A “reaction” isn’t necessarily a brain rot veil for copyright infringement.
Comment on Transcribed text of Samantha Fulnecky's assignment, paper, and professor's comments
selokichtli@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
First of all, the term “reaction paper” is quite vague to me. I understand it’s a thing now to “react” to things, but the verb, to react, implies very little critical thinking. I think this is one of those concepts brought by the content creator trend to enhance the amount of engagement and earnings by producing derivative and lazy content.
Being said that, yes. If you attend a scientific class, you can’t argument based on your personal beliefs only. Religious, biblical truths don’t have any special weight here. It’s quite shocking that this can happen at a university level, and that’s why I’m absolutely opposed to non-secular education in general. Religion and education must always be separated.
Mesophar@pawb.social 2 weeks ago
We had “reaction papers” when I went to college in the early 2000s, too. It’s usually a weekly or daily assignment in a semi-online course to write a summary and reaction (or, to use a different word, response) to an article or paper. You’d then be expected to comment (critique) on one or two other responses posted by other students in the course. It was a way to encourage critical discussion and thinking on topics.