I personally believe that online education is far more superior than in school education. I began last school year going into a physical classroom. After the first semester I ended up going into online school instead. Online school has been much more effective for me personally. There's definitely good arguments on physical school being better as well. My main reason for online school being more efficient is solely based off of personal opinions. When I was in regular school my grades weren't good at all. I am very easily distracted and being around a lot of people for every class kept me out of focus for the most part. When I switched to online school I could tell an immediate change in my grades.

With online school, in most cases, you can work at your own pace. I would tend to get behind when I was in public school because I couldn't catch up with all of the other students. With online school I am able to isolate myself and work at my own pace. I usually just sit in my room and do school until I'm done. However, I could see why people might want to go to physical school.

With physical or in-person school, you are around more people. Some people work better with others. If you need teachers help regular school is a lot better for that. You can just call a teacher over and get help immediately where as, with online school, you might have to email a teacher and wait for a response.

With my personal experience I believe online school is superior.

Hurry 50pts read the excerpt from justice curtis’s dissenting opinion, then answer the question that follows. slavery, being contrary to natural right, is created only by municipal law. this is not only plain in itself, and agreed by all writers on the subject, but is inferable from the constitution, and has been explicitly declared by this court. the constitution refers to slaves as “persons held to service in one state, under the laws thereof.” . . . . it was certainly understood by the convention which framed the constitution, and has been so understood ever since, that, under the power to regulate commerce, congress could prohibit the importation of slaves; and the exercise of the power was restrained till 1808. a citizen of the united states owns slaves in cuba, and brings them to the united states, where they are set free by the legislation of congress. does this legislation deprive him of his property without due process of law? if so, what becomes of the laws prohibiting the slave trade? if not, how can a similar regulation respecting a territory violate the fifth amendment of the constitution? . . for these reasons, i am of opinion that so much of the several acts of congress as prohibited slavery and involuntary servitude within that part of the territory of wisconsin . . were constitutional and valid laws. –dissenting opinion on dred scott v. sandford, justice benjamin curtis which evidence best supports curtis’s opinion that dred scott should be free because he lived in a free territory? check all that apply. “the constitution refers to slaves as ‘persons held to service in one state’” “the convention which framed the constitution . . has . . the power to regulate commerce.” “a citizen of the united states owns slaves in cuba.” “does this legislation deprive him of his property without due process of law? ” “acts of congress as prohibited slavery and involuntary servitude within that part of the territory of wisconsin . . were constitutional and valid laws.”

Which of the following best describes the speaker’s feelings about america?

Write a short paragraph explaining how to determine what information to put into a slide show presentation.