Illustrative response paragraph.

Here are the steps

 

1)      Find a controversial article or essay to read—look in your newspapers, online, or in your textbook. Also, you may use the response activity writing at http://www.geocities.com/collegeteaching/response

 

2)        or anything I’ve given you in class.

 

Remember to write in only third person.

 

In the Topic Sentence:

 

3) In one complete sentence explain to the reader who wrote the article, what the article title (put it in quotations) is, and if you agreed or disagreed with the article.

 

Example:   John Adamson’s messages in the newspaper editorial “Get Your Spank On” are completely wrong.

OR

John Adamson’s points are completely correct in the newspaper editorial “Get Your Spank On.”

 

In the Body:

 

The job of your body is to quote and respond to three points you found in the article with which you agree or disagree.

 

4) To do this, you will need to start your second sentence with a transition and follow it with a quote.

 

Example. One thing the author is completely wrong in is when he notes “We should beat the kids every day to teach them we love them” (Anderson 1)

 

5) Then, you’ll need to respond to the quoted sentence with SEVERAL (At least three)

SENTENCES of YOUR OWN THIRD PERSON RESPONSE.

 

You could write:  Clearly, his views are insane. Spanking kids is nothing but torture, and no one should torture kids every day. Rather, all people who have them should love their kids and do everything to protect them. Clearly his statements show that Adamson either does not have kids, or he does not love them. Spanking kids every day is not the way to go.

 

Remember to write in only third person

 

6) After you respond to one of his points, you will to introduce the second point he makes that you disagree with. Remember to start your sentence with a transition and follow it with a quote.

 

Example. Another remarkable thing he is dead wrong about is when he wrote that, “Spanking kids is the best way to teach discipline” (Anderson 1)

 

7) Now Respond to that point:   It is unimaginable how anyone could see such results from spanking. Spanking can does not teach discipline, it teaches and instills fear in a child. It teaches children that Mommy and Daddy are people to be afraid of; consequently, it teaches them that they do not need to behave to be good citizens. Rather, spanking shows children that they’d better be good because they’ll be beat senseless if they don’t.

 

Remember to write in only third person

 

8) After you respond to his second point, you will to introduce the final point he makes that you disagree with. Remember to start your sentence with a transition and follow it with a quote.

 

Example. The final thing the author notes that is rediculous is when he wrote that, “Spanking kids is the best way to teach discipline” (Anderson 1)

 

9) Now Respond to that point with three or more sentences of your own writing.

 

The conclusion:

 

10) In the concluding remarks, you need to do this. You need to start with a transition. You need to restate your thesis. And you need to simply conclude in a way that ties up loose ends.

 

Example:  When examining these points as is done here, it’s easy to see that John Adamsons’ views miss the mark completely. If he spent more time trying to hit the target with his views, rather than trying to hit his kids, he may have something worthwhile to read.

SAMPLE PARAGRAPH

            John Adamson’s points in the newspaper editorial “Get Your Spank On” are completely wrong. One thing he is completely wrong in is when he notes “We should beat the kids every day to teach them we love them” (Adamson 1). Obviously, his views are insane. Spanking kids is nothing but torture, and no one should torture kids every day. Rather, all people who have them should love their kids and do everything to protect them. Clearly his statements show that Adamson either does not have kids, or he does not love them. Spanking kids every day is not the way to go. Another remarkable thing the author is dead wrong about is when he said that, “Spanking kids is the best way to teach discipline” (Adamson 1). It is unimaginable how anyone could see such results from spanking. Spanking does not teach discipline, it teaches and instills fear in a child. It teaches children that Mommy and Daddy are people to be afraid of; consequently, it teaches them that they do not need to strive to become good citizens. Rather, spanking shows children that they’d better be good because they’ll be beat senseless if they don’t. Finally, the last thing the writer notes incorrectly is that “Only wimps and parents who want their children to become out-of-control students don’t spank” (Adamson 1). If an author could be given a stupidity award, Adamson would win it for that quip. The use of the loaded fear tactic and the use of name calling undermines his last shred of credibility. Parents who don’t spank are making the braver decision, and the evidence is beginning to show the truth—children who have not faced the belt face better academic successes than those who have. Therefore, when examining these points as is done here, it’s easy to see that John Adamson’s views in “Get your Spank On” miss the mark completely. If he spent more time trying to hit the target with his views, rather than trying to hit his kids at home, he may have something worthwhile to read.