# data[].attributes.body
Intro 2 is most compelling because it immediately hooks the reader and creates an image in my mind.

# data[].attributes.body
I think the second intro is more compelling because it created this dramatic effect that catches the reader's attention while expressing the importance their claim, clearly, showing the reader this is something you need to and should read.

# data[].attributes.body
I think intro #2 is the most compelling because it immediately captures the readers attention. Although it doesn't have evidence, it stated the issue/ claim very quickly.

# data[].attributes.body
Intro 2 stood out the most to me, i feel like it drew me in more because of how direct it was and provided needed information about the topic addressing the issue and pulling the reader in at once.

# data[].attributes.body
I think the first intro is the most compelling because right away, it's clear on the topic of the paper and it gives a piece of evidence. Also it's not too short or too long when it comes to the amount of information used.

# data[].attributes.body
The opening that most stands out to me is, Intro 2. Intro provides enough information on the topic without giving to much. (compared to Intro 2)

# data[].attributes.body
Personally, option 2 is most compelling. I say this because it is true that there are a lot of kids now a days that have obesity but it isn't talked about, people say that the kids will grow out of it or just let them be a kid but their not understanding the health risks it comes with at such a young age.

# data[].attributes.body
I find the first one and intro 2 the most interesting because it got straight to the point and it caught my attention early. The evidence was also on point too which was better than intro 3.

# data[].attributes.body
I found Intro #2 was more compelling just because it sounded more personal and it addressed the issue instead of beating around the bush.

# data[].attributes.body
The opening that most stood out to me was opening 2 , it’s short and brief and straight to the point and it shows dialogues more complex and it’s more interesting topic

# data[].attributes.body
I find Intro #1 the most interesting because it seems like the introduction of an essay about changing the No Child Left Behind Act. It’s very specific and briefly describes the purpose and failures of the act. The tone sounds serious and concise.

# data[].attributes.body
I think option #2 was the most compelling because right off the bat they dramatize the issue. They use words that capture my attention like “dauntingly”, instead of something generic. They seem passionate about the topic, as well.

# data[].attributes.body
i think the first intro was the most compelling because it right into the issue

# data[].attributes.body
I find intro 2 the most interesting. The issue they are talking about is clear to see and it is very compelling. The syntax they used in the first sentence makes it almost suspenseful and hooks the reader in.

# data[].attributes.body
I think Intro 1 and 2 are better than the 3rd one. This is because Intro 1 starts off by clearly introducing their evidence/facts and effectively hooks the reader. Intro 2 would spark controversy and engage people to read more about obesity impacting children's health in the U.S. but doesn't have specific evidence. Intro 3 doesn't have a clear intro and doesn't specify what the essay will be about.

# data[].attributes.body
the intro I found more convincing was intro 2 because it being specific but it doesn't have much information.

# data[].attributes.body
I find option 3 a very interesting way about it, the opening is compelling in my opinion because it has range. It gives an example to how farming, agriculture and taming of animals has evolved over the years to keep ourselves alive.

# data[].attributes.body
The introduction I liked the most is #.2 The reason why is because it has all the information and had numbers in it . It was a simple take with everything that needed to be in there .

# data[].attributes.body
i think intro 1 is way better than 2 and 3 because intro 1 gives the most information and uses enough evidence and then goes straight to the point but the other 2 intros just have small sentences and not enough information.

# data[].attributes.body
I think intro 1 was better because it had dialogue and characters.

# data[].attributes.body
I find intro 2 the most interesting, because it had enough information and its short and simple

# data[].attributes.body
I think the most compelling is intro 2 it quickly goes into the issue although it short it was super clear and more convincing

# data[].attributes.body
I think intro 2 was the most compelling cause it quickly and clearly stated a issue which hooked me in while the other felt like they were just throwing information at me

# data[].attributes.body
i find intro 1 to be the most compelling intro there is out of the 3. this is because it’s well explained and gets straight to the point.

# data[].attributes.body
I liked the first intro because it gave good intent on what the topic was about, it did not give enough information in my opinion

# data[].attributes.body
I find more compelling intro number 1 because I think it’s the most well explained. starting with the attention gather, it really got my attention and it was really interesting, also the vocabulary sounded more educated than the others examples.

# data[].attributes.body
I liked intro 1 because of the way it was written it catches the reader attention, starting with what the topic is going to be about to a small definition of what it is, and how it has it’s pros and cons. I liked that there wasn’t a lot of info but just enough to make you want to keep reading.

# data[].attributes.body
The 1st intro was the most compelling because of its effective use of writing and structure. It starts with a specific a fact about the No Child Left Behind Act, which sets the stage for the incoming criticism. The introduction has a clear argument that standardized testing has failed to improve overall student achievement and close racial and socioeconomic gaps, suported with evidence from a specific study. This argument is specific and debatable.

Intro 1 differs from 2 and 3. Introduction 2 presents with a not clear argument or evidence to support it. Introduction 3, while providing context and background information, does not present a clear argument or issue that the essay will address.

# data[].attributes.body
The introduction I liked the most was the Intro 3. I liked it because it has a very intriguing first sentence into the paragraph and gets right to the point on how human civilization has grown and changes over the years. Intros 1 and 2 are way more informative and because this is a argumentative essay and one should be convince that the other persons argument is right.

# data[].attributes.body
i think the most convincing is 2 because they should have statistics based on what they are saying about it going up over the years, all though not much information it still showed a bit more than the rest

# data[].attributes.body
The intro I find the most convincing is intro 1. It’s not really enough information in my opinion

# data[].attributes.body
Intro 2 is the only one with a compelling argument. Intros 1 & 3 are completely fact based, and it only shows itself as the beginning of a research paper. However, this is supposed to be an argumentative research paper.

# data[].attributes.body
The intro I find the most convincing is intro 1. It provides some information of the topic. Not a lot of information for an intro and just enough to get the reader famliar with the topic. Is aware that their topic has some benefits but has flaws.

# data[].attributes.body
I like intro 1 the most. It instantly gets to the point and states fact and time referencing. It feels like this person knows what they are talking about right of the bat. 2 and 3 seem more opinionated or not as knowledgeable. Or like they aren't really sure how to start they're essay.