The set shows strong engagement with the topic of social discernment, but quality varies widely. The essays “How to Develop Social Discernment” and “Social Discernment and the Rhetoric of Power” were the clearest, offering solid examples and structure, though both need deeper analysis and better integration of academic sources. The two versions of “Do We Reward Social Discernment” were far weaker: repetitive, poorly structured, difficult to follow, and lacking critical evidence. They read more like personal opinion pieces than formal essays. Common issues across all papers include weak thesis statements, redundant phrasing, shallow treatment of examples, and inconsistent grammar and sentence structure. Stronger focus, clearer argumentation, and more academic depth are needed. Recommendations: State a clear thesis upfront. Avoid repetition and focus paragraphs on single ideas. Analyze examples thoroughly. Use academic sources more effectively. Edit carefully for clarity and grammar. The enthusiasm is clear, but writing fundamentals and critical depth must be improved.