I think its misgiving because the other ones don’t really make sense.
Answer:
your answer is b
Explanation:
its asking for something supporting the claim so, if you look for evidence, its the same thing
Your answer is the third one, or<span> C
</span>
Lahiri uses dialogue to illustrate how immigrant children often must juggle conflicting cultural values
This is agreeing that education should be free for children world wide and heres why.
According to UNESCO, 264 million children do not go to school, and the number is increasing 1 million every year. If Education is free for everyone then every student will get an equal opportunity and they don’t have to worry about anything than their studies. It ought to be free in light of the fact that there are poor who are keen, brainy and competent, yet the state gives no instruction to them. If the state paid for their education, students would have better opportunities, more time to study and more job opportunities.
If student get a free education then there might be many problems and need for colleges to fulfill students needs. Universities would require more dormitories, classrooms, labs and everything else, along these lines making the requirement for gigantic capital uses, which would overwhelm state spending plans. According to Andrew P. Kelly in the article, “The Problem Is That Free College Isn’t Free” he tells that even if student get free education 33% of understudies from the base pay quartile who began at a junior college in 2003 completed a degree or declaration by 2009. Two-year understudies from the best pay quartile didn’t improve (42 percent). He also tells that the way that 60 to 70 percent of junior college understudies need to take no less than one remedial course, as complete 40 percent of those at open four-year establishments. Or then again the way that understudies who go to open four-year universities with lower graduation rates are less inclined to complete than comparable associates who go to better schools. Realistically, people who cannot afford money for their colleges are going to miss their opportunity to make their future life bright. Free education will increase concentration on studies because they don’t have to worry about their other stuffs than their study and it will expand their knowledge. According to Samah Ae in the article, “University education should be free. Do you agree or disagree?” she tells that researchers have demonstrated that nations who offer free education have the incredible rate of advancements and grow quicker. So, when governments bolster colleges monetarily, they will take their money back through advancement and the high life standard. For example, universities who gives scholarship to qualified student is a opportunity to earn degree even if they cannot afford colleges.
Free education can motivate students to concentrate and focus more on their studies than spending more time in their work and less time in study. In order to get a good grade student, need a lot of concentration and hard work toward their study. According to Ronald Brownstein in the article, “The Problem with Public Colleges Going Tuition-Free” he tells us that wiping out educational cost at open universities could be an incredible method for growing chance and preparing an undeniably assorted America to contend in the worldwide economy. He also states that dispensing with state funded college educational cost for most families could support all the more low-salary youngsters to seek after advanced education by flagging them since early on that they can manage the cost of it
Hence, education should be free since it is understudies appropriate to get a chance to enhance their lives. It can cost a great deal for the state but on the other hand the surprises and advantage are priceless to the society.
Exclamatory sentences ???????????
