WEEK 10.

1: Understanding Reaction, Review,

and Critique Papers

Lesson 10.1.1 Definition of Reaction, Review, and Critique Papers

A reaction paper, a review, and a critique are specialized forms of writing in which a
reviewer or reader evaluates any of the following:
 A scholarly work (e.g., academic books, journals, researches, articles)
 A work of art (e.g., performance art, play, dance, sports, film, exhibits)
 Designs (e.g., industrial designs, furniture, fashion design)
 Graphic designs (e.g., posters, billboards, commercials, and digital media)
Definition of Terms:
1. Critique
 A critique refers to a critical assessment (Yadav, 2017).
 Unlike most reviews, critiques are written by experts in a particular field.
 Hence, critiques tend to be technical and objective.
 They do not provide an overall assessment but focuses on specific parts of a
piece of work.
2. Review
 A review refers to a formal evaluation of a particular work.
 Technically more common than critiques because you can see them in an
everyday setting Written by laypersons in the form of an assessment
 For example, a book review can contain a holistic evaluation (judgment) of a
book.
3. Reaction 
 A task that requires a student to analyze information and give comments on a
certain text or media.
 It requires to condense the content of the work by highlighting the main ideas and
supporting points of the paper.
 It requires one to formulate analysis and reaction to a given body of material
such as readings, lectures, or student presentations.
 The purpose of the reaction paper is to focus on your thinking on a topic after
a close examination of the source material.
 It intends for students to carefully evaluate what they think or feel about the
tasked work.
Lesson 10.1. 2 Principles of Reaction, Review, and Critique
Papers
Principles in Writing Reaction, Review, and Reaction Papers
1. In terms of length, they consist of 250-750 words
2. They are critical assessment, analyses, and evaluation of works
3. Reviewers are ought to use logical reasoning and proofs.
4. They present an analytical response to a book or article.
5. They do not rely on mere opinions.
6. They are not simply summaries or reworded versions.

Summary:
1. A reaction paper, a review, and a critique are specialized forms of writing in which a
reviewer or reader evaluates a variety of works. 
2. Critiques are critical assessments that tend to be technical and objective written by
experts. 
3. Reviews are formal and holistic evaluations done by laypersons. 
4. Reactions intend for students to carefully evaluate what they think or feel about the
tasked work and support it with evidence. 
WEEK 10.2: Solidifying the Understanding of
Reaction, Review, and Critique Papers

Lesson 10.2.1 Opinions based on Facts

Distinguishing Between Fact and Opinion

 For higher-level reading comprehension, students must be able to accurately distinguish

between fact and opinion. To do this successfully students must begin with solid
definitions of the two concepts. Once this has been achieved, students must gain
practice applying these definitions through activities that engage with a wide range of
reading material.
 What is a fact? - A fact generally refers to something true and can be verified as such. That is,
a fact is something that can be proven to be true. 
What is an opinion? - An opinion refers to a personal belief. It relates to how someone feels
about something. Others may agree or disagree with an opinion, but they cannot prove or
disprove it. This is what defines it as an opinion.
Why Are Fact and Opinion So Important?
The ability to distinguish between fact and opinion helps students develop their critical and
analytical skills in both their reading and their listening. Facts and opinions are often woven
together in texts and speeches. It is therefore imperative that students can unravel the threads
of what is true from what is mere belief if they are to successfully navigate the deluge of media
they will encounter in their lifetimes.
Whether on the news, in advertising, or in a history book, distinguishing between what is fact
and what is opinion is crucial to becoming an autonomous person with the critical abilities
necessary to avoid being manipulated easily.
The Language of Fact and Opinion: Signal Words and Phrases
As we mentioned above, often writers will liven up their facts with a sprinkling of opinion.
Unfortunately, it can at times be difficult to extract the verifiable truths from the author’s
preferences and biases. Luckily the language used itself often throws up helpful clues in the
forms of words and phrases that assist us in identifying statements as fact-based or opinion-
based.
Let’s now take a look at some examples of those signal words and phrases being used in the
sentence fragments that often precede a statement of fact or opinion:
Fact
 The annual report confirms…
 Scientists have recently discovered…
 According to the results of the tests…
  The investigation demonstrated…
Opinion
 He claimed that…
 It is the officer’s view that…
 The report argues that…
 Many scientists suspect that…
As we can see from the above examples, the language used to introduce a statement can help
indicate whether it is being framed as a fact or an opinion.
Students need to understand too that things are not always as they appear to be. At times,
writers, whether consciously or not, will frame opinion as fact and vice versa. This is why
students must develop a clear understanding of what constitutes fact and opinion and are
afforded ample opportunities to practice distinguishing between the two.
WHAT IS CONTEXT?
Context is the circumstances surrounding an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it
can be fully understood. Facts and opinions must be placed in context to conclude.
For example, a young boy who tells his mother “I ate a truckload of sweets at the party last
night” needs to be placed in the context of his age, and audience.
We can confidently infer he never actually ate a real truckload of sweets, but we can reasonably
appreciate he ate a lot of them and wanted to emphasize that point.
His mother might ask a clarifying question to turn that opinion into a hard fact.
Summary:
1. A reaction paper, a review, and a critique are specialized forms of writing in which a
reviewer or reader evaluates a variety of works. 
2. Critiques are critical assessments that tend to be technical and objective written by
experts. 
3. Reviews are formal and holistic evaluations done by laypersons. 
4. Reactions intend for students to carefully evaluate what they think or feel about the
tasked work and support it with evidence. 
Lesson 10.2.2 Claims and Sources
People will usually take your word for certain kinds of claims. These include claims about events
that you have personally participated in or observed. For example, when you tell me when and
where you were born, what your name is, or what you do for a living, I will usually believe you
unless I have some reason to doubt your word. Likewise, if we believe people are
knowledgeable about a subject, we will tend to believe what they say about that subject--to a
point. And, of course, we tend to believe other people when they tell us things that we already
believe.

"Common knowledge" consists of a broad range of claims that most people believe as a
matter of course, just because they live in the same culture. (Common knowledge might not be
the same for people from a different culture, which is why it can often be harder to communicate
clearly with people from another culture.)

When you write an academic paper, many of the claims you make will be drawn from our
cultural common knowledge, which you share with your readers. But if your entire paper
consists of common knowledge, it won't be very interesting work. You'll just be telling us what
we already know, stating the obvious. Your thesis statement would be neither controversial nor
informative. So if your work is going to be interesting, if it is going to tell us something we don't
already know, most of what you say will be claims that we are unsure about.

Sometimes they are the kind of claims that we will accept on your authority--for example, a
personal experience that illustrates your point. But unless your paper is entirely about your own
experience, we probably won't accept your word for everything. So the major factor, often the
major factor, determining whether your readers believe what you claim will be the quality of your
supporting evidence.

Evidence

 Evidence is information that answers the question "How do you know?" of a claim you
have made. Please take that question very literally. It is often hard to tell the difference
at first between telling readers what you know and telling them how you know it. But to
become an effective writer, in almost any context, you need to be able to ask this
question repeatedly and test the answers you give for effectiveness.
 
Discover what claims in your essay need supporting evidence.

 You may need to point out in writing your work that China is the largest nation in the
world, in population, or that most Filipinos have a Facebook account, or that Rodrigo
Duterte was elected president in 2016. Claims like these draw on common knowledge.
You can assume that your readers will recognize the truth of such claims without any
further evidence.
  You can also assume that readers will accept claims about your own personal
experience--assuming they sound reasonable--without further evidence. But when you
make a claim that is not common knowledge, then you need to support it.
For every claim that readers might doubt, tell your readers how you know the claim is
true.

 Most of the words in a good paper will be devoted to answering the question "How do
you know?" When revising your work, take that question very literally. If you do in fact
believe that a claim you are making in your essay is true, let your readers know what you
saw, read, or heard that convinced you it was true. In many cases, of course, you may
not be able to answer that question without doing further research, because you may not
remember how you learned something. That means that you will have to, in effect, learn
it again for your essay.
Note that the standard here is that you should support every claim that readers might
doubt. Don't fall into the trap of assuming that everyone knows what you do. If a
reasonable person could question your claim, you should tell us how you know it's true. Even
readers who tend to agree with you already or know most of what you're saying will find that
your work more strongly reinforces their existing beliefs if you support your claims with good
evidence.
 
Explain your sources and cite them where necessary.
To tell us how you know something, you need to tell us where the information came from. If you
personally observed the case you are telling us about, you need to tell us that you observed it,
and when and where. If you read about it, you need to tell us where you read about it. If you are
accepting the testimony of an expert, you need to tell us who the expert is and why she is an
expert in this field. The specific identity (name, position) and qualifications of your sources are
part of the answer to the question "How do you know?" You need to give your readers that
information.
Keep in mind that it is the person, the individual human being, who wrote an article or expressed
an idea who brings authority to the claim. Sometimes that authority may be reinforced by the
publication in which the claim appeared. Sometimes not. But when you quote or paraphrase a
source, you are quoting or paraphrasing the author, not the magazine or journal.
 
Apply the tests of evidence to your supporting material.
You have evidence that you plan to use in your work. The key question for you, because it will
be a key question for your readers, is whether the evidence is true, whether you can trust it.
How do you tell?
In reviewing one another's evidence, you can use a few tests that are widely used to evaluate
evidence and sources.  Not all of these tests are relevant to all evidence, but one or more of
them will apply to almost all evidence.  
They fall into two broad categories: source tests, tests that apply to the credibility of the source
of the evidence; and direct tests, tests of the evidence itself.
 Source Tests
1. Specific Reference to Source:  Does the writer indicate the particular individual or group
making the statements used for evidence? Does the writer tell you enough about the source that
you could easily find yourself?
2. Qualifications of the Source: Does the writer give you a reason to believe that the source is
competent and well informed in the area in question?
3. Bias of the Source: Even if expert, is the source likely to be based on the question? Could
we easily predict the source’s position merely from a knowledge of his job, her political party, or
organizations she works for?
4. Factual Support: Does the source offer factual support for the position taken or simply state
conclusions?
 Direct Tests
1. Recency: Is the evidence too old to be of current relevance to the issue? Would the source
have known about recent developments or discoveries that might have bearing on the issue?
2. Sufficiency: Is there enough evidence to justify all of the claims being made from it?
3. Logical Relevance: Does the claim made in the evidence provide a premise that logically
justifies the conclusion offered?  Can you reasonably conclude being urged based on what the
evidence says?
4. Internal Consistency: Does this source make claims that are contradicted by other claims
from the same source?
5. External Consistency: Are the claims made by this source consistent with general
knowledge and other evidence? If not, does the writer account for this discrepancy?

Summary:
1. A fact generally refers to something true and can be verified as such. 
2. An opinion refers to a personal belief. It relates to how someone feels about
something. 
3. Context is the circumstances surrounding an event, statement, or idea, and in terms
of which it can be fully understood.
4. Facts and opinions must be placed in context to conclude from.
5. Common knowledge consists of a broad range of claims that most people believe as
a matter of course because they live in the same culture.
6. Claim is an assumption that focuses on what you are trying to prove. 
7. Evidence is information that answers the question "How do you know?" of a claim
you have made.

WEEK 11: Reaction and Review

Lesson 11.1 Misconceptions on Reaction Paper
Mistakes to Avoid in Writing Reaction Paper
Like any other writing task, the reaction paper has some common mistakes we need to
avoid while writing. Here are a few we are totally sure about:
1. Do not write your paper summarizing the source. Your task is to analyze the content and
come up with your personal opinion regarding the ideas you highlighted during the
reading activity. 
2. While you need to always use examples and evidence to support your opinion, you need
to use only reliable ones. Besides, your examples should directly relate to the topic.
3. Do not be afraid to conflict with the author of the source. You are not supposed to
support their ideas. Your task is to present your personal opinion and if it differs
drastically from one the author has, it is normal.

Lesson 11.2 Writing a Reaction Paper

Reaction or response papers are usually requested by teachers so that you'll consider
carefully what you think or feel about something you've read. It is a form of paper writing in
which the writer expresses his ideas and opinions about what has been read or seen. 
Guide Questions: 
 How do you feel about what you are reading?
 What do you agree or disagree with?
 Can you identify with the situation?
 What would be the best way to evaluate the story?
Keeping your responses to these questions in mind, follow the following prewriting steps.
 Prewriting for Your Reaction Paper
The following statements could be used in a reaction/response paper. Complete as many
statements as possible, from the list below, about what you just read.
The following statements could be used in a reaction/response paper. Complete as many
statements as possible, from the list below, about what you just read.
 My Reaction to What I Just Read Is That . . .

I think that Also,

I see that For example,
I feel that Moreover,
It seems that However,
In my opinion, Consequently,
Because Finally,
A good quote is In conclusion,

What you've done in completing these statements is written a very rough reaction/response
paper. Now it needs to be organized. Move ahead to the next section.
 Organizing Your Reaction Paper
A reaction/response paper has an introduction, a body, and a conclusion.
Introduction:

 The introduction should contain all the basic information in one or two paragraphs.

This sentence should give the title,

Sentence 1
author, and publication you read.

These sentences give a summary of what

Sentences 2, 3, 4
you read (nutshell and be objective) 

This sentence is your thesis

Sentence 5 statement. You agree, disagree,
identify, or evaluate.

Your introduction should include a concise, one-sentence, focused thesis. This is the
focused statement of your reaction/response.
Body

 The body should contain paragraphs that provide support for your thesis. Each
paragraph should contain one idea. Topic sentences should support the thesis.

Sentence 1 Topic Sentence (specific reaction/ opinion)

Explanation or example of the topic

Sentence  2 (sometimes sentence 3)
sentence (detailed/descriptive reaction)

Sentences 3 (sometimes sentence 4) Evidence from the text

Concluding Sentence/ Linking Sentence (to

Sentence 5
the next paragraph)
Conclusion

 The conclusion can be a restatement of what you said in your paper. It also is a
comment which focuses on your overall reaction. Finally, it can be a prediction of the
effects of what you're reacting to. 
Note: your conclusion should include no new information.

Lesson 11.2 Writing a Reaction Paper

A review paper refers to a formal evaluation of a particular work. Most reviews we know can be
seen on the internet, specifically, youtube. This is because everyone can do or write a review on
something, but in the academic setting, there should be a structure to follow. 
There are several ways to present your academic review and they vary by discipline or subject.
Below is the suggested outline, with one paragraph for each of the six sections
1. Introduction. All good pieces of academic writing should have an introduction, and reviews
are no exception. Open with a general description of the topic/ subject. Think, if possible, of a
hook to draw your readers in. If there is an identifiable thesis statement, you may consider
quoting it directly.
2. About the author(s). Some basic biographical information about the author(s) or editor(s) of
the subject/ text you are reviewing is necessary. Who are they? What are they known for? What
particular sorts of qualifications and expertise do they bring to the subject? How might the work
you are reviewing fit into a wider context?
3. Summary of contents. A reasonably thorough indication of the research methods used (if
applicable) and of the range of substantive material covered in the text should be included.
4. Strength. Identify one particular area in which you think the text/ subject does well. This
should, ideally, be its single greatest strength as an academic work.
5. Weakness. Identify one particular area in which you think the text/ subject could be
improved. While this weakness might be related to something you actually believe to be
incorrect, it is more likely to be something that the author omitted, or neglected to address in
sufficient detail.
6. Conclusion. End your review with a concluding statement summarizing your opinion of the
text/ subject. You should also explicitly identify a range of audiences whom you think would
appreciate reading or otherwise benefit from the text/ subject.
Writing good academic reviews gets easier with experience, just like any skill. And provided you
meet your deadlines and are amenable to any changes your editor may wish you to implement,
your opportunities to make contributions in this genre and to the collective pursuits of a
community committed to the advancement of knowledge will only increase with time. All you
need to do is take that first step.
 
Summary:
1. Reaction or response is a form of paper writing in which the writer expresses his ideas
and opinions about what has been read or seen. 
2. A reaction/response paper has an introduction, a body, and a conclusion.
3. The introduction of the reaction paper should contain all the basic information in one or
two paragraphs.
4. The body should contain paragraphs that provide support for your thesis. Each
paragraph should contain one idea. Topic sentences should support the thesis.
5. The conclusion can be a restatement of what you said in your paper. It also is a
comment which focuses on your overall reaction.
6. Review paper refers to a formal evaluation of a particular work.
7. There are several ways to present your academic review and they vary by discipline or
subject. 
WEEK 12: The Art of Critique

Lesson 12.1 Writing a Critique Paper

Critique

 A critique is a genre of academic writing that briefly summarizes and critically evaluates
a work or concept using or applying critical approaches, such as formalism, feminism,
Marxism, and the reader-response approach. Critiques can be used to carefully analyze
a variety of works such as:
o Creative works – novels, exhibits, film, images, poetry
o Research – monographs, journal articles, systematic reviews, theories
o Media –  news reports, feature articles
 Like an essay, a critique uses a formal, academic writing style and has a clear structure:
an introduction/ introductory sentence (main idea), body/ supporting sentences, and
conclusion/ concluding sentence. Note that critique can be compressed in one
paragraph for as long as the three parts are present and it still follows the principle of
250 to 750 words.
Structure of the Critique

One-to-two-paragraph Critique
Critiques of Academic Researches and Articles
(250-750 words)

Introduction
 The author’s name(s) and the title of the article
Introductory Sentence/ Main Idea
 The author’s main point
 A thesis statement that previews your analysis

Supporting sentences/ critical Summary

evaluation using a critical approach
 The main points of the article
with text-based or subject-based
evidence  The arguments presented in the article

 The findings of the article

Body (detailed explanation and evidence using critical

approach/es)
 Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the
article that you noted while critically reading the
article.
 State your informed opinions about the clarity,
relevancy, and accuracy of the article, using
specific examples from the article to support your
 statements.

Conclusion
 Summarize the key points in the article, as well as
the key points from your own analysis.
 Close with a comment about the significance of the
Concluding Sentence (Restating the
research or a statement of future research needed
main idea)
in the field.
 
Source: https://writingcenter.ashford.edu/writing-article-
critique (Links to an external site.)

Lesson 12.2 Critical Approaches

There are various ways or standpoints by which you can analyze and critique a certain
material. You can critique a material based on its technical aspects, its approach to
gender, your reaction as the audience, or through its portrayal of class struggle and
social structure.
1. Formalist criticism- claims that literary works contain intrinsic properties and treats each
work as a distinct work of art. In short, it posits that the key to understanding a text is through
the text itself; the historical context, the author, or any other external contexts are not necessary
for interpreting the meaning.
Following are the common aspects looked into formalism:
 Author's techniques in resolving contradictions within the work
 The central passage that sums up the entirety of the work
 Contribution of parts and the work as a whole to its aesthetic quality
 Relationship of the form and the content
 Use of imagery to develop the symbols in the work
 The interconnectedness of various parts of the work
 Paradox, ambiguity, and irony in the work
 Unity in the work
2. Feminist Criticism- also called feminism, it focuses on how literature presents women as
subjects of socio-political, psychological, and economic oppression. It also reveals how aspects
of our culture are patriarchal, i.e., how our culture views men as superior and women as inferior.
The common aspects looked into when using feminism are as follows:
 How culture determines gender
  How gender equality (or lack of it) is presented in the text
 How gender issues are presented in literary works and other aspects of human
production and daily life.
 How women are socially, politically, psychologically, and economically oppressed by
patriarchy
 How patriarchal ideology is an overpowering presence

3. Marxist Criticism- is concerned with differences between economic classes and the
implications of a capitalist system, such as the continuing conflicts between the working class
and the elite. Hence, it attempts to reveal that the ultimate source of people's experience is the
socioeconomic system.
The common aspects looked into when using Marxist criticism are as follows:
 Social class as represented in the work
 The social class of the writer/ creator
 The social class of the characters
 Conflicts and interactions between economic classes

4. Reader-Response Criticism- is concerned with the reviewer's reaction as an audience of a

work. This approach claims that the reader's role cannot be separated from the understanding
of the work; a text does not have meaning until the reader reads it and interprets it. Readers are
therefore not passive and distant but are active consumers of the material presented to them.
The common aspects looked into when using reader-response criticism are as follows:
 Interaction between the reader and the text in creating meaning
 The impact of the reader's delivery of sounds and visuals on enhancing and changing
the meaning
 
Note that these are not the only critical approaches you can use. Other approaches in
writing a critique include postmodern criticism, post-colonial criticism, structuralism,
psychological criticism, gender criticism, gender criticism, ecocriticism, biographical
criticism, historical criticism, mythological criticism, deconstructionist criticism, and
many more.