# data[].attributes.body
4/8: her decision making was good however it did not make me visualise the dish well so she gave adequate justification. she also didn’t give a wide range of factors. the second dish was not explained well. the two dishes did not show how she plated the dish and how she garnished it. she also gave a bit too much information on nutritional value

# data[].attributes.body
4/8:
- she chose appropriate dishes
- provided adequate justification but only explained ingredients, too limited in terms of explaining appealing range of factors
- explained dish texture and colours but i could not visualise how it would look plated and garnished
- too much information on ingredients nutrition value

# data[].attributes.body
0/8
- he did not have adequate information on factors and work was incomplete

# data[].attributes.body
3/8 : reason being there was detailed explanation however there was no second dish and the elaboration of the decision making could be better. Many points were also justified on some range of factors ( this also includes sub points ). The dish was also appropriate and followed the criteria of the assesment.

# data[].attributes.body
I would give Jun Yang a 5/8 for both dishes. Overall, I think it’s a decent decision making with minimal description. He has covered the necessary factors which is partially answering the coursework question. However, I think he is missing out important descriptions. Perhaps because both dishes are of the same category; Dish 1 of banana (fruit) and Dish 2 of tempura vegetable, coated in the same batter, cooked with the same method - it limits his description of what is unique about each dish.

Comments
1. More reasons e.g. sources of certain nutrients? How does it make the dish healthier? So what can be done to moderate the fried food?
2. More descriptive words e.g. what you see, what does it smell like, what is the texture/colour/flavour?

# data[].attributes.body
I give this decision making a 7/8 as it was really cohesive and coherent in explaining the dish. She also made it sound very appetising to the reader as she described it really well and explained the end product of her dish in much detail that teh reader can in vision it in their head. It was really in detail and managed to capture the nutrients teenagers need and their uses. She also explained how the dish met all the requirements for appealing like garnishes, colour, texture, and plating.

# data[].attributes.body
0/8: he did nothing

# data[].attributes.body
4/8: After stating her points, there were some attempts to expand to elaborate but more points could have been taken from prior research. I can see that she had stated the vitamins of her chosen vegetables and how the help teens but a link at the end would be good to sum up everything. Writing out your thought process may help at this point because some of the ideas are stated but not detailed enough.

First dish:
Under the appealing section , the point states “having different vegetables will make it more colourful”. Sarah could add on by
1. stating what types of vegetables she had used
2. what colour they are
3. link it at the end by explaining her reasoning as to why a big variety of colourful vegetables is appealing to teens.

Under the section of types of flour for the first dish, she could include the 3 types of flour she used during her experiment and clarify which is the one she would use and why its the best while eliminating the others and explaining why its not the best candidate

Second dish:
Under the section of batter , Sarah could put down more of her reasoning and thought process like how these properties would be a pull factor for teenagers which is your aim and ‘why you chose this dish’

Under the section of types of flour, she could state the flours she used during her experiment, which one the best one (the one she would use) and why, and why the other options are not as good

Overall, more expansion on ideas based on the previous area of research would help score higher marks as it becomes more detailed. A few lines on as to why she thinks these factors help would also be good

# data[].attributes.body
rating: 7/8

katie uses the peel format to sum up her points and links each point to the one before so that the decision-making can be read as a whole easily. she explains the steps needed in detail for the dishes to look more appetising. examples of this is ‘the dish is deep fried so that means that the texture of the dish would be crispy it would also be plated with french toast and fruits such as strawberries,blueberries and topped off with homemade caramel sauce so as to attract the teens attention to the different bright and vibrant colors that are included’ which shows that she is able to connect the sentences to each other and make sure that they fit well. by doing such a thing, the decision making is easier to read and easy on the eyes. however, i think that she should improve on her decision making by elaborating more on the ‘flour’ section and explaining exactly what proteins are inside the flour that is so beneficial for the teenagers. thus why i’ve decided to give her 7/8

# data[].attributes.body
I will give Ikmal 6/8.  For Dish 2, need to elaborate on what happens when flour is exposed to high heat. Dish 2 can also work on the organisation and elaboration on points. For example, Dish 1 is more broken down into sub-points.  Dish 1 (Keyword: Teenagers) work has been split up with Complex Carbohydrates, Proteins, Minerals and Vitamins.  For Dish 1, Ikmal can elaborate a bit more on the Protein part. (Keyword: Teenagers)  Ikmal can mention a bit more on LBV and HBV proteins.

# data[].attributes.body
I would give Ikmal a 6/8 for both dishes. Both descriptions were very detailed and managed to convey the necessary factors. Perhaps because both dishes were very different; Dish 1 which is corn fritters, deep friend, battered vegetable and Dish 2, pancakes, a sweet soft food - it gave him more space to describe his dishes further. His descriptions cover majority of senses and possibilities to convince teenagers that it is appealing.

Comments
1. Maybe you can describe taste and smell more?

# data[].attributes.body
6/8: She gave examples of the types of food that she was going to use. Wrote down the nutrients to justify how it would benefit teenagers. Gave very detailed examples of how she was going to make the dishes appetising. (e.g the amount of food/garnishes she will be serving on 1 plate, what type of plate she would use) Stated how teenagers may find the dish appetising. For the type of flour, she stated what flour she chose and also wrote why another choice of flour would not be ideal. She used the right information from her research to use in decision making.

# data[].attributes.body
5/8
Can be improved in terms of details and elaboration. More examples can be included. Such as when explaining about the usage of the different type of flour, can give examples of different types of foods that the different type of flour is included and what is does to the food.  Because listed is only benefits with no example. There is adequate justification to why certain ingredients were used with compatibility with the type of flour. Explained benefits but can be elaborated. Can include things such as different types of cooking methods etc.

# data[].attributes.body
khairani  provided detailed justification based on her research as she stated the sources,function and further detail about how the ingredients used can benefit the teenagers. she described how she plated the food to ensure that food is properly plated so that it would look appetising enough for the user.she described the second dish better as she used a more detailed justification on the uses and stated the importance of the vitamins that are available in the dish.she also described how the different flour used would affect the taste of the dish as an end product.

ithink that when explaining why she used the flour she decided to use she has adequate details needed, but she should explain more about whether the four changes the taste and the texture of the dish.

hence, i gave khairani a 7/8. as the decision making was detailed and is able to describe the dish well.

# data[].attributes.body
4 marks it was well explained and i could understand what she was talking about.she used many adjectives such as crispy and creamy to explain the dish to the reader she also used words such as gentle place and drizzle the thick sauce to describe how she is going to plate there fore i found it to be adequately justified but i think she can improve on by being more specific on what she what’s to do in th kitchen like the step by step

# data[].attributes.body
3.5 the first one was well explained but the 2nd dish was a bit unclear

# data[].attributes.body
I rate it a 3/8 Hammad is lacking a second dish .  He has adequate justification  about the healthiness of the dish and how it is suitable for the criteria of the assessment and he also explained. He explains that this dish can still taste amazing with it being healthy which can attract teens that you can eat foods that are healthy and delicious. He also describes the appealing factors and he did not give examples.

# data[].attributes.body
rating: 5/8

emilynd states each measurement down to a T in the appeal section of her decision making by giving exact numbers and measurements. this is seen in ‘I would serve 3-4 pancakes on a rustic plate, garnishing with 2 small stalks of parsley/basil placed on top of the pancakes. Paired with simple ketchup for extra flavours when dipped into.’. which shows that she has everything planned out ahead. However, i think that her decision making can be improved by elaborating more on the nutrients and vitamins part as she hardly explains what types of nutrients and vitamins are in the batter, as well as their benefits. she is also quite vague in her points and doesn’t go in detail, as stated here ‘Chicken is also very common for all of us and the pull factor for teenagers to come and try our dish is made even higher now.’ thus why i have decided to give her a 5/8

# data[].attributes.body
7/8: There was a lot of elaboration on her points as seen in the section under teenagers. The points were very well organised with headers separating each area to give a clear view on her thought process. Although, more expansion could be used on the section under types of flour. She can talk about what the factors in the flour itself that could have caused such results, using the information she may have given in prior research for eg, the percentage of certain contents in the flour may have been the differentiating factor.

For the second dish, Khairani could expand more on the points under appealing. For example, how the stated factors are pull factors teenagers. Overall, make more link to teenagers because your aim to to entice teenagers and also ‘why you chose this dish’

One more thing, I recommend adding another point for both sections of appealing. She could explain how her chosen vegetables are enticing for teenagers

# data[].attributes.body
I’d give junyang a 5/6 out of 8. The points come across really well, but lacked some elaboration to back them up. He also used really good examples and explained the uses of vitamins, proteins, and minerals well to explain teenagers dietary needs. The appealing was explained really well, and the garnishing, playing, colours, any textures were mentioned, but needs to be backed up with a bit more elaboration

# data[].attributes.body
I would give Natasha a 7/8. The Decision Making for both Dish 1 and 2 is both consistent. Both are very descriptive, and are supplemented with good elaboration.
Specifically for Dish 2, Natasha can mention other nutrients in the Keyword: Teenagers. She can elaborate a bit more and end it with a link.