Context: A student is revising a literature analysis paragraph to meet MLA expectations.

Draft sentence: I think Shakespeare is kinda saying Macbeth freaks out after the murder, which shows he feels super guilty (and it's low-key tragic) :).

Revision goal: Academic prose typically avoids first-person opinion markers, slang, and emojis; it favors present-tense analysis of texts, integrates sources with signal phrases, and uses parenthetical citations that include the author's last name and page number. A strong revision would present the claim clearly, remove contractions and colloquialisms, and cite quoted material according to MLA conventions. For example, instead of commenting casually on Macbeth's emotions, the writer should assert an interpretive claim, support it with textual evidence, and provide a correctly formatted citation after the quotation. The tone should be formal and precise, suitable for an English paper.

Which edit best aligns the draft with a style manual appropriate for academic writing?

Two versions of a weather-related public message:

Neighborhood post (Local voice): Y'all, a nor'easter's rolling in tonight. Grab your trash cans and salt those steps—walkways get wicked slick fast. Check on folks next door if the wind howls.

National brochure (Standard voice): A winter storm is expected overnight. Please secure trash bins and salt walkways; sidewalks may become slippery. Consider checking on nearby residents during high winds.

Both versions encourage the same actions but use different language choices. One draws on regional expressions and conversational tone to build community rapport; the other uses neutral, widely intelligible phrasing to reach a broad audience without assuming local dialect knowledge.

For a nationwide safety brochure, which sentence is most appropriate?

Specialized vs. general phrasing of the same finding:

Research abstract: In a randomized, double-blind trial, the candidate vaccine yielded a statistically significant reduction in symptomatic cases relative to placebo, with no serious adverse events reported during the study period.

Community briefing: In a carefully controlled study, people who received the test vaccine were less likely to develop symptoms than those who received a placebo, and the study did not find any serious side effects while it was running.

Both statements report the same results. The abstract prioritizes technical precision and conventional phrasing for specialists; the briefing rephrases jargon into plain language while preserving accuracy and avoiding overstatement.

Which paraphrase would be most effective for a slide in a general-audience presentation while staying accurate?

Version 1 (academic): In a three-month pilot of a cafeteria organics-diversion initiative at Northview High School, landfill-bound waste decreased by 35 percent. Custodial staff recorded daily bag counts and weekly aggregate weights. Although seasonal menu shifts may have introduced minor variance, the downward trend persisted across all sampling intervals, indicating the composting intervention—rather than changes in consumption—was the primary driver of reduction.

Version 2 (school newsletter): Good news for greener lunches! Since we added compost bins in the cafeteria, we've cut our trash by about a third in just three months. Students and staff are sorting smarter, and our community is shrinking its footprint together.

Version 3 (group chat): FYI the new compost bins are actually working—trash is down like 35% after 3 months. Pretty cool how fast that changed.

Which analysis best explains how the versions adapt tone and word choice to suit their audiences and purposes?

Version 1 (text to a friend): I'm overwhelmed—calc paper's due at midnight and my brain is fried. Thinking about asking for an extension.

Version 2 (email to a professor): Dear Professor Lee, I am writing to request a 48-hour extension on the calculus paper due tonight. Because of a documented conflict with a championship meet and an overlapping lab deadline, I need additional time to submit work that meets the assignment's expectations. I have attached my coach's letter and can share a draft today. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Jordan Ortiz.

Version 3 (team channel post): Heads up: deliverable will slip to Wednesday due to client feedback; I'll post a revised timeline this afternoon.

Which statement most accurately evaluates the appropriateness of these versions for their audiences and purposes?

Version 1 (local, casual): Y'all can head over around ten; there's a little bonus exhibit down the hall; take the green line to Canal and hang a left.

Version 2 (national conference program): The museum opens at 10 a.m. An additional exhibit is located in the east wing. From downtown, take the green line to Canal Street and turn left.

Version 3 (message to an international visitor): The museum begins admitting visitors at 10 in the morning. There is an extra exhibit on the east side of the building. If you use public transit, ride the green train to Canal Street, then walk left from the station entrance.

Which option best explains which version is most effective for cross-cultural communication and why?

A student includes this claim in a literature paper three different ways:

Version 1: As one critic observes, "the narrator measures power by who controls the archive" (Rivera 23).

Version 2: As one critic observes, "the narrator measures power by who controls the archive." 1

Version 3: As one critic observes, "the narrator measures power by who controls the archive" (see link).

Assume the paper follows MLA guidelines.

Which evaluation best identifies the version that conforms to MLA in-text citation conventions for a print source with a known author and page number?