story a does a better job than story b with the strategies provided.
story a has a clear beginning, middle, and end, while story b is all over the place.
story a sticks to a clear topic – elise's long run – and includes all the important details. story b doesn't have a clear focus and lacks essential details.
story a gives us lots of details about elise and her journey, using past tense consistently. story b doesn't give us much to go on about the character and doesn't use tense well.
story a keeps us interested with vivid descriptions and varied language. story b is a bit boring and doesn't use descriptive language effectively.
overall, story a is more in line with what the strategies suggest: a well-structured story with clear planning, a logical sequence, detailed characters, and engaging language.