Bright Academic Experts

Category: uncategorised

  • Psy 300 week 5

    Nonverbal Communication Across Cultures

    Course: Multicultural Psychology

    Length: 2-3 pages

    Format: APA 7th Edition

    Total Points: 25

    Assignment Description

    Nonverbal communicationincluding gestures, eye contact, facial expressions, and personal spacevaries significantly across cultures and plays a central role in conveying meaning, emotion, and social norms. In this assignment, you will explore the role of nonverbal communication in shaping cross-cultural interactions.

    Drawing on video resources, course readings, and lectures, you will analyze how specific nonverbal behaviors differ across cultures, identify how these norms manifest in your own cultural background, and reflect on how these insights might influence your personal and professional interactions in diverse settings.

    Assignment Instructions

    Part I: Summary and Analysis of Video Content

    Watch one or both assigned videos on nonverbal communication and culture.

    Provide a concise summary of the main points discussed in the video(s).

    Highlight at least three types of nonverbal communication featured (e.g., eye contact, hand gestures, posture, proxemics, facial expressions).

    Explain how these behaviors differ across cultural groups, and provide specific examples.

    Part II: Personal Cultural Reflection

    Describe the nonverbal norms and behaviors typical of your own cultural background.

    Which aspects from the videos align or conflict with your cultural experience?

    Reflect on a personal or observed experience where a cultural difference in nonverbal communication led to misunderstanding, discomfort, or insight.

    Part III: Application of Course Concepts

    Apply at least three key concepts or theories from the course readings/lectures (e.g., Halls High-Context vs. Low-Context Communication, cultural display rules, Hofstedes cultural dimensions, or emic vs. etic perspectives).

    Use these concepts to interpret the cultural patterns of nonverbal behavior discussed in the videos and your own analysis.

    Briefly discuss the implications for human services or helping professionswhy is it important to understand nonverbal cues in a multicultural context?

    Formatting and Sources

    Use APA 7th edition style (title page, in-text citations, reference page).

    Incorporate at least two scholarly sources, which may include course readings.

    Submit in a Word or PDF format with clear headings for each section.

    Nonverbal Communication Across Cultures Grading Rubric

    Total Points: 25

    Criteria

    Excellent

    Proficient

    Developing

    Needs Improvement

    Points

    Part I: Summary & Analysis of Video Content (6 pts)

    Clear, accurate summary; explains at least three nonverbal behaviors with strong cross-cultural examples

    Adequate summary with some examples

    Summary lacks depth or clarity

    Incomplete or inaccurate summary

    /6

    Identification of Nonverbal Communication Types (4 pts)

    Insightful discussion of multiple nonverbal behaviors and cultural meanings

    Identifies behaviors with reasonable explanation

    Mentions behaviors superficially

    Minimal or inaccurate identification

    /4

    Part II: Personal Cultural Reflection (5 pts)

    Thoughtful reflection clearly connected to cultural norms and video content

    Clear reflection with limited depth

    Reflection underdeveloped

    Little or no personal reflection

    /5

    Part III: Application of Course Concepts/Theories (6 pts)

    Effectively applies at least three course concepts or theories

    Correct application with minor gaps

    Weak integration of concepts

    Concepts missing or inaccurate

    /6

    Implications for Human Services / Helping Professions (2 pts)

    Clearly explains importance of nonverbal cues in multicultural practice

    General discussion of implications

    Brief or vague mention

    No meaningful discussion

    /2

    Organization, APA Format & Sources (2 pts)

    Clear organization, correct APA 7, and 2+ scholarly sources

    Minor APA or organization errors

    APA inconsistencies or weak organization

    Poor formatting or missing sources

    /2

    Suggested Grading Scale:

    2325 = Excellent

    2022 = Good

    1719 = Satisfactory

    1416 = Needs Improvement

    Below 14 = Unsatisfactory

    (Due February 16)

  • CrossPost

    Discussion One- Initial Post: Project Idea AI Driven Brainstorming

    Electronic Health Records (EHRs) were designed to improve care quality, optimize workflows, and support seamless documentation. However, nursing documentation and workflows in family practice facilities often remain fragmented and inefficient. This discussion examines how artificial intelligence (AI) can help generate strategies to streamline clinical documentation. These strategies must prioritize nurses’ input, as their firsthand experience is essential to effective change (Johnson et al., 2025). Standardized processes and organizational tools, such as visual flowcharts, can help nurse leaders identify failures early, enhance risk mitigation, and prevent adverse patient outcomes (Roussel et al., 2023).

    Current Practice

    As a nurse leader in a family practice facility, implementing workflow improvement projects, forming EHR optimization committees, and reducing nurse burnout are crucial strategies for addressing persistent gaps in healthcare. Gaps are evident in several areas, including documentation processes that are often time-consuming and repetitive, and a focus on completing mandatory fields rather than capturing clinically meaningful information. By targeting these areas through focused initiatives, healthcare organizations can address gaps and inefficiencies in documentation (Demsash et al., 2023).

    Mission and Values

    To guide these efforts, the following PICO question can be used: Among registered nurses providing direct patient care in a family practice clinic, how does implementing streamlined, standardized, workflow-aligned electronic documentation practices, compared with current documentation processes, affect documentation time, perceived documentation burden, and documentation quality? Prioritizing quality through documentation ensures this family practice facility delivers safe, evidence-based care, underscoring the importance of its mission and values. Efficient documentation is directly linked to these values by improving accuracy and timeliness, supporting compliance, and helping staff track care outcomes.

    Aim and Organizational Improvement

    The project’s purpose is to improve nursing documentation by making it more efficient, clear, and clinically valuable by reducing unnecessary and repetitive charting tasks. The specific aim is to reduce documentation time by 20% and reduce duplicate or unnecessary charting fields by 30% within six months, while maintaining or improving documentation quality and compliance. Streamlining these processes is intended to enhance patient-centered care and reduce documentation burden. Key strategies for this process include removing or merging duplicate documentation, using smart phrases and auto-populated fields, and adopting evidence-based templates for consistency. Making critical information, such as allergies and fall risk, highly visible supports safety. Role-specific EHR training and assigned superusers can improve proficiency and satisfaction. Engaging frontline staff in redesigning documentation and piloting changes ensures practical solutions. Finally, ongoing metric tracking and consistent feedback support continuous quality improvement (Johnson et al., 2025).

    Reflection

    Utilizing artificial intelligence during the brainstorming phase of this quality improvement (QI) project helped transform broad concerns into more focused, actionable ideas by creating potential problem areas, contributing factors, and possible interventions. The AI-generated PICO question provided a structured framework for evaluating the impact of documentation improvement initiatives and aligns with the goal of reducing inefficiencies and enhancing the value of clinical records. Additionally, AI has enabled an innovative range of solutions; however, it does not fully understand the unique culture of a family practice facility. Therefore, it is important to evaluate and refine the ideas presented to include clinical judgment.

    References

    Demsash, A. W., Kassie, S. Y., Dubale, A. T., Chereka, A. A., Ngusie, H. S., Hunde, M. K., Emanu, M. D., Shibabaw, A. A., & Walle, A. D. (2023). Health professionals routine practice documentation and its associated factors in a resource-limited setting: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Health & Care Informatics, 30(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2022-100699

    Johnson, L. G., Macieira, T. G. R., Madandola, O. O., Priola, K. J. B., & Keenan, G. M. (2025). Charting the path forward: Nursing perspectives on documentation and change. Nursing Outlook, 73(4), 102463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2025.102463

    Roussel, L., Harris, J. L., & Thomas, P. L. (2023). Management and leadership for nurse administrators (9th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.

    CrossPost #2

    Initial Post Quality Improvement Project

    Topic Ideation and Final Project Selection

    To help narrow my focus, I used ChatGPT to brainstorm a few potential quality improvement ideas relevant to USA Children’s and Women’s surgical services department. The main options included improving first-case on-time starts, strengthening surgical site infection prevention practices, and addressing inconsistent operating room (OR) block time utilization and scheduling. All were relevant, but block utilization stood out as the most practical and highest impact because it affects staffing, overtime, delays, and overall workflow every day. For that reason, I chose to focus this project on improving OR block time use and creating more consistent weekly caseloads.

    Practice Concern

    In surgical services, the OR volume varies significantly from day to day and week to week. Some days rooms go unused and staff are sent home, while other days feel overloaded with delays and overtime. This inconsistency creates stress for staff, drives up costs, and can affect patient flow and safety. As one of the most resource-intensive areas of the hospital, the OR benefits significantly from better block time use, which supports USA Healths mission to help people lead longer, better lives by reducing delays, improving patient flow, and promoting safe, reliable care.

    Right now, block time is largely based on historical patterns and provider preference rather than actual utilization data. Unused time is often released too late or not advertised enough to fill, and non-emergent add-on cases tend to pile onto already busy days. Research supports that more intentional block planning helps balance workloads and keeps downstream areas running more smoothly (Heider et al., 2022). Other healthcare scheduling studies show similar improvements in efficiency and patient flow when decisions are guided by data (Abdalkareem et al., 2021). Together, this suggests that inconsistent block use is something we can improve with better processes, not just something we have to accept.

    Proposed Changes and Evaluation

    This project will focus on reviewing historical utilization patterns, creating clearer expectations for early block release and sharing available openings, exploring a shared flex block process, and using simple dashboards to make utilization more visible to service lines. The goal is to create a steadier daily schedule and better match staffing to demand. If successful, we would expect to see fewer delays, less overtime, and more consistent room use. These ideas are supported by evidence showing that structured scheduling practices improve OR efficiency and utilization (Soh et al., 2022). Similar quality improvement approaches that standardize processes and address common causes of delays have reduced operational waste in surgical settings without adding cost (Robson Chase et al., 2025).

    AI Reflection

    ChatGPT was helpful for organizing my thinking and narrowing the focus of the project. It helped me compare several options, introduced a few approaches I had not initially considered, and structured the idea using a simple PICO framework that made the literature search more focused and useful for identifying evidence-based scheduling improvement strategies. Overall, the tool made the planning process much more efficient while still allowing me to tailor the project to specific departmental needs.

    References

    Abdalkareem, Z. A., Amir, A., Al-Betar, M. A., Ekhan, P., & Hammouri, A. I. (2021). Healthcare scheduling in Optimization Context: A Review. Health and Technology, 11(3), 445469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12553-021-00547-5

    Heider, S., Schoenfelder, J., Koperna, T., & Brunner, J. O. (2022). Balancing control and autonomy in master surgery scheduling: Benefits of ICU quotas for Recovery Units. Health Care Management Science, 25(2), 311332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10729-021-09588-8

    OpenAI. (2025). ChatGPT [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com/

    Robson Chase, M. E., Anderson, M. J., Stephens, W. A., Levy, B. E., Lantz, S., Goforth, J., Newcomb, M. R., & Harris, A. M. (2025). Utilizing quality improvement methodology to decrease surgical delays. The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 51(78), 474485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjq.2025.04.004

    Soh, K. W., Walker, C., OSullivan, M., & Wallace, J. (2022). Innovative operating room scheduling metric for creating surgical lists with desirable room utilization rates. Operations Management Research, 17(2), 544567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12063-022-00313-4

  • Mental health Process recording/interview

    Interview with a mental health patient who appeared happy and eager to talk. Responds well to questions. States she hears voices telling her to come to the new heaven which is above, its a peaceful place and they would take her there secretly and you dont have to die to go there. Patient refused talking about reason for admission cause it might hinder her leaving the hospital to a nursing home. Patient states she misses her older daughter and her grandkids. Talked about substance abuse, use of cigarettes, cigars, marijuana and coke. Patient states cocaine helps keep her calm and reliefs her anxiety. Doesnt take alcohol but drinks sweet wine. She smokes cigarettes more 2packs a day

    This is a summary of my interview with the patient, you can add more to make up but it should align with my interview. I attached the template/guidelines and also a sample of the process recording. Please follow instructions properly especially the APA format for reference and double spacing

    Requirements: Long as possible

  • Shark Finning Research

    Purpose: To show that you understand your topic from more than one perspective and can explain how different sources contribute to a complex, ongoing conversation. Instead of taking sides, your goal is to highlight areas of agreement, disagreement, and uncertaintyand to reflect on what this complexity means for your own research.

    Audience: Your instructor and classmates

    Genre: Research log (academic reflection and analysis)

    Step 1: Find and summarize sources

    Find two sources on your topic that take different positions or perspectives. These should not be polar opposites, but they should reflect meaningful differences in values, priorities, or conclusions. (For example, two sources that support healthcare reform but disagree on how to achieve it.) At least one of these should be by a reputable publication or outlet (academic journal, major newspaper, policy report, etc). The other can be from a reputable publication or from an advocacy group, blog, or a smaller media outlet.

    Once youve chosen two sources, write a short rhetorical summary that includes:

    • Title, author, and publication
    • Purpose and intended audience of the source
    • Summary of the main claims and supporting evidence
    • A brief analysis of the tone and stance

    Remember that you can find these terms defined on page ### of your textbook.

    Write at least 75 words for each source.

    Step 2: Compare the sources

    This is where youll begin to explore nuance. Many conversations in the public sphere are more complex than they first appear. Your job here is to find points of agreement, identify subtle differences, and reflect on how each source contributes to a deeper understanding of your topic.

    Use the guiding questions below to help structure your response. You dont need to answer every question in order, but your response should address most of the questions. Write at least 150 words total.

    • Where do the authors agree or overlap?
    • Do they agree on the core problem or issue?
    • Do they use similar types of evidence?
    • Do they both support action?
    • Where do the authors diverge- and why?
    • Do they disagree on the cause or source of the current situation?
    • Do they disagree on what matters most (example: the key source of the problem or the key aspect of the solution)?
    • Are they using different kinds of evidence to reach their conclusions (does one use statistics while one relies on personal testimony)?
    • Are they addressing different audiences (average voters vs policy makers; young voters vs older generation)?
    • What uncertainties, nuances, gray areas emerge between the two?
    • Does one source acknowledge a limitation or counterpoint?
    • Is there a tension in the conversation between the ideal solution and barriers to that solution?
    • Is there a tension or uncertainty around the exact cause of the problem or the publics perception of the problem?
    • Do both sources seem partially right, but in different ways?
    • How does this comparison affect your own thinking?
    • Have your views shifted or become more complex?
    • What questions do you have now that you didnt have before? Or what questions seem less/more important now?
    • How might this new complexity reshape how you approach your topic? What aspects of your research question might need to change, narrow, or be reframed?

    Examples to help you think through the questions above:

    • An example of an overlap would be two sources on climate change that agree that its both human-caused and urgent.
    • An example of a divergence would be one source emphasizing individual responsibility for reducing waste, while another source argues that the problem requires large-scale corporate reform.
    • An example of nuance could be one source acknowledging the limits of individual responsibility while still arguing for its potential contributions to a prolonged response.
    • An example of nuance is one source showing that standardized tests are harmful due to stress caused to students, while another source shows that these tests are crucial to identifying learning gaps. Therefore, maybe the answer isnt that tests are all good or all bad, but the issue depends on how tests are used.
    • An example of a change in thinking after identifying complexity is realizing there is more than one potential way to solve the problem but the different solutions each represent competing values/priorities.

    *My topic is how shark finning has been increasing the risks of climate change through the years.

  • Shark Finning Research

    Purpose: To show that you understand your topic from more than one perspective and can explain how different sources contribute to a complex, ongoing conversation. Instead of taking sides, your goal is to highlight areas of agreement, disagreement, and uncertaintyand to reflect on what this complexity means for your own research.

    Audience: Your instructor and classmates

    Genre: Research log (academic reflection and analysis)

    Step 1: Find and summarize sources

    Find two sources on your topic that take different positions or perspectives. These should not be polar opposites, but they should reflect meaningful differences in values, priorities, or conclusions. (For example, two sources that support healthcare reform but disagree on how to achieve it.) At least one of these should be by a reputable publication or outlet (academic journal, major newspaper, policy report, etc). The other can be from a reputable publication or from an advocacy group, blog, or a smaller media outlet.

    Once youve chosen two sources, write a short rhetorical summary that includes:

    • Title, author, and publication
    • Purpose and intended audience of the source
    • Summary of the main claims and supporting evidence
    • A brief analysis of the tone and stance

    Remember that you can find these terms defined on page ### of your textbook.

    Write at least 75 words for each source.

    Step 2: Compare the sources

    This is where youll begin to explore nuance. Many conversations in the public sphere are more complex than they first appear. Your job here is to find points of agreement, identify subtle differences, and reflect on how each source contributes to a deeper understanding of your topic.

    Use the guiding questions below to help structure your response. You dont need to answer every question in order, but your response should address most of the questions. Write at least 150 words total.

    • Where do the authors agree or overlap?
    • Do they agree on the core problem or issue?
    • Do they use similar types of evidence?
    • Do they both support action?
    • Where do the authors diverge- and why?
    • Do they disagree on the cause or source of the current situation?
    • Do they disagree on what matters most (example: the key source of the problem or the key aspect of the solution)?
    • Are they using different kinds of evidence to reach their conclusions (does one use statistics while one relies on personal testimony)?
    • Are they addressing different audiences (average voters vs policy makers; young voters vs older generation)?
    • What uncertainties, nuances, gray areas emerge between the two?
    • Does one source acknowledge a limitation or counterpoint?
    • Is there a tension in the conversation between the ideal solution and barriers to that solution?
    • Is there a tension or uncertainty around the exact cause of the problem or the publics perception of the problem?
    • Do both sources seem partially right, but in different ways?
    • How does this comparison affect your own thinking?
    • Have your views shifted or become more complex?
    • What questions do you have now that you didnt have before? Or what questions seem less/more important now?
    • How might this new complexity reshape how you approach your topic? What aspects of your research question might need to change, narrow, or be reframed?

    Examples to help you think through the questions above:

    • An example of an overlap would be two sources on climate change that agree that its both human-caused and urgent.
    • An example of a divergence would be one source emphasizing individual responsibility for reducing waste, while another source argues that the problem requires large-scale corporate reform.
    • An example of nuance could be one source acknowledging the limits of individual responsibility while still arguing for its potential contributions to a prolonged response.
    • An example of nuance is one source showing that standardized tests are harmful due to stress caused to students, while another source shows that these tests are crucial to identifying learning gaps. Therefore, maybe the answer isnt that tests are all good or all bad, but the issue depends on how tests are used.
    • An example of a change in thinking after identifying complexity is realizing there is more than one potential way to solve the problem but the different solutions each represent competing values/priorities.

    *My topic is how shark finning has been increasing the risks of climate change through the years.

  • Shark Finning Research

    Purpose: To show that you understand your topic from more than one perspective and can explain how different sources contribute to a complex, ongoing conversation. Instead of taking sides, your goal is to highlight areas of agreement, disagreement, and uncertaintyand to reflect on what this complexity means for your own research.

    Audience: Your instructor and classmates

    Genre: Research log (academic reflection and analysis)

    Step 1: Find and summarize sources

    Find two sources on your topic that take different positions or perspectives. These should not be polar opposites, but they should reflect meaningful differences in values, priorities, or conclusions. (For example, two sources that support healthcare reform but disagree on how to achieve it.) At least one of these should be by a reputable publication or outlet (academic journal, major newspaper, policy report, etc). The other can be from a reputable publication or from an advocacy group, blog, or a smaller media outlet.

    Once youve chosen two sources, write a short rhetorical summary that includes:

    • Title, author, and publication
    • Purpose and intended audience of the source
    • Summary of the main claims and supporting evidence
    • A brief analysis of the tone and stance

    Remember that you can find these terms defined on page ### of your textbook.

    Write at least 75 words for each source.

    Step 2: Compare the sources

    This is where youll begin to explore nuance. Many conversations in the public sphere are more complex than they first appear. Your job here is to find points of agreement, identify subtle differences, and reflect on how each source contributes to a deeper understanding of your topic.

    Use the guiding questions below to help structure your response. You dont need to answer every question in order, but your response should address most of the questions. Write at least 150 words total.

    • Where do the authors agree or overlap?
    • Do they agree on the core problem or issue?
    • Do they use similar types of evidence?
    • Do they both support action?
    • Where do the authors diverge- and why?
    • Do they disagree on the cause or source of the current situation?
    • Do they disagree on what matters most (example: the key source of the problem or the key aspect of the solution)?
    • Are they using different kinds of evidence to reach their conclusions (does one use statistics while one relies on personal testimony)?
    • Are they addressing different audiences (average voters vs policy makers; young voters vs older generation)?
    • What uncertainties, nuances, gray areas emerge between the two?
    • Does one source acknowledge a limitation or counterpoint?
    • Is there a tension in the conversation between the ideal solution and barriers to that solution?
    • Is there a tension or uncertainty around the exact cause of the problem or the publics perception of the problem?
    • Do both sources seem partially right, but in different ways?
    • How does this comparison affect your own thinking?
    • Have your views shifted or become more complex?
    • What questions do you have now that you didnt have before? Or what questions seem less/more important now?
    • How might this new complexity reshape how you approach your topic? What aspects of your research question might need to change, narrow, or be reframed?

    Examples to help you think through the questions above:

    • An example of an overlap would be two sources on climate change that agree that its both human-caused and urgent.
    • An example of a divergence would be one source emphasizing individual responsibility for reducing waste, while another source argues that the problem requires large-scale corporate reform.
    • An example of nuance could be one source acknowledging the limits of individual responsibility while still arguing for its potential contributions to a prolonged response.
    • An example of nuance is one source showing that standardized tests are harmful due to stress caused to students, while another source shows that these tests are crucial to identifying learning gaps. Therefore, maybe the answer isnt that tests are all good or all bad, but the issue depends on how tests are used.
    • An example of a change in thinking after identifying complexity is realizing there is more than one potential way to solve the problem but the different solutions each represent competing values/priorities.

    *My topic is how shark finning has been increasing the risks of climate change through the years.

  • Available orders

    Attached Files (PDF/DOCX): Olson Syllabus for Spring 2026 Advanced Diagnosis.docx

    Note: Content extraction from these files is restricted, please review them manually.

  • Module 4 Olson

    Find a journal article written in the last 23 years (published in 2000 or more recently) on an issue related to a topic in Chapter 5 and/or 6 of our text.

    1. Read the chapters and find a topic of interest to you.
    2. Find a journal article published in the year 2000 or more recently.
    3. Then provide:
    • The conclusion(s) or final assertions of the study, and the evidence on which this or that conclusion/assertion was based. If data were collected, a brief summary of the methodology is appropriate.
    • Describe at least one aspect of the article that was of personal interest to you, or a strength or two of the article.
    • Describe at least one aspect of the article that you considered a weakness. For example, what questions are left unanswered? What would you have done different if you had written the article or conducted the research?
    • A brief description how the journal article relates to either Chapter 5 and/or 6 in the textbook. For example, describe how the two sources agree or complement each other, or how they might contradict each other.
    • Embed some brief mention/description of the DSM-5 here.

    Remember, be a cautious, somewhat skeptical reader and writer. You like evidence! The field of counselling/psychology rests on science, not whim.

    Write between 400 to 650 words of narrative/discussion, not counting your References section and title page.

    Turning in your Research Paper requires that you submit it in two places:

    1. First, submit your paper to be graded (you will see the submission page, by clicking “Next” at the bottom of this page).
    2. Second, post your completed paper in the Module 4, “Medication Nonadherence and Preliminary Diagnostic Considerations” forum (discussion board). You will see the Discussion Board on the page after your file submission page. Here, other students may read your paper and, if they wish, make a positive/productive comment about it; no criticisms, only give compliments and/or identify an interesting aspect of the paper you enjoyed. Any comments made here are not part of the “Group Participation” activity. Comments here do not generate points and are strictly optional

    Model Paper #1

    I assigned 10 points to the writer of this paper. I liked it. It read well and the detail provided of the Dagan and Ayalon (2005) journal article was adequate. The critique at the end, although brief, was right on. Nice brief mention of the DSM-5. I prefer that the DOI (digital object identifier) be included in the References section. Otherwise the APA Style was generally correct. The student-author’s name is fictitious. Note, our textbook referred to in this paper is of an earlier edition. When you cite our text in your References section, be sure you cite it as the 9th edition, 2021, and with a fourth author now.

    Model Paper #2

    I assigned 10 points to the author of this paper. I liked it. There was nice detail about the journal article of focus. Nice critique too. I liked the tie-in to the DSM-5. The student-author’s name is fictitious. Note, our textbook referred to in this paper is of an earlier edition. When you cite our text in your References section, be sure you cite it as the 9th edition, 2021, and with a fourth author now.

  • Analysis

    Artwork: Wheat Field with Cypresses by Vincent van Gogh, 1889, oil on canvas, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City (viewed virtually).

    Great hall

    All instructions in the pdf, please read carefully. Thank you

    Attached Files (PDF/DOCX): Forrmal analysis of a selected artwork.pdf

    Note: Content extraction from these files is restricted, please review them manually.

  • Sport in society article assignment

    use articles from farmingdale state college website databases no later than 2018