Ally Inquiry Feedback

Introduction:

What is the initial inquiry question?  Is it expressed clearly?  Why/why not?

The question is stated very clearly in the last part of the introductory paragraph: Are colleges doing an effective job at offering healthy food choices.

How does the author draw in the reader’s interest?  Can it more effectively?  Is this an inquiry with greater import?  Is it expressed? (Note: it might be more effective expressed later in the inquiry.)

The topic explored is interesting to the college audience. Many people are fascinated over heath and eating right is a big media endorsed initiative. It could be improved upon be adding additional coverage of both sides of the argument. The author makes it clear that we should be interested as it impacts our health.

Do we know where the author prior knowledge?  Does s/he have a stake in the inquiry?

The author’s stake lies in her being a college student herself and eating campus food. While she has knowledge firsthand, she does a good job bringing in many other peoples ideas.

Voice:

How would you characterize the voice?  Is it effective for the subject material?  Do we believe in the inquisitiveness of the author (does this matter to him/her)?

Compared to the other essays people wrote, this essay has more of a formal tone. This is alright though, because the tone stays constant and evokes a certain persona which takes on many perspectives.

If the voice/tone breaks from type, point it out to the author.  Should it not?

While the tone is mainly formal throughout, there are a few slips of first person. This usually isn’t an issue but is a little weird to come across, especially after the first paragraph.

Abstactions/Generalities: are there any instances where abstract ideas need specific details and concrete support for greater understanding?  Point these out.

The paper is fairly specific with the examples chosen. There are specific restaurant details, specific college details, etc.

Body:

Is the author’s thought process evident?  Are we led smoothly from one section of the inquiry to the next?  Are there any questions/answers the author missed?  What are they?

The ideas are really good, and the thought process is evident. However, the question is not equally explored on both sides and there is an obvious bias from the beginning. There needs to be more organization with the paper. Transitions and breaking up longer paragraphs would also be helpful.

Does the author question his/her own assumptions, findings, logic? 

There are a few side questions and assumptions which distract slightly from the paper. Because these questions aren’t explored too deeply though, I don’t think they really hurt the paper. They don’t make it better though.

How is research effectively used?  Incorporation of quotes?  Does the research lead to other branchs of inquiry?  Intellectual disciplines?  Are there missed opportunities for expansion?

I liked how research was pulled from all over the place: surveys, personal experience, and the experts on the internet. On the other hand, I think they could all be used a bit more and the experts could become a larger part in better depth. The quotes were also useful.

Does the author maintain your interest?  How so?  Where does your attention lag?  Why?  How can it be fixed?

The attention, for me really lagged during the long paragraphs. Sometimes there just wasn’t much going on as far as discussion or evidence from a solid source. The opinions lost me sometimes.

Does the reader continue to broaden the inquiry?  Should it be further broadened, complicated?

The inquiry does become much broader. I think the author stopped at an appropriate point: any broader and the discussion and significance to the question would have been lost.

Conclusion:

How does the conclusion operate? (Is an answer found?  Is the initial inquiry complicated, expanded?  Does it point to further inquiry?  Does it conclude with greater import/implications?)

There is a lot going on in the conclusion. New ideas and information is introduced along side the wrapping up of the paper. It becomes a little much. I would suggest focusing on the ideas discussed in the body and making sure to tie up loose ends.

Is it effective?  Are you, the reader, satisfied with the ending?  Why, why not?  What are some suggestions for greater effectiveness?

This kind of feels more like another body paragraph. It would be better if there was another paragraph added to just tie up the inquiry and answer the question.