Dentify the reasons that support the claim. check all that apply. claim: students should be required to take at least one online class. learning entirely remotely is one option that many schools offer. online classes provide more flexibility in students’ schedules. everyone enjoys using a computer, so online learning is more fun than traditional learning. one online class should be a mandated part of any school’s curriculum. students learn valuable skills they can apply in online college courses.

C) Online classes provide more flexibility in students’ schedules, and F) Students learn valuable skills they can apply in online college courses.

Explanation: an argument or claim is a statement assertion that something is true. From the given options, the ones that support the claim that students should be required to take at least one online class, are the corresponding to options C: Online classes provide more flexibility in students’ schedules, and F: Students learn valuable skills they can apply in online college courses, because they express the benefits of taking online classes in an objective and clear way.

Among the options, we can select two that support the claim that students should be required to take at least one online class:

2. Online classes provide more flexibility in students’ schedules.

5. Students learn valuable skills they can apply in online college courses.

With the information above in mind, we can choose options 2 and 5.

Learn more about claim here:

link

1)they use panels

2)they include images and words.

3)they contain gutters.

word count 168

serve the people! ,” smoothly translated by julia lovell, offers an initial sample of yan lianke’s writing to an english-speaking audience. a bluntly drawn, mildly erotic fable, it teases mao zedong by poking fun at a true believer who obeys the chairman’s precepts too literally. to a western sensibility, the broad strokes of yan lianke’s humor would seem to pose little risk of inciting rebellion, whether of the flesh or of the body politic. but then, part of the book’s attraction is that it doesn’t have a western sensibility. it lets the reader see — or rather, intuit — what jokes chinese officials don’t consider funny, and how very little it takes for a writer to be branded an incendiary in 21st-century china, more than three decades after the death of mao, a decade after the death of deng xiaoping and seven years since china entered the world trade organization, a move that would seem to signal a willingness (however wary) to mingle with the rest of the world.