States Spending the Most and Least on Education From one part of the country to another public school spending varies widely. New York is the biggest spender, while Idaho and Utah spend only about a third of what New York does. The U.S. Census Bureau’s data show wide variation in spending. Many factors affect the vast differences in spending. The following are a few of the factors. School district spending is strong related to the money available. School districts spend almost all of the money that they receive. Those schools that depend more on state funding than on local property taxes typically receive less money. School districts with the highest property values typically have the most money. There’s a particularly large variation across states in wage and salary expenses. New York spends more than any other state -- $8,712 per student -- followed by Connecticut and New Jersey. By comparison, some states spend as little as $3,000 per student in some cases. These usually tend to be the states with fewer teachers and lower wages. Schools that have teachers with more experience or who employ teachers with advanced degrees spend more on salaries. Employee benefits like teacher pensions, health insurance, and tuition reimbursement are a large part of school spending. Nationally, employee benefits for teachers account for about $1,700 in spending per pupil. The highest rates of spending are $4,127 per student in Alaska and $4,660 in New York. The states with a higher cost of living tend to be the states that spend the most on education. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, costs are highest in the District of Columbia, Hawaii and New York. Class size is an important factor that determines how much a school district spends. In Utah’s primary schools, there are nearly 28 students per class. However, Maine, Tennessee, Vermont and Wyoming average fewer than 18 students per class. Nevada’s high school classes have an average of 31 students, the largest size in the country. Spending on school and executive administration accounts for a small amount of total spending. The District of Columbia and 13 states spend more than $1,000 per student on administrative costs. On the opposite end, Utah spends $463 and Arizona spends $450 per student. Part of this has to do with the fact that school districts are much more fragmented in the high-spending states, notably Illinois and New Jersey. Many different types of policies affect funding of school systems. States employ varying funding formulas and maintain certain laws around special education or other requirements that end up affecting how much districts spend. Cutting spending on education is usually unpopular. Many have criticized states like Arizona that have reduced spending on school aid.

How does the text illustrate the relationship between state funding and public school spending?

States Spending the Most and Least on Education From one part of the country to another public school spending varies widely. New York is the biggest spender, while Idaho and Utah spend only about a third of what New York does. The U.S. Census Bureau’s data show wide variation in spending. Many factors affect the vast differences in spending. The following are a few of the factors. School district spending is strong related to the money available. School districts spend almost all of the money that they receive. Those schools that depend more on state funding than on local property taxes typically receive less money. School districts with the highest property values typically have the most money. There’s a particularly large variation across states in wage and salary expenses. New York spends more than any other state -- $8,712 per student -- followed by Connecticut and New Jersey. By comparison, some states spend as little as $3,000 per student in some cases. These usually tend to be the states with fewer teachers and lower wages. Schools that have teachers with more experience or who employ teachers with advanced degrees spend more on salaries. Employee benefits like teacher pensions, health insurance, and tuition reimbursement are a large part of school spending. Nationally, employee benefits for teachers account for about $1,700 in spending per pupil. The highest rates of spending are $4,127 per student in Alaska and $4,660 in New York. The states with a higher cost of living tend to be the states that spend the most on education. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, costs are highest in the District of Columbia, Hawaii and New York. Class size is an important factor that determines how much a school district spends. In Utah’s primary schools, there are nearly 28 students per class. However, Maine, Tennessee, Vermont and Wyoming average fewer than 18 students per class. Nevada’s high school classes have an average of 31 students, the largest size in the country. Spending on school and executive administration accounts for a small amount of total spending. The District of Columbia and 13 states spend more than $1,000 per student on administrative costs. On the opposite end, Utah spends $463 and Arizona spends $450 per student. Part of this has to do with the fact that school districts are much more fragmented in the high-spending states, notably Illinois and New Jersey. Many different types of policies affect funding of school systems. States employ varying funding formulas and maintain certain laws around special education or other requirements that end up affecting how much districts spend. Cutting spending on education is usually unpopular. Many have criticized states like Arizona that have reduced spending on school aid.

• ---

  -

• Which detail from the text supports the inference that administrative costs have a significant impact on public school spending?

States Spending the Most and Least on Education From one part of the country to another public school spending varies widely. New York is the biggest spender, while Idaho and Utah spend only about a third of what New York does. The U.S. Census Bureau’s data show wide variation in spending. Many factors affect the vast differences in spending. The following are a few of the factors. School district spending is strong related to the money available. School districts spend almost all of the money that they receive. Those schools that depend more on state funding than on local property taxes typically receive less money. School districts with the highest property values typically have the most money. There’s a particularly large variation across states in wage and salary expenses. New York spends more than any other state -- $8,712 per student -- followed by Connecticut and New Jersey. By comparison, some states spend as little as $3,000 per student in some cases. These usually tend to be the states with fewer teachers and lower wages. Schools that have teachers with more experience or who employ teachers with advanced degrees spend more on salaries. Employee benefits like teacher pensions, health insurance, and tuition reimbursement are a large part of school spending. Nationally, employee benefits for teachers account for about $1,700 in spending per pupil. The highest rates of spending are $4,127 per student in Alaska and $4,660 in New York. The states with a higher cost of living tend to be the states that spend the most on education. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, costs are highest in the District of Columbia, Hawaii and New York. Class size is an important factor that determines how much a school district spends. In Utah’s primary schools, there are nearly 28 students per class. However, Maine, Tennessee, Vermont and Wyoming average fewer than 18 students per class. Nevada’s high school classes have an average of 31 students, the largest size in the country. Spending on school and executive administration accounts for a small amount of total spending. The District of Columbia and 13 states spend more than $1,000 per student on administrative costs. On the opposite end, Utah spends $463 and Arizona spends $450 per student. Part of this has to do with the fact that school districts are much more fragmented in the high-spending states, notably Illinois and New Jersey. Many different types of policies affect funding of school systems. States employ varying funding formulas and maintain certain laws around special education or other requirements that end up affecting how much districts spend. Cutting spending on education is usually unpopular. Many have criticized states like Arizona that have reduced spending on school aid.

-

• Based on the text, what is the meaning of "depended" in the context of "School districts depend more on state funding"?

States Spending the Most and Least on Education From one part of the country to another public school spending varies widely. New York is the biggest spender, while Idaho and Utah spend only about a third of what New York does. The U.S. Census Bureau’s data show wide variation in spending. Many factors affect the vast differences in spending. The following are a few of the factors. School district spending is strong related to the money available. School districts spend almost all of the money that they receive. Those schools that depend more on state funding than on local property taxes typically receive less money. School districts with the highest property values typically have the most money. There’s a particularly large variation across states in wage and salary expenses. New York spends more than any other state -- $8,712 per student -- followed by Connecticut and New Jersey. By comparison, some states spend as little as $3,000 per student in some cases. These usually tend to be the states with fewer teachers and lower wages. Schools that have teachers with more experience or who employ teachers with advanced degrees spend more on salaries. Employee benefits like teacher pensions, health insurance, and tuition reimbursement are a large part of school spending. Nationally, employee benefits for teachers account for about $1,700 in spending per pupil. The highest rates of spending are $4,127 per student in Alaska and $4,660 in New York. The states with a higher cost of living tend to be the states that spend the most on education. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, costs are highest in the District of Columbia, Hawaii and New York. Class size is an important factor that determines how much a school district spends. In Utah’s primary schools, there are nearly 28 students per class. However, Maine, Tennessee, Vermont and Wyoming average fewer than 18 students per class. Nevada’s high school classes have an average of 31 students, the largest size in the country. Spending on school and executive administration accounts for a small amount of total spending. The District of Columbia and 13 states spend more than $1,000 per student on administrative costs. On the opposite end, Utah spends $463 and Arizona spends $450 per student. Part of this has to do with the fact that school districts are much more fragmented in the high-spending states, notably Illinois and New Jersey. Many different types of policies affect funding of school systems. States employ varying funding formulas and maintain certain laws around special education or other requirements that end up affecting how much districts spend. Cutting spending on education is usually unpopular. Many have criticized states like Arizona that have reduced -spending on school aid.

How does the text's tone contribute to the analysis of public school spending?

Pennsylvania’s Climate Future Data sets and analytical techniques for examining Pennsylvania’s climate future have advanced significantly since the 2009 Impact Assessment. Since those reports, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released new scenarios for future concentrations of greenhouse gases. The IPCC also provided new output from a suite of General Circulation Models running standardized climate simulation experiments. This update analyzes historical and future changes in Pennsylvania’s climate utilizing the new data sets, statistical techniques, and the most recent climate model simulations. The findings are largely similar to those of the 2009 Report and 2013 Update. Pennsylvania has undergone a long-term warming of more than 1 °C (1.8°F) over the past 110 years. This warming was interrupted by a brief cooling period in the mid-20th century. This pattern is simulated by climate models only when human greenhouse gases are included. Changes in Pennsylvania’s temperature are reflected in other metrics, such as heating degree days (which have increased) and cooling degree days (which have decreased). An analysis of above- and below-normal precipitation in the agriculturally productive southeastern portion of Pennsylvania shows a decreasing number of very dry months and an increasing number of very wet months. This reflects the overall wetting trend in the Commonwealth. Pennsylvania’s current warming and wetting trends are expected to continue at an accelerated rate. This report adopts the Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 (RCP 8.5). This pathway is the one that the world is currently on, and is one of two emissions pathways adopted by a large number of climate modeling groups. Under RCP 8.5 it is projected that by the middle of the 21st century, Pennsylvania will be about 3 °C (5.4°F) warmer than it was at the end of the 20th century. The corresponding annual precipitation increase is expected to be 8%, with a winter increase of 14%. The likelihood for meteorological drought is expected to decrease. And months with above-normal precipitation are expected to increase. Projections regarding Pennsylvania’s hydrology are more uncertain. Runoff and soil moisture simulations show substantial differences from products based on observations. The existing models suggest modest but significant increases in annual runoff and small changes in annual soil moisture. Future Climate Projections Due to the enormous complexity of the atmosphere, the most useful tools for gauging future changes are climate models. These are computer-based mathematical models which simulate the climate's behavior, its components and their interactions. Climate models are constantly improving based on both our understanding and the increase in computer power. The first step in any modeled projection of climate change is to first simulate the present climate and compare it to observations. If the model is considered to do a good job at representing modern climate, then certain parameters can be changed. One parameter is the concentration of greenhouse gases, which helps us understand how the climate would change in response to changes in greenhouse gasses. Projections of future climate change therefore depend on how well the computer climate model simulates the climate and on our understanding of how other variables will change in the future. The IPCC Special Report on Emission Scenarios determines the range of future possible greenhouse gas concentrations (and other variables) based on considerations such as population growth, economic growth, energy efficiency and a host of other factors. This leads to a wide range of possible scenarios, and consequently a wide range of possible future climates. According to the range of possible scenarios, the IPCC projects a best estimate of global temperature increase of 1.8 - 4.0°C by 2100, depending on which emissions scenario is used. However, this global average will integrate widely varying regional responses. For example, land areas will warm much faster than oceans, particularly those land areas in northern high latitudes. Additionally, it is very likely that heat waves and other hot extreme weather events will increase. Precipitation is also expected to increase over the 21st century, particularly at northern latitudes. These trends may be more variable in the tropics, with much of the increase coming in more frequent heavy rainfall events. However, over mid-continental areas summer-drying is expected due to increased evaporation with increased temperatures, resulting in an increased tendency for drought. Snow extent and sea-ice are also projected to decrease further in the northern hemisphere, and glaciers and ice-caps are expected to continue to retreat.

What is the purpose of comparing Pennsylvania's climate in the present to climate model simulations in the text?

Pennsylvania’s Climate Future Data sets and analytical techniques for examining Pennsylvania’s climate future have advanced significantly since the 2009 Impact Assessment. Since those reports, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released new scenarios for future concentrations of greenhouse gases. The IPCC also provided new output from a suite of General Circulation Models running standardized climate simulation experiments. This update analyzes historical and future changes in Pennsylvania’s climate utilizing the new data sets, statistical techniques, and the most recent climate model simulations. The findings are largely similar to those of the 2009 Report and 2013 Update. Pennsylvania has undergone a long-term warming of more than 1 °C (1.8°F) over the past 110 years. This warming was interrupted by a brief cooling period in the mid-20th century. This pattern is simulated by climate models only when human greenhouse gases are included. Changes in Pennsylvania’s temperature are reflected in other metrics, such as heating degree days (which have increased) and cooling degree days (which have decreased). An analysis of above- and below-normal precipitation in the agriculturally productive southeastern portion of Pennsylvania shows a decreasing number of very dry months and an increasing number of very wet months. This reflects the overall wetting trend in the Commonwealth. Pennsylvania’s current warming and wetting trends are expected to continue at an accelerated rate. This report adopts the Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 (RCP 8.5). This pathway is the one that the world is currently on, and is one of two emissions pathways adopted by a large number of climate modeling groups. Under RCP 8.5 it is projected that by the middle of the 21st century, Pennsylvania will be about 3 °C (5.4°F) warmer than it was at the end of the 20th century. The corresponding annual precipitation increase is expected to be 8%, with a winter increase of 14%. The likelihood for meteorological drought is expected to decrease. And months with above-normal precipitation are expected to increase. Projections regarding Pennsylvania’s hydrology are more uncertain. Runoff and soil moisture simulations show substantial differences from products based on observations. The existing models suggest modest but significant increases in annual runoff and small changes in annual soil moisture. Future Climate Projections Due to the enormous complexity of the atmosphere, the most useful tools for gauging future changes are climate models. These are computer-based mathematical models which simulate the climate's behavior, its components and their interactions. Climate models are constantly improving based on both our understanding and the increase in computer power. The first step in any modeled projection of climate change is to first simulate the present climate and compare it to observations. If the model is considered to do a good job at representing modern climate, then certain parameters can be changed. One parameter is the concentration of greenhouse gases, which helps us understand how the climate would change in response to changes in greenhouse gasses. Projections of future climate change therefore depend on how well the computer climate model simulates the climate and on our understanding of how other variables will change in the future. The IPCC Special Report on Emission Scenarios determines the range of future possible greenhouse gas concentrations (and other variables) based on considerations such as population growth, economic growth, energy efficiency and a host of other factors. This leads to a wide range of possible scenarios, and consequently a wide range of possible future climates. According to the range of possible scenarios, the IPCC projects a best estimate of global temperature increase of 1.8 - 4.0°C by 2100, depending on which emissions scenario is used. However, this global average will integrate widely varying regional responses. For example, land areas will warm much faster than oceans, particularly those land areas in northern high latitudes. Additionally, it is very likely that heat waves and other hot extreme weather events will increase. Precipitation is also expected to increase over the 21st century, particularly at northern latitudes. These trends may be more variable in the tropics, with much of the increase coming in more frequent heavy rainfall events. However, over mid-continental areas summer-drying is expected due to increased evaporation with increased temperatures, resulting in an increased tendency for drought. Snow extent and sea-ice are also projected to decrease further in the northern hemisphere, and glaciers and ice-caps are expected to continue to retreat.

Which detail from the text supports the inference that Pennsylvania's warming trend is primarily influenced by human activities?

Pennsylvania’s Climate Future Data sets and analytical techniques for examining Pennsylvania’s climate future have advanced significantly since the 2009 Impact Assessment. Since those reports, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released new scenarios for future concentrations of greenhouse gases. The IPCC also provided new output from a suite of General Circulation Models running standardized climate simulation experiments. This update analyzes historical and future changes in Pennsylvania’s climate utilizing the new data sets, statistical techniques, and the most recent climate model simulations. The findings are largely similar to those of the 2009 Report and 2013 Update. Pennsylvania has undergone a long-term warming of more than 1 °C (1.8°F) over the past 110 years. This warming was interrupted by a brief cooling period in the mid-20th century. This pattern is simulated by climate models only when human greenhouse gases are included. Changes in Pennsylvania’s temperature are reflected in other metrics, such as heating degree days (which have increased) and cooling degree days (which have decreased). An analysis of above- and below-normal precipitation in the agriculturally productive southeastern portion of Pennsylvania shows a decreasing number of very dry months and an increasing number of very wet months. This reflects the overall wetting trend in the Commonwealth. Pennsylvania’s current warming and wetting trends are expected to continue at an accelerated rate. This report adopts the Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 (RCP 8.5). This pathway is the one that the world is currently on, and is one of two emissions pathways adopted by a large number of climate modeling groups. Under RCP 8.5 it is projected that by the middle of the 21st century, Pennsylvania will be about 3 °C (5.4°F) warmer than it was at the end of the 20th century. The corresponding annual precipitation increase is expected to be 8%, with a winter increase of 14%. The likelihood for meteorological drought is expected to decrease. And months with above-normal precipitation are expected to increase. Projections regarding Pennsylvania’s hydrology are more uncertain. Runoff and soil moisture simulations show substantial differences from products based on observations. The existing models suggest modest but significant increases in annual runoff and small changes in annual soil moisture. Future Climate Projections Due to the enormous complexity of the atmosphere, the most useful tools for gauging future changes are climate models. These are computer-based mathematical models which simulate the climate's behavior, its components and their interactions. Climate models are constantly improving based on both our understanding and the increase in computer power. The first step in any modeled projection of climate change is to first simulate the present climate and compare it to observations. If the model is considered to do a good job at representing modern climate, then certain parameters can be changed. One parameter is the concentration of greenhouse gases, which helps us understand how the climate would change in response to changes in greenhouse gasses. Projections of future climate change therefore depend on how well the computer climate model simulates the climate and on our understanding of how other variables will change in the future. The IPCC Special Report on Emission Scenarios determines the range of future possible greenhouse gas concentrations (and other variables) based on considerations such as population growth, economic growth, energy efficiency and a host of other factors. This leads to a wide range of possible scenarios, and consequently a wide range of possible future climates. According to the range of possible scenarios, the IPCC projects a best estimate of global temperature increase of 1.8 - 4.0°C by 2100, depending on which emissions scenario is used. However, this global average will integrate widely varying regional responses. For example, land areas will warm much faster than oceans, particularly those land areas in northern high latitudes. Additionally, it is very likely that heat waves and other hot extreme weather events will increase. Precipitation is also expected to increase over the 21st century, particularly at northern latitudes. These trends may be more variable in the tropics, with much of the increase coming in more frequent heavy rainfall events. However, over mid-continental areas summer-drying is expected due to increased evaporation with increased temperatures, resulting in an increased tendency for drought. Snow extent and sea-ice are also projected to decrease further in the northern hemisphere, and glaciers and ice-caps are expected to continue to retreat.

How does the text's tone contribute to the analysis of future climate projections for Pennsylvania?

Pennsylvania’s Climate Future Data sets and analytical techniques for examining Pennsylvania’s climate future have advanced significantly since the 2009 Impact Assessment. Since those reports, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released new scenarios for future concentrations of greenhouse gases. The IPCC also provided new output from a suite of General Circulation Models running standardized climate simulation experiments. This update analyzes historical and future changes in Pennsylvania’s climate utilizing the new data sets, statistical techniques, and the most recent climate model simulations. The findings are largely similar to those of the 2009 Report and 2013 Update. Pennsylvania has undergone a long-term warming of more than 1 °C (1.8°F) over the past 110 years. This warming was interrupted by a brief cooling period in the mid-20th century. This pattern is simulated by climate models only when human greenhouse gases are included. Changes in Pennsylvania’s temperature are reflected in other metrics, such as heating degree days (which have increased) and cooling degree days (which have decreased). An analysis of above- and below-normal precipitation in the agriculturally productive southeastern portion of Pennsylvania shows a decreasing number of very dry months and an increasing number of very wet months. This reflects the overall wetting trend in the Commonwealth. Pennsylvania’s current warming and wetting trends are expected to continue at an accelerated rate. This report adopts the Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 (RCP 8.5). This pathway is the one that the world is currently on, and is one of two emissions pathways adopted by a large number of climate modeling groups. Under RCP 8.5 it is projected that by the middle of the 21st century, Pennsylvania will be about 3 °C (5.4°F) warmer than it was at the end of the 20th century. The corresponding annual precipitation increase is expected to be 8%, with a winter increase of 14%. The likelihood for meteorological drought is expected to decrease. And months with above-normal precipitation are expected to increase. Projections regarding Pennsylvania’s hydrology are more uncertain. Runoff and soil moisture simulations show substantial differences from products based on observations. The existing models suggest modest but significant increases in annual runoff and small changes in annual soil moisture. Future Climate Projections Due to the enormous complexity of the atmosphere, the most useful tools for gauging future changes are climate models. These are computer-based mathematical models which simulate the climate's behavior, its components and their interactions. Climate models are constantly improving based on both our understanding and the increase in computer power. The first step in any modeled projection of climate change is to first simulate the present climate and compare it to observations. If the model is considered to do a good job at representing modern climate, then certain parameters can be changed. One parameter is the concentration of greenhouse gases, which helps us understand how the climate would change in response to changes in greenhouse gasses. Projections of future climate change therefore depend on how well the computer climate model simulates the climate and on our understanding of how other variables will change in the future. The IPCC Special Report on Emission Scenarios determines the range of future possible greenhouse gas concentrations (and other variables) based on considerations such as population growth, economic growth, energy efficiency and a host of other factors. This leads to a wide range of possible scenarios, and consequently a wide range of possible future climates. According to the range of possible scenarios, the IPCC projects a best estimate of global temperature increase of 1.8 - 4.0°C by 2100, depending on which emissions scenario is used. However, this global average will integrate widely varying regional responses. For example, land areas will warm much faster than oceans, particularly those land areas in northern high latitudes. Additionally, it is very likely that heat waves and other hot extreme weather events will increase. Precipitation is also expected to increase over the 21st century, particularly at northern latitudes. These trends may be more variable in the tropics, with much of the increase coming in more frequent heavy rainfall events. However, over mid-continental areas summer-drying is expected due to increased evaporation with increased temperatures, resulting in an increased tendency for drought. Snow extent and sea-ice are also projected to decrease further in the northern hemisphere, and glaciers and ice-caps are expected to continue to retreat.

Based on the text, which factor contributes significantly to the uncertainty surrounding future hydrological projections for Pennsylvania?

Pennsylvania’s Climate Future Data sets and analytical techniques for examining Pennsylvania’s climate future have advanced significantly since the 2009 Impact Assessment. Since those reports, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released new scenarios for future concentrations of greenhouse gases. The IPCC also provided new output from a suite of General Circulation Models running standardized climate simulation experiments. This update analyzes historical and future changes in Pennsylvania’s climate utilizing the new data sets, statistical techniques, and the most recent climate model simulations. The findings are largely similar to those of the 2009 Report and 2013 Update. Pennsylvania has undergone a long-term warming of more than 1 °C (1.8°F) over the past 110 years. This warming was interrupted by a brief cooling period in the mid-20th century. This pattern is simulated by climate models only when human greenhouse gases are included. Changes in Pennsylvania’s temperature are reflected in other metrics, such as heating degree days (which have increased) and cooling degree days (which have decreased). An analysis of above- and below-normal precipitation in the agriculturally productive southeastern portion of Pennsylvania shows a decreasing number of very dry months and an increasing number of very wet months. This reflects the overall wetting trend in the Commonwealth. Pennsylvania’s current warming and wetting trends are expected to continue at an accelerated rate. This report adopts the Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 (RCP 8.5). This pathway is the one that the world is currently on, and is one of two emissions pathways adopted by a large number of climate modeling groups. Under RCP 8.5 it is projected that by the middle of the 21st century, Pennsylvania will be about 3 °C (5.4°F) warmer than it was at the end of the 20th century. The corresponding annual precipitation increase is expected to be 8%, with a winter increase of 14%. The likelihood for meteorological drought is expected to decrease. And months with above-normal precipitation are expected to increase. Projections regarding Pennsylvania’s hydrology are more uncertain. Runoff and soil moisture simulations show substantial differences from products based on observations. The existing models suggest modest but significant increases in annual runoff and small changes in annual soil moisture. Future Climate Projections Due to the enormous complexity of the atmosphere, the most useful tools for gauging future changes are climate models. These are computer-based mathematical models which simulate the climate's behavior, its components and their interactions. Climate models are constantly improving based on both our understanding and the increase in computer power. The first step in any modeled projection of climate change is to first simulate the present climate and compare it to observations. If the model is considered to do a good job at representing modern climate, then certain parameters can be changed. One parameter is the concentration of greenhouse gases, which helps us understand how the climate would change in response to changes in greenhouse gasses. Projections of future climate change therefore depend on how well the computer climate model simulates the climate and on our understanding of how other variables will change in the future. The IPCC Special Report on Emission Scenarios determines the range of future possible greenhouse gas concentrations (and other variables) based on considerations such as population growth, economic growth, energy efficiency and a host of other factors. This leads to a wide range of possible scenarios, and consequently a wide range of possible future climates. According to the range of possible scenarios, the IPCC projects a best estimate of global temperature increase of 1.8 - 4.0°C by 2100, depending on which emissions scenario is used. However, this global average will integrate widely varying regional responses. For example, land areas will warm much faster than oceans, particularly those land areas in northern high latitudes. Additionally, it is very likely that heat waves and other hot extreme weather events will increase. Precipitation is also expected to increase over the 21st century, particularly at northern latitudes. These trends may be more variable in the tropics, with much of the increase coming in more frequent heavy rainfall events. However, over mid-continental areas summer-drying is expected due to increased evaporation with increased temperatures, resulting in an increased tendency for drought. Snow extent and sea-ice are also projected to decrease further in the northern hemisphere, and glaciers and ice-caps are expected to continue to retreat.

What is the sequence of steps described in the text for projecting future climate changes using climate models?

Residential Segregation Residential segregation persists for a variety of reasons. Segregated neighborhoods may be reinforced by the practice of "steering" by real estate agents. This occurs when a real estate agent makes assumptions about where their client might like to live based on the color of their skin. Housing discrimination may occur when landlords lie about the availability of housing based on the race of the applicant, steer applicants toward segregated neighborhoods, or give different terms and conditions to the housing based on race; for example, requiring that black families pay a higher security deposit than white families. Redlining has helped preserve segregated living patterns for blacks and whites in the United States because discrimination motivated by prejudice is often contingent on the racial composition of neighborhoods where the loan is sought and the race of the applicant. Lending institutions have been shown to treat black mortgage applicants differently when buying homes in white neighborhoods than when buying homes in black neighborhoods in 1998. These discriminatory practices are illegal. The Fair Housing Act of 1968 prohibits housing discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, or disability. The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity is charged with administering and enforcing fair housing laws. Any person who believes that they have faced housing discrimination based on their race can file a fair housing complaint. Households were held-back or limited to the money that could be made. Inequality was present in the workforce which lead over to the residential areas. A study provides this statistic: "The median household income of African Americans was 62 percent of non-Hispanic Whites ($27,910 vs. $44,504)."However, African Americans were forced by the system to be in urban and poor areas while the whites lived together, being able to afford the more expensive homes. These forced measures promoted poverty levels to rise and belittle African Americans.

According to the text, what practice by real estate agents contributes to the reinforcement of segregated neighborhoods?

Residential Segregation Residential segregation persists for a variety of reasons. Segregated neighborhoods may be reinforced by the practice of "steering" by real estate agents. This occurs when a real estate agent makes assumptions about where their client might like to live based on the color of their skin. Housing discrimination may occur when landlords lie about the availability of housing based on the race of the applicant, steer applicants toward segregated neighborhoods, or give different terms and conditions to the housing based on race; for example, requiring that black families pay a higher security deposit than white families. Redlining has helped preserve segregated living patterns for blacks and whites in the United States because discrimination motivated by prejudice is often contingent on the racial composition of neighborhoods where the loan is sought and the race of the applicant. Lending institutions have been shown to treat black mortgage applicants differently when buying homes in white neighborhoods than when buying homes in black neighborhoods in 1998. These discriminatory practices are illegal. The Fair Housing Act of 1968 prohibits housing discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, or disability. The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity is charged with administering and enforcing fair housing laws. Any person who believes that they have faced housing discrimination based on their race can file a fair housing complaint. Households were held-back or limited to the money that could be made. Inequality was present in the workforce which lead over to the residential areas. A study provides this statistic: "The median household income of African Americans was 62 percent of non-Hispanic Whites ($27,910 vs. $44,504)."However, African Americans were forced by the system to be in urban and poor areas while the whites lived together, being able to afford the more expensive homes. These forced measures promoted poverty levels to rise and belittle African Americans.

How does the text suggest that inequality in the workforce affects residential segregation?

Residential Segregation Residential segregation persists for a variety of reasons. Segregated neighborhoods may be reinforced by the practice of "steering" by real estate agents. This occurs when a real estate agent makes assumptions about where their client might like to live based on the color of their skin. Housing discrimination may occur when landlords lie about the availability of housing based on the race of the applicant, steer applicants toward segregated neighborhoods, or give different terms and conditions to the housing based on race; for example, requiring that black families pay a higher security deposit than white families. Redlining has helped preserve segregated living patterns for blacks and whites in the United States because discrimination motivated by prejudice is often contingent on the racial composition of neighborhoods where the loan is sought and the race of the applicant. Lending institutions have been shown to treat black mortgage applicants differently when buying homes in white neighborhoods than when buying homes in black neighborhoods in 1998. These discriminatory practices are illegal. The Fair Housing Act of 1968 prohibits housing discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, or disability. The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity is charged with administering and enforcing fair housing laws. Any person who believes that they have faced housing discrimination based on their race can file a fair housing complaint. Households were held-back or limited to the money that could be made. Inequality was present in the workforce which lead over to the residential areas. A study provides this statistic: "The median household income of African Americans was 62 percent of non-Hispanic Whites ($27,910 vs. $44,504)."However, African Americans were forced by the system to be in urban and poor areas while the whites lived together, being able to afford the more expensive homes. These forced measures promoted poverty levels to rise and belittle African Americans.

Which detail from the text illustrates the discriminatory practices faced by black mortgage applicants?

Residential Segregation Residential segregation persists for a variety of reasons. Segregated neighborhoods may be reinforced by the practice of "steering" by real estate agents. This occurs when a real estate agent makes assumptions about where their client might like to live based on the color of their skin. Housing discrimination may occur when landlords lie about the availability of housing based on the race of the applicant, steer applicants toward segregated neighborhoods, or give different terms and conditions to the housing based on race; for example, requiring that black families pay a higher security deposit than white families. Redlining has helped preserve segregated living patterns for blacks and whites in the United States because discrimination motivated by prejudice is often contingent on the racial composition of neighborhoods where the loan is sought and the race of the applicant. Lending institutions have been shown to treat black mortgage applicants differently when buying homes in white neighborhoods than when buying homes in black neighborhoods in 1998. These discriminatory practices are illegal. The Fair Housing Act of 1968 prohibits housing discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, or disability. The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity is charged with administering and enforcing fair housing laws. Any person who believes that they have faced housing discrimination based on their race can file a fair housing complaint. Households were held-back or limited to the money that could be made. Inequality was present in the workforce which lead over to the residential areas. A study provides this statistic: "The median household income of African Americans was 62 percent of non-Hispanic Whites ($27,910 vs. $44,504)."However, African Americans were forced by the system to be in urban and poor areas while the whites lived together, being able to afford the more expensive homes. These forced measures promoted poverty levels to rise and belittle African Americans.

In the context of the text, what does "redlining" refer to?

Residential Segregation Residential segregation persists for a variety of reasons. Segregated neighborhoods may be reinforced by the practice of "steering" by real estate agents. This occurs when a real estate agent makes assumptions about where their client might like to live based on the color of their skin. Housing discrimination may occur when landlords lie about the availability of housing based on the race of the applicant, steer applicants toward segregated neighborhoods, or give different terms and conditions to the housing based on race; for example, requiring that black families pay a higher security deposit than white families. Redlining has helped preserve segregated living patterns for blacks and whites in the United States because discrimination motivated by prejudice is often contingent on the racial composition of neighborhoods where the loan is sought and the race of the applicant. Lending institutions have been shown to treat black mortgage applicants differently when buying homes in white neighborhoods than when buying homes in black neighborhoods in 1998. These discriminatory practices are illegal. The Fair Housing Act of 1968 prohibits housing discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, or disability. The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity is charged with administering and enforcing fair housing laws. Any person who believes that they have faced housing discrimination based on their race can file a fair housing complaint. Households were held-back or limited to the money that could be made. Inequality was present in the workforce which lead over to the residential areas. A study provides this statistic: "The median household income of African Americans was 62 percent of non-Hispanic Whites ($27,910 vs. $44,504)."However, African Americans were forced by the system to be in urban and poor areas while the whites lived together, being able to afford the more expensive homes. These forced measures promoted poverty levels to rise and belittle African Americans.

Which word best describes the tone of the passage regarding the treatment of African Americans in the housing market?