I'm preparing an example of my writing for high level feedback. The deepest goal is to see what I'm doing that engages the reader and what precludes engagement. At this point I don't want editorial feedback. Not that my writing doesn't need it, but I'm looking for more broad brush opinions. The three questions I've come up with so far are:

1. What did you like about the story?
2. What did you not like about it?
3. What are the top couple "you need to improve this" things on your mind?

Are there better questions? Am I barking up the wrong tree?

I think that's a great start! Another question that comes to my mind would be: "What did you take away from the story?".

I also like to ask if the reader still has any unanswered questions or is confused by anything at the end of the story.

When I give high-level beta-reading comments, I give a lot of feedback on plot and character, and this is the kind of feedback I look for when I get my own writing reviewed. I want to know if my plot has any holes or took any major logic leaps, if my characters were relatable and easy to follow, and if their motivations were clear. If my story--or my characters' actions--"lose" the reader, I want to know.

*Did you notice any major holes or inconsistencies in the plot?
*Did you enjoy the characters? Were there any you had trouble "getting into"?
*Were the characters' motivations and actions clear? Did they do anything that seemed out of character, forced, or illogical to you?

First of all, a quibble about terminology: "Broad brush opinions" (other than mere personal preferences) are "editorial feedback." This level of critique is what distinguishes an "editor" from a mere "proofreader," and used to be one of the main selling points of the "traditional publishing" route. (Not that proofreading isn't editing, but it's only the (ideally) last and least intrusive stage.)

But in my experience (having had an English teacher who made us get peer review and urged critique on as high a level as possible, and then both giving and receiving critique on ideas and drafts after I graduated high school), the more open-ended a question is, the harder it is to answer it, so I would recommend giving, say, ten more-specific questions rather than four or so very general ones (though having some open-ended questions is good so that you get the answers to them if the reviewer has any). If you have any specific place that you think might not "work," for example, you might ask about that. Ms. Hansen's suggested questions are good ones.

Jon makes a good point. Usually when I send a story to beta-readers, I have an idea in my head about what my book's strong and weak points are. So while I'll ask general questions and seek their initial reaction, I'll point out a few areas I either think are great (and I want to make sure others like them too) or think are weak (and I want to know if other readers also have a problem with them). I'll ask questions like "Is this character annoying?" "Is this too dark for the age range?" etc.