It could be an isosceles trapezoid, but that's not the question as asked. We really should be expecting mathematically precise language.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 18, 2011, at 12:08 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> Right...but were you saying that out of the 4 choices none were > correct? > Liz > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jonathan <email@example.com> > To: nyshsmath <firstname.lastname@example.org> > Sent: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 10:52 am > Subject: Re: Geometry #21 > > In a kite, neither pair of sides is parallel. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Aug 18, 2011, at 10:32 AM, email@example.com wrote: > >> I believe isosceles trapezoid is correct. Although I do recall an >> earlier conversation on this list from several years ago where a >> few people defined a trapezoid as a quadrilateral with AT LEAST one >> pair of parallel sides where most of us used EXACTLY one pair of >> parallel sides. This would make a difference, I think. >> Liz Waite >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jonathan <firstname.lastname@example.org> >> To: nyshsmath <email@example.com> >> Sent: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 10:24 am >> Subject: Geometry #21 >> >> The diagonals of a quadrilateral are congruent but do not bisect >> eac other. The quadrilateral is: >> >> Iso trapezoid >> Parallelogram >> Rectangle >> Rhombus >> >> But none of these are necessarily correct (kite, anyone?) >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Aug 10, 2011, at 4:48 PM, Iva Jean Tennant <firstname.lastname@example.org> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi All- >>> Sorry this is a bit late, but I have been away for the last week. >>> I hope you are all enjoying some time off over the summer. >>> I know most of you have seen the news around the release of the >>> PARCC Model Content Frameworks for public comment. For those of >>> you who have not, read on. >>> · The Model Content Frameworks in Mathematics and English >>> language arts/literacy were released for public review on Augus >>> t 3rd, after several rounds of feedback from the PARCC states. >>> This public review period is an opportunity for an even wider gr >>> oup of interested parties to provide feedback on all parts of th >>> e frameworks, including the introductions and the grade level an >>> alyses, which contain suggested areas of emphasis and priority. >>> · By following the this link, http://www.parcconline.org/parcc-content-framework >>> s, you will be able to review the draft Model Content Frameworks >>> and provide your feedback through an on-line survey. All feed >>> back is due to PARCC by Wednesday, August 17th. >>> During this public review period, PARCC hopes that teachers >>> in particular will provide their feedback on the draft Model >>> Content Frameworks. While teachers have helped to develop the >>> frameworks to this point, the feedback of a broader group of >>> educators is critical. The Model Content Frameworks are being >>> shared directly with NCTM, NCSM, NCTE, AFT, and NEA, as well as >>> others, so these organizations can share them with their members, >>> as well. >>> >>> >>> · >>> >>> John Svendsen >>> Mathematics Associate >>> Office of Curriculum and Instruction >>> NYS Education Department >>> EB 320 >>> Albany, N.Y. 12234 >>> (518) 474-5922 >>> (518) 486-1385 (fax) >>> email@example.com >>> http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/ciai/mst/math/home.html >>> www.emsc.nysed.gov/ciai >>> >>> >> >