Nicola Orridge
Language Development
Journal 3
05.08.2010
We Should Cherish Our Children’s Freedom to Think – Kie Ho
Like the two previous articles, ‘We Should Cherish Our Children’s Freedom to Think’ was originally featured in a newspaper: the Los Angeles Times. This is not the only similarity between the three articles; they are all focused on the quality of education within the U.S. system and follow an argumentative, compare and contrast structure.
The author opens the article with an almost anecdotal-style story about the diverse population within the U.S.A complaining about the quality of the education system. This style makes the article easy to read and understand, and raises a level of shock and disbelief within the reader which encourages (perhaps subconsciously) initial support of the outlined argument.
At the start of the main section, the author opens with a question: “But I wonder: If American education is so tragically inferior, why is it that this is still the country of innovation?” This begins the start of another of the author’s anecdotes and introduces the described solution to the problem: “Their public school had provided these children with opportunities and direction to fulfil their creativity, something that people tended to dismiss or take for granted.” A compare and contrast approach within the essay is continued, stating the opposite sides of the development of creativity, free-thinking and innovative education against that of the development of core knowledge, obedience and structured education.
What I found most interesting within the article was the introduction of comparative education techniques. The author encourages the readers to view the argument from another point of view, almost to view themselves in ‘someone else’s shoes’. By doing this, he encourages appreciation from the reader and confirms his argument with a concluding statement of: “Our public education certainly is not perfect, but it is a great deal better than any other.” I feel that the informal tone of the article makes it easy to read, understand and digest.
Nicola,
ReplyDeleteI like your rhetorical analysis of Ho's argument. I agree that his use of anecdotes is effective in drawing the reader toward his position. Do you agree with Ho's solution?