I really liked the writing style of this paper. In particular, I appreciated the directness of the statements, claim and thesis. Stating them so plainly makes it easy for the reader to understand the viewpoint, and therefore the evidence that author will use to back their claims. There was also good use of qualifiers. What do you like least about this paper? How can it be improved? Overall I enjoyed the paper very much. If I could offer any advice, it would be better transition statements between paragraphs and ideas, and perhaps group the point and counterpoints together. Having them separated as they are may confuse some readers. Again, overall, good paper.
Other general comments?
The facts are there, and do support the claim. I would probably recommend adding the study or guideline information from the American Academy of Pediatrics. They are such a strong authority figure, and can add considerable weight to the author’s viewpoint. There are a few instances where some of the sentences are redundant. Redundancy can be very effective to drive a point home, but I wasn’t sure if that was the intention. Specifically the 4th sentence in the 4th paragraph. FOCUS What is your partner’s thesis or claim? Where is it located? Discuss questions or thoughts about the claim here. The thesis is “Playing violent video games can increase aggressive behavior, thoughts, and feelings in young children and adults”. It is the second sentence in the first paragraph. It is direct, and to the point, and immediately lets the reader know where article will go. Do you get a sense of the paper’s direction and focus early on? Why or why not?
The paper immediately lets the reader know that the author believes that there is a strong correlation between the violence depicted in video games, and the aggression and behavioral problems in children. The article follows the thesis with evidence of “imitative” behavior displayed by children who are exposed to violent behavior in video games. Has your partner identified an issue? Does your partner divide his or her big topic/issue into 3 or 4 main sections to support the claim? What are they? The author identified that violent video games increase violent behavior in children. The author then uses different examples/sections to support this argument. She also uses counter points to show the other side of the argument. The sections she uses are, violent games, violent media, and parental responsibility.
DEVELOPMENT / STYLE
Has the subject matter been explored and explained thoroughly? Do you have questions about what is going on in any of the sections? What sections need more development? I feel that the issue is fairly covered and offers both views of the subject. I would like to see more of what Parental responsibility should be, and if there were any government regulations that could, or should be enforced. Did the author use any good argument strategies (induction, deduction, argument by authority, statistics, etc)? Name one. The author twice used authority to back her claim.
Did the author use any fallacious logic or shady techniques (post hoc, ad hominem, hasty generalizations)? If so, where?
There were no direct fallacies, but there was some redundancies that could be interpreted as circular logic. Does the author use an effective introduction? What is it? Does the introduction grab your interest? Does it set up the rest of the paper? Is there a creative technique that the author could add to make his or her introduction livelier?
The author immediately states the position they have taken, which is very effective in establishing the tone of the paper. Sometimes analogies can be used to help convey the meaning on a different level to reader, and help them relate to the issue better.
Does the author use an effective conclusion strategy? What is it? Does it bring the paper to a satisfactory conclusion? The author summarizes the major points of their paper effectively. Their prior paragraph states possible solutions, which helps the closing paragraph be more effective.
Does the body of the paper follow the organization suggested by the introduction? Somewhat; the introductory paragraph is open, so the paper can go in different directions. Does each body paragraph have a topic sentence or unifying idea? Could you underline each one? If you had to go back to outline this paper, could you? Yes, there is a clear topic sentence, and it would be easy to underline them. Writing an outline from the paragraphs would not be difficult.
Does the paper have smooth transitions from paragraph to paragraph? Does the essay flow well from idea to idea? Where can these links be smoother? I would recommend more transition statements to connect the paragraphs/ ideas. These can be used when switching between point and counter points.
Were you impeded by grammatical or mechanical errors?
There are a few grammatical errors, and at times, where it seems that the same sentence is repeated. To be fair, my reading comprehension is not great, so it may be that the author was conveying something different that I understood.