# data[].attributes.body
- straightforward and clear introduction
- use of subtitles and good structure
- statistics to back up points
- lack of evaluation
- overuse of in-text citations
- lack of comparison

# data[].attributes.body
Overall good ideas, however, some generalized points/ ideas that need further explanation and better formulation

# data[].attributes.headline
A good range of studies, however, some studies were lacking evaluation. 

# data[].attributes.subject
A good range of studies, however, some studies were lacking evaluation. 

# data[].attributes.headline
most paragraphs have a good summarizing final sentence  

# data[].attributes.subject
most paragraphs have a good summarizing final sentence  

# data[].attributes.headline
seems to switch between past and present tense in some cases

# data[].attributes.subject
seems to switch between past and present tense in some cases

# data[].attributes.body
A very clearly written essay, but some ideas are presented quite simplistically

# data[].attributes.body
A range of references throughout. But, some studies used and evaluated are vague and to make sure they are linking back to the question at hand. Should try not to make it a summary of studies need a bit more evaluation and how it helps the argument being made.

# data[].attributes.headline
short sentences used which can be expanded and evaluated more 

# data[].attributes.subject
short sentences used which can be expanded and evaluated more 

# data[].attributes.body
The essay is logically structured with clear headers which make it easier to navigate

# data[].attributes.headline
Seems to just list findings rather than explaining them but includes an evaluation of some research

# data[].attributes.subject
Seems to just list findings rather than explaining them but includes an evaluation of some research

# data[].attributes.headline
Says that women both deviate from the prestigious norm and use the prestigious standard more frequently without explaining this difference

# data[].attributes.subject
Says that women both deviate from the prestigious norm and use the prestigious standard more frequently without explaining this difference

# data[].attributes.headline
'Its foundations also lacked empirical evidence; therefore, it may be considered a biased model created by a feminist.' Based off of statistical evidence so could it be bias?

# data[].attributes.subject
'Its foundations also lacked empirical evidence; therefore, it may be considered a biased model created by a feminist.' Based off of statistical evidence so could it be bias?

# data[].attributes.body
1. Make sure you're linking back to the question/ point.

2. At the end of each section, be sure to suggest how it has helped your argument with explicit links to your point.

3. Use the study to prove/ disprove your point rather than just to summarise/ give information.

# data[].attributes.headline
"it could be argued whether in 2020, such a patriarchal order does still exist, making this claim less convincing" ???? back this up with a source or remove it

# data[].attributes.subject
"it could be argued whether in 2020, such a patriarchal order does still exist, making this claim less convincing" ???? back this up with a source or remove it

# data[].attributes.body
It synthesises lots of papers, seems well researched, and the papers are from varied places/times. They also unpacked the studies and evaluated them

Some arguments are a bit vague and not very technical or convincing eg. "it is more up to date/modern" doesn't really mean anything (modern isn't good or bad)

The conclusion seems a bit fluffy and less specific in terms of linguistic theories

# data[].attributes.body
- The intro explains the intentions/arguments of the essay.  Also telling us what studies they plan to talk about and giving context.
- Well structured and easy to follow with clear headings.
- Some studies there was no evaluation- more like summarising.
- Good range of data from the 1970s to current.
- Give a definition of the terms they're talking about.
- When discussing results they add their own opinion.
- Doesn't seem to be a conclusion at the end of each section- not a lot of engagement/ overarching argument is not that clear.
- Conclusion: needs more thorough explanation/ explanation.
- Fab research with lots of references.
- Concluding sentence doesn't coherently link to the start to show a clear argument.

# data[].attributes.headline
Good structure with headings for each element

# data[].attributes.subject
Good structure with headings for each element

# data[].attributes.headline
Seems odd to reject Zimmerman and West just because Beattie's sample size was larger as it still provides valuable evidence

# data[].attributes.subject
Seems odd to reject Zimmerman and West just because Beattie's sample size was larger as it still provides valuable evidence

# data[].attributes.headline
The second paragraph discusses two different examples, but they are not tied together well. Either break them up or make the paragraph's argument clearer

# data[].attributes.subject
The second paragraph discusses two different examples, but they are not tied together well. Either break them up or make the paragraph's argument clearer

# data[].attributes.headline
Descriptive for the most part; requires more explanations to link it back to the question

# data[].attributes.subject
Descriptive for the most part; requires more explanations to link it back to the question

# data[].attributes.headline
Evaluate a lot too --> i.e this is good but can also be seen as. evaluate the context of the points. i.e including years and referencing the zeitgeist. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Evaluate a lot too --> i.e this is good but can also be seen as. evaluate the context of the points. i.e including years and referencing the zeitgeist. 

# data[].attributes.body
Many direct quotations where perhaps paraphrasing would have sufficed

# data[].attributes.headline
Uses a lot of features to explain and include arguments from both sides. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Uses a lot of features to explain and include arguments from both sides. 

# data[].attributes.headline
Some claims are very broad and not necessarily true (i,e less patriarchal society and lack of empirical evidence.)

# data[].attributes.subject
Some claims are very broad and not necessarily true (i,e less patriarchal society and lack of empirical evidence.)

# data[].attributes.headline
More explanation needed on some of the broader claims and more clarification -i.e why does it show less patriarchal society and what is hedging? give examples?) I.e briefly mentioned Iran but not much explanation of why its relevant. 

# data[].attributes.subject
More explanation needed on some of the broader claims and more clarification -i.e why does it show less patriarchal society and what is hedging? give examples?) I.e briefly mentioned Iran but not much explanation of why its relevant. 

# data[].attributes.headline
Sometimes the argument gets lost: it can jump around and could benefit from more of a clear train of thought

# data[].attributes.subject
Sometimes the argument gets lost: it can jump around and could benefit from more of a clear train of thought

# data[].attributes.headline
Not a lot of actual examples (like what women only adjectives?)

# data[].attributes.subject
Not a lot of actual examples (like what women only adjectives?)

# data[].attributes.headline
Good references --> relevant and seem to be correctly presented. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Good references --> relevant and seem to be correctly presented. 

# data[].attributes.headline
Clear introduction (introduces topic, discusses what will be discussed in the essay and background.)

# data[].attributes.subject
Clear introduction (introduces topic, discusses what will be discussed in the essay and background.)