Sieu Feedback

Peer Review Worksheet – Inquiry Essay

Author: Sieu Tran

Peer: Craig McKenzie

Introduction:

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

The question is something to the extent of: what happens after we die? It is pretty clear. Make sure you check your grammer though. “Grew up in a catholic family” should be “growing up in a catholic family.”

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.)

While the topic holds interest alone, the authors inclusion of personal support helps keep the readers attention. It is held through the telling of a story.

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

There is a lot of knowledge that comes from personal experience. Everyone has a stake in the inquiry because everyone dies.

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)?

The tone is personal yet reserved. While it is in first person, it gives formal vibes which I think are necessary for this topic. The tone is handled very well with the author’s voice. This topic obviously matters to the author because of his personal experiences with death.

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

The tone breaks every few paragraphs to halt the story to insert research and other’s ideas. I think it would work better if in these more formal paragraphs some informal references were added.

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

This topic appropriately moves from a very specific situation to more of a vague one. The story of his grandfather is told and broadened into death in general. I think this is done well.  

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 author does a great job at research! There are many ideas introduced but they were all well thought out. If anything needs to be added, instead of adding new topics, I suggest going deeper into the contemplation of research already done.

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

There isn’t really a lot of questioning going on here. There is some exploration of both the science and religious sides of death, but I think it would be helpful to somewhat question reality and the findings for what the truth really is?

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

Research is taken from many different resources.  The ideas that were researched very well, but I wish there were some numbers for the more concrete thinkers to grasp. Maybe find a poll of who believes in what, when it comes to dying. I’m sure this can be found on the internet.

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

The organization is by far the strong point of this essay and keeps my attention. The distinct sections investigating one side of the argument makes the entire inquiry easy to follow and stay attentive to.

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

The topic seems to broaden as the essay continues. It starts with a personal story and adds to that by talking about death in general. I think this strategy works really well!

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?)

The conclusion acts to bring everything together and add some more touchy feely stuff. It works to bring importance and personality too the essay. Just be careful about being so morbid.  

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

I think it does an effective job wrapping up the paper. It begins and ends personally and I feel like there is a sense of finishing upon reading the conclusion with all questions answered.