Prior to beginning work on this assignment, review the Week 5 Final Project Instructionscarefully. Also, use the following guides to take full advantage of the University of Arizona Global Campus tutoring and paper review support options: Submitting a Paper to the Writing Center (Links to an external site.), Grammarly, and Using the Library’s 24/7 Chat Service (Links to an external site.).In your Final Project, you will compare twodifferent societies or civilizations that we have covered in this class, within the time period we have considered (ca. 5000BCE—ca. 1600CE), in at least three of the following categories:Gender Roles, Ideals and RelationshipsSocial and Economic StructuresReligious or Ethical BeliefsTechnological or Cultural InnovationsThe purpose of this assignment is to prepare you for your Final Project by guiding you through the research and writing process. To do so, you will first select the two societies or civilizations you would like to examine in your Week 5 Final Project, and then complete the HIS103 Final Project Preparation Template downloadusing research compiled on these societies.Refer to the HIS103 Research Guide: Library Resources and Primary Sources for help selecting appropriate sources. You may also want to review the HIS103 Final Project Help Sheet downloadprior to completing this assignment. Keep in mind that the Writing Center and University of Arizona Global Campus Library have many additional sources available to you, which you are also encouraged to explore..In your paper,Identify the societies you will compare and contrast in the Final Project.Identify three of the following categories (i.e., Gender Roles, Ideals and Relationships, Social and Economic Structures, Religious or Ethical Beliefs, Technological or Cultural Innovations) you would like to examine within the societies you chose for your Final Project.Develop your preliminary thesis statement for your Final Project.Establish the central issue or perspective for your project to give clear direction and purpose for the project. (For help, review Writing a Thesis Statement (Links to an external site.) and the Thesis Generator for Writing an Argumentative Thesis (Links to an external site.) in the Writing Center.)Create an outline of at least three main points that will support your thesis statement.For each main point, write two topic sentences. (For help, review Body Paragraphs (Links to an external site.) from the Writing Center.)Topic sentence one explains the similarities between your chosen societies, according to the category of analysis you are examining.Topic sentence two explains the differences between your chosen societies, according to the category of analysis you are examining. For each topic sentence, provide at least one specific example for each of your chosen societies, drawn from your compare and contrast worksheet.For each example, indicate which sources from your list of sources you will use.Create an APA-formatted annotated reference list containing a minimum of five sources you intended to use for your final project. These sources should include:A minimum of four scholarly secondary sources, of which at least three are from the University of Arizona Global Campus Library.At least one primary source.Note: The course textbook does not count toward your required sources.Note: You may also include images or multimedia course materials, but these sources are in addition to (not instead of) the required sources. Remember such sources should also be cited according to APA format.For help, review Formatting Your References List (Links to an external site.) from the Writing Center.

Purpose: to expose you to real issues surrounding the analysis and interpretation of phylogenetic data. It is not intended to be a review of recent literature on a specific topic, nor a critique of an existing paper or set of papers. Rather, it should be your best attempt to address a specific issue in phylogenetic biology by analyzing real data.Structure: Each project will be required to analyze a minimum of 1-2 specific species. The project should be organized around a standard lab report, with an Introduction section outlining the purpose of your analysis, a Methods section summarizing the types of analyses and computer programs used, a Results section summarizing results, and a Conclusion or Discussion section. The paper should have a bibliography with at least 4 references on the characters studied, the taxonomic group of interest, the computer programs used and any other useful information.Timeline and strategy: The best strategy is to start your project early! I recommend consulting recent papers from systematics journals of your favorite organisms, as well as journals like Science, Nature, PNAS, PLoS Biology, etc. Choose a study that makes its data public – most commonly, this will be DNA sequences deposited in GenBank. One way to begin to decide on a project is to pick your favorite group of organisms and consult GenBank, TreeBASE and literature databases (according to instructions given in labs) to see what data sets are available.Once you have decided on a topic, the following questions can be used to help structure your project. They assume that your project consists of reanalysis of data from a published paper. Most likely you will be able to approach these data with different questions or improvements in mind. Questions 1-3 can serve as guides leading up to the main questions 4 and 5.1. What was the specific or general question that the authors were trying to answer? 2. What computer programs were used by the authors to determine the phylogeny of the group in question?3. Are there any peculiarities about the mode of evolution of the gene that was used by the authors that might make phylogenetic analysis by their methods difficult or misleading? 4. What novel methods of analysis can you bring to bear on the problem. and how do your results differ from those already published?5. What kind of data would be needed to make the conclusions more reliable? Suggestions and example projectsPhylogeny of a group of organisms: re-analysis of published molecular and/or morphological data, e.g.:∙ How are zebras related to horses?∙ How are sperm whales (Physeter) related to other whales?∙ Domestication of animal species∙ The red fox domestication experiment∙ From wolves to dogs∙ Relationships among animals, plants and fungi∙ How many times has carnivory evolved in flowering plants? How many different structural adaptations have evolved for carnivory?∙ Phylogenetic analysis of molecular evolution, e.g.:∙ Evolution of genes involved with the immune system∙ Evolution of genes involved with development∙ Evolution of genes in species living at extreme temperatures∙ Molecular clock comparisons among species differing in generation time or ecology ∙ Examining methods of phylogenetic analysis∙ Do analyses of different kinds of data (e.g. morphology and DNA sequences) yield the same phylogeny?∙ Effect of differences in nucleotide base composition on phylogenetic analysis ∙ Effect of assuming different models of character evolution on inferring phylogenies ∙ Effect on phylogenetic analysis of sampling only a few representative species from a particular taxonomic group

Reply:

Is That True? by Joel Best
1- Alexander Malonson : It is interesting  how sociological reasoning is rooted with one idea, comparing, a  researcher must clearly categorize a comparison, then define the reason  of how/why the study intends to answer that comparison. (The reason is  usually how/why a pattern in society behaves a certain way.) In the  first paragraph of chapter 10, Best makes it clear that being able to  compare aspects of social life is a key tool for all sociologists. In my  understanding, this is the only analytical tool used to compare values.  This practice allows sociologists “to discover and demonstrate what is  happening” while remaining objective because “… their training in  sociology does not qualify them to make authoritative judgment about  what is fair or just” in regards to societal values (Best 113, 101).The  most complicated issue sociologists must overcome when comparing is the  inability to replicate the research. This is extremely difficult because  of intervening variables or the inability to test the same subjects. In  the words of Best, “intervening variables alter the causes’ impact on  the effect”, and “there is no way to avoid this; researchers can only  explain their choices and point to their evidence” (115, 127).One idea  that raised questions for me was concept creep or how the meaning of a  word changes over time. Best used the example of the word deviant.  Todays meaning of deviant is exactly opposite of what sociologist coined  it to be. Best suggests that “there is no natural end to this process”,  this happens because everyone is encouraged to add on examples to the  fuzzy terms (97). Is this how the meaning of deviant morphed? Are all  the fuzzy terms like institution also doomed by evolving examples in the  future?. Write reply….

2- Klarissa Peraza : One  “big idea” that I found very insightful was the idea of Measurements. I  have always seen surveys and polls being taken, but I never really  payed close attention to all that is behind it. In other words, I took  these questionaries to be fairly easy to come up with. But, while  reading chapter 9, I realize how difficult it must be to produce results  with high validity. To add, Best (2021) mentions obtaining a  representative sample in order for the results to be more accurate, but  even then it is not 100%. Therefore, the best way to get accurate  results is to look at the answers that seem to have validity. For  example, “You probably ought to ignore the responses of people in your  sample who aren’t eligible to vote, perhaps because they are underage or  noncitizens” (Best, 2021, p. 90). I interpreted this as Best explaining  that whatever seems “irrelevant” to the study, should not even be  included. This being because any little thing may throw off the results  of the whole study. I found this very interesting because I began to  wonder if the surveys I have taken and are as valid as I ought them to  be. For example, there have been many times where I simply answered  “other” on surveys. I choose this as my answer when other answers  provided were not thorough enough. In addition, “Oh, and you’ll need to  decide what to do with the responses of people who say they haven’t made  up their minds or who refuse to respond because they figure their  preference is none of your damn business” (Best, 2021, p. 90). So as I  reflect on this, what do pollsters do with the results that are vague?  Although “throwing them out” or placing them where they want will allow  for better results, it is a totally valid result.

Shirley RRE: Unit 3: Discussion QuestionsAccording to Stringer & Aragon (2021), the audience and purpose section is used to identify who the report is intended for and why the report is important. The writer is responsible for informing the intended audience on the issues that are surrounding the effected stakeholders (Stringer & Aragon, 2021). Additionally, the writer has to ensure they are communicating appropriately the information the audience needs to know (Stringer & Aragon, 2021). The case study that is being presented by this writer has many parts and is intended to educate the Hispanic community on cultural issues that hold back individuals from receiving mental health services. This writer’s experience developing the audience and purpose section has been extremely helpful in thinking about the upcoming literature review section of the report. In thinking about the purpose of the research, this writer has been able to further expand on the information she would like to present to the audience. Identifying the purpose of the research has been important in developing an outline for the extensive research that will support this writers ideas. The upcoming assignment has begun to give this writer more insight on how to identify and present important information to the intended audience. However, this writers case study has many parts and there have been issues with identify what will be new information to the readers versus what is already known. Also, this writer has begun to notice that personal opinion can overpower the flow of the paper. Stringer & Aragon (2021) state to show passion and connect with the audience, however, this writer believes that there may be a thin line between showing passion and sharing too much personal opinion. This writer has begun to outline what is personal opinion versus what is factual. This writer believes it is important to ensure the information that is provided to the audience is supported with facts and is quantitative. Reference Stringer, E., & Aragon, O.A. (2021). Action research. (5th ed). SAGE Publications Jasmine JRE: Unit 3: Discussion QuestionsAfter reviewing information illustrated by Stringer (2013) discussing in detail the audience and purpose of a research as well as other peers’ perspective, the audience and purpose section, appears to be an ease in part of the case study. This writer has thought about how to make this section at least the required length, but she also feels as she continues to elaborate on this section, words will continue to flow diligently. Additionally, this writer does feel she needs more assistance with knowing how to identify the stakeholders. There are some stakeholders that are not major in the case study, but this writer does not want to leave out any pieces that could make her case study stronger.With the literature review, this writer currently does not have any issues to discuss during this time. The literature review will provide the audience with in-depth information regarding to the case study. This writer has begun brainstorming her literature review to ensure she does miss important questions that should be answered. Due to this section being a large portion of the case study, this writer hopes she will develop her literature review precisely.This writer does believe this course is flowing great and providing an outlook on what to expect in the future. also, this writer believes each peer is doing well and will continue to progress as this course continues. This writer wishes everyone the best of luck in this section!References:Stringer, E. T. (2013). Action research (4th ed.). Sage Publication.

Create and analyze a 1–2-page simulated case study of a child with developmental challenges, aged 2–5 years old. Then, create a 5–7-page intervention plan based on evidence-based strategies that have proven effective in similar cases and make projections of possible long-term impacts that current challenges may produce across the individual’s lifespan.Note: The assessments in this course follow the successive stages of lifespan development, so you are strongly encouraged to complete them in sequence.Early childhood begins at the end of toddlerhood, at approximately age 2, and continues until middle childhood begins with formal school entry at age 5 or 6. During this period, there are greater changes in cognitive development than any other period of life. At the same time, family relationships provide individuals with their earliest social experiences. Attachment patterns developed during early childhood influence an individual’s ability to successfully develop and maintain peer and adult relationships throughout the lifespan.Two major theories describe cognitive development in early childhood—Piaget’s constructivist theory and Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory.SHOW LESSJean Piaget was one of the first theorists interested in cognitive development. Piaget proposed that cognitive development follows a predetermined sequence of four stages. Interestingly, Piaget conducted a substantial amount of his research observing his own three children. In their studies, Piaget and his wife transcribed detailed records of their children’s behavior (Lefmann & Combs-Orme, 2013).Lev Vygotsky (1962) emphasized the role of culture or society in the transmission of knowledge and offers a sociocultural perspective of lifespan development, integrating social environment and culture. He is well known for the introduction of the concepts of scaffolding, the zone of proximal development, and the private speech transformation to inner speech.Attachment is an important aspect of human emotional development during early childhood and throughout the lifespan. The family provides individuals with their earliest social experiences. According to Erik Erikson (1950), the key developmental issue in infancy is developing trust. The development of trust is directly related to the quality of attachment patterns. Much of the attachment theory is based on the strange situation, which is a measurement technique developed by Mary Ainsworth and her colleagues (Bretherton, 2013). There are four types of attachment patterns:Secure attachment.Avoidant attachment.Ambivalent attachment.Disorganized-disoriented attachment.Other topics related to attachment include stranger anxiety and separation anxiety, intergenerational attachment patterns, the long-term effects of attachment, and the introduction of the concepts of mutual regulation and social referencing.At this point, the direct application of attachment theory to the world of work may seem remote to you. However, attachment can affect an individual’s ability to successfully develop and maintain peer and adult relations.ReferencesBretherton, I. (2013). Revisiting Mary Ainsworth’s conceptualization and assessments of maternal sensitivity-insensitivity. Attachment & Human Development, 15(5/6), 460–484.Erikson, E. H. (1950). Childhood and society (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Norton.Lefmann, T., & Combs-Orme, T. (2013). Early brain development for social work practice: Integrating neuroscience with Piaget’s theory of cognitive development. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 23(5), 640–647.Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Though and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.