Review of Matthew How Yew Kin

Peer Review Worksheet – Inquiry Essay Aj Joslin’s review of Matthew How Yew Kin

Introduction:

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

The author main question is how much technology actually help us. It is clear in the first paragraph.

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 author draws in attention by pointing out how much time we spend with our phones and how little people talk face to face now a days.

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

The author has experience with this and prefers to go talk to someone rather than sending them a text.

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 voice is the paper is focused on getting away from phones and going to personal conversations. The sources need work so they transition better from one another. Some of the paragraphs have more than one main idea and these should be used as new paragraphs.

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

The tone is constant is the paper and it wants the reader to get away from the phone.

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

I think the paragraph on page three could use more explanation on how social media leads to drugs and depression.

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?

Some of the ideas don’t transition well from one idea to the other. Some paragraph should be broken into smaller one with one main idea.

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

The author sticks to his idea of how communication should be.

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?

The author does use research. I would like to see more stats or information about how social media leads to drugs or depression.

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

The author does keep my attention since this is a problem in the modern world.

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

The author does bring in many ideas to his agreement. Again the idea that social media leads to drugs should be more explained.

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 is in two paragraphs and does an alright job of ending the paper. I think it could be stronger without using some of the questions in the second last paragraph.

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

It works but I would like to see the author get rid of the questions in the second last paragraph and just state facts.