Let's analyze the errors based on the provided description.
-
There should be 5 rows labeled 20%: This is incorrect because there is no indication that there should be multiple rows for 20%. In fact, there should not be any rows labeled 20% since the diagram is attempting to represent the discount of 25%. This is likely an error.
-
The 25 should be for each percent, not dollar amounts: This is also incorrect in the context provided, where the $20 is correctly representing the discount amount, not something that should be divided among percentages. The focus is on the total discount of 25%, which corresponds to the amount reduced.
-
The percents do not add up to a whole of 100%: This statement is misleading because the key percent in question (the 25% discount) is not adequately represented in the diagram. However, there is no indication that the 20% values correctly represent parts of a whole in relation to a 100% total.
-
There should be 4 columns of 25% that each equal $20: This is incorrect. The statement seems to misunderstand how discounts work. The original price should be calculated based on a total where 25% equals $20, meaning that the original price \( (P) \) would be calculated using \( 0.25P = 20 \), leading to the total being \( P = 80 \).
In summary, Tara's diagram has several errors:
- The 20% labeling is incorrect.
- The dollar amounts are correctly meant to represent the discount rather than percentage values.
- The representation of percentages is misleading.
- The use of columns doesn't adequately illustrate how the discount is supposed to relate to the original price.
Thus, the most applicable errors based on the options provided are:
- There should be 5 rows labeled 20%.
- The 25 should be for each percent, not dollar amounts.
- There should be 4 columns of 25% that each equal $20.
Therefore, the errors are mostly in representation and calculation methods rather than in the understanding of the discount application itself.