Read the two students response and write a 100 word helpful positive response.

1) The two characters—King Kashpaw and Lipsha Morrissey in the novel “Love Medicine” by Louise Erdrich, have a conflicting relationship that builds upon every interaction. King Kashpaw is introduced in the first section of the novel as the son of June Morrissey and a cowardly drunkard who abuses his wife. While on the other hand, King Kashpaw is presented in a different light as we learn that he is also June Morrissey’s son without knowing who she was. King’s grandparents had taken Lipsha in as their adoptive son since word had declared that his mother attempted to drown him. Through Albertine Johnson’s perspective, we learn the he does not place importance in knowing who his mother was or why she had attempted to drown him (Louise 39). It’s clear enough that Lipsha appears to be unaffected by his biological mother’s affection and care but is described as “a listener than a talker, a shy one with a wide, sweet, intelligent face” that puts to question into what is he truly thinking or wanting to reveal (Louise 29).

In addition to this note, Lipsha had explained to Albertine that King had attempted to potshot him before implying that he has perhaps a hidden fear for him and does not know what to expect from him, uncertain as to what could possibly be the cause of such abhorrence towards him. A reason for this rival nature that King adopts to is that he knows that Lipsha is June Morrissey’s son and his own step-brother. While Lipsha does not reflect June Morrissey’s behavior and character, his facial features resemble that of the mother as he has “her pretty flat features and slim grace” that could only remind King of his deceased mother and that he does not resemble her in appearance (Louise 30). Lastly, I noticed that Albertine has fond feelings for Lipsha. Could it be a possibility thay they connect romantically and repeat June’s and Gordie’ s steps?

Erdrich, Louise. Love Medicine. London: Harper Perennial, 2009. Print.

2) The pair of characters that strike me as quite the interesting pair in Love Medicine by Louise Erdrich are Lynette and King Kashpaw. Throughout the novel they have an extremely interesting relationship and throughout the novel it becomes more and more apparently that their relationship is actually unhealthy and at most times violent. Albertine Johnson is the narrator at this point in the novel and she describes one of many altercations to come between King and Lynette as they fight and Albertine can hear “clanging sound of struck metal, pots tumbling in the house” from outside the house (40). This fight broke out in the kitchen between the pair while King was quite intoxicated. Showing violence in a relationship is unhealthy and even dangerous, for example Albertine describes she saw “King was trying to drown Lynette” (41). Albertine then had to step in when it is not her responsibility but she “jumped on his back and bit his ear” to get him away from Lynette (41). Albertine is a young girl trying to make a grown man stop drowning his wife and mother of his child. It is disappointing for the reader to think of this image in their head of a young adult woman trying to defend this woman from her husband while falling into the trap of staying in this relationship. This event ends with Lynette “begging King to take her away in the car” while leaving their child inside sleeping (42). This shows the lack of respect Lynette and King have for one another because a significant other should never show any sort of violence towards one another.

please post a draft of your rhetorical-genre analysis memo. As you draft your memo, please consider the 5 questions from the assignment sheet as jumping off points, but don’t simply answer the questions in the memo. You’ll want to consider and adhere to the conventions of a professional memo, and begin to consider document design principles as well.

When you post your draft, please include 2 questions about your draft that you want your classmates to address. The questions should focus on big picture issues–structure, organization, details, overall analysis, etc. You might, for example, ask your reviewers to consider places in the memo where they need additional information or support to better understand what you are communicating. Avoid asking reviewers to read for surface-level errors such as spelling, punctuation, and grammar.

Critique of a Research Study

Reread the full text of the study you selected in Week One. Evaluate the study and write a critique, using the textbook and relevant journal articles to support your analysis of the study. Use the following section headings and content in your paper.

1. Introduction

• State the purpose of the paper. Clearly identify the study being critiqued, by title and authors. Summarize the research question, hypothesis (if a quantitative study), and background information on the topic from the study’s literature review. Did the authors present a well-balanced summary of current knowledge about the topic? Is there any apparent bias in the literature review?

1. Methods

• Differentiate the research design (experimental or non-experimental) and approach (qualitative or quantitative), sampling method, and data collection methods. Indicate the sample size, variables and measures (if a quantitative study), statistical tests (if a quantitative study), coding and analysis procedures (if a qualitative study), and any assumptions made by the researchers. Were the procedures chosen appropriate for the study? What alternative methods would you suggest?

1. Ethical Aspects

• Analyze ethical issues pertaining to this study. Did the researchers explicitly address ethical issues in the article? If not, was there evidence in the report that the participants’ safety and confidentiality were protected? Was an approval process by an Institutional Review Board or similar ethics review committee mentioned? Were any of the practices ethically questionable (deception, coercion, etc.)?

1. Results

• Present a summary of the results of the analysis performed in the study. Did the authors keep their interpretations and conclusions separate from the analysis results (evidence)?

1. Discussion and Conclusion

• Analyze and critique the conclusions drawn by the researchers. Do the conclusions follow logically from the results of the analysis? Evaluate the overall efficacy of the research study by identifying the strengths and weaknesses of aspects of its design and implementation. Identify the limitations noted by the researchers and add any limitations you see that were not mentioned in the article. Describe the directions for future research proposed by the authors and evaluate their appropriateness. Recommend at least one idea for a future study that will overcome some of the limitations of this study. Keep in mind that this suggested future study will serve as the basis for your Final Paper.

Your paper should be four to six pages in length (excluding title and reference pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. Utilize a minimum of five sources that were published within the last 10 years and are documented in APA style, as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. These sources should include the article being critiqued, at least three peer-reviewed journal articles, and the course textbook. It is recommended that you visit the Research Methods research guide in the Ashford University Library for suggested articles, as well as searching for articles in the Library’s databases.

Carefully review the Grading Rubric (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your assignment.

Stuck on a problem? Don’t skip that assignment – click the button to chat with a live tutor. It is free and here to help you now.

Go to top of page

Waypoint Assignment Submission The assignments in this course will be submitted to Waypoint. Please refer to the instructions below to submit your assignment. Click on the Assignment Submission button below. The Waypoint “Student Dashboard” will open in a new browser window. Browse for your assignment. Click Upload. Confirm that your assignment was successfully submitted by viewing the appropriate week’s assignment tab in Waypoint. For more detailed instructions, refer to the Waypoint Tutorial (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site..

Question 4

Complete the following steps:

1. Highlight the chi-square and significance values in the output. Write the chi-square results as you might see them in a journal.

QUESTION 12 (I DID STEP 1, PLEASE DO 2-6)

Complete the following steps after opening the SPSS file assessment5d.sav linked in the Resources under the Required Resources heading:

1. Create a scatterplot. Copy and paste the scatterplot output to your Word document.
2. Based on the scatterplot, what is the expected strength and direction of the correlation?
3. Identify the null hypothesis.
4. Calculate Pearson r. Copy and paste the correlation output to your Word document.
5. Based on the correlation output (two-tailed test), can the null hypothesis be rejected? If the null can be rejected, how confident can you be that the results are not due to chance?
6. Report the results as you might see them in a journal.

The Literature Review

This week, we will be expanding on the work we started in week two of this course. Rather than just analyzing resources, this week we will be blending our resources into a larger frame, drawing connections between each of the resources and to our project thesis. For a refresher on the final project criteria, see our preview.

A literature review has two specific goals:

• To demonstrate that you, the researcher, have done your due diligence in exploring the work other researchers have done in the area; and
• To ground the theory in the current research available.

You should think of your literature review as a way to tell a story about your research using sources as guideposts along the way. Think about your role in this as a moderator in a discussion between your sources, and your job is to keep them focused on your thesis (this is usually the first section of a research article, so you should use the literature reviews of your sources as a model for what we are doing here).

You will need a minimum of five (5) sources in your literature review (you will need a total of ten in your Final Project). Consider the following to help you gather these sources:

• Do a library search using Grantham’s EBSCOhost library database or from Google Scholar
• Use key words to search (try different variations)
• Only use scholarly books or peer-reviewed journal articles
• Choose sources from within the past 5 years (you can set your EBSCO search to only show articles within this range)
• Read titles to see what looks relevant (don’t waste your time reading things that don’t look like they will work for your project)
• Read the abstracts and only choose the most pertinent articles (once again, don’t waste your time—if the abstract doesn’t seem promising, move on to the nerxt article).

Please note: information from the Internet may not be used for this project unless the source is from an e-journal (a peer-reviewed journal that is published on the web). The organization’s website is an exception to this rule, but it can only count as one of your ten sources.
Assignment

Create a literature review, incorporating each of your references (minimum of five), tying them to each other and to the thesis of your project in a single narrative. You should cite each source in the body of your literature review and in a references page at the end of your paper.

Your literature review should be arranged in the following way:

• Introduction: A concise definition of the topic and organization with which you are working. A clearly stated thesis of your project. A brief description about how this project might be interesting and/or important to your readers/adudience.

• Main Body: A discussion of each of your sources, including what they are claiming, how they relate to other sources you are using, and how they support your thesis (make sure you identify and cite each source as you use them). Each work should be summarized and evaluated for its premise, scope, and conclusion. In addition, address any inconsistencies, omissions, or errors, as well as accuracy, depth, and relevance you find compelling or think might be useful to your readers/audience. Use logical connections and transitions to connect sources.

• Conclusion: The conclusion summarizes the key findings of the review in general terms. You may want to revisit commonalities and differences between your sources, whether favorable or not. Make sure you tie your work throughout this review back to your thesis.

References: As well as accurate in-text citations, your literature review must contain complete and correct APA citations for every source in a references page at the end of your review.