Read the two passages. passage 1 the need for standardized testing in education is a sensitive topic to some. many fear that the use of these tests with students of all ages would lead to a decline in both academic growth and innovation; however, if standardized testing continues to be a reliable and objective source of measuring student achievement, we must conclude that the means justify the end. we can simply state the results of a 100-year analysis of testing research for proof: 93 percent of studies on student testing found a favorable outcome for student achievement. passage 2 when the brookings institution, a 100-year-old organization made up of experts in education and government, reports that up to 80 percent of standardized test score improvements were temporary and did not lead to improvements in learning, we must realize that student testing is not working. i have visited several schools during testing time, so i can personally vouch for the negative effect that standardized tests have on students’ emotions. standardized testing is unnecessary and must end. how does the evidence in the first passage differ from the evidence in the second? passage 1 uses anecdotal evidence, while passage 2 uses empirical evidence. passage 1 uses empirical evidence, while passage 2 uses logical evidence. passage 1 uses anecdotal evidence, while passage 2 uses logical evidence. passage 1 uses logical evidence, while passage 2 uses anecdotal evidence.

The first passage metions results of testing and analysis, while the second passage says things like "I have visited several schools" or "I can personally vouch for.." Making the first passage beased on logical evidence and the second on anecdotal evidence.

The last and fourth option is the right answer.

many were disgusted, nauseated and shook their heads with disapproval upon finding out about the recycling of water process. however, they do not seem to understand that this process actually saves water.

although individuals may argue that it is unhealthy, and or unsafe to drink water that is "from toilet to tap" , the water is 100% safe to drink and involves forcing the water across a membrane, which "removes   any impurities, including viruses, pharmaceuticals and dissolved minerals" , according to paul rozin, a psychology professor who studies revulsion.

i agree that that the thought of drinking water that once ran through someones kitchen sink isn't quite appealing, but recycled wastewater is safe to drink. it also saves water. "the city produces nine million gallons a day" claims russell schreiber, the city’s director of public works.

recycled waste water has absolutely no health concerns whatsoever. when wastewater goes into a system, it's absorbed back into the ground. thus, it goes into a sewer system, then goes through a treatment process that removes contaminants before being released. nonetheless, there is no problem in drinking water that has been recycled.

"in drought-ed california, there are six state agencies that use wastewater that comes from an intellectual property source," according to the university of california, riverside. studies show that this water is completely safe to drink, however, it still doesn't mean people are going to happily pour it in a water glass.

researchers hope it "may make consumers more amenable to drinking recycled wastewater," extraordinarily, women who have a higher "disgust reaction" and make most consumer purchasing decisions.

hey wanna : ) ; )