# data[].attributes.body
2.This author's thesis did not make sense.She said that technology is deriving originality which is a positive thing to say about technology, but she goes on to say that technology is not helpful and makes originality obsolete.

# data[].attributes.body
The writer did well with adding examples to support their side. The writer could improve on getting even deeper into their side, it does not seem like their paragraphs were completely thought out as much as it could have been.

# data[].attributes.body
They did a good job using anecdotal evidence, but they failed to develop their ideas thoroughly

# data[].attributes.headline
1 - The development of their ideas do support the thesis. It's a good thing that they put an experience of their life. Overall, this is a great start, I would just change up a few words to more "professional" type words.

# data[].attributes.subject
1 - The development of their ideas do support the thesis. It's a good thing that they put an experience of their life. Overall, this is a great start, I would just change up a few words to more "professional" type words.

# data[].attributes.body
The development was not that bad and the idea was there. But it was minimally developed, I believe there is more room for development in the idea.

# data[].attributes.body
They had good anecdotal evidence. They just needed to finish all their thoughts through the paper this includes (grammar , and connected evidence to argument)

# data[].attributes.headline
I would say this is a 1 because they were unclear and it was unconvincing. But the did give some good sentences about technology deriving originality.Next time they should be clear and be more persuavie .

# data[].attributes.subject
I would say this is a 1 because they were unclear and it was unconvincing. But the did give some good sentences about technology deriving originality.Next time they should be clear and be more persuavie .

# data[].attributes.headline
This essay is a 1 because they did not have their second supporting detail and the grammar was incorrect. The author can improve this by adding their second reasoning and improve the first paragraph 

# data[].attributes.subject
This essay is a 1 because they did not have their second supporting detail and the grammar was incorrect. The author can improve this by adding their second reasoning and improve the first paragraph 

# data[].attributes.body
Sample 1 contains incomplete thoughts and sentences. They used the wrong homophones for words such as "their" and "there". The writer didn't use correct grammar. The compound and complex sentences that they tried to make did not contain commas. I would give this passage a 1 or 2.
A positive point is that they did stay on one side of the argument

# data[].attributes.body
Slightly confusing going back and forth. There is also fluff and dead words which gives the essay less quality.

# data[].attributes.headline
Didn't go into depth on how tech killed originality. Incorrect use of "their". Second paragraph does not pertain to how technology kills creativity.

# data[].attributes.subject
Didn't go into depth on how tech killed originality. Incorrect use of "their". Second paragraph does not pertain to how technology kills creativity.

# data[].attributes.headline
I would give this essay a one because it does not mention anything about being technology stifling creativity and instead focuses on entertainment. The anecdotes are nice to read though.

# data[].attributes.subject
I would give this essay a one because it does not mention anything about being technology stifling creativity and instead focuses on entertainment. The anecdotes are nice to read though.

# data[].attributes.body
This essay is a 1. They put first hand accounts on the topic. I would suggest to fix the thesis being not fully developed, baby words used, it is not engaging, grammar underdevelopment, and the ideas are hard to follow.