Tonya and Pearl each completed a separate proof to show that alternate interior angles AKL and FLK are congruent. Who completed the proof incorrectly? Explain.

option a.

step-by-step explanation:

if you look closely at the graph, we can notice that the function is not defined at two different points.

if you look at functions b and c, you will notice that both functions are not defined at just one point. the function b is not defined at x= -5/2 and function c is not defined at x=-5. both options are discarded, given that our function should not be defined at two fiferent points.

now, if you look closely at the graph you will notice that the function sketched is not defined at x=5 and x=-2.

step-by-step explanation:

the options are kind of confusing. i can tell you what i see going on here when i look at the graph.

the class and exam medians are closely related, and it looks like the low outlier on the exam did pull the median lower. [tex][/tex]