¶ … Kristoffer Borch WW2

The first thing noticed in this midterm was the lack of outline. There was no outline present and the first quote made no sense in relation to what the subject was about. At first look it appeared to be about the media but then before he introduced his thesis: "For instance, if certain media outlets cause an audience to have specific opinions, they will ultimately adapt their lifestyles in accordance to these opinions. An example of this process will be revealed and evaluated in this document." I began feeling confused as to what exactly what the point he was attempting to make. He stated he wanted to do research and a study which: "This study, a survey rather," turned out to be a short survey detailing broadly which age groups used which media outlets, such as TV or internet.

He also decided to include global warming, one of the main topics in the paper, along with climate change, in only two questions of the survey. Some of the questions had nothing to do with the thesis. They consisted of asking for political party, etc.: "It is a complete myth and we all need to stop wasting our time and money on a fallacy ." The analysis did not reveal much and the results were not too detailed. It lacked clear voice throughout the paper and the study was too simple and not analyzed enough.

There were no clear connections made in the results to his thesis. He simply stated that young people use the internet and TV more for news than older people who use the newspaper. I did like however, the solution he offered to promote more media literacy within the population. He suggested Media Arts Education and installation of media literacy. It doesn't really connect with climate change and how the media is responsible for lack of awareness of this issue, especially when...

The conclusion pretty much sums up the incoherent essay: "In doing this, we can address a variety of controversial issues, such as climate change" Such as climate change makes the thesis which is about climate change seem trivial; when it is meant to be the main focus. The quotes made no sense in relation to the topic and felt jumbled.
Suggestions would include to remove the unnecessary questions from the survey that do not relate to climate change and include some that do, for instance: When was the last time you saw anything concerning global warming? Where did you see it? And then put the various media outlets as options. Also he can try to include legitimate campaigns on Facebook, and TV that have promoted Global warming to demonstrate that it is out there and that not all populations know about it because of their lack of knowledge on current technology. The bibliography was quite long and had various sources so he did well in that section. Overall it was a solid effort, but needs to be re-read and definitely needs an outline.

Oneika Sewell1

'HERE'S TO HEALTHCARE'

Oneika did a fabulous job of introducing her topic, the good parts of the health care system. She was precise and clear in her statement and thesis. Her outline was very short, and needed more detail. She used "does" instead of "do" in the last sentence of the first paragraph. When she started on nursing homes and hospice care, she was really talking about the positive aspects of healthcare, she was discussing the negative impact of having to reach a certain financial bracket in order to qualify for long-term care. She also used Medicare twice. I think she meant to say Medicaid and Medicare: " Medicare and Medicare." "However, when I look at the fact that so much of our resources are used to finance and support war and controversy both at home and abroad, and then our soldiers return home, if they are so blessed and can't receive proper health care for their services, I can only say this country has a lot of improvement left to make. " Isn't this paper supposed to be about healthcare improvements? Why is there so much focus on the negative aspects of healthcare?…