I have to write a thesis about Dracula. It has to be about Modernism and the novel's attitude towards scientific advancement.

Dracula by Bram Stoker is a late-19th century novel about the eponymous vampire, Count Dracula, and the humans who encounter him. It is recounted as if it were a collection of primary sources, including letters, logs, and newspaper articles. As the novel creates tension with its contrasts between science and magic and between the past and the present, there are a few ways you can approach this question.
Modernism
According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, modernism is “fueled in various literatures by industrialization and urbanization and by the search for an authentic response to a much-changed world.” To explore this in Dracula, you could start by comparing the modern world of Harker to the more ancient world that Dracula inhabits. Harker even compares his journey to Transylvania to a trip backwards in time. If Britain is the future and the center of civilization, then Transylvania is the past and the wild, uncivilized frontier. The human characters utilize the latest technological advancements of their time, including typewriters, telegrams, trains, and cameras, which are all a far cry from Dracula and the older world of Transylvanian society.
Science
The scientific method, as defined by the Encyclopedia Britannica, is “the process of observing, asking questions, and seeking answers through tests and experiments.” It seeks to collect observable facts and create theories that can explain them. The very structure of the novel lends itself well to the scientific method. By following the narrative through a series of letters and articles, the reader is forced to participate in the scientific process by treating the events of the story as information to record, process, and assemble in a meaningful way. Science and magic are often side by side, however. Dracula himself is a supernatural creature that science is unable to explain. He performs feats outside of what is scientifically possible, baffling the human characters who often rely on their confidence in what the modern world has taught them about reality.
I would recommend looking for these points of tension between the old and the new, the magical and the scientific, and relating these examples to the ways that Stoker uses modernism to respond to a world that was rapidly changing.
https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/dracula

What are five lessons that Santiago learned in part one of The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho?

Paul Coehlo's The Alchemist deals with several themes, including the nature of desire, coming of age, seeking your life's purpose, recognizing and attaining your dreams, and paying attention to the beauty and lessons you encounter on your journey. Below are a series of fundamental lessons that Santiago learns through the five main parts of his journey to self-fulfillment and understanding.
The protagonist, introduced to the reader simply as a young boy on the cusp of adulthood tending sheep in the Spanish country side, encounters a mystical figure who encourages him to take his first step into the wide world beyond his familiar, recognizable homeland. Thus the first lesson Santiago learns in the first part of the book is to recognize the inherent calling that makes you, you and to embark on a journey of discovery to seek after that calling (part one).
After Santiago embarks on his journey to seek a "treasure" hidden in The Great Pyramids, he begins to encounter difficulties and the struggle to stay your course in the face of challenges and complexity. He learns through daily living with a merchant in Morocco that everyone in life has a deep purpose and it's up to each of us to pursue it and not stay stagnant. Santiago sees a reflection of this potential future in the crystal merchant he takes up shop with, and he learns to avoid being lost in the minutiae of life's ups-and-downs, finally recommitting to his quest (part two).
Santiago begins the long journey across the wide desert of the Sahara on his way to Egypt, and now he has built up his skill for interpreting the signs in the world that can help or harm you. His time in the desert among the nomadic people teaches him to live without fear and recognize how the world teaches you to achieve your life's purpose (part three).
In his journey across the desert, Santiago also learns to set aside all else but the goal of your desire, understanding that everything works out in its own time (part four).
And finally, at the completion of his journey Santiago learns that you must always apply everything you've learned to overcoming the greater and greater difficulties that life sends your way to test your knowledge, resolve and dedication to achieving your purpose (part five).

What did the Cratchit family do before the goose was carved and they started eating?

The Cratchit family is not used to having sufficient food—and certainly not food of such quality as the goose they are offered on Christmas day. As such, the children carry it in as if in a "procession," and the family behaves as if the goose is a very rare thing. They are extremely excited, and they indicate this with much "bustle."
Before they can eat, various preparations have to be made. Mrs. Cratchit prepares the gravy and warms it up; Peter vigorously mashes the potatoes; Belinda sweetens the apple sauce; Martha dusts the hot plates; Bob takes Tiny Tim over to a corner of the table to make sure he has his plate; and the youngest two Cratchits set out the chairs around the table. They put spoons into their mouths as if to hold in their shrieks of delight. Finally, before the goose is carved, the dishes are laid on the table and the family says grace. At last, Mrs. Cratchit plunges the carving knife into the cooked goose, and Tiny Tim beats on the table with his knife and shouts, "Hurrah."

What are the strengths of “Girl” being written in the second person? In other words, what was the story able to accomplish specifically because it was told in the second person? Then, describe a weakness that the second person created, and describe why you see it as weak.

The choice of the second person as a narrative voice is an unusual one which is always deliberate. Second person gives a text a very particular feel: the reader is necessarily the person being addressed by the text. In the case of "Girl," the effect of this is that the reader is now the recipient of the barrage of information and instruction that is delivered to the girl in question on a moment by moment basis. As the recipient of all this instruction, we can clearly sense how inexorable it feels: the long sentences, broken by semi-colons, add to this sense of continuous instruction and command without pause. The story is exhausting to read; we can only imagine, then, how exhausting this life must be for the girl herself to lead.
There are, of course, weaknesses and downsides to this type of narrative. The chief among these is that we have no idea how the girl feels about all this, other than what we can assume based on our own feelings. However, this may also be seen as a positive thing—we are forced to place ourselves in the girl's position and feel with a true immediacy, rather than being told how this feels. We understand the girl's life directly, rather than at a remove.

Writing "Girl" in the second-person point of view places the reader in the position of the "girl" who is evidently being educated about many different aspects of life. When she is accused of something, like singing benna on Sundays or in Sunday school, we feel her defensiveness. We also sense more easily how the "girl" really does not seem to get an opportunity to get a word in edgewise. We feel her relative powerlessness because we read the text as if it were directed at us—instead of at someone else in front of us.
One potential weakness of writing the story from this point of view is that imperative sentences end up dominating the story. We don't get much description or any background information (called exposition). This really just reads like a list of things the "girl" is expected to memorize and know, going forward. We don't know much about what she thinks or feels at all, and this could be considered a weakness.

Dostoevsky employs two different strategies to represent individual psychology. In Part One, he uses "stream of consciousness," in which the narrator theoretically express whatever comes into him mind without censor. In Part Two, he has the narrator engage others in behavior that is both self-destructive and destructive to others but leaves the narrator's motivations open to interpretation, which compels the reader to try to enter the narrator's mind. Which of these two techniques better expresses psychological realism?

Great question! Ultimately, the answer to your query is rooted in opinion but here are some thoughts that might help guide you answer this prompt.
Psychological realism is a literary style that aims to replicate the inner thoughts and hidden motives of a character as precisely as possible. Authors who employ psychological realism, such as Fyodor Dostoevsky, are frequently more concerned with inward characterization than they are with the plot. The result is often a gritty examination of human nature that is unflinching in its portrayal of the ugliness that can grow in the human soul.
Dostoevsky’s novel Notes From The Underground is written in the first person by a bitter former Saint Petersburg civil servant. The unnamed narrator is caustic and unreliable in his narration; Dostoevsky clearly expects the reader to question the sanity of the narration! The novel explores this ailing man’s mental state and his twisted, incomprehensible motives for his actions.
Part I, or “Underground”, is relayed in a stream of consciousness and is much more philosophical than Part II. The narrator expounds his varied philosophies, rants about events from his past, complains of his social status and acknowledges that many readers will find his ramblings bewildering. In Part I, the reader is introduced to the narrator and exposed to his contradictory value systems.
Part II, or “Apropos the Wet Snow,” is a narrative that displays how the narrator lived out his bitter philosophy with former friends and lovers. Most readers are repulsed by the narrator’s treatment of others, particularly his savaging of Liza.
I feel that Part I is the best example of psychological realism in Dostoevsky’s novel. This is because Part I mirrors the thought processes of the deranged protagonist and offers the audience a clear, accurate window into the mental depravity of the narrator.

What is the significance of Farquhar's heightened attention to detail?

I think the answer to this question depends on the reader. On one hand, I think his vivid and heightened attention to detail helps sell the idea to the reader that Farquhar's escape is actually happening. People often say that in the midst of some harrowing experience, like a car accident, everything slows down and they notice the oddest details. Anecdotally, I can confirm this. I remember the most odd and vivid details from a car crash that I had earlier in my life.
On the other hand, Farquhar's heightened attention to detail might clue certain readers into the fact that Farquhar isn't experiencing anything. He is imagining it all in vivid detail. This should also resonate with readers, because many people are likely to be able to claim that they have had a dream that seemed so real they weren't sure it was a dream. Scientifically speaking, there is hardly any difference in brain activity between actually seeing something and imagining it. The same brain centers are triggered in both cases. The significance of Farquhar's heightened awareness is that it makes the story believable and suspicious sounding at the same time.
https://www.nytimes.com/1993/08/31/science/seeing-and-imagining-clues-to-the-workings-of-the-mind-s-eye.html

Readers are often shocked by the conclusion of Bierce’s story when they realize that Peyton Farquhar’s escape and journey home existed only in his mind. The abrupt conclusion jolts them, just as Farquhar’s body is jolted when the rope plays out, ending his free fall. The truth of what occurred at Owl Creek Bridge is confronted quite suddenly, even though Bierce provides plenty of clues to the illusory nature of Farquhar’s experience after he falls between the railroad ties.
Many specific details in Part III of the story describe that which simply could not have happened. After fighting his way to the surface of Owl Creek, Farquhar could not have observed the veins on each leaf of the individual trees by the stream. He could not have seen “the very insects upon them: the locusts, the brilliant-bodied flies, the gray spiders stretching their webs from twig to twig,” nor could he have seen the “prismatic colors in all the dewdrops upon a million blades of grass.” Also beyond the realm of possibility is Farquhar’s hearing, in the midst of the fast-moving creek, the “audible music” of gnats humming and dragonflies beating their wings or the sound of “the strokes of the water-spiders’ legs.” His head above water, he very well could have heard rifle shots and seen the Union troops at the bridge, but in the distance, the soldiers’ forms would not have appeared “gigantic,” and he could not have seen “the eye of the man on the bridge gazing into his own through the sights of the rifle.” The rifleman’s eye is gray, Farquhar notes, another specific detail that indicates the illusory nature of his escape.
Numerous other details of Farquhar’s escape defy belief, especially toward the end of Part III as he makes his way home through a landscape both foreign and peculiar. The road he follows is “as wide and straight as a city street” but seems untraveled, and it takes him through a land with no signs of human habitation. The trees are black and form “a straight wall on both sides, terminating on the horizon in a point, like a diagram in a lesson in perspective.” That his experience is surreal is emphasized when he sees “great golden stars” shining overhead, “looking unfamiliar and grouped in strange constellations.” Reading Part III carefully makes it obvious that Farquhar’s escape is a fantasy.
Why, then, are readers so often shocked when they arrive at the final sentence in the narrative? Perhaps they respond to the conclusion of the story for reasons that have nothing to do with literary analysis. Many readers sympathize with Farquhar as he faces death. They identify with his love for his family and understand his desperate desire to go home. While reading Part III, they simply want Peyton Farquhar to survive. Consequently, many readers fail to consider, or choose to ignore, the evidence that his escape is not real. Thus the sight of Farquhar, his neck broken, swinging “gently from side to side beneath the timbers of the Owl Creek Bridge” shocks and disturbs, ending very abruptly what readers hoped for him, despite the impossibility of his escape.

What are the three hardships the people of Copenhagen must endure because of the war in Number the Stars?

The citizens of Copenhagen must cope with a constantly lessening supply of things they need. In the first chapter, readers are told that coffee and tea have long disappeared and that women sip hot tea with herbs. Then readers learn that fuel is in short supply and that the "winter nights were terribly cold." Electricity is rationed, and they often use candles for light. This doesn't even provide enough light for Ellen's father, a teacher, to see well enough to grade his students' papers.
They must also live in fear of the soldiers who walk their streets, ready to sneer at them and terrorize them at any moment. When the girls are walking home from school one day, they are stopped by soldiers questioning how well they do in school. Soldiers don't engage in small talk, so the girls are left to wonder the real purpose of the confrontation. Later soldiers burst into their home and demand to know how two blonde sisters could have a brunette sister as well. Annemarie's father must quickly devise a plan to hide the real truth and then sell this lie to the officers. There is no room for error in dealing with the ongoing threat of these confrontations.
They must leave their homes to survive. People falling into classifications established by Hitler were actively sought out and sent to concentration camps—or killed. Many people live in terror that their lives will soon end, so they are forced to flee their homes in hope of survival. With the brave assistance of those in the Resistance, some of these people found this hope—but at great risk to all involved. Annemarie finds that the fewer details she knows about how all this happens, the better she is in dealing with soldiers' inquiries.