Anthropology

Part 2 of 4 Below, turn in a 2-3 page (600-900 word) critique/analysis of your Secondary Source Article (review information turned in in Topic and Articles).  Make sure you cite the article at the end, a full APA citation, copying this format – Author, A. A. (Year, Month Day). Title of article. Title of newspaper, magazine. Retrieved from http://www.someaddress.com/full/url/ Instructions – Give yourself plenty of time to read the first article (do not read the primary source until after this analysis is done).  Your goal is to answer the questions below in your own words, not quoting the article or using the author’s words.  Therefore, you should know the material well enough to be able to summarize it. Analyze the secondary source article using the questions listed below (drawn from the Campus Library at UW Bothell and Cascadia College).  Do NOT complete in short answer – this is an essay.  It will work best if you view each major grouping as a paragraph, therefore ending with a 5 paragraph paper. Before you turn in the assignment, work your way through what you have written, highlighting and commenting to show where you answered each of the questions listed below.  This exercise will allow you to double check your work, and prevent you from writing a summary instead of an analysis.  A complete analysis will have 17 comments (1.1, 1.2, 1.3, etc) that I can see.  You will find the New Comment prompt under the Review tab at the top of your paper. Here is a video to describe how it is done.  https://support.office.com/en-us/article/video-insert-and-review-comments-in-word-5d50bf36-a069-41d5-b805-ceacd0762cdc  (Links to an external site.) Links to an external site.   When you turn in this analysis, it will be checked by TurnItIn.  You may review your score and resubmit if needed.  It will tag your highlights and comments, this is fine.  I will be looking for mentions of your article.  If your article shows, it means you did not do a good enough job of using your own words instead of the author’s and I will send it back to you for a redo.   Analysis questions – Introduction   What is the article title? Who are the authors? Thesis/position/argument/question – What is the primary argument made by the author/s? 2.  Context Why is the argument significant? When was the article written? Which journal/source published it? Who is the intended audience? 3.  Evidence What evidence does the author offer in support of the position put forth? (Identify all pieces of evidence you find.) How convincing is the evidence? Are the ethical considerations adequately explored and assessed? Have you read/heard anything on the subject that confirms or challenges the subject from a scientific point of view? 4.  Counter arguments What arguments are made in opposition to the author’s views (within the article or that come to you as you read, you do not need to look for outside sources)? Are these arguments persuasively refuted?  5.  Effectiveness What are the strengths of the article? Is it difficult to read and understand the article? If so, why? If not, why not? Are you able to follow the moves of the article from thesis to evidence?  In other words, was the article logically organized so that it flowed easily from topic to topic? Does all of the material seem relevant to the points made?   Rubric: Did you review and comment, showing your work?  If not, the paper will be returned to you. On time? Correct word count? Correct, complete APA citation? Content (did you answer all the questions above)? Grammar (spelling, verb/noun agreement, paragraph format, complete sentences, etc)? Do not use quotations.  This does not mean pull things straight from the article without quotations. That is plagiarism.  I want you to use your own words to summarize the information.  That means you have to read and understand the articles well enough to discuss the information and break it down. Analyze – don’t summarize Use scientific writing (clear and concise, not verbose)

Visit the Donner Party Archaeology Project here: Donner Party Archaeology Project        (Links to an external site.)  to learn more about the tragic story of the ill-fated Donner Party during the winter of 1846-47. Read through the information regarding the project, including going through the virtual dig.   Write a short paper summarizing the information that you discovered. What additional information did historical archaeologists provide about this event that adds to the story? Explain why archaeology projects such as this are valuable.

Here’s the link for the discussion board. Outline your results, talk to your classmates about plastics, what you use in your family, how you can cut back, etc. https://www.ecowatch.com/mutant-enzyme-recycles-plastic-2645686207.html?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1 1. Break your plastics into different groups: A. Long term plastics: tv, pc, furniture, reusable water bottles, etc. B. Short term plastics: one use bottles, bags, caps, disposable items. 2. Take partial inventory of these#B plasti things in different rooms…you can go crazy with this if you’re bored, or you can just look around and see how much you have. Write these down (separate by room). 3. List A. items you could readily do without (explain why/how) B. items that you would have to make a strong effort to remove and replace (explain why/how) C. items that it’s just not possible to get rid of (explain why/how). 4. I’d like to give you a personal challenge. Talk to your family about items from 3.A. and see if you would all be willing to give these up for a specific amount of time…maybe a month. (If you’re successful and you’ve found work-arounds that are perfectly fine…then you’ve made a difference…maybe they can all still with it? At the same time, consider items in 3.B. Choose 3 that you would want to try to give up and trying something else. These will be more difficult…but not impossible. Likely you’ll be looking for alternative products that will take a little getting used to… Now, see if folks in your family are onboard with choosing a few of their own 3 items. They may not be….but that’s ok…we’ll start them off easy with the items in 3A. A positive outcome there after a month may be encouraging for them to make more changes… While at it…as anyone in your household why it would be too difficult to give up certain items. Don’t just…this is actually our dilemma today. Recycling these items is great, but if we gave them up, we wouldn’t need to recycle. Why can’t humans give up these things? Think about that and the psychology of it all. This is why we need to study humans as well as the environment. Let’s talk about all of this on Thursday. I will tell you, I understand the struggles in a household with others in it. I try, but not everyone (particularly my 76 year old mother) is not willing to make changes — not too easily anyway. So, some are my own. For instance: I now use silicon reusable zip-baggies rather than plastic ziplocs. I use bar shampoo and conditioner (that took me a really long time to get used to), I use toothpaste bites rather than buying tubes of toothpaste –odd, but perfectly fine, actually. I never buy plastic straws, I have reusable metal ones and I have reusable metal travel coffee cup and plastic water bottle. These are just some of the changes that I have actively tried to make a conscious effort to change from single-use plastic to … not. But I still have a ton of plastic around me in my life…

Write a 4 – 5 page essay that answers the following questions: Summarize at least two hypotheses proposed to explain Neanderthal extinction.  What specific information do scientists use to support these different claims? (about 1.5 to 2 pages in length) Based on your evaluation of the scientific evidence, which hypothesis for Neanderthal extinction do you find most credible, and why? (about 1.5 – 2 pages in length)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdYwMLSNHnU&feature=emb_title Before you watch the video, answer this question. 1. The basic claim of the video is that anatomically modern humans interbred with other human species. What evidence would you expect to find that would support this? Why?    Ok now watch the video and answer the following questions 2. Summarize the findings and the claims made in the video. Do they correspond with your answer to number 1? 3. Does this change what it means to be “human” to you? Explain your answer.

There is 2 parts for this assignment.  For the first part its  a research style assignment this part it includes sources. The second part it is a video with questions to answer no sources needed. First assignment :This will be a  research style assignment – nothing too formal though. Mostly, I want you to start thinking of these types of questions through the lens of natural selection. Once you do that, I want you to use what you have learned about critical thinking, evolution and genetics to start researching for your answer.    Please answer all questions in complete sentences. Please make sure that I am able to assess how it is that you reached your conclusion.    and  provide an informal list of references you used – links to websites are fine, or just stating the name of the chapter from the book is fine as well.       1. What is language? And how does this differ from other forms of non-human animal communication?    2. Using your understanding of natural selection, why would have language evolved in humans? Second assignment :Please make sure to watch the video on human species interacting and answer the following questions.  For full points, please answer all questions in complete sentences. Please make sure that I am able to assess how it is that you reached your conclusion.       Before you watch the video, answer this question.   1. The basic claim of the video is that anatomically modern humans interbred with other human species. What evidence would you expect to find that would support this? Why?       Ok now watch the video and answer the following questions   2. Summarize the findings and the claims made in the video. Do they correspond with your answer to number 1?  3. Does this change what it means to be “human” to you? Explain your answer.  Video link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdYwMLSNHnU&feature=emb_title

III.  Implications/Conclusions Statement that uses the peer-reviewed articles as evidence for the hypothesis that if the victim is defending themselves from their assailant, then the effects of trauma will be seen on the bone and that the bone trauma can help identify how the individual was killed (i.e. evidence from the peer-reviewed articles that support the idea that identifying bone trauma can determine the manner of death and/or the cause of death of an individual). Example:  The peer-reviewed articles show research and evidence of how blunt force and sharp force trauma on human bone can help determine how the individual’s skeleton acquired the injury. More research needs to be done to better understand how trauma through soft tissue affects the bone as discussed by Dempsey and Blau (2020). As discussed by Crowder, Rainwater and Fridile (2019) patterns on the bone from sharp force trauma can lead to the object that caused them, similar to how Daisy Wick and Dr. Hodgens observed the abrasions running along the bones and predicted the weapon had many grooves to cause striations on the bones.  References Crowder, C., Rainwater, C. W., & Fridile, J. S. (2013). Microscopic analysis of sharp force trauma in bone and cartilage: A validation study. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 58(5), 1119-1126. Retrieved from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1556-4029.12180 Dempsey, N., & Blau, S. (2020). Evaluating the evidentiary value of the analysis of skeletal trauma in forensic research: A review of research and practice. Forensic Science International, 307, 1-12. Retrieved from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0379073820300025.  Obertová, Z., Leipner, A., Messina, C., Vanzulli, A., Fliss, B., Cattaneo, C., & Sconfienza, L. M. (2019). Postmortem imaging of perimortem skeletal trauma. Forensic Science International, 302, 1-11. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.109921 ?Simon L. V., Lopez R. A., & King, K. C. (2020). Blunt Force Trauma. Retrieved from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK470338/

respond to five of the short answer identifications and the essay 1Historical ecology 2Horticulturists 3World system 4Affinal 5State 6Bilateral descent 7Polygamous 8Exogamy 9Acculturation 10Reified 11There are a number of factors that lead to political affinity and political systems.  Some of these include subsistence, economics, family, traditions and race and ethnicity.  Explore several of these factors in a well-written 5-7 paragraph essay. Textbook Perspectives:  An Open Invitation to Cultural Anthropology 2nd Edition http://perspectives.americananthro.org/

Please provide a Title Page, an Introduction, a Body of discussion, a Conclusion, and a minimum of 5 different academic references in the Bibliography. Use only College Library references, on-line Journals, and other credible academic or anthropological sources. In your research paper make sure your voice is distinct, and work the experts into your discussion, like in the example above, use attributive phrases, like according to Smith, Smith also stated, etc. Finally, chose a topic you are personally interested in concerning a specific culture of the world.

In a total of roughly 250 words, please answer the following:  1. According to Karl Marx, why is there a fundamental conflict between employees and bosses?  2. Why are class and inequality largely invisible in U.S. culture? Do you think the same is true of Canadian culture?