5 3.
RI.1
PART B: Which of the following quotes best supports the answer to Part A?
A.
"Despite some scares, the cancer never came back, but living with his history itself became a burden." ( Paragraph 4)
B.
"In the past, the very word cancer summoned images of hopelessness, pain, and death; little thought was given to life after cancer because it was considered brief. The cancer "victim" was seen as the passive recipient of ill fate and terrible luck. No more." ( Paragraph 6)
C.
"Emboldened by effective diagnosis and treatment strategies, celebrities such as Melissa Etheridge and Fran Drescher have made public disclosure of the disease increasingly routine and the fight definitely important and profound." ( Paragraph 7)
D.
"As more patients have lived longer, a body of research on their experiences has developed." ( Paragraph 9)

Why does a coyote decide to take care of bill and if you need the story’s name it is pecos bill

Constructed response paragraph: after reading “the case for short words,” do you think the author makes a convincing case that short words are effective? explain your answer and support it with evidence from the selection.

Read the excerpt from a supporting opinion of the supreme court’s ruling in plessy v. ferguson, 1896. laws permitting, and even requiring, their separation in places where they are liable to be brought into contact do not necessarily imply the inferiority of either race to the other, and have been generally, if not universally, recognized as within the competency of the state legislatures in the exercise of their police power. how does this relate to the premises of brown v. board of education? the brown case addresses whether state legislatures are equipped to judge the quality of education offered at segregated schools. the brown case addresses whether authorities believe that one race is inferior to another when creating public schools. the brown case addresses whether these laws inherently deny certain citizens equal protection under the law. the brown case addresses the legality of using police power to monitor public places separated by race.