English Language Arts: Appropriate Response Style (TEKS.ELA.9-12.6.H)
Help Questions
Texas High School ELA › English Language Arts: Appropriate Response Style (TEKS.ELA.9-12.6.H)
Dear Acquisitions Committee, I submit this proposal recommending the purchase of three mixed-media works by Araceli Mora for the fall exhibition on migration. The pieces synthesize archival cartography with community testimony, extending our collection's dialogue between place and memory. Preliminary audience studies suggest strong alignment with our strategic goal of deepening engagement among first-time visitors. "Plus, these pieces are just really cool and will totally draw a crowd." Conservators confirm that the substrates are stable under standard humidity controls, and the artist has agreed to provide process documentation to support interpretive materials. Given the works' provenance, price, and thematic fit, the acquisition would signal an ethically grounded commitment to representing contemporary movements without reducing them to spectacle. I welcome questions and can supply budget projections.
Which revision best replaces the sentence "Plus, these pieces are just really cool and will totally draw a crowd." to align with a professional curatorial proposal?
These works are cool and will bring more people.
Moreover, the works possess clear curatorial significance and are likely to increase visitor engagement.
If we snag them now, we'll crush attendance numbers.
Attendance might change, but this is probably fine either way.
Explanation
Choice B elevates register and precision (curatorial significance, visitor engagement) and maintains a professional, consistent voice appropriate for a museum acquisitions proposal.
Representative Morales, as your office evaluates drought-resilience strategies for Central Texas, I recommend prioritizing aquifer storage and recovery paired with tiered pricing that protects low-income households. Regional climate projections indicate longer dry spells and higher evaporation rates across the Edwards Plateau, stressing municipal supplies during peak demand. "Look, if we don't get our act together, things are gonna get messy." A phased investment, beginning with pilot wells integrated into existing distribution networks, would allow performance benchmarking without overextending capital. Concurrently, a data-sharing compact among utilities could standardize leak detection and accelerate conservation gains. These measures, codified through enabling legislation, would reduce risk exposure for ratepayers while preserving flexibility for rural districts and agricultural users. I welcome a briefing to discuss timeline, costs, and equity impacts.
Which revision best replaces the sentence "Look, if we don't get our act together, things are gonna get messy." to match a policy memo addressed to a state legislator?
If we don't act, Texas will totally be in trouble fast.
It will be bad, and we should do something soon.
Frankly, it'll be chaos if folks don't step up immediately.
Without prompt, coordinated action, the region faces escalating supply volatility and avoidable socioeconomic harm.
Explanation
Choice D adopts precise, professional language (escalating supply volatility, socioeconomic harm) and aligns tone and vocabulary with policy communication for a legislative audience.
This presentation examines longitudinal outcomes associated with community college transfer pathways using a quasi-experimental design. We analyze administrative records from four urban districts and two statewide university systems, estimating intent-to-treat effects on bachelor's completion and early-career earnings. "We messed up the model a bit, but it's fine now." Robustness checks include cohort fixed effects, inverse probability weighting, and sensitivity analyses for unobserved confounds. Preliminary estimates indicate statistically significant gains for students who complete 30 transferable credits within two years, with heterogeneous effects by program of study. Implications include advising reforms and targeted bridge courses to mitigate credit loss at articulation. Audience questions will be invited regarding external validity, data governance, and ethical considerations in linking education and labor datasets. Slides will be available following session.
Which revision best replaces the sentence "We messed up the model a bit, but it's fine now." to suit a research presentation abstract?
Following diagnostic tests, we corrected a specification error and re-estimated results using pre-registered procedures.
We kind of fixed a goof in the stats, no worries.
The model was bad at first, but it's probably okay now.
Honestly, the math got weird, and we just rolled with it.
Explanation
Choice A uses precise methodological vocabulary and a professional tone, aligning with scholarly conventions for reporting corrections and procedures.
To the Public Utility Commission of Texas: This memo summarizes recommendations to enhance winter reliability within ERCOT without undermining market efficiency. Extreme cold events are unlikely to disappear; consequently, resource adequacy must reflect correlated risks across gas supply, generation, and transmission. "The grid freaked out last winter, and everybody freaked with it." I propose a performance-based reserve product that rewards verifiable weatherization and on-site fuel readiness, paired with transparent scarcity pricing caps to reduce volatility. Additionally, require standardized blackout communication protocols to protect medically vulnerable customers. These interventions, implemented with public reporting and third-party audits, would bolster resilience while preserving incentives for innovation. I am available to brief staff on modeling assumptions, cost impacts, and stakeholder engagement timelines. Please advise preferred format and scheduling timing.
Which revision best replaces the sentence "The grid freaked out last winter, and everybody freaked with it." to fit a regulatory policy memo?
Things went sideways last winter, and folks totally panicked.
The system got very unstable, so people were scared, understandably.
During the February event, cascading failures across fuel supply and generation precipitated widespread outages.
It was a freak-out situation, basically a mess for everyone.
Explanation
Choice C employs formal, precise terminology and an objective tone appropriate for regulatory communication, accurately characterizing the event without colloquialisms.
My report tries to explain what we did and why it matters. We looked at air sensors near a highway and a neighborhood park, then compared the numbers. I think the park air was better, which is not super surprising, but we want to show it clearly. We used simple averages and some graphs. I'm still figuring out how to talk about error and limits, because that part is tricky. The audience is reviewers who care about method and results, so I will keep it clear and not too long. If they like it, maybe the paper gets in a journal, which would be cool for our lab. I also need to cite sources better and explain why our time frame was short this semester.
Which revision best improves the draft's register, vocabulary, tone, and voice for journal reviewers evaluating a research manuscript?
Revise to: This manuscript delineates sampling procedures and comparative analyses of roadside and park-adjacent air sensors. Preliminary results demonstrate reduced particulate concentrations near the park, supported by descriptive statistics and confidence intervals. The discussion acknowledges measurement error, methodological limitations, and the abbreviated sampling window this semester. Citations are standardized to strengthen the evidentiary base.
Revise to: We kept it short and sweet so reviewers won't get bored. The graphs are pretty clear, and the park air was obviously better, which is cool.
Revise to: The paper is fine and explains what happened. There are numbers and some averages, and the methods are okay.
Revise to: Although initially electrifying, our findings dance beyond expectations, weaving a narrative of fresh breezes conquering highways.
Explanation
Choice A adopts an academic register, precise terminology, and a professional tone aligned with reviewer expectations; the others are informal, simplistic, or florid and inconsistent.
Representative, I'm writing about how the power grid freaked out during winter storms and what we might do. People in my town were freezing and boiling water, and that was rough. I looked at some reports and news articles and made a few ideas that seem doable. We could weatherize equipment more and help folks lower their bills with better insulation. Also, more communication would be nice, because a lot of people had no clue what was going on. I don't want to sound bossy, but I hope you can consider this. If we can fix stuff before next year, that would be great for families across Texas. Attached is a short memo with sources and costs, though I still need to cite better properly.
Which revision best improves the draft's register, vocabulary, tone, and voice for professional correspondence with a Texas policymaker?
Revise to: Hey there! The grid kind of freaked out, so maybe fix stuff and text people faster. Thanks!
Revise to: The power grid had problems, and we should make it better with more insulation and information.
Revise to: I am writing regarding grid failures during recent winter storms and evidence-based mitigation options. Constituents experienced outages and boil-water notices. Recommendations include weatherization of critical infrastructure and demand-side efficiency incentives (e.g., residential insulation rebates). Enhanced risk-communication protocols would improve situational awareness. An enclosed memorandum summarizes sources, preliminary cost estimates, and citations requiring refinement. I appreciate your consideration on behalf of Texas families.
Revise to: While not wanting to be bossy, I beg you to act immediately; our suffering was unbearable!
Explanation
Choice C uses professional, policy-oriented language with precise recommendations and a respectful tone suited to a legislator; the others are informal, simplistic, or overly emotional.
Good afternoon, I'm going to talk about how students at our school use study spaces. We walked around the library and the student center and counted people, then made a chart. The library was usually quieter and had more solo studiers, which totally makes sense. We didn't ask people questions, though, so that's a gap. I'll try to be quick so nobody zones out. The main point is we should get more outlets and maybe nicer chairs. The crowd today includes professors and facilities staff, so I'll keep it friendly and not too technical. If you want details, I can send my notes after the talk. I still need to define variables better and explain why our counts varied across times and days this semester.
Which revision best improves the draft's register, vocabulary, tone, and voice for a university research presentation to faculty and facilities staff?
Revise to: I'll keep it super chill so nobody zones out, and we can chat about chairs later.
Revise to: This presentation reports observational data on study-space utilization across the library and student center. The library exhibited lower ambient noise and higher single-occupancy use. Limitations include the absence of intercept surveys and time-of-day variation; variables will be operationalized more precisely. Findings motivate targeted investments in power availability and ergonomic seating. Detailed counts and methods are available upon request.
Revise to: People used places differently, which makes sense, so we should add more outlets and nicer chairs.
Revise to: The results are shocking beyond belief; our spaces practically scream for redemption and plush thrones.
Explanation
Choice B elevates to a professional, academic voice with precise terms and appropriate scope; the others are informal, simplistic, or overwrought.
In this poem, the narrator is dealing with sadness, and the ocean is like a big mirror for their feelings. I say "mirror" because the waves seem to copy the mood. I think the writer wants us to feel that life has ups and downs, but also that we can handle it. I'm not going to go super deep on form, because that gets kind of heavy, but there is some rhyme and stuff, and the lines are pretty short. For this seminar, I'll keep it positive and not too picky. If I had more time, I'd look at a critic or two and add quotes. I should also explain how imagery and meter relate to theme, but I'm still figuring out that argument today.
Which revision best improves the draft's register, vocabulary, tone, and voice for an academic seminar in literary studies?
Revise to: The poem is kinda sad but chill, and the ocean vibes match the mood, which is neat.
Revise to: The poem shows feelings. There is rhyme and short lines. The ocean is like life. It's fine.
Revise to: Although I prefer to stay positive, I will not nitpick the form; instead, I'll share vibes.
Revise to: This analysis foregrounds maritime imagery as a reflective correlative for the speaker's affect. Prosodic features—concise lines, intermittent rhyme, and regular meter—organize oscillations between resilience and vulnerability. Engaging relevant criticism would strengthen the argument by situating these observations within existing scholarship.
Explanation
Choice D employs disciplinary vocabulary, analytical precision, and an academic voice appropriate for scholarly discussion; the others are informal, simplistic, or tonally inconsistent.
Despite lots of talk about drought, this paper sort of puts together a basic look at water-use patterns in semi‑arid regions of West Texas. I pulled data from public reports and some spreadsheets I made, and I tried to compare cities and farms. I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel; I just want to show what's going on and what might help. The methods are pretty straightforward, and the results show some big differences that seem important. I also throw in a few ideas for what agencies could try next. Overall, the point is to get people to pay attention and maybe coordinate better, because right now things feel patchy and not super efficient across the board. Limitations and uncertainties are noted but not explored.
Which revision best elevates the abstract's academic register and intellectual voice for a scholarly audience?
This paper kind of looks at water issues in West Texas and tells people to pay attention, which is pretty important.
The paper shows what's going on and what might help across the board.
The study compiles publicly available datasets to compare municipal and agricultural consumption in semi-arid West Texas and advances actionable recommendations for interagency coordination.
The results are big and the methods are straightforward, so folks should coordinate better.
Explanation
Choice C replaces informal phrasing with precise, discipline-appropriate vocabulary and a professional tone that matches scholarly expectations; the other options are vague or colloquial.
Hi there! I hope you're doing great. I'm reaching out about our school's air-quality project, which we think is awesome and super useful for the community. We've been collecting data with low-cost sensors around town and posting the results online so people can see what's up. We want to expand the project, add more spots, and fix some glitches in the gear. I'm writing to see if your foundation might want to chip in and partner with us. We'd use the funds to buy more sensors, train volunteers, and build a dashboard that doesn't crash so much. If you need more info, I can totally send it. Thanks a ton for your time, and I'm excited to hear back! Our timeline is quick and clear.
Which revision best improves the professional tone and vocabulary for correspondence with a foundation program officer?
I am requesting consideration for a partnership grant to expand our community air-quality monitoring network and strengthen data reliability through additional sensors, volunteer training, and a stable public dashboard.
We're super pumped you might chip in and help us fix our gear and stuff.
If you could please send money, that would be great because our dashboard kind of crashes.
We want to add more spots and also plans that make the project more good.
Explanation
Choice A adopts a professional register, specifies objectives, and uses precise vocabulary suited to a funding request; the distractors are casual, blunt, or simplistic.