someone who chooses to have a hourly/tip job over a salary job is choosing to work a specific time/times for specific pay plus the incentive of maybe getting extra money. a salaried position guarantees unlimited availability. the hourly choice might be made due to other obligations such as familial responsibilities, commitments to another job, or higher learbing. an hourly position might be best for them as their financial obligations vary from day to day.
I left typos and used weird word usage so that you can use this to make your own paragraph.
Answer: Steve is experiencing evaluation apprehension
Explanation: Since Steve was playing for his high school team for the first time, he knew that others would be watching and evaluating his game, and among those watching him were coaches, therefore, on whom his future playing on the team depends. Based on the coach's judgement, it depends on whether Steve will play the next game, etc., which means a reward / penalty concept based on what others think of Steve. This means that during the game, Steve has been thinking about what others think of him that causes arousal, and that arousal can improve or diminish our work, in Steve's case was that this excitement diminished his performance in the match.
It means that when we work in the presence of others who are watching over us, we think like Steve, what do they think about our work and that can improve or diminish our performance, so we have experienced <em>evaluation apprehension.</em>
I think the answer is
- respect
-reconciliation
-honor
A multiple-choice test is a good example of a test of: recognition.
Recognition tests sees what a person has been taught before and allows them to pick the appropriate response to a question based on what they've learned previously. When you are picking from a list of choices, you are able to see various answers that could be correct but are expected to be able to decipher between them and chose the right one.
Supreme Court, is the highest court in the judicial system, and it is the last court for resolving non-constitutional matters.
The Supreme Court's affirmative action in the case of Regents v. Bakke by the following:
(B) Racial quotas were not used to make admissions decisions.
<h3>The Supreme Court's affirmative action in the case of Regents v. Bakke</h3><h3 />
- The supreme court on June 18, 1978, declared affirmative action constitutional but invalidate the use of racial qoutes.
- Allan Bakke, a white man of California, filed a complaint against The medical school at the University of California, Davis.
- He applied twice to the medical school and with good marks but didnt get admission.
- Bakke said he had been subjected to unjust "race discrimination."
- In the Court, six separate opinions were issued, agreed that the university’s use of racial quotas was unconstitutional, and ordered that the medical school admit Bakke.
Thus, option (B) Racial quotas were not used to make admissions decisions is correct.
To know more about Supreme Court, visit here:
brainly.com/question/1755400
