Brainstorming Questions:Consider your accomplishments this term. Describe the strengths and weaknesses of your work in this course.What would you say was the most important thing you learned this session and why?How has your thinking about academic success changed since you started the class?What techniques, tips, and/or advice will you carry forward into the next semester? Why?Having completed this course, what advice would you give an incoming freshman about being academically successful?What has been your greatest challenge and how has it affected your academic life? What are you doing to manage this challenge?What was your favorite reading; explain how it applies to you now.Describe a change you have made this semester. How has it benefited you?Please make this analysis relate to my old journal, it’s attached to this question. Thanks.

This project will require you to come up with a plan to put positive psychology into action. You should select one or more positive psychology constructs (e.g., altruism, gratitude, forgiveness, mindfulness) or theories (e.g., the broaden and build theory of positive emotions) and develop a plan to bring these constructs to life over the course of the semester, preferably having the effect of positively affecting the lives of others. At the end of the semester, write a summary about your positive psychology in action project, incorporating material from the text and other sources.Written ReportAll papers should include:A title page with the name of the project and other information (your name, course)A table of contentsA section including the definition and a description of the positive psychology construct(s) and/or theories that you have attempted to put into action in your projectA section describing the design, goals, and implementation of the project (i.e., what is the goal, what is the plan to achieve the goal, who will be affected by the project, what are the desired outcomes) and a rationale for why you think this plan will have the desired outcomesAn analysis section in which you critique your own work – if there were problems or if the goals were not achieved, why do you think this was the case, and what could you do to improve this project if you were to try it again in the future? If the goals were achieved, why do you think this was the case, and is there anything you would do differently to make the project even better if you were to try it again in the future?In a separate section, or combined with the above section, choose three of the assigned articles or videos from the course (any from Weeks one through eight) that are most relevant to your positive psychology in action project and provide the following:One picture (graphic format is not important) that best captures the relevance of the concepts presented in the article/videoTwo Web sites with two to three sentences that describe the Web site for each article/videoOne article summary (note the actual article must be at least two pages in length) from a peer-reviewed journal for each article/video you choose. You must include a means of gaining access to a copy of the article (e.g., the appropriate doi or an active hyperlink) in the references section.Three to five paragraphs describing why you chose the pictures, Web sites, and articles.A strong conclusion of at least five pages (no more than eight), double-spaced, reflecting on how you interpret and understand the material, integrating your project with the material. Include any thoughts on how you perceive you can use the information learned from the course and from your project. Also, how might the information be used on a broader level (e.g., in applied psychology, schools, etc.)?A list of references. At least three.

my Abnormal Psychology Critical Review Assignment. I would like for a completed assignment with reference list in APA 6th. The Frequently Asked Questions list is attached and the instructions are as follows.Instructions In this assignment you are to conduct a Critical Review of the literature related to a theory/model of a particular psychological disorder. You should choose one of the following disorders: Major Depressive Disorder; Panic Disorder with Agoraphobia (although these are now separate diagnoses, theories typically combine them); Bulimia Nervosa, or Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder. You are reviewing one particular, evidence-based psychological theory of that disorder. A psychological theory should primarily refer to thoughts, behaviours, and/or social factors, rather than focusing on biological factors. An example of a specific theory is Paul Salkovskis’ theory of OCD. It is not sufficient to simply refer to “cognitive-behavioural theories”. Note that if you do not select a specific psychological theory (i.e., if you choose to review a biological theory or if you simply look at “cognitive models” or something very general) then you will not be eligible to receive any more than 50% of the available marks in the overview or critical review sections of the marking criteria.You may choose to review the literature on a psychological theory of the disorder you used in the Case Study Assignment. However you do not have to do so and may choose another disorder if you wish. The reason that I have limited your choice to 1 of 4 disorders is that these four disorders have plenty of well-validated theories building on cognitivebehavioural principles that should be relatively easy to research.You will need to provide a brief overview of the theory/model that you are reviewing. You should summarise the main aspects of the theory/model although this does not need to be in much detail.In your Critical Review, you need to refer to published literature to critique the evidence for the usefulness of the selected theory/model. In particular, you should focus on explaining the key strengths of the theory/model as well as its key limitations or weaknesses. Some questions to guide your critique might include: What features of the disorder does the theory/model account for and what can it not account for? Does the model explain known characteristics of the disorder (e.g. gender differences in the prevalence of the disorder, average age of onset of the disorder)? Is there cross-cultural evidence for the theory/model? How does the theory/model relate to other theories/models that are accepted in the literature? Does an alternative theory explain something about the disorder that your chosen theory cannot (i.e., this would indicate a limitation of your chosen disorder). Is there evidence that truly shows the causal role of features described in the model, or is the evidence mainly correlational? How effective is treatment that derives from the theory, and how does this compare to the effectiveness of other treatments for the same disorder? What further research is required to expand or test the theory/ model or the treatment that derives from it? You will not be able to address all of these issues within the word limit and might choose to focus on other issues instead. However you will need to decide what is relevant and important (i.e., what issues arise in the literature) for the theory/model that you’ve chosen. However please remember that no theoretical model accounts for all aspects of any psychological disorder, so it is important that you show evidence that you understand the strengths and limitations of thetheory that you are reviewing. Part of this involves critiquing the literature that you are reviewing (for example, does a particular study or body of literature contain methodological flaws that render its conclusions uncertain?).Your review should end with a conclusion in which you provide your evidence-based opinion (using references) of the usefulness of the theory/model that you’ve reviewed.I suggest that you use headings and subheadings to help organize and structure your review. For some ideas about how to write and present a critical review, see some articles in the journal Clinical Psychology Review: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/02727358 Note: You DO NOT conduct a meta-analysis for this review, the examples available through the above link are to illustrate the literature review process.Referencing In-text referencing and a reference list (in APA format, 6th edition) are required. Although there is no set minimum number of references, you should refer to a sufficient number of sources to broadly cover the literature on the topic, including literature that presents different or contradictory opinions/evidence.Word length Maximum of 1500 words (excluding reference list and cover page). Please note that anything after this will not be read/marked. Also note that this is a relatively small word count for a critical review so you will need to write concisely. Nevertheless, you are encouraged to read a wide range of sources relating to your chosen theory/model to ensure that you have an adequate understanding before writing your review. There is no minimum word count.Marking Criteria: The Critical Review will be marked according to the following criteria, but please refer to the detailed marking rubric available on Blackboard:  Overview of the theory/model (5 marks)  Critical evaluation of strengths and limitations of the theory/model (20 marks)  Appropriate professional writing style (5 marks)  Use of relevant scientific literature and appropriate referencing (10 marks)Formatting Your assignment should be written in size 12, Times New Roman font and should be doublespaced.

THE BEARING OF EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE UPON THE GERM-THEORY OF DISEASE. SIR,-Dr. Bastian’s remarks on the above subject, published in the last number of the BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, will receive the attention due to any deliberate statement made by so high an authority. I question, however, if pathologists will be impressed with either the clearness or the cogency of the arguments adduced by Dr. Bastian against the germ-theory of disease; or will regard as other than rash and unwarranted his statements, ” that existing evidence seems abund antly sufficient for the rejection of this doctrine as untrue”, and that ” all the distinctive positions of those who advocate a belief in the so called ‘ germ-theory of disease’, or rely upon the exclusive doctrine of a ‘ contagium vivum’, seem to be absolutely broken down and refuted”. Before we can be in a position to talk so decidedly and confidently re garding ” the distinctive positions of” those who maintain the germ theory of disease, we must have an intelligent appreciation of what those distinctive positions are. To understand or appreciate arguments for or against the germ-theory of disease, we must have a clear understanding what that theory is. Till we have this, we cannot see the exact force and bearing of a given argumeint. What, then, is the germ-theory of disease? This is no unnecessary question; for, both by its friends and foes, this theory is referred to in the most loose and indefinite manner. Not only by Dr. Bastian, but by many others, the germ-theory of fermentation, and the germ-theory of disease, are treated and written about as parts of one and the same question. It cannot be too strenuously insisted on that the two questions, though allied, are totally distinct and separate ; and that each must stand or fall on its own merits, and independently of the other. A short statement of what each theory implies will make this ap parent. There are two theories as to the mode of production of ferment ation. One is the vital theory, according to which living organisms are the sole causes capable of producing fermentative change. The other is the physico-chemical theory, according to which such change may be produced by any organic matter, living or dead, which is undergoing change. All admit the presence of organisms in the fermenting fluid. According to one theory, these organisms are developed from the pre existing germs whose presence in the fluid gave rise to the fermentative change. According to the other, they are developed de novo in the changing fluid. Such, briefly, are the two opposing views. The question is, not whether living organisms can set agoing fermentation-that is admitted by all-but whether or not living organisms are the sole causes capable of doing so. Of the invariable presence of masses of minute organisms in fermenting fluids there is no doubt. The point of discussion is the source and mode of origin of these organisms. Thus it has come to pass that the discussions which have taken place regarding the mode of production of fermentation (and putrefaction) have really been dis cussions on the doctrine of spontaneous generation. Those who uphold the germ-theory of fermentation deny the occurrence of heterogenesis, and maintain that all life springs directly from antecedent life. Those who uphold the physico-chemical theory as strenuously maintain the doctrine of heterogenesis. The germ-theory of fermentation is thus essentially antagonistic to the doctrine of heterogenesis; and the question with which we are really dealing, when we discuss that theory, is the doctrine of spontane ous generation. It is not so with the germ-theory of disease. This theory is that many diseases (notably epidemic and contagious diseases) result from the propagation in the system of minute organisms having no part or share in its normal economy. It deals simply with the com petence of living organisms to produce the phenomena of disease; and does not necessarily take cognisance of the question, whether or not organisms may originate de novo. The germ-theory of disease, there fore, exists on an independent footing ; and would still exist and hold sway, though the physico-chemical theory of fermentation and putre faction had been proved beyond a doubt. The competence of germs to produce fermentation is admitted by all. The competence of germs to produce the phenomena of disease is the special subject of discussion between the supporters and the opponents of the germ-theory of disease. I have elsewhere* shown that the germ-theory affords of the pheno * The Germ-Theory aA4lied to the Exzfanationt of the Phenomena o1 Disease London: I876. mena of the specific fevers a more v-mplete and satisfactory explanation than any theory hitherto advanced; *he whole of the phenomena pre sented by these diseases being quite explicable on the view that millions of minute organisms are being propagated in the system during the period of their continuance. And this i% the line of argument to which we must sooner or later come, if we would fulfil the highest duties of our calling. It is not enough to try to explain why infusions of meat decompose, why wine ferments, and why urine becomes putrid. We are constantly surrounded by ailments whose causation and pathology the germ theory of disease seeks to explain. People are annually dying of these ailments by tens of thousands. It is the investigation of tbe phenomena of these diseases, as they present themselves at the bedside and in the post mortemt room, that should engage the attention of physicians and pathologists. Earnest hard-working men of science are eagerly engaged in investigating the more purely scientific, and, to humanity, less prac. tically useful, question of the germ-theory of fermentation and putre. faction. Let us, as medical men, have an equally keen sense of the importance to our science of the allied question of the germ-theory of disease-a theory which deals with the question of the causation and pathology of the most important ailments to which man is liable. But let us free ourselves at once from the fatal error of supposing that our question is inseparably linked with that of the philosophers, or that we are in any way dependent on them. There are in our ranks earnest, able, and willing workers enough. Let us only have a clear conception of what we are called upon to do. Let us be alive to the great fact that the subjects of our investigations and inquiries are the phenomena of disease, as they present themselves to our notice at the bedside ; and let us discard for ever the deluding idea that the germ-theory of disease must stand or fall with the germ theory of fermentation, or that it has even any necessary connection with it. What has been said affords all the answer that is required to Dr. Bastian’s hostile remarks on the germ-theory of disease. The argu ments which he brings forward are all meant to support his well-knowv views on the doctrines of heterogenesis and archebsosis. They have no bearing on the germ-theory of disease. Dr. Bastian refers to the ex periments of Drs. Lewis and Cunningham, and of Dr. Burdon Sander son. It would not be difficult to show that their facts tell more in favour of than against the germ-theory of disease. On a future occa sion, I may take the opportunity to do so. In the meantime, as Dr. Bastian merely adduces them ” to show that, under certain conditions, low independent forms of life may originate in the midst of living tissues, previously free from them, by a kind of transformation (hetero genesis) of some of the units of protoplasm, which, though still living, have been modified in nature and tendency by reason of their existence in a partially devitalised area”. As this is all that he adduces them for, I shall content myself with pointing out that he is arguing, not against the germ-theory of disease, but in support of the doctrine of heterogenesis;

what have you learned about research at an introductory level?How do you evaluate or critique this from a biblical, Christian perspective?You will use the APA skills that you honed during Module/Week 1, the case study skills you developed in Module/Week 6, and all the content you studied throughout all the modules/weeks of this course.Be sure to include your properly formatted title page and references as well as the body of your document with proper citations and levels of headings. Use consistency between your citations and references. The 4–8-page body of your paper is in addition to the title and reference pages. The paper must include at least 2 references in addition to the course textbooks, assignments, and the Bible.You may use your Discussion Board Forum posts, your answers to previous short essay quiz questions, and additional personal reflection. Your answer will not be just like anyone else’s answer, and that is expected.Submit your assignment using SafeAssign.Note: Some matching on the SafeAssign report is not unexpected. You will be citing sources that others may have used in other papers, so a match might appear. The faculty member will be able to discern what is appropriate matching due to properly cited sources. This assignment is open-book/open-notes, open-Bible, open to discussion with friends, etc. Be sure to document your sources when you use the textbook or other scholarly sources, personal interviews with friends, etc.