# data[].attributes.body
The essay grading feature.

# data[].attributes.body
Love the unit set up design.

# data[].attributes.body
It gave students quick and meaningful feedback to revise writing.

# data[].attributes.body
Disagree with the grading. The grading is also SUPER annoying and time consuming.

# data[].attributes.body
Readings and skills did not match up.

# data[].attributes.headline
Skills relate to reading questions and quiz for each reading passage.

# data[].attributes.subject
Skills relate to reading questions and quiz for each reading passage.

# data[].attributes.body
Skills and readings matched up.

# data[].attributes.body
It was not accurate. Some students would submit 2 sentences and not close to an essay and get high scores for analysis or textual evidence. It would count grammar errors and say none when the writing was riddled with errors.

# data[].attributes.body
It's a little clunky. Can't set points for assignments.

# data[].attributes.body
Students are easily lost. Each "page" has to be a new assignment and new tab. It is overwhelming.

# data[].attributes.body
Annotations didn't stay and couldn't be used.

# data[].attributes.body
It works! Also, student annotations from one assignment carry over to another.

# data[].attributes.body
There is not a very clean way to get a PDF or printed copy of the texts.

# data[].attributes.body
It was easy to give feedback and identify cheating. The Writable feature was a great addition to the program. HMH itself was easy to use.

# data[].attributes.body
Does not work on assignments we create or alter.

# data[].attributes.body
Navigation, Glitchy at times, not always a clear and focused set of goals/units. Grammar feature is almost useless.

# data[].attributes.body
I had already read a lot of the texts in this resource whereas HMH had many texts I'd never heard of.

# data[].attributes.body
There are more grammar resources in HMH (not the best, but at least there was a lot).

# data[].attributes.body
It's frustrating that we have to switch between the library and Core ELA modes to access the texts and assign work. I model annotations for students, which can be saved only in the library mode, but then assigning work seems to be most effective (and offer all features) from the Core ELA mode.

# data[].attributes.body
The layout is very linear and easy for both teachers and students to understand.

# data[].attributes.body
Clear Units and many options to assign and highlight in a unit. Easy to navigate once you get used to the format. Short readings. Explores interesting topics a clear sequence within the units.

# data[].attributes.body
Reviewing student work was a pain in the butt because you had to flip through each students' work page by page.

# data[].attributes.body
The little skills activities didn't save their scores. I understand that it wants students to "redo" it for extra practice, but I didn't find it super helpful.

# data[].attributes.body
No grammar resources available.

# data[].attributes.body
Assumes students knowledge on skills, topics, etc. instead of assessing them beforehand. Many materials have to be made in between assignments to properly scaffold. OR the information/materials given to students is helpful but the layout is overwhelming for them.

# data[].attributes.headline
Writable - a very nice feature, allows quick feedback to students

# data[].attributes.subject
Writable - a very nice feature, allows quick feedback to students

# data[].attributes.body
Way too difficult to produce a hard copy of the texts

# data[].attributes.body
although a nice feature, it was not accurate and some of the students' grades were inflated

# data[].attributes.body
I was not a fan of the sign posts