english
zhang1123
3.1-response_essays_1.rtfFrequently-asked questions for Response Essays
Q: How much summary should I put in my response paper?
A: Assume an educated reader who has not read the original article. You should explain enough of the original article that your reader has a clear idea of that article’s subject and stance on that subject. However, you do not need to summarize every last detail—include only what is relevant to your response. This may vary quite a bit, depending on the nature of your response. Some responses may include the whole range of the original text, while others may deal with only a small portion of that original article. However much you summarize, do so intentionally.
Q: How much background does my reader need on my topic?
A: Assume an educated reader who does not specialize in your topic. You do not need to define terms common to humanities studies, including but not limited to the following:
Literacy
Text
Discourse
Rhetoric
[any commonly-used electronic platform, e.g. Twitter]
If you include definitions of these terms, it will be considered filler. However, if you are attempting to create a new definition for a term, or clarify a definition, or expand or restrict a definition’s typical range (as researchers often do, as we saw in Howard’s discussion of “vernacular” or in Marwick’s discussion of “microcelebrity,”), you do need to clearly explain this redefinition.
Q: What exactly is meant by ‘response’ / what kinds of responses are there?
A: A response can either agree, disagree, or modify (a combination of agreement and disagreement.)
Agreement: “This article is correct, now here is
-additional evidence for why they’re correct, or
-further support showing the validity of their position, or
-a new way of phrasing or explaining what they’re saying, such that more people are likely to comprehend or be persuaded by the author’s views.”
Disagree: “This article is incorrect, because
-the author’s premises are incorrect;
-they observed the wrong thing, or
-they didn’t observe enough, or
-the author’s interpretation of their observation is off, they
-took their interpretation too far, or
-didn’t take it far enough, or
-took it in the wrong direction.
Modify: “This article is correct in some things but incorrect in others, because
-[see above scenarios. NB: modifying an argument is essentially taking a mixed approach, but your thesis statement still needs to be cohesive—don’t bring up what’s right and what’s wrong with an article unless those features are somehow related, or our understanding of one is aided by an understanding of the other.]
Q: Which kind of response is best?
All three approaches are equally valid and equally likely to result in a given grade. Intellectual progress relies on corroboration as much as it relies on disputation; both are essential to keeping the academic conversation moving forward. All three approaches, if written well, will involve similar levels of research and critical thought.
