Please see the attached documents for the details needed to complete this assignment. You can use the attached NCU Consulting Case Study Scenario.

In this forum, post your thesis statement (a complete sentence) and a brief outline for the critical evaluation essay. For your critical evaluation essay, you will probably want to evaluate the same TED Talk that you chose and discussed in last week’s Forum. In fact, The Week 2 Forum was designed to allow you to get a head start on your critical evaluation essay by first analyzing your chosen speech within Forum 2, before developing it further here, in Forum 3.

Then, discuss how you plan to show how your chosen speaker uses ethos, pathos, logos, etc. Choose one original example of this support, and explain how it was effective in the speech’s argument. Cite this example correctly using MLA style documentation.

Finally, consider the following. During this section of the course you evaluated a speaker’s rhetorical skills. How can this sort of critical evaluation of another speaker’s methods of persuasion be used in future courses at APUS?

In your responses, find a classmate who chose a different argument than yours. Do you agree with your classmate’s discussion? See if you can find a different example of where support is used within that chosen speech (or point out a possible fallacy to your classmate). Continue this conversation over a few days. Also, if you find that your chosen classmate has misunderstood the critical evaluation essay instructions, please help that student get back on track.

Shelley’s Frankenstein

Directions: Create a word processing document titled “Frankenstein Assignment 2.” For each question that follows, compose a short essay response (250 to 400 words). Be sure to provide a clear thesis statement that does not just restate the question. Support your thesis with specific evidence from the text. Clearly number your responses and copy the question and place your essay response under it. To earn full credit, each response must meet the following requirements:

• Writing is free of spelling or word use errors.
• Writing is free of run-on sentences or sentence fragments.
• All punctuation is used appropriately.
• All proper nouns and the beginnings of sentences are capitalized appropriately.
• All other standard English grammar, punctuation, and spelling are followed.
• Sentences vary in structure between simple, complex, compound, and complex-compound structures.
• Fully developed paragraphs have a minimum of four – five sentences each.

1. Victor says of his father that “a more indulgent and less dictatorial parent did not exist upon earth.” Discuss Alphone’s influence on Victor and Victor’s feelings toward his father. Compare Alphonse’s and Victor’s relationship to Victor’s relationship with the creature.
2. Give some examples of the Romantic concept in Shelley’s use of physical locations. How does it help establish character and mood in the novel?
3. Discuss Victor’s reluctance to create the second creature. Why do you think he destroys it in front of the other creature?
4. Compare the events that occur on Victor’s wedding night to the night when Victor destroyed the second creature.
5. Did it surprise you that the creature killed Elizabeth and not Victor? Explain your answer.
6. When Victor is chasing him, why does the creature keep leaving clues to help Victor follow his trail?
7. Do you think Victor is right when he urges Walton to abandon his ambition? Explain your answer.
8. Is Victor justified in blaming himself for the deaths of Henry, Elizabeth, and his other family members? Explain your answer.
9. Discuss the creature’s final speech to Walton. How does he really feel about Victor? Is he sad or happy about his death?
10. Why do you think the creature wants to eliminate any evidence of his own existence?

Overview: Understanding how data is collected is an important aspect of ensuring a research project’s or experiment’s overall validity. Research ethics is an integral part of any valid research finding. This research will potentially have a major impact on your decision as a leader within the criminal justice organization where you are employed. Therefore, it is vital to ensure proper findings by ethical data collection to minimize liability in your decisions.

Prompt: Read the following real-world case study: The Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment. Then, read the following information on predictive policing: Evaluation of the Shreveport Predictive Policing Experiment. Think about the research and data collection methods used in both studies. Compare and contrast both methods. Identify ways in which the findings of the research experiments could be vulnerable to liability. Suggest alternative methods to minimize liability in the research findings. If no vulnerabilities can be identified, explain how the methods used in the research experiment preserved ethical and accurate findings.

Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:

ï‚· Compares and contrasts the data collection methods of two case studies

ï‚· Identifies the vulnerabilities of the research findings and/or explains if methods used preserved ethical and accurate findings

ï‚· Suggests alternative methods to limit liabilities

Guidelines for Submission: Your paper must be submitted as a 2- to 3-page Microsoft Word document with double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, one-inch margins, and at least three sources cited in APA format.

Here are the two articles:

https://www.policefoundation.org/projects/the-kansas-city-preventive-patrol-experiment/

https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/evaluation-shreveport-predictive-policing-experiment