reflection 2

The second time of “teacher and student conference” is similar as the first one to me. Until now I don’t have too many questions in my four annotations. The only problem is in the third annotation. My original topic is “Do Men Have the Right to Control Lives?” But in the third annotation, I mention about the sperm banks. Although sperm banks do benefit so many infecund couples, in some of the countries there are no laws to limit the donors’ donation. Teacher Emma asked me that if the sperm bank is not legal, then why I need to discuss this issue anymore? So I change the topic into “Is that Right for Men to Control Life?” But teacher says it is not good enough. So I change the title back to the original one. I find an explanation to explain why I use the third annotation to support my standpoint: even though many people do something which is beneficial, it doesn’t mean it is right. So we still can focus on the sperm bank and its potential problems and discuss whether men have the right or not to control lives (ex. Under some circumstances people can have their babies through the sperm bank, like taking the sperms from the father instead of the unknown donor).
Teacher Emma still asks us (Rachel and I) to focus on our topic and annotations. Annotations are set to support our topic, so we should find something powerful to support our standpoints. And we should take notice of setting our own viewpoints in the annotations because what the readers really want to know is our position, not those information. So we should emphasis on our own words and use some articles and information to support us that will make the article more attractive and convincing.