enry mixed salt and water together in a cup until he observed a clear solution. He measured the mass of the solution. Then he placed the cup outside for several sunny days during the summer. After a week, he observed that only solid salt remained in the cup and the mass had decreased. Henry concluded that a physical and chemical change occurred in this investigation. Which statements correctly defend or dispute his conclusion? He is correct. Dissolving salt in water is a physical change, but evaporating the water is a chemical change. Formation of a solid is evidence that a chemical change occurred. He is correct. Evaporation is a physical change, but dissolving salt in water is a chemical change. The change in mass is evidence that a chemical change occurred. He is incorrect. Dissolving salt in water and evaporation of the water are both physical changes. The reappearance of salt is evidence that the change was reversible by a physical change, so it could not be a chemical change. He is incorrect. Dissolving salt in water and evaporation of the water are both chemical changes. The reappearance of salt is evidence that the change was reversible by a chemical change, so it could not be a physical change.

Voluntourism: an opportunity too good to be true a speech to the student body of evergreen high [1] picture this: it's spring break, and you fly off to some country where there's lush rainforests and beautiful, blue coastlines to explore. there's also people in need, so you decide to blend your vacation with volunteering. volunteering as a tourist, or voluntourism, seems like a great way to explore new regions and people at the same time. however, this "volunteer plus travel" experience can actually harm local communities. while many teens might view traveling and volunteering abroad as a worthwhile adventure, there are more genuine and effective ways to make a difference. [2] most would agree that volunteering in general is a worthy use of time. however, what if you found out the children you are "" are actually being kept in poor conditions so voluntourists will spend money to come to the local area? dale rolfe, a supporter of ethical voluntourism, explains the shocking reality that "animal sanctuaries and orphanages are often manufactured for the voluntourist…encouraging a cycle of exploiting the very animals and children the volunteers are trying to ." [3] proponents of the "volunteer plus travel" experience also argue that traveling to new places builds character and is a valuable way to learn about different cultures. with voluntourism, however, participants often pursue experiences that are all about them. for example, they sign up to build a school for a gold star on their resume, but they have no real building skills and take jobs away from local construction workers (schulten). or, they arrive to teach english but instead take selfies with the locals. one world traveler and ethical voluntourist believes voluntourism "can perpetuate small minded views of the world by taking insulated, fake, and structured experiences and selling them as unabridged and eye opening" (carlos). the voluntour experience is a mirage. the voluntourist's eyes are not opened to real life at the destination, and lasting change is not achieved. [4] if you want a genuine experience where you can see a lasting impact, there are better options than voluntourism. you can volunteer in your local community. give an hour every week to your town's animal rescue. serve monthly dinners to the homeless. be a reliable, positive influence on a child who needs a mentor. studies show that volunteering and forming lasting relationships with those you has a positive impact on your physical and emotional health. in fact, blood pressure is reduced, memory is improved, and rates of depression are reduced (michaels). [5] there is another reason to look into alternatives to voluntourism. did you know the average "voluntour" travel package costs $3,400 (rolfe)? could that travel money be better spent? if the world's citizens are your passion, it could go to an international organization. if you care about education, your funds can be used to buy books for students in faraway lands. if you want villagers to have clean water, contribute funds to local efforts to dig wells. if you want to experience a different culture, travel to the country as a guest, and learn from the locals how you can best them after you've returned home. but do not voluntour. [6] in reality, there are better ways to make a difference. voluntourism might appear to be an adventure that blends travel and others, but it does little except provide a costly, superficial experience that might actually do more harm than good. so, volunteer where you are most needed-at home, where you can stay to see the job through and form genuine, lasting relationships. choose a beautiful coastline closer to home and send the travel money you saved to an international organization that will put it to good use. whatever you do, don't turn someone else's hardship into your vacation. which paragraphs address the counterclaim of the argument? paragraphs 1 and 6 paragraphs 2 and 3 paragraphs 3 and 4 paragraphs 4 and 5

Read these lines from denise levertov's poem "in thai binh (peace) province": it is that life, unhurried, sure, persistent, i must bring home when i try to bring the war home. child, river, light. here the future, fabled bird that has migrated way from america, nests, and breeds, and sings, common as any sparrow. which statement best interprets the author's use of metaphor in these lines? a. the metaphor of home suggests that american foreign policy should turn inward. b. the metaphor of the river suggests that life moves ear forward. c. the metaphor of the fabled bird suggests that the war has left americans divided. d. the metaphor of the fabled bird suggests that vietnam will rise to fight again.

Where did the european renaissance begin