Character can be portrayed by direct exposition. true false

Read the excerpt from elie wiesel’s all rivers run to the sea. why were those trains allowed to roll unhindered into poland? why were the tracks leading to birkenau never bombed? i have put these questions to american presidents and generals and to high-ranking soviet officers. since moscow and washington knew what the killers were doing in the death camps, why was nothing done at least to slow down their “production”? that not a single allied military aircraft ever tried to destroy the rail lines converging on auschwitz remains an outrageous enigma to me. birkenau was “processing” ten thousand jews a day. stopping a single convoy for a single night—or even for just a few hours—would have prolonged so many lives. based on the paragraph, the author would most likely agree that it is best to avoid confrontation at all costs. people need to be proactive when they witness an injustice. countries should remain neutral to keep alliances strong. moscow and washington are to be blamed for the holocaust.

Create a well-crafted essay of 1-2 pages outlining a likely theory of king tutankhamun’s death at the age of nineteen. your goal is to convince peers your age that this is the most reasonable theory according to the evidence. incorporate the subjunctive and conditional moods within your writing. use the following rubric to guide your writing. remember to check your spelling (by using a spell checker and also against the original text) to ensure the proper spelling of names and places in king tut’s world. reminder: spell checkers are great, but they’re not always right. think about terms specific to egypt or even tutankhamun’s name. a spell checker won’t know if you’re spelling these correctly, so check with the reading to keep consistent. rubric criterion exceptional capable developing beginning points earned ideas & content main claim supporting details sources are cited clear, focused, interesting ideas with appropriate detail, sources are cited evident main idea with some support which may be general or limited, sources are mentioned main idea may be unclear; supporting detail is vague or off topic, some source information used central idea or theme is not stated; supporting detail may be nonexistent, no sources mentioned organization structure (claim/counterclaim) introduction conclusion strong organization; seamless paragraph transitions; effective and engaging intro and conclusion organization is appropriate but conventional; attempt at introduction and conclusion attempts at organization, inappropriate use of lists or bullets; introduction and conclusion are not developed no introduction or conclusion; no clear organizational framework or transitions voice personality sense of audience appropriate to audience; expressive, engaging, sincere voice is appropriate to topic, but inconsistent or dry voice may be inappropriate; writing may seem mechanical writer’s voice is inappropriate or nonexistent word choice precision effectiveness imagery broad range of descriptive words; creative examples, vivid details and images language is functional and appropriate; descriptions may lack detail or be overdone words may be correct but simplistic; no attempt at detail, description, or examples word choice is limited, words are often misused; supporting detail and examples are nonexistent sentence fluency rhythm, flow variety easy flow and rhythm; good variety in length and structure sentences are appropriate but lack variety and length awkward phrasing and structure, similar patterns and choppy language sentences are incomplete or difficult to follow, language is confusing conventions age appropriate spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar strong use of correct conventions; errors are few and minor most writing conventions correct; occasional high profile errors frequent errors; most do not interfere with readability frequent errors interfere with readability

Read the excerpt from "mother tongue." lately, i’ve been giving more thought to the kind of english my mother speaks. like others, i have described it to people as “broken” or “fractured” english. but i wince when i say that. it has always bothered me that i can think of no other way to describe it other than “broken,” as if it were damaged and needed to be fixed, as if it lacked a certain wholeness and soundness. what best supports the inference that tan believes nonstandard english is no less valid than standard english? tan spends a lot of time thinking about her mother’s “fractured” english. tan has trouble thinking of descriptive words when she is writing. tan’s american education makes it difficult for her to understand her mother. tan winces when she describes her mother’s english as “broken.”