Response essay

Intro:  I will identify these errors from the intro paragraph. Please apply my comments to similar errors throughout the rest of the paper.

· Line 3: You have already established that you are responding to the Teller article at the beginning of your intro. No need to go on saying "From the article" as it is stilted and awkward.

· I would have recommended that you start by addressing the issues raised in the intro and then get specific to Teller and Stewart in the second paragraph. That way you establish what we are talking about  (the issues) and then give examples of arguments for and against with Teller and Stewart.

· Remember I asked that you not assume that the reader is either familiar with the article or has read it. 

· Beginning and end of the intro: You write out the entire title of Teller's article - which there is no need to do. The in-text citation will direct the reader to your references section where they will see the title. As I mentioned previously, you can introduce Teller with his full name, title and affiliation and thereafter say "according to Teller" or "Teller claims that..."

· Remember with In-text citations you write them this way: (Teller, 2016) or (Stewart, 2016) and put them at the end of each sentence where you refer to the author's words, ideas or claims. Not with the title of the article.

Body: 

Lots of examples of you making statements about Teller and Stewart's arguments - but without mentioning either or using in-text citations. Yes you are to respond with your opinions - but in the concluding paragraph after having presented and analyzed each author's arguments in the paper. The reason you do not make personal statements throughout the paper is because you are showing the reader what each author said. These authors are experts with Ph.Ds and decades of experience - which you do not have. Therefore when you make a statement about one of the issues you would say "Teller makes a compelling point about..." or "Stewart indicates that Teller is incorrect..." That way the burden of proof is on them and not you. You are not credible, they are. Where your personal opinion is most useful is in the concluding paragraph when you can then evaluate Teller and Stewart's points like a judge in a courtroom listening to two opposing lawyers. Your verdict is your evaluation of the amount of evidence each presents and how convincing their arguments are based on your analysis of the issue. The arguments are not yours to claim, only the analysis.

Conclusion:

Here you  continue to ignore Stewart and Teller as experts, and refer to them only as 'the writer' or 'this article', which does not tell us which author you are referring to. Further, you make additional claims about things that were not in the articles, which while interesting, is not relevant to the purpose of this paper.