But the truth is, I struggled for a very long time with writing, largely because I had a series of teachers who enforced arbitrary expectations without explaining the pedagogy behind it.  Stubbornly resisting the notion that there are some hoops one must jump is not one of my better traits, and though I’ve improved in this manner (and to which I continue to endeavor), “Follow directions” has long ceased to be an acceptable explanation to a request in most situations.  I spent a lot of time and effort (and my parents’ money) developing critical thinking skills, and that I should presciently abandon them at another’s caprice cannot be established as a reasonable expectation.

Obviously, I had a recent provoking experience, and it’s left me writing as a way of organizing and articulating my position.  Being put in a position of having to defend my position has also left me with the drive to get off my butt and start doing what I’ve intended for some time: to resume my old practice of regularly reading articles (academic and otherwise) and books of interest and writing in response to them.

I never stopped reading, and I never lost my old good practice of annotating as I read.  But I have ceased to craft and fine tune my reactions.  Summaries continue to be a struggle.

And so, I’d like to lay out goals and intentions as well as a framework for value.  A response ought to practice any number of skills, including grokking themes, critically thinking about how an author came to conclusions, application and reception, rhetorical strategies employed, and context within the larger whole.