# data[].attributes.body
Demonstrates minimal understanding of story elements. Only identifies one element correctly or shows significant misconceptions about multiple elements.

# data[].attributes.body
Shows partial understanding of story elements. Correctly identifies only two or three elements and provides limited explanations.

# data[].attributes.body
Demonstrates basic understanding of story elements. May have minor misconceptions about one element or lack detailed explanations for two elements.

# data[].attributes.body
Shows strong understanding of most story elements. Identifies all elements correctly but may lack some depth in explanation or textual evidence for one element.

# data[].attributes.body
Demonstrates comprehensive understanding of all four story elements (Orientation, Complication, Resolution, Message). Accurately identifies and explains each element with specific textual evidence from the stories.

# data[].attributes.body
Venn diagram is highly disorganized or incomplete. Placement of elements shows fundamental misunderstanding of how to use a Venn diagram or how to compare stories.

# data[].attributes.body
Venn diagram is poorly organized with multiple errors in placement. Shows confusion about how to use the diagram to represent similarities and differences.

# data[].attributes.body
Venn diagram shows basic organization with some correct placements. Has several errors in determining which elements are shared versus unique to each story.

# data[].attributes.body
Venn diagram is well-organized with mostly correct placement of story elements. May have 1-2 minor errors in placement but overall demonstrates good understanding of similarities and differences.

# data[].attributes.body
Venn diagram is exceptionally well-organized with clear, logical placement of all story elements. Shared elements are correctly placed in overlapping sections, and unique elements are properly placed in respective sections.

# data[].attributes.body
Provides minimal or no meaningful comparisons between stories. Fails to identify key similarities and differences. Analysis is missing or shows fundamental misunderstandings.

# data[].attributes.body
Offers limited comparisons between stories. Identifies only a few obvious similarities and differences with minimal examples. Analysis lacks depth and detail.

# data[].attributes.body
Provides basic comparisons between stories. Identifies major similarities and differences but may lack specific examples for some elements. Analysis is somewhat superficial.

# data[].attributes.body
Offers clear comparisons between stories for most elements. Identifies obvious similarities and differences with examples from texts. Analysis shows good understanding but may miss some nuanced differences.

# data[].attributes.body
Provides insightful, detailed comparisons between stories for all elements. Identifies subtle similarities and differences with specific examples from both texts. Analysis shows depth of understanding and critical thinking.

# data[].attributes.body
Provides no meaningful textual evidence or citations. Analysis is unsupported by references to the stories or includes irrelevant citations.

# data[].attributes.body
Rarely supports analysis with textual evidence. May only reference one story or provide minimal citations that are vague or poorly connected to the analysis.

# data[].attributes.body
Sometimes supports analysis with textual evidence but may be general rather than specific. Citations from both stories are present but may be limited for some elements.

# data[].attributes.body
Frequently supports analysis with textual evidence from both stories for most elements. Citations are mostly accurate and well-integrated to support comparisons.

# data[].attributes.body
Consistently supports analysis with relevant, specific textual evidence from both stories for all four elements. Citations are accurate and effectively integrated to support comparisons.

# data[].attributes.body
Does not participate in class discussion even when prompted, or makes comments that are off-topic or inappropriate. Shows no meaningful engagement with the activity.

# data[].attributes.body
Rarely contributes to class discussion without prompting. Comments are minimal or superficial and show limited engagement with the topic or peers' ideas.

# data[].attributes.body
Sometimes contributes to class discussion with basic comments about story elements. May mostly respond when directly called upon but shows engagement with the topic.

# data[].attributes.body
Regularly contributes to class discussion with relevant comments about story elements and comparisons. Responds to peers' ideas and occasionally asks questions that help clarify or extend understanding.

# data[].attributes.body
Actively contributes to class discussion with thoughtful insights about story elements and comparisons. Respectfully responds to peers' ideas, asks thought-provoking questions, and helps advance the group's understanding.