SHORT PAPER ASSIGNMENTHIUS 313 - THE AMERICAN FOUNDINGTopic: Short Paper: State Ratification AssignmentMODULE/WEEK 5 -- The Ratification DebatesOverviewThis assignment will allow you to research and better understand the ratification conventions for the U.S. Constitution that occurred at the state level. The assignment’s purpose is to enhance the historian’s grasp of the early American founding era by investigating and interpreting primary and secondary source evidence. InstructionsUsing primary source documents located in the Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution resource, which is available online through the Jerry Falwell Library, you will write a Turabian style 2-page short research paper about the Federalists and Anti-Federalists debates at the state ratifying conventions. The paper must use a minimum of 3 primary sources from the Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution resource. Additional secondary sources are encouraged and must be appropriately cited if used. The paper must be a full 2 pages but must not exceed 2 ¼ pages with footnotes applied. So be concise in your writing and verify proper citations, including the use of footnote Ibid. And shortened versions.Overall, you must:Select 1 of the 13 state ratifying conventionsProvide a well-written narrative analyzing the following three things about that state’s convention: The initial position of the Federalists in the chosen state convention.The fears of the Antifederalists.The Federalist promises were made to relieve those fears.Also, include very brief biographical material of the people involved.Your paper’s body must include an identifiable introduction with a well-crafted thesis statement and summative conclusion. The title page and bibliography do not count toward the 2-2 ¼ page requirement. No headings should be used (except on the Bibliography page). Also, the paper must be written in the third person. You should utilize the template from the LU Online Writing Center – Writing Style Guide website.NOTE: The citation guide provided at the bottom of each webpage on the Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution website is not accurate! Therefore, each speech by a delegate should be cited as a separate source in footnote form as follows:1 George Mason, “Speech at the Virginia Ratifying Convention,” 19 June 1788, in Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution, Volume X: Virginia, ed. John P. Kaminski, et al. (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2009), 1391.Gathering information for this citation is easy. Locate the author of the speech by name in the proceedings of the debates. Each speech will have the same title as listed above: “Speech at the <State> Ratifying Convention.” Identify the date of the speech, then use the “Original source” citation information at the bottom of the webpage to locate the volume number and state for the source. Then add the page number found within the body of the recording debate in brackets [xxxx] at the end of the citation. The page number will always come after the material you quote, paraphrase, or otherwise use as your source.For the "Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution" - https://www.liberty.edu/library/databases/?l=D - scroll down to the bottom; however, I don't know if it gives access or not.

Here is a brief (4:30) video, where I discuss the guidelines in detail:  https://csusm.zoom.us/rec/share/5E9ORuAqFxbKuKS3wJ... Requirement using at least 5 of the Elements listed below, write a 400-word review of the performance attended. Describe the performance through your eyes. The review should be in narrative form with an introduction and conclusion. It should not feel like a list. **Character – What stood out about the main players? **Plot – DO NOT GIVE A DETAILED PLOT SUMMARY – but you can reference the overall actions of the play. **Theme - What ideas are explored? Is there a clean resolution or is the audience challenged to figure out the answers? Are ideas explored through the experiences of the characters or does the show preach? Remember plot is not theme. **Language– Were the actors clear? Were there dialects? Did the actors use the space appropriately with their vocals? **Spectacle - How were set, lighting, costumes utilized to enhance the storytelling? **Sound/music - Was sound or music used to enhance the production? **Acting - Was the acting stylized? Believable? Did any actors stand out in good or bad ways? **Directing - Was the direction obvious or hidden? Any strong directorial choices?) Be as specific with your ideas and opinions as possible. If there is an aspect of the show that you love/hate, give specific examples to back up your response. Tell me what worked and what did not work for you and WHY. BAD EXAMPLE 1: The sets were lame. GOOD EXAMPLE 1: The sets didn’t seem to support the style of the play. Everything the actors did was realistic, but the sets were fantastical and crazy. In the garden scene, all of the flowers were purple with blue stems, but I didn’t see a reason to support that choice. BAD EXAMPLE 2: The acting was awesome. GOOD EXAMPLE 2: The actors were especially truthful. In the scene with the murder, I understood why Joanna felt betrayed by Steve. The actress playing Joanna carried a tension in her body that totally released after the murder. To me, it seemed like she exorcised something in herself at that moment. WEB: https://www.stellartickets.com/wallet Teenage Dick is "a high school-set riff on Richard III [that] treats disability sensitively without sentimentality" (Charles McNulty, Los Angeles Times) and is available for you to stream from the comfort of your own home. Join the students of Roseland High as Richard schemes his way through a glorious path to senior class presidency. How far will he go to get everything he (thinks) he wants? There’s only one way to find out! Similar to Hamilton on Disney+, Teenage Dick was professionally filmed in front of a live audience as a ten-camera, HD digital theatrical experience that puts you right in the center of the action

For this Assignment, you will practice steps in Evidence-Based Practice. 1) You will think of a practice problem. 2) You then conduct a literature review on available research. 3) You will evaluate the evidence to determine which intervention to use. 4) You will consider client values and your clinical expertise. 5) You will think about what you hope the client gains from this intervention (i.e., decreased depression, increased quality of life, decreased PTSD symptoms) and consider how you might measure this change. To prepare: Choose a population of interest to you: Elderly/Aging Choose a presenting problem (depression) related to the population of interest.: Depression  Conduct a literature review focused on the presenting problem within the population of interest. \Briefly describe the population and presenting problem you are focusing on for this assignment. Provide a review of the articles you reviewed from this project and explain what you learned from conducting this research. Briefly describe at least 2 evidence-based interventions currently used for your chosen population when addressing this particular problem. Provide supporting references when explaining the evidence behind the interventions. Explain which of these interventions you might choose to use and why. Consider client values and your clinical expertise and how those might affect your decision of which intervention to use. Describe how you might apply the specific skills and techniques of the chosen intervention. Briefly explain how you could measure the outcomes of this intervention. Explain any cultural considerations that you need to take into account when working with this population or the particular presenting problem. Discuss how the Code of Ethics applies when working with this particular presenting problem and population. Explain how you would apply a trauma-informed lens when working with this population.