ELEC153 Circuit Theory II M2A4 Lab: AC Parallel Circuits Introduction In this experiment we work with AC parallel circuits. As we did in the AC series circuits lab, the results obtained through Transient Analysis in MultiSim will be verified by manual calculations. Procedure 1. Figure 1 is the circuit we want to analyze.The voltage source is 24 volts peak at 1000 Hz. Figure 1: AC parallel circuit used for analysis using MultiSim Unlike the series circuit, there is no resistor in series with the voltage source that allows us to plot the current by taking advantage of its in-phase relationship. So, in order to measure the current produced by the source (total current) add a 1 Ohm resistor in series with the source. This small resistor will not affect the calculations. Figure 2: Arrangement for analyzing the current waveforms 2. Run the simulations and with the oscilloscope measure both the source voltage and the voltage across the resistor. You should get a plot similar to the following graph: Figure 3: Source voltage (red) and source current (blue) waveforms 3. From the resulting analysis plot, determine the peak current. Record it here. Measured Peak Current 4. Determine the peak current by calculation. Record it here. Does it match the measured peak current? Explain. Calculated Peak Current 5. Calculate the phase-shift. Using the method presented in the last lab, measure the time difference at the zero-crossing of the two signals. Record it here. Time difference 6. From the resulting calculation, determine the phase shift by using the following formula Record it here. Measured Phase Shift 7. Determine the phase shift by calculation. Record it here. Does it match the measured phase shift? Explain. Calculated Phase Shift 8. Change the frequency of the voltage source to 5000 Hz. Re-simulate and perform a Transient Analysis to find the new circuit current and phase angle. Measure them and record them here: Measured Current Measured Phase Shift 9. Perform the manual calculations needed to find the circuit current and phase shift. Record the calculated values here. Do they match the measured values within reason? What has happened to the circuit with an increase in frequency? Calculated Current Calculated Phase Shift 10. Replace the capacitor with a 0.8 H inductor. Set the source frequency back to 1000 Hz. Perform Transient Analysis and measure the current amplitude and phase shift. Record them here: Measured Current Measured Phase Shift 11. Perform the manual calculations needed to find the circuit current and phase shift. Record the calculated values here. Do they match the measured values within reason? Calculated Current Calculated Phase Shift 12. Change the frequency of the voltage source to 5000 Hz. Re-simulate and perform a Transient Analysis to find the new circuit current and phase angle. Measure them and record them here: Measured Current Measured Phase Shift 13. Perform the manual calculations needed to find the circuit current and phase shift. Record the calculated values here. Do they match the measured values within reason? What has happened to the circuit with an increase in frequency? Calculated Current Calculated Phase Shift Write-up and Submission In general, for each lab you do, you will be asked to setup certain circuits, simulate them, record the results, verify the results are correct by hand, and then discuss the solution. Your lab write-up should contain a one page, single spaced discussion of the lab experiment, what went right for you, what you had difficulty with, what you learned from the experiment, how it applies to our coursework, and any other comment you can think of. In addition, you should include screen shots from the MultiSim software and any other figure, table, or diagram as necessary.
No expert has answered this question yet. You can browse … Read More...
Read this article and answer this question in 2 pages : Answers should be from the below article only. What is the difference between “standards-based” and “standards-embedded” curriculum? what are the curricular implications of this difference? Article: In 2007, at the dawn of 21st century in education, it is impossible to talk about teaching, curriculum, schools, or education without discussing standards . standards-based v. standards-embedded curriculum We are in an age of accountability where our success as educators is determined by individual and group mastery of specific standards dem- onstrated by standardized test per- formance. Even before No Child Left Behind (NCLB), standards and measures were used to determine if schools and students were success- ful (McClure, 2005). But, NCLB has increased the pace, intensity, and high stakes of this trend. Gifted and talented students and their teach- ers are significantly impacted by these local or state proficiency stan- dards and grade-level assessments (VanTassel-Baska & Stambaugh, 2006). This article explores how to use these standards in the develop- ment of high-quality curriculum for gifted students. NCLB, High-Stakes State Testing, and Standards- Based Instruction There are a few potentially positive outcomes of this evolution to public accountability. All stakeholders have had to ask themselves, “Are students learning? If so, what are they learning and how do we know?” In cases where we have been allowed to thoughtfully evaluate curriculum and instruction, we have also asked, “What’s worth learning?” “When’s the best time to learn it?” and “Who needs to learn it?” Even though state achievement tests are only a single measure, citizens are now offered a yardstick, albeit a nar- row one, for comparing communities, schools, and in some cases, teachers. Some testing reports allow teachers to identify for parents what their chil- dren can do and what they can not do. Testing also has focused attention on the not-so-new observations that pov- erty, discrimination and prejudices, and language proficiency impacts learning. With enough ceiling (e.g., above-grade-level assessments), even gifted students’ actual achievement and readiness levels can be identi- fied and provide a starting point for appropriately differentiated instruc- tion (Tomlinson, 2001). Unfortunately, as a veteran teacher for more than three decades and as a teacher-educator, my recent observa- tions of and conversations with class- room and gifted teachers have usually revealed negative outcomes. For gifted children, their actual achievement level is often unrecognized by teachers because both the tests and the reporting of the results rarely reach above the student’s grade-level placement. Assessments also focus on a huge number of state stan- dards for a given school year that cre- ate “overload” (Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006) and have a devastating impact on the development and implementation of rich and relevant curriculum and instruction. In too many scenarios, I see teachers teach- ing directly to the test. And, in the worst cases, some teachers actually teach The Test. In those cases, The Test itself becomes the curriculum. Consistently I hear, “Oh, I used to teach a great unit on ________ but I can’t do it any- more because I have to teach the standards.” Or, “I have to teach my favorite units in April and May after testing.” If the outcomes can’t be boiled down to simple “I can . . .” state- ments that can be posted on a school’s walls, then teachers seem to omit poten- tially meaningful learning opportunities from the school year. In many cases, real education and learning are being trivial- ized. We seem to have lost sight of the more significant purpose of teaching and learning: individual growth and develop- ment. We also have surrendered much of the joy of learning, as the incidentals, the tangents, the “bird walks” are cut short or elimi- nated because teachers hear the con- stant ticking clock of the countdown to the state test and feel the pressure of the way-too-many standards that have to be covered in a mere 180 school days. The accountability movement has pushed us away from seeing the whole child: “Students are not machines, as the standards movement suggests; they are volatile, complicated, and paradoxical” (Cookson, 2001, p. 42). How does this impact gifted chil- dren? In many heterogeneous class- rooms, teachers have retreated to traditional subject delineations and traditional instruction in an effort to ensure direct standards-based instruc- tion even though “no solid basis exists in the research literature for the ways we currently develop, place, and align educational standards in school cur- ricula” (Zenger & Zenger, 2002, p. 212). Grade-level standards are often particularly inappropriate for the gifted and talented whose pace of learning, achievement levels, and depth of knowledge are significantly beyond their chronological peers. A broad-based, thematically rich, and challenging curriculum is the heart of education for the gifted. Virgil Ward, one of the earliest voices for a differen- tial education for the gifted, said, “It is insufficient to consider the curriculum for the gifted in terms of traditional subjects and instructional processes” (Ward, 1980, p. 5). VanTassel-Baska Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum gifted child today 45 Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum and Stambaugh (2006) described three dimensions of successful curriculum for gifted students: content mastery, pro- cess and product, and epistemological concept, “understanding and appre- ciating systems of knowledge rather than individual elements of those systems” (p. 9). Overemphasis on testing and grade-level standards limits all three and therefore limits learning for gifted students. Hirsch (2001) concluded that “broad gen- eral knowledge is the best entrée to deep knowledge” (p. 23) and that it is highly correlated with general ability to learn. He continued, “the best way to learn a subject is to learn its gen- eral principles and to study an ample number of diverse examples that illustrate those principles” (Hirsch, 2001, p. 23). Principle-based learn- ing applies to both gifted and general education children. In order to meet the needs of gifted and general education students, cur- riculum should be differentiated in ways that are relevant and engaging. Curriculum content, processes, and products should provide challenge, depth, and complexity, offering multiple opportunities for problem solving, creativity, and exploration. In specific content areas, the cur- riculum should reflect the elegance and sophistication unique to the discipline. Even with this expanded view of curriculum in mind, we still must find ways to address the current reality of state standards and assess- ments. Standards-Embedded Curriculum How can educators address this chal- lenge? As in most things, a change of perspective can be helpful. Standards- based curriculum as described above should be replaced with standards- embedded curriculum. Standards- embedded curriculum begins with broad questions and topics, either discipline specific or interdisciplinary. Once teachers have given thoughtful consideration to relevant, engaging, and important content and the con- nections that support meaning-making (Jensen, 1998), they next select stan- dards that are relevant to this content and to summative assessments. This process is supported by the backward planning advocated in Understanding by Design by Wiggins and McTighe (2005) and its predecessors, as well as current thinkers in other fields, such as Covey (Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006). It is a critical component of differenti- ating instruction for advanced learners (Tomlinson, 2001) and a significant factor in the Core Parallel in the Parallel Curriculum Model (Tomlinson et al., 2002). Teachers choose from standards in multiple disciplines at both above and below grade level depending on the needs of the students and the classroom or program structure. Preassessment data and the results of prior instruc- tion also inform this process of embed- ding appropriate standards. For gifted students, this formative assessment will result in “more advanced curricula available at younger ages, ensuring that all levels of the standards are traversed in the process” (VanTassel-Baska & Little, 2003, p. 3). Once the essential questions, key content, and relevant standards are selected and sequenced, they are embedded into a coherent unit design and instructional decisions (grouping, pacing, instructional methodology) can be made. For gifted students, this includes the identification of appropri- ate resources, often including advanced texts, mentors, and independent research, as appropriate to the child’s developmental level and interest. Applying Standards- Embedded Curriculum What does this look like in practice? In reading the possible class- room applications below, consider these three Ohio Academic Content Standards for third grade: 1. Math: “Read thermometers in both Fahrenheit and Celsius scales” (“Academic Content Standards: K–12 Mathematics,” n.d., p. 71). 2. Social Studies: “Compare some of the cultural practices and products of various groups of people who have lived in the local community including artistic expression, religion, language, and food. Compare the cultural practices and products of the local community with those of other communities in Ohio, the United States, and countries of the world” (Academic Content Standards: K–12 Social Studies, n.d., p. 122). 3. Life Science: “Observe and explore how fossils provide evidence about animals that lived long ago and the nature of the environment at that time” (Academic Content Standards: K–12 Science, n.d., p. 57). When students are fortunate to have a teacher who is dedicated to helping all of them make good use of their time, the gifted may have a preassessment opportunity where they can demonstrate their familiarity with the content and potential mastery of a standard at their grade level. Students who pass may get to read by them- selves for the brief period while the rest of the class works on the single outcome. Sometimes more experienced teachers will create opportunities for gifted and advanced students Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum to work on a standard in the same domain or strand at the next higher grade level (i.e., accelerate through the standards). For example, a stu- dent might be able to work on a Life Science standard for fourth grade that progresses to other communities such as ecosystems. These above-grade-level standards can provide rich material for differentiation, advanced problem solving, and more in-depth curriculum integration. In another classroom scenario, a teacher may focus on the math stan- dard above, identifying the standard number on his lesson plan. He creates or collects paper thermometers, some showing measurement in Celsius and some in Fahrenheit. He also has some real thermometers. He demonstrates thermometer use with boiling water and with freezing water and reads the different temperatures. Students complete a worksheet that has them read thermometers in Celsius and Fahrenheit. The more advanced students may learn how to convert between the two scales. Students then practice with several questions on the topic that are similar in structure and content to those that have been on past proficiency tests. They are coached in how to answer them so that the stan- dard, instruction, formative assess- ment, and summative assessment are all aligned. Then, each student writes a statement that says, “I can read a thermometer using either Celsius or Fahrenheit scales.” Both of these examples describe a standards-based environment, where the starting point is the standard. Direct instruction to that standard is followed by an observable student behavior that demonstrates specific mastery of that single standard. The standard becomes both the start- ing point and the ending point of the curriculum. Education, rather than opening up a student’s mind, becomes a series of closed links in a chain. Whereas the above lessons may be differentiated to some extent, they have no context; they may relate only to the next standard on the list, such as, “Telling time to the nearest minute and finding elapsed time using a cal- endar or a clock.” How would a “standards-embed- ded” model of curriculum design be different? It would begin with the development of an essential ques- tion such as, “Who or what lived here before me? How were they different from me? How were they the same? How do we know?” These questions might be more relevant to our con- temporary highly mobile students. It would involve place and time. Using this intriguing line of inquiry, students might work on the social studies stan- dard as part of the study of their home- town, their school, or even their house or apartment. Because where people live and what they do is influenced by the weather, students could look into weather patterns of their area and learn how to measure temperature using a Fahrenheit scale so they could see if it is similar now to what it was a century ago. Skipping ahead to consideration of the social studies standard, students could then choose another country, preferably one that uses Celsius, and do the same investigation of fossils, communities, and the like. Students could complete a weather comparison, looking at the temperature in Celsius as people in other parts of the world, such as those in Canada, do. Thus, learning is contextualized and connected, dem- onstrating both depth and complexity. This approach takes a lot more work and time. It is a sophisticated integrated view of curriculum devel- opment and involves in-depth knowl- edge of the content areas, as well as an understanding of the scope and sequence of the standards in each dis- cipline. Teachers who develop vital single-discipline units, as well as inter- disciplinary teaching units, begin with a central topic surrounded by subtopics and connections to other areas. Then they connect important terms, facts, or concepts to the subtopics. Next, the skilled teacher/curriculum devel- oper embeds relevant, multileveled standards and objectives appropriate to a given student or group of stu- dents into the unit. Finally, teachers select the instructional strategies and develop student assessments. These assessments include, but are not lim- ited to, the types of questions asked on standardized and state assessments. Comparing Standards- Based and Standards- Embedded Curriculum Design Following is an articulation of the differences between standards-based and standards-embedded curriculum design. (See Figure 1.) 1. The starting point. Standards- based curriculum begins with the grade-level standard and the underlying assumption that every student needs to master that stan- dard at that moment in time. In standards-embedded curriculum, the multifaceted essential ques- tion and students’ needs are the starting points. 2. Preassessment. In standards- based curriculum and teaching, if a preassessment is provided, it cov- ers a single standard or two. In a standards-embedded curriculum, preassessment includes a broader range of grade-level and advanced standards, as well as students’ knowledge of surrounding content such as background experiences with the subject, relevant skills (such as reading and writing), and continued on page ?? even learning style or interests. gifted child today 47 Standards-Based v. Standards-Embedded Curriculum Standards Based Standards Embedded Starting Points The grade-level standard. Whole class’ general skill level Essential questions and content relevant to individual students and groups. Preassessment Targeted to a single grade-level standard. Short-cycle assessments. Background knowledge. Multiple grade-level standards from multiple areas connected by the theme of the unit. Includes annual learning style and interest inventories. Acceleration/ Enrichment To next grade-level standard in the same strand. To above-grade-level standards, as well as into broader thematically connected content. Language Arts Divided into individual skills. Reading and writing skills often separated from real-world relevant contexts. The language arts are embedded in all units and themes and connected to differentiated processes and products across all content areas. Instruction Lesson planning begins with the standard as the objective. Sequential direct instruction progresses through the standards in each content area separately. Strategies are selected to introduce, practice, and demonstrate mastery of all grade-level standards in all content areas in one school year. Lesson planning begins with essential questions, topics, and significant themes. Integrated instruction is designed around connections among content areas and embeds all relevant standards. Assessment Format modeled after the state test. Variety of assessments including questions similar to the state test format. Teacher Role Monitor of standards mastery. Time manager. Facilitator of instructional design and student engagement with learning, as well as assessor of achievement. Student Self- Esteem “I can . . .” statements. Star Charts. Passing “the test.” Completed projects/products. Making personal connections to learning and the theme/topic. Figure 1. Standards based v. standards-embedded instruction and gifted students. and the potential political outcry of “stepping on the toes” of the next grade’s teacher. Few classroom teachers have been provided with the in-depth professional develop- ment and understanding of curric- ulum compacting that would allow them to implement this effectively. In standards-embedded curricu- lum, enrichment and extensions of learning are more possible and more interesting because ideas, top- ics, and questions lend themselves more easily to depth and complex- ity than isolated skills. 4. Language arts. In standards- based classrooms, the language arts have been redivided into sepa- rate skills, with reading separated from writing, and writing sepa- rated from grammar. To many concrete thinkers, whole-language approaches seem antithetical to teaching “to the standards.” In a standards-embedded classroom, integrated language arts skills (reading, writing, listening, speak- ing, presenting, and even pho- nics) are embedded into the study of every unit. Especially for the gifted, the communication and language arts are essential, regard- less of domain-specific talents (Ward, 1980) and should be com- ponents of all curriculum because they are the underpinnings of scholarship in all areas. 5. Instruction. A standards-based classroom lends itself to direct instruction and sequential pro- gression from one standard to the next. A standards-embedded class- room requires a variety of more open-ended instructional strate- gies and materials that extend and diversify learning rather than focus it narrowly. Creativity and differ- entiation in instruction and stu- dent performance are supported more effectively in a standards- embedded approach. 6. Assessment. A standards-based classroom uses targeted assess- ments focused on the structure and content of questions on the externally imposed standardized test (i.e., proficiency tests). A stan- dards-embedded classroom lends itself to greater use of authentic assessment and differentiated 3. Acceleration/Enrichment. In a standards-based curriculum, the narrow definition of the learning outcome (a test item) often makes acceleration or curriculum compact- ing the only path for differentiating instruction for gifted, talented, and/ or advanced learners. This rarely happens, however, because of lack of materials, knowledge, o
Standard based Curriculum In standard based curriculum, the initial point … Read More...
2. Problem 7.2 The flyback converter of Figure 7.2a has an input of 48V, and output of 30V, a duty ratio of 0.45, and a switching frequency of 25kHz. the load resistor is 15Ω. a. Determine the transformer turns ratio b. Determine the transformer magnetizing inductance Lm such that the minimum inductor current is 25% of the average.
Two wires each carry a current I=I=5 Amp to the left. The charge q is positive , has velocity v to the left , is directly between the two wires. 1) the net force on q zero, 2) If I is incresed to 10 amp, net force on q is down , 3) If wire 2 is moved higher up on the page, the net force on q is down. 4) If the current wire 1is reversed so that now I is to the right the net force on q is down , 5) If I and I are both incresed to 10 amp, the net force on q is zero.
Name: __________________________________ MIS 3000 Spring 2014 Excel Hands-On Exam #1 Complete all the items on the test. You must submit this sheet and your file to the Pilot Dropbox to receive a grade. Be sure to put your name on this sheet also. The total amount of points you can receive for this test is 50. In this exercise, you will use Excel to create a sample budget workbook that will contain information of your choice, using the Excel skills and features presented in Tutorials 1 through 4. Use the following steps as a guide to completing your workbook. Note: Please be sure not to include any persona l information of a sensitive nature in any workbooks you create to be submitted to your instructor for this exam 1. Gather the data related to your monthly cash inflows and outflows. For example, how much do you take home in your paychecks each month? What other sources of income do you have? What expenses do you have-rent, utilities, gas, insurance, groceries, entertainment, car payments, and so on? 2. Create a new workbook for the sample financial data. Use the first worksheet as a documentation sheet that includes your name, the date on which you start creating the workbook, and a brief description of the workbook’s purpose. (3 points) 3. Plan the structure of the second worksheet, which will contain the budget. Include a section to enter values that remain consistent from month to month, such as monthly income and expenses. As you develop the budget worksheet, reference these cells in formulas that require those values. Later, you can update any of these values and see the changes immediately reflected throughout the budget. (3 points) 4. In the budget worksheet, enter realistic monthly earnings for each month of the year. Use formulas to calculate the total earnings each month, the average monthly earnings, and the total earnings for the entire year. (3 Points) 5. In the budget worksheet, enter realistic personal expenses for each month. Divide the expenses into at least three categories, providing subtotals for each category and a grand total of all the monthly expenses. Calculate the average monthly expenses and total expenses for the year. (5 points) 6. Calculate the monthly net cash flow (the value of total income minus total expenses). (5 points) 7. Use the cash flow values to track the savings throughout the year. Use a realistic amount for savings at the beginning of the year. Use the monthly net cash flow values to add or subtract from this value. Project the end-of-year balance in the savings account under your proposed budget. (5 points) 8. Format the worksheet’s contents using appropriate text and number formats. Add colors and borders to make the content easier to read and interpret. Use cell styles and themes to provide your worksheet with a uniform appearance. (3 points) 9. Use conditional formatting to automatically highlight negative net cash flow months. (4 points) 10. Insert a pie chart that compares the monthly expenses for the categories. (5 points) 11. Insert a column chart that charts all of the monthly expenses regardless of the category. 12. Insert a line chart or Sparkline that shows the change in the savings balance throughout the 12 months of the year. (4 points) 13. Insert new rows at the top of the worksheet and enter titles that describe the worksheet’s contents. 14. Think of a major purchase you might want to make-for example, a car or a house. Determine the amount of the purchase and the current annual interest rate charged by your local bank. Provide a reasonable length of time to repay the loan, such as five years for a car loan or 20 to 30 years for a home loan. Use the PMT function to determine how much you would have to spend each month on the payments for your purchase. You can do these calculations in a separate worksheet. (5 points) 15. Add the loan information to your monthly budget and evaluate the purchase of this item on your budget. 16. Format the worksheets for your printer. Include headers and footers that display the workbook filename, the workbook’s author, and the date on which the report is printed. If the report extends across several pages, repeat appropriate print titles on all of the pages, and include page numbers and the total number of pages on every printed page. (DO NOT PRINT) (5 points) 17. Save and close the workbook.
Assessed task no 1 THE NEW ENTERPRISE PROJECT Introduction to tasks one – the New Enterprise Project All managers become involved in business planning at some stage in their careers and the first assessed task requires you to demonstrate the skills required to produce a business plan. Often business planning is undertaken by a management team and so this first task is a group activity. The first task involves producing a business plan for a new company of your choice, either a standalone new business or a new subsidiary of an existing company. The business plan should be designed either to secure approval and funding from the board of an existing parent company or funding from an investor/lender in the case of a new, stand-alone business. You should agree the subject of the new enterprise project with your tutor. The task brief Strategic plans are, by definition, about the future. Trying to match an organisation’s capabilities (its resources and its competences) to a changing external environment is central to the idea of strategic management. It is clear, therefore, that if strategic management is not to be completely reactive it requires a degree of foresight – at least a view of the future. This first part of this task therefore encourages you to undertake “Horizon scanning” so that you can assess the likely future directions of a particular market or industry, – the one which you choose for your new enterprise plan. Working as a group, having first decided on your new enterprise project you are asked to consider what sort of changes will occur in the market in which you have chosen to operate, and how this will influence your strategic plans for the company. To do this you should do conventional PEST analysis and then, because PEST analysis considers the current situation, you should use the horizon scanning techniques and facilities available through the shapingtomorrow website in order to get some views as to how the market is likely to develop. Having identified in the first part of this task what sort of changes will occur in the market in which you have chosen to operate and how this will influence your strategic plans for the company, you now have to select the strategies which you intend to follow and create a financial model to determine the financial outcomes of those strategies. Finally, you should produce a PowerPoint presentation (20 minutes max) to present and justify your business plan. Your group will present your new enterprise project as part of a symposium held the last week of the module. Your tutor will give you verbal feedback on your completed business plan at this stage. This is a group assessed task: consequently the portfolio item submitted by each individual group member will be the same and should include: 1. A list of group members 2. A brief review of future developments in your chosen area using an appropriate planning horizon horizon, and in markets or industry is where changes are frequent or unpredictable you may feel it sensible to identify more than one scenario (500 words maximum). 3. an executive summary (400 words maximum) of your business plan, and 4. A link to the financial spreadsheet, or a summary of it 5.The PowerPoint presentation used to present the plan You will no doubt find a good deal of information on your chosen industry, but please try to identify only the most significant issues and limit your submission to the equivalent of two A 4 pages
There are over 100 alleles known for the gene associated with cystic fibrosis. With current technology, it is possible to determine exactly which allele or alleles is/are carried by a person. What is the maximum number of different alleles that any person can carry?
Because there are two chromosomes, each with one locus for … Read More...
Nilsson & Riedel 9e, p. 348, Problem 9.12. The expression for the steady-state voltage and current at the terminals of the circuit seen in the figure are vg(t) = 300 V cos (5000 rad/s • t + 78°) ig(t) = 6 A sin (5000 rad/s • t + 123°) a) What is the impedance seen by the source? b) By how many microseconds is the current out of phase with the voltage?
This assignment challenges you to analyze how two writers present arguments about a significant issue or topic. For this assignment, you will choose two current newspaper or scholarly journal articles that focus on a current issue relevant to the people on the continent of Africa, and/or people of African descent. Your goal is to identify the purposes and claims of each author, locate their arguments in a rhetorical situation, and analyze the appeals each writer makes to support their argument. You will then evaluate the arguments: which author better satisfies their readers? Which author crafts the more fitting response? In sum, then, the main goals are: 1. Identify the purposes and claims that two authors make about a significant issue. 2. Locate the arguments in a rhetorical situation (what exigencies do the authors address? What constraints and resources exist for the authors? To whom are they writing? When and where was each article published? 3. Analyze the appeals (logical, ethical, emotional) put forth by the writers. 4. Evaluate the arguments. Which argument is more fitting? Which author better satisfies readers? (Your evaluation need not be either/or: maybe one author is more effective logically, for instance, while the second author is more effective ethically and emotionally.)