Claim: the school day should be extended by one hour to increase instructional time for students. counterclaim: students who have jobs would be severely affected by an extended school day. which example addresses this counterclaim in a civil way? a. i don't understand people who are concerned about students' after-school jobs. don't they want students to get a better education? b. while it's true that students with after-school jobs would be affected, more time spent learning would only benefit their future job prospects. c. students work too hard at after-school jobs, and people who think money is more important than education don't care about students. d. who cares about after-school jobs? students go to school to learn, and they can start working after they graduate from high school.

B. While it's true that students with after-school jobs would be affected, more time spent learning would only benefit their future job prospects.

Explanation:

First of all, let's define "counter claim", it refers to a claim that is made to oppose a previous claim. In this case, we want to answer in a polite way the counterclaim that opposes to the extention of the school day. Therefore we want to defend the idea of an extra hour in school. Their argument is that the students with jobs are going to be affected. A direct allusion to that argument is then needed. The chosen answer (B) not only adresses the argument presented in the counterclaim, it does it in a  civil way as it is presented as a logic argument that seeks benefit for everyone. It accepts the idea stablished in the counterclaim as an importan factor but it points out the fact that in a long term it's benefits will be more important than it's cons.

The other options state in a rude way that the counterclaim is wrong, they don't make the effort on trying to undestand their point of view. They use preconceptions of the people against the extra hour.

resents dr jekyll

explanation:

that is the answer