Answer:
1. the writer has limitations because they can only write about the chesapeake colonies and the new england colonies, not about anything else that doesn't tie in with those two colonies. the writer can make choices about how to answer the questions and how to word them to make them sound well written.
2. you will need to think about the historical causation, appropriate use of relevant historical evidence and more that are required by the prompt. without these you wont know how to answer the question. the essay must include the intro, body, and the conclusion to receive a full score.
3. option a would not be an acceptable thesis for the prompt. it is not an acceptable thesis because it doesn't give more detail about what you are talking about. your thesis should be specific, it should only cover what you will discuss in your paper. option a was not specific, so it could of talked about anything including those two colonies.
4. the new england colonies had thin rocky soil with fast moving rivers with a more diverse economy that included shipping luber, and exports of food and crops. the chesapeake colonies had better soil that the new england colonies,and a longer growing season. the chesapeake colonies had a much more higher priority on the production of tobacco and other cash crops. since they lived in different regions they had different production needs. they were both settled for religious freedom but they had their differences. both colonies did disturb the american indians by taking away their land to settle, which lead to conflict. i've met all of the requirements because i answered the question fully.
5. to provide evidence you must include facts about what you are writing about. they must be true to be considered evidence. you could also use sources to add information. this excerpt did a good job at using evidence. they used lots of facts regarding the two colonies. (not sure about this one)
6. you could provide historical context by first adding some background about what your going to add. then you could state your historical context that you are going to add, and then explain what you just added. you could add the historical context in the body paragraphs when trying to prove or solve something to the reader.
Explanation:
i hope this helps everyone. goodluck!!!
Yes that's true but everything should be in a balanced diet because even in a vegetarian diet there are products made of milk such as butter,ghee,cheese and many more so if we consume these types of foods also it is very harmful for our health whereas in a non-vegetarian diet fish is very good for health and consuming little red meat is also good so in both there are good&bad effects.
HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND.
The four scientific principles of sustainability are...
1. Reliance of solar energy
how much of the sun we reuse.
2. Biodiversity
When there is a large verity of species.
3. Nutrient Recycling
When a Population benefit from other populations.
4. Population control
When one type of population of species is to large.
Have a wonderful day
Yes, it is fair because some people might intentionally did it for their own self act of crime. Not everyone is good. Some people are very selfless.
Explanation:
Ethics is a very important part in our daily lives. Ethics plays a vital role in a public speaking situation. An ethical public speaker should always be honest and should avoid plagiarism by taking his notes during the research process, identifying the sources, and ten deciding when it is suitable to cite the sources.
The ethical public speakers also also cite the sources properly by understanding how to paraphrase and then directly quote the sources.
In the context, if I lost the citation information for an important source for my speech, I will paraphrase the information and avoid plagiarism and as an ethical speaker I will mention that the abstract has been taken from an external source but the citation information was lost.
