Outline - Support argument 1 – giving vouchers to encourage people to buy healthy food - Evidence and explanation against – financial approach: incentive / what is to stop people selling vouchers for less money? / buy more healthy foods / short-term solution / wasteful initiative - Supporting argument 2 – encouraging engagement with local people through groups and community action - Evidence and explanation for – group action to improve conditions / individuals follow / people with different experts / responsibility for own actions / growing own food / long-term behavior change - Evaluation in favor of 2 – long-term behavior change Introduction The world we live in is suffering from the consequences of our lifestyles, which are becoming essentially more selfish. This phenomenon is not restricted to any one country or region of the world. For the purposes of this essay, lifestyle is defined as the way in which a person or a community, or group of people, lives and works, and includes not just diet and exercise, but also living conditions, general consumption, financial and social behavior; in fact, every action that is involved in an individual’s life. A considerable amount of research has been done into persuading people to adapt their lives and lead more responsible lifestyles and there is a wealth of literature as to strategies to engage communities to do so. This essay argues that the most effective way to involve people in making decisions about their lives is not through financial inducement or penalties, but through strategies that engage not just individuals but also communities and families in taking responsibility for their actions. Body paragraph 1 A recent government initiative in the UK suggests giving individuals £50 vouchers to buy healthy goods at participating outlets. This is perhaps a waste of public money. Harrison (2010, p. 025) claims that this is not an effective use of public funds, as it is open to abuse. For example, supposing people want cash rather than vouchers. The vouchers can be sold for less than their full value. Further, if the value of eating healthily is not understood, then giving out vouchers is hardly likely to have any lasting effect. Johnson (2001, pp. 126-7) criticizes such schemes for their focus on short-termism and not dealing with the issue. Perhaps, as Gonzalez and Parker (2003, p.074) propose, a better option would be community involvement, not just individual involvement. If the people around an individual or group like a family or community take action to improve their conditions, an individual is then more likely to follow, as Cooper (2007, p.204) points out. Let us imagine people in a community are invited to a local meeting with various experts on changing behavior. They can be shown how to take responsibility for their own behavior, through perhaps growing their own healthy food communally with children and adults being involved. With proper encouragement and support, this strategy is much morel likely to lead to long-term behavior change than the distribution of vouchers. Evaluate the introduction and body paragraph 1 of the essay above using the questions below. 1) Does the writer state their main argument and summarize the different ideas well? Introduction The world we live in is suffering from the consequences of our lifestyles, which are becoming essentially more selfish. This phenomenon is not restricted to any one country or region of the world. For the purposes of this essay, lifestyle is defined as the way in which a person or a community, or group of people, lives and works, and includes not just diet and exercise, but also living conditions, general consumption, financial and social behavior; in fact, every action that is involved in an individual’s life. A considerable amount of research has been done into persuading people to adapt their lives and lead more responsible lifestyles and there is a wealth of literature as to strategies to engage communities to do so. This essay argues that the most effective way to involve people in making decisions about their lives is not through financial inducement or penalties, but through strategies that engage not just individuals but also communities and families in taking responsibility for their actions.[AZ1] Body paragraph 1[AZ2] A recent government initiative in the UK suggests giving individuals £50 vouchers to buy healthy goods at participating outlets[AZ3] . This is perhaps a waste of public money. Harrison (2010, p. 025) claims that this is not an effective use of public funds, as it is open to abuse. For example, supposing people want cash rather than vouchers.[AZ4] The vouchers can be sold for less than their full value. Further, if the value of eating healthily is not understood, then giving out vouchers is hardly likely to have any lasting effect.[AZ5] Johnson (2001, pp. 126-7) criticizes such schemes for their focus on short-termism and not dealing with the issue[AZ6] . Perhaps, as Gonzalez and Parker (2003, p.074) propose, a better option would be community involvement, not just individual involvement[AZ7] . If the people around an individual or group like a family or community take action to improve their conditions, an individual is then more likely to follow, as Cooper (2007, p.204) points out. Let us imagine people in a community are invited to a local meeting with various experts on changing behavior[AZ8] . They can be shown how to take responsibility for their own behavior, through perhaps growing their own healthy food communally with children and adults being involved. With proper encouragement and support, this strategy is much more likely to lead to long-term behavior change than the distribution of vouchers[AZ9] . 2) Is the statement of the overall argument clear? Give evidence. Introduction The world we live in is suffering from the consequences of our lifestyles, which are becoming essentially more selfish. This phenomenon is not restricted to any one country or region of the world. For the purposes of this essay, lifestyle is defined as the way in which a person or a community, or group of people, lives and works, and includes not just diet and exercise, but also living conditions, general consumption, financial and social behavior; in fact, every action that is involved in an individual’s life. A considerable amount of research has been done into persuading people to adapt their lives and lead more responsible lifestyles and there is a wealth of literature as to strategies to engage communities to do so. This essay argues that the most effective way to involve people in making decisions about their lives is not through financial inducement or penalties, but through strategies that engage not just individuals but also communities and families in taking responsibility for their actions. Body paragraph 1 A recent government initiative in the UK suggests giving individuals £50 vouchers to buy healthy goods at participating outlets. This is perhaps a waste of public money. Harrison (2010, p. 025) claims that this is not an effective use of public funds, as it is open to abuse. For example, supposing people want cash rather than vouchers. The vouchers can be sold for less than their full value. Further, if the value of eating healthily is not understood, then giving out vouchers is hardly likely to have any lasting effect. Johnson (2001, pp. 126-7) criticizes such schemes for their focus on short-termism and not dealing with the issue. Perhaps, as Gonzalez and Parker (2003, p.074) propose, a better option would be community involvement, not just individual involvement. If the people around an individual or group like a family or community take action to improve their conditions, an individual is then more likely to follow, as Cooper (2007, p.204) points out. Let us imagine people in a community are invited to a local meeting with various experts on changing behavior. They can be shown how to take responsibility for their own behavior, through perhaps growing their own healthy food communally with children and adults being involved. With proper encouragement and support, this strategy is much more likely to lead to long-term behavior change than the distribution of vouchers. 3) How clear are the supporting arguments in body paragraph 1? Give evidence. Introduction The world we live in is suffering from the consequences of our lifestyles, which are becoming essentially more selfish. This phenomenon is not restricted to any one country or region of the world. For the purposes of this essay, lifestyle is defined as the way in which a person or a community, or group of people, lives and works, and includes not just diet and exercise, but also living conditions, general consumption, financial and social behavior; in fact, every action that is involved in an individual’s life. A considerable amount of research has been done into persuading people to adapt their lives and lead more responsible lifestyles and there is a wealth of literature as to strategies to engage communities to do so. This essay argues that the most effective way to involve people in making decisions about their lives is not through financial inducement or penalties, but through strategies that engage not just individuals but also communities and families in taking responsibility for their actions. Body paragraph 1 A recent government initiative in the UK suggests giving individuals £50 vouchers to buy healthy goods at participating outlets. This is perhaps a waste of public money. Harrison (2010, p. 025) claims that this is not an effective use of public funds, as it is open to abuse. For example, supposing people want cash rather than vouchers. The vouchers can be sold for less than their full value. [AZ10] Further, if the value of eating healthily is not understood, then giving out vouchers is hardly likely to have any lasting effect. Johnson (2001, pp. 126-7) criticizes such schemes for their focus on short-termism and not dealing with the issue. [AZ11] Perhaps, as Gonzalez and Parker (2003, p.074) propose, a better option would be community involvement, not just individual involvement. If the people around an individual or group like a family or community take action to improve their conditions, an individual is then more likely to follow, as Cooper (2007, p.204) points out. Let us imagine people in a community are invited to a local meeting with various experts on changing behavior. They can be shown how to take responsibility for their own behavior, through perhaps growing their own healthy food communally with children and adults being involved. [AZ12] With proper encouragement and support, this strategy is much more likely to lead to long-term behavior change than the distribution of vouchers. 4) How is the main argument linked with the thesis statement? Introduction The world we live in is suffering from the consequences of our lifestyles, which are becoming essentially more selfish. This phenomenon is not restricted to any one country or region of the world. For the purposes of this essay, lifestyle is defined as the way in which a person or a community, or group of people, lives and works, and includes not just diet and exercise, but also living conditions, general consumption, financial and social behavior; in fact, every action that is involved in an individual’s life. A considerable amount of research has been done into persuading people to adapt their lives and lead more responsible lifestyles and there is a wealth of literature as to strategies to engage communities to do so. [AZ13] This essay argues that the most effective way to involve people in making decisions about their lives is not through financial inducement or penalties, but through strategies that engage not just individuals but also communities and families in taking responsibility for their actions.[AZ14] Body paragraph 1 A recent government initiative in the UK suggests giving individuals £50 vouchers to buy healthy goods at participating outlets. [AZ15] This is perhaps a waste of public money. Harrison (2010, p. 025) claims that this is not an effective use of public funds, as it is open to abuse. For example, supposing people want cash rather than vouchers. The vouchers can be sold for less than their full value. Further, if the value of eating healthily is not understood, then giving out vouchers is hardly likely to have any lasting effect. Johnson (2001, pp. 126-7) criticizes such schemes for their focus on short-termism and not dealing with the issue. Perhaps, as Gonzalez and Parker (2003, p.074) propose, a better option would be community involvement, not just individual involvement. If the people around an individual or group like a family or community take action to improve their conditions, an individual is then more likely to follow, as Cooper (2007, p.204) points out. Let us imagine people in a community are invited to a local meeting with various experts on changing behavior. They can be shown how to take responsibility for their own behavior, through perhaps growing their own healthy food communally with children and adults being involved. With proper encouragement and support, this strategy is much more likely to lead to long-term behavior change than the distribution of vouchers. 5) Do you agree with the writer’s main argument? Are you persuaded by the argument? Give reasons. Introduction The world we live in is suffering from the consequences of our lifestyles, which are becoming essentially more selfish. [AZ16] This phenomenon is not restricted to any one country or region of the world. For the purposes of this essay, lifestyle is defined as the way in which a person or a community, or group of people, lives and works, and includes not just diet and exercise, but also living conditions, general consumption, financial and social behavior; in fact, every action that is involved in an individual’s life. A considerable amount of research has been done into persuading people to adapt their lives and lead more responsible lifestyles and there is a wealth of literature as to strategies to engage communities to do so. This essay argues that the most effective way to involve people in making decisions about their lives is not through financial inducement or penalties, but through strategies that engage not just individuals but also communities and families in taking responsibility for their actions. Body paragraph 1 A recent government initiative in the UK suggests giving individuals £50 vouchers to buy healthy goods at participating outlets. This is perhaps a waste of public money. Harrison (2010, p. 025) claims that this is not an effective use of public funds, as it is open to abuse. [AZ17] For example, supposing people want cash rather than vouchers. The vouchers can be sold for less than their full value. Further, if the value of eating healthily is not understood, then giving out vouchers is hardly likely to have any lasting effect. Johnson (2001, pp. 126-7) criticizes such schemes for their focus on short-termism and not dealing with the issue. Perhaps, as Gonzalez and Parker (2003, p.074) propose, a better option would be community involvement, not just individual involvement. If the people around an individual or group like a family or community take action to improve their conditions, an individual is then more likely to follow, as Cooper (2007, p.204) points out. Let us imagine people in a community are invited to a local meeting with various experts on changing behavior[AZ18] . They can be shown how to take responsibility for their own behavior[AZ19] , through perhaps growing their own healthy food communally with children and adults being involved[AZ20] . With proper encouragement and support, this strategy is much more likely to lead to long-term behavior change than the distribution of vouchers. ________________________________ [AZ1] Main argument: individuals and communities should take responsibilities for their own actions through different strategies rather than financial inducements or penalties [AZ2]Funding vs. teaching healthy eating [AZ3]Main idea: vouchers [AZ4]Vouchers argument 1 plus example 1 [AZ5]Vouchers argument 1 example 2 [AZ6]Vouchers argument 2 [AZ7]Vouchers solution [AZ8]Vouchers solution example [AZ9]Closing statement [AZ10]Expand (also see 5)) [AZ11]Is this related to the previous sentence – teaching people to eat healthy food – or the main point of this paragraph – vouchers – in general? [AZ12]See 5) [AZ13]Very general opening [AZ14]Narrowing down the general opening without properly bridging the gap -> introduces the problem of financial inducement/penalties in the thesis statement [AZ15]Abrupt jump to the first point/paragraph supporting the thesis [AZ16] How is selfishness related to individual/communal behavior (is not a community selfish as well?) [AZ17]Needs more detail (just one example is not enough) [AZ18]Would they even show up? If they did, would they listen? [AZ19]Paternalistic [AZ20]How are you convincing a community to do a sudden 180-degree turn in their behavior?