ASSIGNMENT TWO1. Restate your observation (already done in first assignment). If you wish or feel the need to do so, you can pick a new observation and start over. If you do this, please refer to the first assignment in order to remind you what is required. If you need to revise anything that you, please do so.2. Restate your three models (already done in first assignment). Many of you may have to come up with new models. Also, if it was stated poorly in the first exercise, fix it now. As always, remember PROCESS. Then make sure you have followed the other rules of thumb: Generality and interesting implications. Also, remember this isn’t a list itemizing different reasons for something, but rather models that are explaining how or why something happens. Ideally, for this assignment, they should be competing models where only one of them can be true. The format should be the same as in the first homework assignment. The first sentence is a simple sentence stating the model. The next couple of sentences can explain how the model relates to the observation. The model should be separate from the observation. Most people have a tendency to state a model too specific to the observation. Watch out for this.3. State two interesting implications (hypotheses) for each model. Remember to refer to Lave and March for what makes a good model. There are new concepts, also: Simplicity and Fertility. If you are not able to come up with a wide variety of implications and hypotheses, it may be because your model isn’t fertile. Remember the rules of thumb (Generality and Interesting Implications). A few sentences should suffice for each implication.4. Describe natural experiments that will discriminate between the models. We call any experiment that distinguishes between two models a critical experiment. So, these should be natural experiments that are also critical experiments. (We will refine this more in the next assignment.) There need to be at least two experiments (if it is well done). Three would probably be better. Do not combine this section with section 3 (above). It is a distinct section although many of you will find it repetitive. Depending on your observation and your models, the natural experiments may be very similar to a re-stating of your implications. If this occurs, don’t panic. Likewise, don’t expect or anticipate this to happen.The following four points are guidelines/requirements.A) The experiments must be critical experiments. (Refer to Lave and March section 3.2.2.)B) You must have enough critical experiments to distinguish all of your models from each other. Remember, if an experiment predicts the same result for each model, then it is not a good experiment.C) All of the experiments must be natural experiments (as defined by Lave and March – and in class).D) Make sure that you specify which model is supported by a particular experimental outcome. And make sure that for each experiment you discuss more than one outcome.In addition, you will have to operationalize all of the variables used in the experiments, and you will have to indicate which variables are dependent variables and which variables are independent variables.Thus, your assignment will look like this:Section One (old/revised): A description of your observation.Section Two (old/revised): Stating your first model and explaining how it relates to your observation.Section Three (new): State the two implications for your first model. Discuss each implication separately. Use two paragraphs, one for each implication.Section Four (old/revised): Stating your second model and explaining how it relates to your observation.Section Five (new): State the two implications for your second model. Discuss each implication separately. Use two paragraphs, one for each implication.Section Six (old/revised): Stating your third model and explaining how it relates to your observation.Section Seven (new): State the two implications for your third model. Discuss each implication separately. Use two paragraphs, one for each implication.Section Eight (new): Describe one of your critical experiments. (Remember it has to be a natural experiment as well.) State what the experiment is. State which two models it is distinguishing between. And state what you would expect to see if one of the models is true, and state what you would expect to see if the other model is true.The description of the first critical experiment should look something likea) Describe the experiment.b) State which are the independent and dependent variables.c) State how you are going to operationalize the variables.d) Describe the outcomes and state which model each outcome supportsSection Nine (new): Repeat Section Eight with another critical experiment.Section Ten (new): Repeat yet again with yet another Critical experiment. (Remember, unless you can distinguish all three of you models from each other with only two critical experiments, it is strongly recommended that you use three critical experiments to successfully distinguish all of you models from each other.) Note: If your first experiment distinguishes Models 1 and 3, your other experiments cannot alldistinguish Models 1 and 3 and never discuss Model 2. I assume this is obvious.You should separate the sections. Do not merely write one long paragraph. We want to easily see you points.Realize that we are expecting more at this point. Just because you received nine or ten points on your previous assignment does not mean that you will earn as many points for the same work here.

The eye-of-the-storm technique is an experiential, teaching technique heralded by Jane Elliot, and used to enlighten youngsters on the impact of overt racism and discrimination.Micro-assaults are covert or subtle acts of discrimination that plague minority, dis-empowered or disenfranchised groups in our contemporary world.Watch the following video on the Eye of the Storm technique. Then, reflect upon applying this pedagogical exercise to microaggressions.Identify a current social cause (example: gender discrimination) and write a paper describing how you would implement an eye-of-the-storm teaching technique/demonstration to highlight micro-assaults plaguing a group.Please identify the social cause (e.g., gender discrimination), the social group (e.g., women), the micro-assaults you want to expose your "class" to, and the strategy(-ies) you will use to induce the eye-of-the-storm technique (i.e., what will you do). Please be creative and concise.More specifically, please address the following points in your paper:Explain micro-aggressions/assaults/invalidations, (2 points)Explain prejudice, discrimination, stereotype, and racism, as well as how these concepts specifically relate to modern prejudice (e.g., microaggressions (2 points)Describe the social cause, the social group affected, and the micro-assaults you want to expose your “class” to; i.e., describe to whom and how you will do “eye of the storm” (3 points)Describe strategies you will use to induce the eye-of-the-storm technique (3 points)

This is the second installment of the two NACLA Report on the Americas reviews that you will submit for this class.This review is to be at least 3-4 pages and this due date of October 23, at 11:59 PM, corresponds to South America, such as Argentina, Chile, Brazil, Ecuador, etc.Please submit your review through the Canvas in either of the following formats: doc, docx or PDF.Late papers will be accepted but only for one week after the assigned due date and will be assessed a full grade deduction.Please use both a title page and a works cited page (neither of these pages count toward your 3-4 pages of text).Both reports will count as a combined 15% toward your final grade, with each review counting as 7.5% of your overall grade.In your works cited page, compose your article entry in a format like this: Schrader, Stuart, "From Police Reform to Police Repression: 50 Years after an Assassination,"NACLA Report on the Americas website (August 10, 2020). Here is a list of articles from the NACLA website pertaining to regions for the October 23 due date. Everybody, just pick any one article from this list for your October 23 review.Just follow the same format for your first NACLA submission.These articles range in date from February 2019 to September 2020.For this list, I'm going in alphabetical order by nation: Argentina: