The answer is b the plot engages readers because it moves quick and linear manner toward the climax
"My ideal life in 15 years is me and my wife, sitting on the porch of our lake house watching our kids play. In order to reach that goal i can do great in my classes and follow a significant career path."
Read the passage from “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings.”
I have tried often to search behind the sophistication of years for the enchantment I so easily found in those gifts. The essence escapes but its aura remains. To be allowed, no, invited, into the private lives of strangers, and to share their joys and fears, was a chance to exchange the Southern bitter wormwood for a cup of mead with Beowulf or a hot cup of tea and milk with Oliver Twist. When I said aloud, "It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done . . .” tears of love filled my eyes at my selflessness.
<span>Q1: The ability of an ecosystem to recover from damage.
In the text, it says "the resiliency of the reefs". From this we know that resiliency is a trait that the reefs have. In the next sentence, we see the context clues that define resiliency when it states "reefs bounce back-even flourish." When someone or something bounces back it recovers and returns to it's previous state.
Q2: to inform readers about how the coral reefs are being destroyed AND to convince readers that practices that destroy coral reefs must be stopped.
It is a "Check All That Apply" so more than one answer can be chosen. The passage title is "Save the Coral Reefs" and the selection ends with the sentence "More can be done now to help the coral reefs bounce back". These clues tell the reader that the author's purpose is to save the reefs. In order to do this the author needs to first explain how the reefs are being destroyed. Then convince readers to save the reefs by stopping the practices that destroy them.
Q3: "could help save" and "unsubstantiated risks".
It is important to pay attention to the question here. It is asking for phrases that support safety - not necessarily nutrition. A pixie stick is safe to eat, but not nutritious. The phrase "could help save" supports the idea that it is safe because it is being defined as possibly life and eye-saving. "Unsubstantiated risks" also shows safety because it state that any risks have not been proven and are therefore unfounded. Some of the other phrases such as "more vitamin A" and "more nutritious" support the argument that the food is healthier but are not used to specifically explain how safe it is.</span>
Answer:
There are many negatives about deporting illegal immigrants. Firstly, there are many families that lack connections with their parents due to deportation. This lack of connection can increase hate in a country. This can cause hate and anger in a person. People in Mexico usually try to find better locations to stay in. People want a place to call home. People want to get an opportunity that is in a different place than the past. All in all, there is a huge question in this situation. Who is wrong here the people who just want a better life or the people who separate innocent family's?
Hope this helps!!
Kavitha
