The late 1960's and the election of allende: socioeconomic change and political crisis by Arturo Valenzuela

[meteor_slideshow slideshow=”adssa” metadata=”height: 126, width: 630″]
Order Details
Suggested organization pattern
I. Start by summarizing the reading, using language something like this: “In (title), (author) argues that…..” Show that you understand the reading and demonstrate that you are fair-minded by clearly showing that you “get” the reading and can see, even if you disagree, how someone might find it reasonable.
II. Articulate your argument. In a reaction paper, you can certainly disagree with a reading. But you can also agree with it (and spend your response explaining some more about why this reading makes a strong point). You can also challenge, problematize, extend an argument, discuss implications, propose solutions or new ideas, or do many other things. Use language something like this:
• “While Smith argues X, I believe that Y is actually the case because…”
• “Smith is correct when he suggests X for the cases she discusses, but if we think of these other examples…”
• “Smith claims X. While X is partially true, my own experience (or new evidence or another perspective) suggests that the situation is more complicated….”
• “The author omits an important factor.” The critique of omission should not simply identify what is missing, but also explain how the conclusions would be different, had that factor been taken into account.
[meteor_slideshow slideshow=”best” metadata=”height: 126, width: 630″]