After watching the Ted talk by Nadine Burke Harris, Identify two adverse childhood experiences, how they negatively impact mental health and wellness, and two ways to cope with the type of stress/trauma as one grows into adulthood.

Discuss the legal rights and responsibilities of both teachers and students and the implications of each on the teaching field.

What’s the difference between a fable/parable/tale and a short story?What’s the difference between a protagonist and an antagonist? please use 200 words if you can

List several social statuses you occupy. Which ones are ascribed, and which are achieved? What roles are you expected to play as a consequence of the positions you occupy? Minimum length is 200 words.

in general how do we construct our perception?

What is the meaning of the phrase “liberal arts”? Why is a liberal arts education valuable in the workplace?

Passage 2 (Questions 8–14)

In the first place, to make the poem or the novel the central concern of literary criticism has appeared to mean cutting it loose from its author and from the author’s particular hopes, fears, interests, conflicts, etc. A criticism so limited may seem bloodless and hollow.

In the second place, to emphasize the work seems to involve severing it from those who actually read it, and this severance may seem drastic and therefore disastrous. After all, literature is written to be read.

The formalist critic knows as well as anyone that poems and plays and novels are written as expressions of particular personalities and are written from all sorts of motives–for money, from a desire to express oneself, for the sake of a cause, etc. Moreover, the formalist critic knows as well as anyone that literary works are merely potential until they are read–that is, that they are re-created in the minds of actual readers, who vary enormously in their capabilities, their interests, their prejudices, their ideas. But the formalist critic is concerned primarily with the work itself. Speculation on the mental processes of the author takes the critic away from the work into biography and psychology. Such studies describe the process of composition, not the structure of the thing composed.

On the other hand, exploration of the various readings which the work has received also takes the critic away from the work into psychology and the history of taste. But such work, valuable and necessary as it may be, is to be distinguished from a criticism of the work itself. The formalist critic makes two assumptions: (1) that the relevant part of the author’s intention is what the author actually put into the work–that is, the critic assumes that the author’s intention as realized is the “intention” that counts. And (2) the formalist critic assumes an ideal reader–that is, instead of focusing on the varying spectrum of possible readings, the critic attempts to find a central point of reference from which to focus on the structure of the poem or novel.

There is no ideal reader, of course. But for the purpose of focusing on the poem rather than on the critic’s own reactions, it is a defensible strategy. (The alternatives are desperate: Either we say that one person’s reading is as good as another’s, and thus deny the possibility of any standard reading, or else we take the lowest common denominator of the various readings that have been made–that is, we frankly move from literary criticism into social psychology. To propose taking a consensus of the opinions of “qualified” readers is simply to split the ideal reader into a group of ideal readers.) As consequences of the distinction just referred to, the formalist critic rejects two popular tests for literary value. The first proves the value of the work from the author’s “sincerity” (or the intensity of the author’s feelings as he or she composed it). We discount also such tests as the intensity of the critic’s reaction.

A literary work is a document and as a document can be analyzed in terms of the forces that have produced it, or it may be manipulated as a force in its own right. It mirrors the past, it may influence the future. These facts it would be futile to deny, and I know of no critic who does deny them. But the reduction of a work of literature to its causes does not constitute literary criticism; nor does an estimate of its effects. Good literature is more than effective rhetoric applied to true ideas–even if we could agree upon a philosophical yardstick for measuring the truth of ideas and even if we could find some way that transcended nose counting for determining the effectiveness of the rhetoric.

Material used in this test passage has been adapted from the following source:
C. Brooks, The formalist critic. ©1951 by The Kenyon Review.

The author of the passage probably rejects the use of biography and psychology in literary criticism because these disciplines:

1. cannot provide any information about literature.
2. assume that the author’s intention as realized is the only intention that counts.
3. take into account the entire range of possible readings of a literary work.
4. focus on the process of literary composition and not on its product.

Solution: The correct answer is D.

1. The passage author acknowledges that “such work [may be] valuable and necessary”. Implicitly, however, its value and necessity are the responsibility of biographers, historians, and psychologists, not of literary critics (see rationale D).
2. According to the passage author, it is the formalist critic for whom the intention as realized–i.e., the finished work–is the only relevant consideration. Conversely, it is the proper role of biography and psychology to consider the intention within the author’s mind.
3. The passage asserts that one alternative to an analysis of the poem itself is that “we take the lowest common denominator of the various readings that have been made–that is, we frankly move from literary criticism into social psychology”. This assertion does not reject psychology (biography is not at issue in this regard) because it might study the effects of literature on readers; it rejects this psychological approach for critics because it “does not constitute literary criticism”.
4. To use biography in literary criticism would be to consider facts about an author’s life; to use psychology would be to speculate about the inner life of an author or of those who have commented on a literary work. The passage author contends that the application of either of these disciplines to an author is inappropriate for a literary critic because both “describe the process of composition, not the structure of the thing composed”. The argument against a critic’s using psychology to explore the various ways that readers have understood a work is that this investigation, too, “is to be distinguished from a criticism of the work itself”.

I thought B "assume that the author’s intention as realized is the only intention that counts." was the correct answer because in the passage it literally states that the authors intention REALIZED intention is the only intention that counts. The explanation given by AAMC doesnt really make much sense to me.

Why is culture important to consider when studying populations in experimental psychology?

2.    Discuss the theories of sexuality listed in the textbook. Describe each theory clearly.  

a)    The Social Constructionist Perspective

b)   The Integrative Perspective

c)    Queer Theory.  

Why is each of the following good legal advice?

a.         Employers must not create or control “company unions.”

b.         Employers should not respond to union organizing efforts by raising wages or making other unscheduled changes in employment benefits.

c.         Employers must abide by the terms of labor agreements when making human resource decisions regarding their unionized employees.

d.         Employers should not establish informal practices of conferring benefits and privileges not specified in labor agreements.

e.         If individual employees wish to present their own grievances, their union must be notified and given the opportunity to be present at any meetings about the grievances.

What does the song "No Church in the Wild" use from Plato's dialogue Euthyphro? What do you understand the song to be trying to say with that quote in this song? Is the song using the quote from Plato to convey a different meaning than it has in the dialogue by Plato?

1.Use the principles of classical and operant conditioning to explain how you would teach the baby to become just like Sherlock Holmes – a clever and successful detective, rude, with no interest in relationships. Explain at least five ways you would manipulate the environment to shape the baby to become like Sherlock Holmes.

2.To what degree do you think these conditioning principles alone shape personality, and what problems might you expect with this approach on humans?

1) What is the major purpose of controls in research?

A. to counteract threats to validity

B. to generate initial ideas

C. to produce research hypothesis when combined with problem statement

D. to increase participants willingness to participate

2) To double-blind control procedure involves

A. Having the experimenter's assistant sand the experimenter both blind to the hypothesis

B. Having both the experimenter and the participant blind to the assignment of each participant

C Having all participants blind to both the hypothesis and the assignment

D. None of the above

3)Extremely high control in laboratory setting

A. is crucial in case studies

B. is always accomplished

C. may lead to diminished external validity

D. is not useful

4) which of the following is a major control for order effects?

A. holding the variable constant

B. counterbalancing

C. including the factor as a research variable

D. random assignment of participants

If a person does not understand a law or was unaware of that law can they still be charged the same way as someone that was aware of the law and knowingly broke the law? There are some laws that can be unclear, what if a law was just misunderstood by a person?

2. Do you think our free speech laws should be changed in any way? Currently a person can say anything to anyone that is not a threat on that person. Should there be laws against not spreading lies publicly, or is this something that should not be policed?