First in the lecture they say that the subjective test is good, do people do critical thinking, but the problem is the people who has so good writting skill, they write quickly and good, that other people cant do. Also the teacher need so much time to grade these exam, more that objective exams, and a study comprobate that the teachers grade the exams different at different times. Ans the teacher says that the objective exam is better, because you have to know basic facts about the theme so these help you to remember to do it, like divisions of 2 digits. Then he says that he dont waste so much time to grade the exams, he just put it in a grade machine, this is effectevily if there is a big class like 30 or more.

So to contrast the ideas, the teacher debilitates the reading ideas, saying that you have to know basic facts about the them, that mostly essay exams dont do it, also in the lecture says that the essays exams are more eassily to make, but the teacher says that it is so much time to grade it and the grade would be different at different hour, so if he grades an exam at 4 pm and the same exam at 6pm, the result, different grades. But if you do by objectivee test, it would be less time to grade it.

In conclusion the teacher debilitates so much the text with 2 or 3 ideas. Making that some ideas of the text were weak and not clear.

The reading part talks about the difference between the objective test and subjective test, the objective test is very well used nowadays and it is focus on memorize concepts.  The author says that in real life we do not answer questions in that way. He says at the end that if history teachers do more essay test, students will be encourage to make better compositions.

The listening part ….

In my opinion, social media influencers have a strong impact on consumers. That is one of the reasons that new marketing strategies focus on the internet. Now the new strategies are in the hands of the influencers, the company checks their number of followers and the scope of sales they can achieve if they work with them. One of the most useful platforms the companies and the influencers use is Tiktok. Companies want visualization and sales and most of the time in Tiktok, you do not need to invest a lot of money to get viral, you need creativity and the right audience for the product or service.

No i am not agree

Reason #1:Because the stadarizes exams, do not show the real tech, you just memoriza, and you passed.

Detail #1: The teachers do not search for creativity, critical thinking and more.

Reason#2: They can do easy the cheat, because its true or false, or a,b,c,d.

Detail#2: The students tend to do more cheat in that type of exams, because it is more easy.

2. Yes i am agree

Reason #1: The examples many times has a perspectives, and they are more enterteiment than just learn by theory.

Detail#1: The examples, put the students to think very much, to do critical thinking

Reason#2: The students learn faster, because the examples are like easy to understan.

Detail#2:The students when they dont understand by concepts, they try to search for examples, and they can learn all.

So,in the text the author say that this cars are safe, because they will communite with others cars, so they will know were they are. But the professor, refute these saying that it is not safe, last week there was an accident car, that it become famous on internet.

Another thing that the author´s says that it would be less polution, because these cars mostly are electric cars. But the professore in the lecture says that it would be more polution, because there would be a lot of cars, so these makes that there were more pollution, for example a electric car generates 1 kg cubic meters at week, but 100 of them would generate 100 kg cubic meters.

In conclusion we mencionate 2 arguments that was say in the text and the lecture.The first one was of safety and the seond one was on pollution. Also the profesore usa a concrete and valid example to invalide the argument of the authore

In the lecture, the speaker made several points about the turtle exclude device. The speaker mainly argues about the use of the turtle exclude device.

However, the author of the passage contends that the use of the turtle excludes device is a great idea. The speaker of the lecture casts doubts on the reading by using a number of points that are contrary to the use of the turtle exclude device.

The main point that the speaker uses to cast doubt on the reading is that it is not perfect. It is not easy to control the boat owners who use the turtle exclude device. It is easy to make fake documents about it and only few people know how to detect the authentication of them.

On the other hand, the author of the passage exposes that the use of the turtle exclude device is very helpful for sea turtles. And it is also useful to catch shrimps, for this case the boat owners must already install the turtle exclude device. For the process of import in USA there are control and the products like shrimps must have the turtle exclude device certification.

The lecture supports these ideas by explaining that genetic studies show that most human DNA is shared among all people. The professor says that differences in traits like skin color come form long-terms adaptation to climate, such as exposure to sunligth, not from separate races. The professor also mentions that traits like lactose tolerance or resisttance to diseases are examples of adaptation, not proof of different biological races. In addition, the lecture agress with the reading that, although race is not biologically real, it still affects people's lives socially and has strong effects on identity and inequality.

The first point made in the lecture the professor says that the race is the social construct, because it is social realities, this is an argument that supports the reading, because in the reading they say this, that in the past the people classify humans by their color skin (mostly), hair texture, facial features, and etcetera. And this shape our identity, health outcomes and access recources.

Another point in the lecture, that the professor says, is that the genetics helps to adapt, not to separate, because was an adaptation. This idea also supports the reading, because it says here it represents the long term adaptation, the environmental conditions that the people in the past live.

In conclusion these two points of the lecture, supports very good the passage of the reading,

first the social construct, and the adaptation.

Historically, some people tried to divide humans into distinct “races,” but modern biology shows that this idea is socially constructed, not scientifically accurate. A biologist understands that while genetics explain physical traits, social and cultural factors give those traits meaning and importance in society.

For example, skin color variations are influenced by a combination of genetic, environmental, and geographical factors — such as the amount of sunlight in a region. However, the social meaning that people attach to skin color comes from history, culture, and power relations, not from biology.

Therefore, human diversity should be understood as a continuous spectrum, not as fixed groups. Genetics can explain how we adapt to our environments, but society defines how those differences are valued or discriminated. The idea of race, then, is more of a social reality than a biological one.

However, I believe that all businesses influence people in some way, because each product that customers buy reflects their needs, preferences, or lifestyle. When it comes to monopolies and control of trade, I think this situation is harmful. Every company should have the freedom to sell its products, but prices must remain fair and competitive in the market. Finally, I believe that all businesses are created to solve a problem and make life easier. Even if profit is their first goal, their innovations can also improve society in meaningful ways.