input with options: Read the following article and answer the question. Article: Nick Santonastasso has one arm equipped with one finger. He has no legs. He also has no limitations . " I know anything's possible ," the 12-year-old told TODAY 's Ann Curry. He can play baseball and football, play the keyboard and drums, and play video games with his brothers. When Nick was born, he suffered a disease only found in 11 other people. The Santonastassos had three other children, and they decided to treat Nick the same as others, with love but without excuse " We're supposed to be heroes to our children, but Nick is a hero to us," his father Michael said. But heroes have heroes, too, and Nick's is Tiki Barber, the former football superstar who retired last year and became a reporter for TODAY. Curry told Nick that for his birthday, the show wanted to give him a new skateboard. The person who presented it to him was Barber. " You're an inspiration," Barber said. " There are a lot of kids who might be at a disadvantage. You give them strength." Curry observed that most parents try to protect their kids from failure, but the Santonastassos didn't do that with Nick. "Absolutely not, "Nick's mother Stacey said. " If you do have a small failure, it just makes you stronger to succeed at the next stop." " It builds self-confidence in yourself to try it again," Nick added. Recently, Nick entered a drawing in a statewide contest in New Jersey. His drawing was a tree with a spreading canopy and deep toots. Above the tree were the words, "The roots of a family are..." Below the ground, the roots spelled out the final word for the message: " Love." It won the contest. The judges didn't know Nick' physical condition. He won on merit , the same way he does everything else in life. Question: How did the Santonastassos treat Nick? Answer:
OPTIONS:
- They gave him much more care
- They treated him as a normal boy
- They made excuse for his failure
- They protected him from failure.
output: They treated him as a normal boy

input with options: Read the following article and answer the question. Article: A recent experiment held in Japan shows that it is almost impossible for people to walk exactly straight for 60 metres. Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology found 20 healthy men and asked them to walk as straight as possible to a target 60 metres away at normal speed. Each man had to walk on white paper fixed flat to the floor wearing wet colored socks. The footprints revealed that all walked in a winding rather than a straight line. Researchers found that people readjust the direction of walking every few seconds. The amount of the winding differed from _ to subject. This suggests that none of us can walk in a strictly straight line. We walk in a winding way mainly because of a slight structural or functional imbalance of our limbs . Although we may start walking in a straight line, several steps afterwards we have changed direction. Eyesight helps us to correct the direction of walking and leads us to the target. Your ears also help you walk. After turning around a lot with your eyes closed, you can hardly stand still, let alone walk straight. It's all because your ears help you balance. Inside your inner ear there is a structure which contains liquids. On the sides of the organ are many tiny hair-like structures that move around as the liquid flows. When you spin the liquid inside also spins. The difference is that when you stop, the liquid continues to spin for a while. Dizziness is the result of these nerves in your ear. When you open your eyes, although your eyesight tells you to walk in a straight line, your brain will trust your ears more, thus you walk in a curved line. Question: The purpose of writing the article is to _ . Answer:
OPTIONS:
- prove that ears and eyes help us to walk straight
- explain why we can hardly walk in a strictly straight line
- point out the importance of noticing everyday science
- give background information about a latest study
output: explain why we can hardly walk in a strictly straight line

input with options: Read the following article and answer the question. Article: Never Talk to Strangers? "Never talk to strangers." Many children are taught this simple rule as a precaution against abduction . In June, 2005, an 11-year-old boy was lost in the Utah wilderness for four days. During that time, he stayed on the path. He saw people searching for him but deliberately hid from them, afraid someone might "steal" him. Eventually, the unfortunate game of hide-and-seek ended and he was found. According to the Canada Safety Council, this alarming incident shows how unwise it is to instill a fear of strangers in children. The "stranger danger" message can prevent children from developing the social skills and judgment needed to deal effectively with real-life situations. In a difficult situation, a stranger could be their lifeline to safety. To have a child go missing is a parent's worst nightmare. The threat of abduction by a stranger is minimal when compared with other possible reasons for a disappearance. In 2004, there were 67,266 missing-children cases in Canada. Only 31 involved abduction; in most of those cases the abductor was a relative, friend, or person known to the family. There were 671 cases of children wandering off, and 332 cases of abductions by a parent. Almost 80 percent of all cases were runaways. These statistics cast doubt on the idea that children should never talk to strangers. Wandering off is more common--but a lost children may have to call upon a stranger for help, and must develop the ability to judge what kind of people to approach. The "never talk to strangers" rule does not protect children in the situations they are most likely to face. On top of this, it can be confusing. Adults do not model the behaviour; they often talk to strangers. A child may not know how to tell who is a stranger, and who is not. For young children, nothing replaces close supervision . Pre-schoolers do not understand risk and tend to act without thinking. Children need to develop habits and sttitudes that will protect them from the real threats and dangers they may face. The... Question: Which would the author agree with about the "never talk to strangers" rule? Answer:
OPTIONS:
- It is not well recognized by parents.
- It is not effective in keeping kids safe.
- It is easy enough for children to follow.
- It is practical as a safety tip in daily life.
output:
It is not effective in keeping kids safe.