PRACTICAL BOOK REVIEW

at
Categories
Tags

 

A Practical Book Review (PBR) is a way of responding to readings that requires you to interact with new ideas and techniques on several levels. Your PBR can be accomplished by thinking of four action words: Summarize, Respond, Reflect, and Act. Use the following headings and details to satisfactorily complete the review.
INSTRUCTIONS

Summarize
• In your own words, summarize what you have read by boiling down the book into a brief summary (1-2 pages). Prove that you comprehend the material by writing a brief, comprehensive summary. Summarize is not a commentary with reflection or a rehearsing of the text’s Table of Contents; rather, it is a gut-level, insightful “précis” of the longer, more highly crafted book. Bottom line: Provide a clear and concise overview of the material!
• Short quotations are acceptable, but they should not be more than 1-2 sentences. Direct quotations, paraphrases, and core notes must be properly cited. Do not reference any other source in your summary. This summary is only about the assigned text. Do not use first or second person; be a reporter and give clear, concise facts.
• Do not copy and paste from the text, a website, student sample, or from a previous Practical Book Review──this is plagiarism!
• In the closing transition, pitch a convincing “So What?!” to the reader. The “So-What?!” qualifier introduces the central point with an appeal for application. Be clear and concise regarding a central point that makes it a good-read. In short, use the “So-What?!” phrase as you point out to the reader “Why s/he should care?!”enough to apply this point to his or her life.

Respond
What parts of this book are about your growth and development in the midst of relationships? You will remember almost nothing you have read unless you make this critical, personal connection.
• In light of seeking to be and become more like Christ in a specific relational context, be attentive to a word, phrase, or concept from the text that informs the description of the “Me I See NOW.” Noticeably use the phrase – “Me I See NOW” and develop a research-based discussion early on rather than at the end of the section.
• Relate at least 1 personal life episode that a specific part of the of the text triggered in your memory (i.e., cite accordingly). What video memory began to roll?
• Relate your story in first person, describing action; quote exact words you remember hearing or saying and/or the non-verbals on display in the memory. What was going on with your internal conversation during the story? This is your chance to tell your present story and make new ideas your own through a practical learning activity designed for you!
• Be sure to connect your personal life example to a specific insight or quote from the book.
• The RESPOND! section should be at least 1 full page.
• While there is no need to reference any other source, it is important to include citations from the assigned text. If a Scripture verse is cited, a brief explanation should be included to inform the reader (i.e., brief explanation: verse location and translation).

Reflect
Review notes made while reading the book. Consider how these insights relate to the development of the “Me I Want to See SOON”?

• Noticeably use the phrase “The Me I Want to See SOON” and develop a research-based discussion early on rather than at the end of the section.
• What new questions or “ah ha” moments popped up after reading the book?
• What insight(s), technique(s), word pictures(s), and tool(s) are you seeing for the first time?
• More specifically, how do these fresh notions relate to 1) your primary purpose and how it should function within a specific relational context (see Pettit, 2008, ch. 9) and 2) the development of the “Me I Want to See SOON”?
• This section should meaningfully connect to the assigned book’s content. Discuss/analyze and use source citations!
• The REFLECT! section should be 1 full page.
• Again, there is no need to reference any other source. If a verse is cited, then a brief explanation should be included to inform the reader (i.e., brief explanation: verse location and translation).

Act
So what are you going to DO about it anyway? Consider the following:
• Noticeably use the phrase “The Me I Want to BECOME” and develop a research-based discussion early on rather than at the end of the section.
• In light of your aspiration to be and become more like Christ, what insights, techniques, and/or supporting relationships are needed to secure and support “Becoming the Me I Want to Be”?
• More specifically, which particular insights, techniques, and/or supporting relational activities will you apply immediately to begin growing in favor with God and others? Dig deep and dig up significant contributions to inform the action plan. Integrate these contributions as you concisely point out small, measurable, and repeatable steps to achieve your goal (i.e., the Me I Want to See Soon). Explain why this strategy is needed now.
• Connect your action steps to the assigned text’s content and use proper citations!
• The ACT! section should be at least one full page.
• There is no need to reference any other source. If Scripture(s) is cited, make sure to inform the reader regarding your use of a particular verse (i.e., brief explanation: verse location and translation abbreviation).

Sample Solution

Transient memory is the memory for a boost that goes on for a brief time (Carlson, 2001). In reasonable terms visual transient memory is frequently utilized for a relative reason when one can’t thoroughly search in two spots immediately however wish to look at least two prospects. Tuholski and partners allude to momentary memory similar to the attendant handling and stockpiling of data (Tuholski, Engle, and Baylis, 2001).

They additionally feature the way that mental capacity can frequently be antagonistically impacted by working memory limit. It means quite a bit to be sure about the typical limit of momentary memory as, without a legitimate comprehension of the flawless cerebrum’s working it is challenging to evaluate whether an individual has a shortage in capacity (Parkin, 1996).

 

This survey frames George Miller’s verifiable perspective on transient memory limit and how it tends to be impacted, prior to bringing the examination state-of-the-art and outlining a determination of approaches to estimating momentary memory limit. The verifiable perspective on momentary memory limit

 

Length of outright judgment

The range of outright judgment is characterized as the breaking point to the precision with which one can distinguish the greatness of a unidimensional boost variable (Miller, 1956), with this cutoff or length generally being around 7 + 2. Mill operator refers to Hayes memory length try as proof for his restricting range. In this members needed to review data read resoundingly to them and results obviously showed that there was a typical maximum restriction of 9 when double things were utilized.

This was regardless of the consistent data speculation, which has proposed that the range ought to be long if each introduced thing contained little data (Miller, 1956). The end from Hayes and Pollack’s tests (see figure 1) was that how much data sent expansions in a straight design alongside how much data per unit input (Miller, 1956). Figure 1. Estimations of memory for data wellsprings of various sorts and bit remainders, contrasted with anticipated results for steady data. Results from Hayes (left) and Pollack (right) refered to by (Miller, 1956)

 

Pieces and lumps

Mill operator alludes to a ‘digit’ of data as need might have arisen ‘to settle on a choice between two similarly probable other options’. In this manner a basic either or choice requires the slightest bit of data; with more expected for additional complicated choices, along a twofold pathway (Miller, 1956). Decimal digits are worth 3.3 pieces each, implying that a 7-digit telephone number (what is handily recollected) would include 23 pieces of data. Anyway an evident inconsistency to this is the way that, assuming an English word is worth around 10 pieces and just 23 pieces could be recollected then just 2-3 words could be recalled at any one time, clearly mistaken. The restricting range can all the more likely be figured out concerning the absorption of pieces into lumps.

Mill operator recognizes pieces and lumps of data, the qualification being that a lump is comprised of various pieces of data. It is fascinating to take note of that while there is a limited ability to recall lumps of data, how much pieces in every one of those lumps can differ generally (Miller, 1956). Anyway it’s anything but a straightforward instance of having the memorable option enormous pieces right away, fairly that as each piece turns out to be more recognizable, it tends to be acclimatized into a lump, which is then recollected itself. Recoding is the interaction by which individual pieces are ‘recoded’ and appointed to lumps.

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.
Hi, how can I help?