The format of your Summary & Analysis paper will be roughly the same throughout this course.
Part 1: Summary
Summarize each of the articles or book chapters you read this week. Each summary should:
Be at least 300 words long;
Be separated by a header, identifying which reading you are summarizing in that section;
Include all sections of the readings (beginning, middle, end).
Part 2: Analysis
The end of your paper should be an analysis section in which you consider all of this week’s readings, together as a group. This section of the paper should be at least 300 words long, total. Discuss:
Why you think these particular studies or psychologists were so important to the field at the time they were written;
Whether and how you think these ideas or individuals are still influencing the field today; and
If you have any remaining questions about anything you read this week.
This section of the paper involves your personal opinion and analysis, but it’s not about whether you “like” the person, theory, or article. Instead, this section is your analysis about the importance of each article or psychologist highlighted this week.
All assignments should be in 12-point, Times New Roman font, double-spaced and with 1-inch margins on all sides of the paper. You do not need to put in-text citations within your paper unless you are using a direct quotation; the header in each section tells the instructor what your reference is. You also do not need to include a references section for this paper.
This paper is worth 50 points each week. Points are awarded for quality of writing (including grammar, spelling, punctuation, eloquence, etc.), following instructions, thoroughness of summaries, and critical thinking in the analysis section. If points are taken off for any reason, your instructor will explain why the first time an error occurs so that you can learn from your mistakes. If the same errors continue in later papers, additional points may be removed because you have failed to consider feedback from the instructor.
the readinf:
Megan Williamson
3 hours ago
Binet, A., & Simon, T. H. (1916). The development of intelligence in children (Selection from Chapter 1). Vineland, NJ: The Training School at Vineland. (Click on .pdf link below for exact pages to read)
Canady, H. G. (1943). The problem of equating the environment of Negro-White groups for intelligence testing in comparative studies. The Journal of Social Psychology, 17, 3-15. http://rd6rh6dl7c.scholar.serialssolutions.com/?sid=google&auinit=HG&aulast=Canady&atitle=The+problem+of+equating+the+environment+of+Negro-White+groups+for+intelligence+testing+in+comparative+studies&id=doi:10.1080/00224545.1943.9712259&title=The+Journal+of+social+psychology&volume=17&issue=1&date=1943&spage=3&issn=0022-4545
Gardner, H., & Hatch, T. (1989). Educational implications of the theory of multiple intelligences. Educational Researcher, 18(8), 4-10. http://www.sfu.ca/~jcnesbit/EDUC220/ThinkPaper/Gardner1989.pdf
Festinger, L., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58(2), 203-210. https://libproxy.bvu.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/614268802?accountid=26505
Snyder, M. (2001). Self-fulfilling stereotypes. In A. Branaman (Ed.), Self and society (pp. 30-35). Malden, MA: Blackwell. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=97rSGAtWfncC&oi=fnd&pg=PA195&dq=snyder+on+the+self-fulfilling+nature&ots=Rt–zwAFkB&sig=quptIkzKQwGu9EIJgNuBFGPctkw#v=onepage&q=snyder%20on%20the%20self-fulfilling%20nature&f=false
