in the session.

2. Which modality does the theory used in the video categorized as (Affective, Behavioral, Cognitive)? What evidence is presented in the session that confirms this?

3. Would you classify this theory as directive or non-directive? Give at least 3 examples from the sessions to support your stance.

4. Do you recognize SOLAR and SOFTEN in the session? Present examples of this you observed in the session.

5. Give your thoughts on the counselors interventions. Do you feel they were successful with the client? Why or why not?

6. Give your thoughts on this theory. Do you feel it is effective?

7. Could this theory be effective with any client? Why or why not?

This paper will examine youth justice in a canadian context and the use of restorative justice. The thesis should be something in regards to that restorative justice is trauma informed in comparison to traditional justice system and that restorative justice can reduce reoffending for youth. I have attached the instructions.

IMPORTANT: I have also attached images of text from a textbook that must be used in the essay. I will include information of the text book so it can be cited. This will be ONE of the 6 scholarly sources required. The photos will have information of how restorative justice considers victim needs, offender needs, and community needs. This must be included in the essay.