# data[].attributes.body
Response A should be a (1) because according to the text, it doesn't include enough evidence that supports the authors claim, with the grammar missing and not in its correct place.

Response B should be a (0) because according to the rubric, the writer did not include any evidence, details, or anything to supports both of the authors statements

Response C should be a (2) because according to the rubric and the text, the writer does a perfect job giving evidence and reasoning for his claims, as will as leaving the reader with a interesting conclusion

# data[].attributes.body
(Donnel) Response A should be a 1 because it gave very weak evidence and details  while the rubric required a strong one.

(Terry) Response B should be a 0 because the paper doesn't explain anything at all, gives no text evidence, and has weak reasoning.

(Nieem) Response C should be rated a 2 because had good examples on how the brainstorming was represented in different passages.

# data[].attributes.body
Response A should be a (1) because, despite the fact that the writer clearly comprehends each point, she fails to accurately assess the texts. They only mention the potential outcomes of working in a group without going into detail.

Response B should be a (0) because several questions like what are the differences between the passages? and how do they each back up their claims? are examples that come to mind. it appears like they simply rewrote the prompt and called it a day.

Response C should be a (2) because it is brief and includes proof directly from the text, as well as an explanation of why they chose the quote they did. Their response is neither too long nor too brief.

# data[].attributes.body
Response A should be a 1 because according to the rubric you need to provide strong evidence, and the response has no direct evidence from either texts, and provides shallow evidence and a basic reasoning. They also use a basic vocabulary which makes their argument repetitive and uninteresting.

Response B should be a 0 because according to the rubric you need evidence and an explanation on how it supports their arguments. The writer does neither, and doesn't show any way the author supports their argument. There is also grammar mistakes and basic wording. The response does not support the claim at all, which is why it should be a 0.

Response C should be a 2 because according to the rubric you need evidence and reasoning on how the author supports their claim. The writer provides good pieces of evidence, but does not connect their evidence to their claim. There is also some grammatical errors.

# data[].attributes.body
Response A should be a 1 because the writer does not use lots of evidence to support their claims but they do get their point across and there are some spelling mistakes.

Response B should be a 0 because the response does not have a good explanation and uses no evidence.

Response C should be a 2 because there is lots of evidence to support their claims and they use correct grammar and spelling.

# data[].attributes.body
Response A should be a 1 because the rubric said you have to have strong evidence but response A only had very weak evidence.

Response B should be a 0 because according to the rubric if it does not explain anything it is a 0 and response B does not explain anything or give text evidence

Response C should be a 2 because the rubric answer said you should have strong evidence and strong reasoning and response C gives both of these things and a lot more with the story.

# data[].attributes.body
Response A should be a 1 because there are some spelling mistakes, run-on sentences, not enough punctuation, and is very repetitive overall.

Response B should be a 0 because there is no evidence from either passages and there is bad grammar.

Response C should be a 2, because response 3 follows all of these major points. This is why Response C receives all points and gets a 2.

# data[].attributes.body
Response A should be a (1) because according to the rubric you would need a stronger evidence to get a higher point rating, but response A only provide a very weak explanation and weak evidence.

Response B should be a (0) because according to the rubric it does not explain anything and it does not provide details from the passages.

Response C should be a (2) because according to the rubric it should have strong evidence and strong reasoning and it also has more than that.

# data[].attributes.body
Response A should be a 1 according to the rubric. It provides a weak explanation and the spelling is beyond immaculate. They barley give an example of how the author showed different ways of brainstorming, they just repeat the same phrase over and over.

Response B should be a 0 according to the rubric. They give no examples of how the author shows different ways of brainstorming, nor did they explain any evidence.

Response C should be a 2 according to the rubric. They give good examples on how the author showed different ways of brainstorming in each passage, and they explained each one very thoroughly.

# data[].attributes.body
Response A should be a 1 because according to the rubric, the response follows almost all of the points. The reason it is a 1 is because there is spelling mistakes, run-on sentences, not enough punctuation, and is very repetitive overall.

Response B should be a 0 because there is no evidence from either passages, or an reasoning. There is also bad grammar.

Response C should be a 2, because according to the rubric, there should be strong evidence, strong reasoning, and correct grammar/spelling. Response 3 follows all of these major points. This is why Response C receives all points and gets a 2.

# data[].attributes.body
Response A should be a 1 because according to the rubric you have to have strong evidence but A only very weak evidence.

Response B should be a 0 because according to the rubric if it does not explain anything it is a 0 and B does not explain anything or give text evidence

Response C should be a 2 because according to the rubric an answer should have strong evidence and strong reasoning and C gives both of these things and more.

# data[].attributes.body
Response A should be a 1 because according to the rubric you would need stronger evidence to get a higher point rating, but response A only provides very weak explanation and weak evidence.

Response B would be a 0 because according to the rubric, a 0 would be when there is no explanation, and response B doesn't provide one

Response C would be rated 2 because it does provide a good explanation and has good evidence to support their reasoning.

# data[].attributes.body
Response A should be a (1) because according to the rubric while having an explanation it is weak, because the author doesn't use very much evidence and detail from the text.

Response B should be a (0) because according to the rubric it doesn't provide any explanation to support the response, and includes no examples from either of the texts.

Response C should be a (2) because according to the rubric it provides an ample explanation and strong reasoning from the text to support their explanation.

# data[].attributes.body
Response A should be a 1 because it provides a short and weak explanation of the author's arguments, and also had spelling mistakes.

Response B should be a 0 because it does not provide examples or details from the text, and also has weak reasoning.

Response C should be a 2 because it provides a good explanation of the author's arguments, while also using examples and details from the text.

# data[].attributes.body
Response A should be a 1 because according to the rubric, you need to have relevant and sufficient evidence. The passage had very weak explanations and examples. There were several misspelled words and did not a lot of punctuation. Also, the passage had very weak examples/details. The passage was boring and barley persuasive.

Response B should be a 0 because according to the rubric, you should have strong evidence, examples, and details. The writer did not provide examples, details, or evidence in their work. They had horrible grammar. Misspelled words and zero punctuation. The passage was disappointing and not persuading.

Response C should a 2 because according to the rubric, you should have strong examples, evidence, and details. The author gave great examples and details. They had good evidence to back up their work. The passage is great for an argumentative passage.

# data[].attributes.headline
Kathrine, Sarah, Addison, Cimone - Response

# data[].attributes.subject
Kathrine, Sarah, Addison, Cimone - Response

# data[].attributes.body
(Addison) Response A doesn't give quoted evidence from any of the two passages and only gives an explanation as to how each author supported their arguments. There is no textual evidence presented in the response therefore I would rate it a 1 point response.

(Sarah) Response B should be a 0, according to the rubric, because it does not provide an explanation for their argument. It also does not give any examples, or go into detail, about the topic of each argument. Overall, the writer does not have specific and relevant details on the topic of the argument.

(Kathrine, Cimone) Response C should be a 2 because according to the rubric it does introduce and distinguish a claim and evaluate the quality of each argument. The writer provided examples that were relevant to the claim and used clear and concise words to explain their examples.

# data[].attributes.body
Response A should be a (2,1,0) because according to the rubric it does/doesn't do (explanation here).

Response B should be a (2,1,0) because according to the rubric it does/doesn't do (explanation here).

Response C should be a (2,1,0) because according to the rubric it does/doesn't do (explanation here).