PLEASE READ BEFORE BIDDING: Below is the assignment. I DO NOT have the book. Can anyone write a one page paper using the attached post by another student for information? A weakness of Leahey’s account of psychology’s history is his lack of attention to women and minorities in psychology. Much of the works of black psychologists have been virtually invisible in the ordinary history of psychology. We know all the internal politics of Harvard and Cornell but very little about Howard. If we don’t look, we don’t see. 1. What information did you find surprising in this book? 2. What ideas about black education did Sumner hold that you think are still relevant today? 3. What do you conclude from the tone of Guthrie’s writing? How does his presentation differ from “old” history? Can you provide examples to support your answer? 4. How does Guthrie’s narrative about G. Stanley Hall differ from Leahey’s? Hall seems to have two identities in Guthrie’s book. Does Guthrie resolve this two-fold characterization of Hall? 5. What other comments do you have about this book?