Isabelle claims that amno - arst is she correct? if
not what is her mistake?
kia yes she is correct.
no, the triangles are congruent because all
corresponding sides and angles are congruent
no the vertices in her claim are not written in
corresponding order
no, her claim cannot be made about triangles with
only one pair of congruent corresponding angles.

Step-by-step explanation:

No, the vertices in her claim are not written in corresponding order.

C on egde

Step-by-step explanation:

i took the test

area of part 1:

a1=base*height/2=(8+2)*(8-2-2-1)/2=10*3/2=15 ft^2

area of part 2:

a2=length*width=(8+2)*1=10 ft2

area of part 3:

a3=length*width=8*2=16 ft2

total shaded area : a1+a2+a3=41 ft2

total area of the reactangle : a=16*8=128 ft2

total area of the nonshaded region : 128-41=87 ft2

answer: 590

step-by-step explanation: