Category: Political Science

Analyze Mark Andrejevic & Neil Selwyn’s Facial Recognition and tells the reader what the point it is trying to make; and, how convincingly it makes this point.

6 Pages double spaced 14 Font [You do not need a title/cover page] I will provide details on how to
reference the book review in Class 6, Book Review Session.
This assignment is a book review. It is an assignment that asks you to critically analyze Mark Andrejevic
& Neil Selwyn’s Facial Recognition and tells the reader what the point it is trying to make; and, how
convincingly it makes this point. Writing a critique achieves three purposes. First, it provides you with
an understanding of the information contained in a book; and a familiarity with other information written
on the same topic. Second, it provides an opportunity to apply and develop your critical thinking skills as
you attempt to evaluate critically a political scientist’s (or other thinker’s) work. Third, it helps you to
improve your own writing skills as you attempt to describe the book’s strengths and weaknesses within a
specific page length so that your reader can clearly understand them.
This book review assignment has four areas: Thesis Statement; Methods; Evidence; and,
Recommendations. Before you start your critical review, you should provide the reader with a short
summary of what the book is about. This should be no longer than ½ page. Consider this as your
introduction to the review. Next, you should turn your attention to the four requirements of the critical
review. The following are guides to help you write your paper.
Thesis Statement: Your first task is to find and clearly state the thesis in the book. The thesis is the main
point the book is trying to make. Quote Andrejevic & Selwyn’s Thesis Statement in the body of your
review and tell me which page or pages you believe it is found on. Many authors, however, do not present
their thesis clearly. Do you have to hunt for the thesis of the book? If you believe you found it, quote it
in our review; and, tell me which page(s) you believe you found it on. Comment about the clarity of
the author’s thesis presentation. If you do not believe they had a thesis statement than indicate this in
your answer to this section of the book review.
Methods: What methods did the authors use to investigate her topic? In other words, how did the authors
go about supporting their thesis? In your critique, carefully answer the following two questions. First,
were appropriate methods used? In other words, did the authors approach to supporting the thesis make
sense? Second, did the authors employ the selected methods correctly? Did you discover any errors in
the way the authors conducted their research?
Evidence for thesis support: In your critique, answer the following questions: What evidence did the
authors present in support of their thesis? What are the strengths of the evidence presented by the authors?
What are the weaknesses of the evidence presented? On balance, how well did the authors support their
thesis?
Recommendation: In this section, summarize your evaluation of the book. Tell the readers several things.
Who would benefit from reading it? What will the benefit be? Be specific. Don’t for example say
something generic like “everybody should read this book” or “students taking political science courses
should read it”. How important and extensive is that benefit? Finally, clearly state your evaluation of the
book – whether you liked or disliked it and why?
Think of your paper as a construction requiring planning (an outline) and careful thinking of concepts,
issues, problems etc. It is helpful to state the objectives and the plan for the paper in the opening paragraph
(introduction). The introduction should conclude with a concise, coherent summary of the argument to
be developed. Despite having major components in the paper, you do not need subheadings as they tend
simply to be space filler and I will call you out on it and deduct marks. Instead, you should use
paragraphs as building blocks. To effectively use the book in your paper, try to identify the main
argument(s) of the author and select examples carefully to bolster your argument. Do not use too many
long, direct quotations. You can summarize the argument(s) in your own words, but make sure to cite the
source of the information as an indirect quote.
Your paper will be evaluated on the following criteria:
• A clear, coherent, and systematic presentation.
• Correct spelling and a competent writing style which allows you to express your views and ideas
clearly.
• Proper citation [refer to the documentation posted to D2L on how to reference this assignment.]
• Adequately and fully addressing all aspects of the assignment
• Any review, which is simply a chapter-by-chapter summary, will automatically receive at
best a grade of 50%; and the grade may be lowered based upon the other grading criteria.
• Do not use any other sources other than the book under review. If outside sources are used, I will deduct a substantial grade.

This assignment is designed for you to get an in depth look at the policy analysis process.

Paper Guidelines per the professor:
This assignment is designed for you to get an in depth look at the policy analysis process. You are expected to produce a well-written, concise paper on the subject.The paper should be 8-10 pages in length double spaced with proper citations.Your paper should address the following areas:
1. Introduce your topic. This includes identifying the problem and defining any key terms.
2. Establish the criteria with which you will evaluate the existing policy and policy alternatives. For example, cost, legality, efficiency and political acceptability represent possible evaluative criteria.
3. Summarize the existing literature that addresses your policy issue, including online and print publications.
4. Analyze the existing policy according to the evaluative criteria you have established. This analysis should also include the effects the policy has on different groups and any conflicts it creates among important values.
5. Identify alternatives to your policy and evaluate each one individually, according to your established criteria. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each option. Keep in mind that you can combine alternative options into new ideas.
6. Conclude by recommending any changes in or alternatives to the existing policy, and briefly reiterate your rationale. Outline a plan for adopting an alternative, if applicable, and discuss the possible consequences of adopting your recommended changes.The paper should have at least ten sources. At least eight of these must be from scholarly journals. The others can come from “other sources.” Scholarly journals do not include magazines such as Newsweek or Time. Please do not use Wikipedia for any of your sources.

-Review the project descriiption and feedback on the Annotated Bibliography.(you

-Review the project descriiption and feedback on the Annotated Bibliography.(you need a question around which to frame your literature review. )
-The outline should be no more than one page (single-spaced is okay; use 12-point font).
– and look into the document please
========
– I attached for you two documents:
the annotated paper with the prof comment
and the instructors for for the outline

writing a book review of Mark Andrejevic and Neil Selwyn (2022) Facial
Recogniti

writing a book review of Mark Andrejevic and Neil Selwyn (2022) Facial
Recognition.
6 Pages double spaced 14 Font [You do not need a title/cover page] I will provide details on how to reference the book review in Class. Book Review Session.
This assignment is a book review. It is an assignment that asks you to critically analyze Mark Andrejevic
& Neil Selwyn’s Facial Recognition and tells the reader what the point it is trying to make; and, how
convincingly it makes this point. Writing a critique achieves three purposes. First, it provides you with
an understanding of the information contained in a book; and a familiarity with other information written
on the same topic. Second, it provides an opportunity to apply and develop your critical thinking skills as
you attempt to evaluate critically a political scientist’s (or other thinker’s) work. Third, it helps you to
improve your own writing skills as you attempt to describe the book’s strengths and weaknesses within a
specific page length so that your reader can clearly understand them.
This book review assignment has four areas: Thesis Statement; Methods; Evidence; and,
Recommendations. Before you start your critical review, you should provide the reader with a short
summary of what the book is about. This should be no longer than ½ page. Consider this as your
introduction to the review. Next, you should turn your attention to the four requirements of the critical
review. The following are guides to help you write your paper.
Thesis Statement: Your first task is to find and clearly state the thesis in the book. The thesis is the main
point the book is trying to make. Quote Andrejevic & Selwyn’s Thesis Statement in the body of your
review and tell me which page or pages you believe it is found on. Many authors, however, do not present
their thesis clearly. Do you have to hunt for the thesis of the book? If you believe you found it, quote it
in our review; and, tell me which page(s) you believe you found it on. Comment about the clarity of
the author’s thesis presentation. If you do not believe they had a thesis statement than indicate this in
your answer to this section of the book review.
Methods: What methods did the authors use to investigate her topic? In other words, how did the authors
go about supporting their thesis? In your critique, carefully answer the following two questions. First,
were appropriate methods used? In other words, did the authors approach to supporting the thesis make
sense? Second, did the authors employ the selected methods correctly? Did you discover any errors in
the way the authors conducted their research?
Evidence for thesis support: In your critique, answer the following questions: What evidence did the
authors present in support of their thesis? What are the strengths of the evidence presented by the authors?
What are the weaknesses of the evidence presented? On balance, how well did the authors support their
thesis?
Recommendation: In this section, summarize your evaluation of the book. Tell the readers several things.
Who would benefit from reading it? What will the benefit be? Be specific. Don’t for example say
something generic like “everybody should read this book” or “students taking political science courses
should read it”. How important and extensive is that benefit? Finally, clearly state your evaluation of the
book – whether you liked or disliked it and why?
Think of your paper as a construction requiring planning (an outline) and careful thinking of concepts,
issues, problems etc. It is helpful to state the objectives and the plan for the paper in the opening paragraph
(introduction). The introduction should conclude with a concise, coherent summary of the argument to
be developed. Despite having major components in the paper, you do not need subheadings as they tend
simply to be space filler and I will call you out on it and deduct marks. Instead, you should use
paragraphs as building blocks. To effectively use the book in your paper, try to identify the main
argument(s) of the author and select examples carefully to bolster your argument. Do not use too many
long, direct quotations. You can summarize the argument(s) in your own words, but make sure to cite the
source of the information as an indirect quote.
Your paper will be evaluated on the following criteria:
• A clear, coherent, and systematic presentation.
• Correct spelling and a competent writing style which allows you to express your views and ideas
clearly.
• Proper citation [refer to the documentation posted to D2L on how to reference this assignment.]
• Adequately and fully addressing all aspects of the assignment
• Any review, which is simply a chapter-by-chapter summary, will automatically receive at
best a grade of 50%; and the grade may be lowered based upon the other grading criteria.
• Do not use any other sources other than the book under review. If outside sources are used,
I will deduct a substantial grade

Students are required to write a 3-4-page paper (around 1500 words) wherein they

Students are required to write a 3-4-page paper (around 1500 words) wherein they conduct a critical review of two written works (at least) addressing a specific course topic.
The written works: (I will attach them below)
1. The Roots of Authoritarianism in the Middle East by Selin M. Bolme
2. Authoritarianism and Democracy in Muslim Countries: Rentier States and Regional Diffusion by Ahmet T. Kuru
The paper should include:
1) a comparative analysis of the arguments presented in the papers
2) identification and evaluation of strengths and weaknesses
3) an assessment of their scholarly validity and contribution
4) a substantiated endorsement or rejection of either perspective.
Please make sure that the paper compares authors’ arguments, engage with them critically, show their contribution, and whether you agree with them or not.

The essay question is:
What roles, if any, did American foreign policy play vis

The essay question is:
What roles, if any, did American foreign policy play vis a vis the historical, political, social, cultural, and economic underpinnings of the 1979 Revolution in Iran? What were the policies on the ground, what did they presuppose, and how did they “fail” to see the revolution?
In a well-organized, well-written 10-12-page double-spaced essay, answer one of the following questions with a clear and original argument. Be sure to use specific examples from the readings to support your case (at least 5 readings from the course must be engaged thoroughly). You will need a Works Cited page at the end of the paper, and please use proper citations throughout the paper (pick one style and stick with it). I will share the readings and sources you need to use – if you use additional sources, please make sure they are ONLY academic books or articles from academic institutions. Please use these sources:
Kevan Harris, A Social Revolution: Politics and the Welfare State in Iran: Introduction
Abbas Amanat: Iran, A Modern History; Chapter 11 “Development, Disarray, and Discontent” and Ch 12 “Cultures of Authority and Cultures of Dissent”
Kevan Harris, A Social Revolution: Politics and the Welfare State in Iran: Chapter 2: “Seeing like a King: Welfare Policy as State-Building Strategy in the Pahlavi Monarchy”
– Charles Kurzman, The Unthinkable Revolution in Iran (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004): Read the whole book.
– Behrooz Ghamari-Tabrizi: Foucault in Iran; Chapter 1.
– Misagh Parsa, Social Origins of the Iranian Revolution (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1989): Chapters 5, 6, and 7
– Negar Mottahedeh, Whisper Tapes: Read the whole book
– Sreberney-Mohammadi and Mohammadi: Small Media, Big Revolution, Chapter 8: “The ‘Heavy Artillery’: Small Media for a Big Revolution.”
– Ervand Abrahamian, Khomeinism: Essays on the Islamic Republic (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993): Introduction and Chapter 1
– Negar Razavi: The Systemic Problem of “Iran Expertise” in Washington, Jadaliyya
– Naghmeh Sohrabi, “The ‘Problem Space’ of the Historiography of the 1979 Iranian Revolution,” in History Compass 16, 2018.
– Afsaneh Najmabadi, “Iran’s Turn to Islam: From Modernism to a Moral Order,” in Middle East Journal 41(2), 1987.
– Edward Said, Covering Islam: Chapter 2: “The Iran Story”

The design and aim of the positional paper are to allow you to SELECT ANY TOPIC

The design and aim of the positional paper are to allow you to SELECT ANY TOPIC THAT interests YOU and write an argumentative position. So, you are encouraged to select any topic and theme, whether empirical observation or theoretical debates in the various IR theories.
Yet, if you have problems identifying any topic of interest, you can select any of the topics below.
1. Analyze the workings and dynamics of the balance of power in the Ukraine crisis.
2. Selecting any conflict of your choice, analyze the roles of individuals in the decision-making of such conflict.
3. Analyze by comparing and contrasting the roles and dynamics of collective security (led by the United Nations) and Collective defence (led by NATO) in the preservation of international peace.
4. Select any conflict of your choice (past or present), and analyze the problems and benefits of negotiations in such a conflict. Here, you can select a single conflict as a case study and analyze the dynamics of negotiation in such a conflict.
5. Analyze the advantages and disadvantages by comparing and contrasting constructivist and classical realist approaches to arms control agreements. Here you can choose any arms control agreement of your choice.
In writing this analytical paper, ensure you have all the following elements of a good essay.
1. You have developed a thesis or hypothesis that guides your essay.
2. You have developed your hypothesis into an analytical framework or model, considering the pros and cons that challenge your hypothesis or thesis.
3. You must have sources of evidence that support your hypothesis or thesis or challenge it. When selecting your evidence, you have to balance your analysis. Every argument has two sides, so try to balance your argument.
4. Consult scholarly literature or work to support your hypothesis or thesis statement.
5. Make sure your conclusion (s) flows logically from your argument, considering your hypothesis and analytical tramework.
Further instructions.
1. The Position paper is a 5 double-spaced paper (not counting the endnotes and citation pages). Citations are to be Chicago-style.
NO AI USE

Look at how Dewey articulated his beliefs about education and come up with your own statements with rationale for each.

By this point, we have discussed many topics: frameworks for teaching and learning, culturally responsive and sustaining pedagogy, critical theories, and connections between culture, learning and identity. You all have come into this class with folk theories and scripts of how students learn and how you think teachers teach. The hope is that through readings, discussions, videos, and your assignments, you have challenged those folk theories and scripts by considering what you have learned thus far through theoretical concepts, yet also knowing there is more than just “Theory” that informs how we teach and how students learn.
John Dewey, an American philosopher and educational reformer, wrote his Pedagogic Creed in 1897. In it, he articulated his beliefs around the purpose of education, the purpose of schools, what should be taught, how it should be taught, and how education moves towards social progress. He started his ideas with “I believe…”
You will refer to Dewey’s Pedagogic Creed
Actions
.In this assignment, you are to look at how Dewey articulated his beliefs about education and come up with your own statements with rationale for each.
Example: I believe education is a process of living and not a preparation for future living.
In this final paper, you will do something similar, with 5 “I believe” statements around 1) what is education, 2) how students should learn, 3) the purpose of content, 4) the purpose of schools and education, and 5) your stance on how education is a move toward social progress.
Under each “I believe…” statement, include 1) your rationale for that statement citing a reading you have done in our class or another class, and 2) an example of how that might look in a classroom. Throughout your paper, at least 5 of the resources should be from this class. Your rationale from the reading should support your claim or stance.
In your paper,
1) Begin with an introduction and end with a conclusion that reflects back on your statements.
2) how you have made sense of the readings/discussions in class and how you are applying and connecting them to your own ideas about teaching and learning,
3) to see that your thoughts and examples are clearly articulated and organized, and
4) to see that you have referenced at least 5 readings from our course that support your ideas.
Please be sure to proofread your work prior to submitting.
Assignment Details:
12 point, Times New Roman font
1.5 spacing
3-4 pages
No more than 2 direct quotes from a text. Must be cited in APA format.
APA citations in-text AND in a Reference section at the end of the paper (APA resources are in Canvas under Modules if needed, or you can look at Purdue OwlLinks to an external site. for proper APA citations)You may also refer to class slides, but need to refer to the information in the lectures. This is how to cite:In-text citation (Professor’s first initial. Last name, personal communication, date of lecture)Example(S. Graham, personal communication, June 17, 2020)

Describe at least one analytical pathology outlined in this report

Throughout 2020, the intelligence community researched, analyzed, and reported on what it saw as potential interference in the US election that year. There were complaints of politicization by the IC and policymakers alike. In response to complaints from the IC, the IC’s Analytic Ombudsman did a review of the analysis, how it was produced, and its use.
Here is the report: 2021 IC Analytic Ombudsman’s Report on Threats to the Election. Links to an external site.
(A PDF is attached).
Directions
Describe at least one analytical pathology outlined in this report. Be sure to refer to the other readings for the week for context. Refer to specific quotes and page numbers when explaining the pathology. Cite in Chicago N/B.

Discuss a feature that could be used for geolocating imagery

elements of geolocation: What this refers to are features of an image or video that could be used to determine the physical location of an image. Are there features from which you reliably cannot infer a location, even though it seems that way? You could also link a case and highlight a particularly interesting detail that has been used for geolocation.
Prompt
Discuss a feature that could be used for geolocating imagery, something that’s not a reliable indicator of location, or a case where an interesting feature in an image was used to determine the physical location.Include a satelite image of the location and explain how it was useful or suspicious.
use the attached scholarly source to add to your discussion of your location choice, citing one or more exact qoute from it in Chicago format. Also be sure to cite how you got the image/ where the image came from in Chicago format.