Central Argument
| Reading | through | the | case | study |
| Researching | more | on | the | information |
| Picking | on | the | important | facts |
| Deciding | on | the | key | argument |
| Collating | information | around | the | argument |
Main Idea 1
| The | question | was | the | guide |
| Team | dynamics | dynamics | in | case |
| Required | adequate | understanding | on | case |
| More | research | from | outside | sources |
| Collating | case | and | research | information |
Main Idea 2
| Defining | the | key | term, | teamwork |
| Reading | more | on | teamwork | concept |
| Looking | for | teamwork | in | organization |
| Drafting | the | ideas | on | paper |
| Writing | the | final | detailed | section |
Main Idea 3
| Searching | for | effective | leadership | definition |
| Researching | on | ineffective | leadership | meaning |
| Comparing | the | two | organizational | concepts |
| Looking | for | characteristics | in | case |
| Writing | down | the | final | information |
Main Idea 4
| Developing | understanding | of | leadership | role |
| Researching | on | the | leadership | role |
| Investigating | leadership | in | the | case |
| Looking | into | strengths | and | weaknesses |
| Writing | the | findings | on | topic |
Concluding Thoughts
| Reading | through | the | work | done |
| Pointing | out | the | important | points |
| Comparing | to | research | on | topic |
| Summing | up | the | main | ideas |
| Writing | down | the | concluding | section |
Response
There is a clear articulation of a writer’s ideas. From the beginning of the argument, the writer shows a well-laid out plan for the concepts. From what I have done, I concur with the writer that the discussion takes a process from the start to the end. The writer’s work has a main argument that is clearly stated. As I wrote my discussion, I realized that from the main argument, it is possible to investigate the other main ideas. It is evident that the key concept relates to team dynamics from which it becomes possible to develop the whole paper. The writing shows evidence of an understanding of metacognition, indicating that the writer is knowledgeable about the whole course of writing. Among the most evident ideas in the work is the importance of defining the key concepts before commencing on further discussions.
Besides the definitions of the notions, the writer shows knowledge of research. There is no process of writing that can be done successfully without sourcing ideas from different authors. At the same time, there is evidence of comprehension of the case being studied. Comparing the case to the ideas from outside sources played a major part in successful writing. The process of metacognition effectively indicates the structure of the entire paper. Just like my work, the writer lays out a defined picture of how the work should be structured. It is evident that the work was set in a number of sections, each with a different main idea. The work provided an opportunity to think about the way the initial paper was constructed.
It is not always that the writer takes time to think about what he/she had written. From the student’s work and what I have presented, we took a while to contemplate about the presentation. The writer has indicated the steps and efforts that went into writing the initial work. The presentation by my classmate is impressive, although there is no 5X5 table as required in the instructions. However, there is a great deal of efforts that are evident in the work. From the analysis, is it possible to tell the thinking patterns that went into this presentation. In fact, it is evident that each person takes time to write down ideas that are useful and to come up with convincing facts.