I am writing in response to your request that I analyze Rebecca Mead’s “Learning by
Degrees” and make a recommendation about publication in The Shorthorn. I do not recommend the article “Learning by Degrees” by Rebecca Mead, which queries the assumption that goes against attending school to achieve success within the modern society, should be published in the next upcoming issue of The Shorthorn. The article was written for a completely totally different audience than The Shorthorn’s readers. In spite of the article having powerful logos and ethos appeals, I believe readers from The Shorthorn would not realize the subject of the article fascinating at all and would not even place up with reading the article in the first place. Also, another issue that weakens the article that the Shorthorn’s readers would find interesting that it lacks a claim that fails to create a case for going towards a career path right away or getting a university degree first. Through my analysis on this text, I even have provided many reasons and proof why I do not advocate this article to be published since Rebecca is making an attempt to persuade a hostile audience throughout this essay, gives a poor claim, and has credibility for a separate view that she is discussing about. The main audience of the article “Learning by Degrees” is endeavoring to convince that average working parents are preparing their kids for a higher education or a career that will be successful towards the future.
This article is endeavoring to convince resistant and aggressive audience instead of a sociable audience. We must recall that the Shorthorn is mainly indited and read by college professors that have already received their degrees and involve...
... middle of paper ...
... a university degree.
“Learning by Degrees” by Rebecca Mead is an article I would not recommend to publish in the upcoming issue of the Shorthorn. Its main audience doesn’t have the same characteristics as the readers of The Shorthorn, the central claim doesn’t have a strongly and stable base since it lacks whether college is necessary or not, and the writer’s creditability does not fit the side of the argument she is defending. Due to these factors, Shorthorn readers will find this a weak and insubstantial argument that will bore them and find this article a waste of time. If Mead chooses towards favoring the belief of obtaining a college degree, made the main audience similar to the readers of the Shorthorn, and used her credibility towards agreeing with college, “Learning by
Degrees” would be a great article to publish in the next upcoming Shorthorn.
basic charge of this criticism can be stated in the words of a recent critic,
Do the authors appear to be treating the issue seriously? Does Brooks or Tannen seem to be more serious?
However, Dale Stephen should have taken an alternative route by explaining the other side, which highlights how completing college and obtaining a degree can lead to success and a well-paying job. If Dale had used evidence and opinions from other sources, readers would be more likely to believe his point and investigate further. It is shocking that the article was published because Dale merely complains that college is a waste of time and not beneficial to anyone.
2) She seems like she is telling everyone they way they should think: I don't get why she is so hung up on telling people who they should call what, and what they should do about it. Half of her book is about letting people feel free to be who they are, being proud of ones back round, and having a mind of your own and thinking for yourself.
With the interest of the reader piqued, she uses the rest of her essay to attempt persuade readers to accept her argument, primarily through appeals to logos, and language targeted for a conservative audience.
Furthermore, many statements presented to support Lake’s claim are a non sequitur fallacy. Lake argues that his son may be slow at learning but this is because of the change in culture. He tells the teacher that Wind Wolf “recently encountered his first harsh case of racism.” This in reality has little to do with the speed of his learning but is still presented as a counter argument to the teacher’s claim. This further weakens Lake’s argument and hence, very few statements significantly support Lake.
...dibility by mentioning that journalists and television producers defer to her as an authority, but she does not make a case for being an expert. Moreover, she maintains a detached tone for a majority of the editorial, as an appeal to her authority on the matter, but switches to and involved perspective when giving illustration. This would otherwise be acceptable, except that the illustration is given in place of supporting theory or fully supported argument. To that end, Tannen’s argument would be much more persuasive if she had articulated her position with an even tone, and avoided sensationalism when giving examples.
In his article, he tries to show readers his ideas and concepts with examples. For instance, he chooses example of Nazism when he claims racial differences regard as a cultural perspective from a biological perspective which was disliked causes of Holocaust by Nazism. (Malik 86) He also picks French to explain all people who have common language do not have a common recognition against the world. (Malik 86) These examples are related to his arguments when he claims ineffectiveness of dying language so examples he gives in the article can make his ideas simply because the readers are likely to imagine how the author tries to say ineffectiveness of dying language. Also, these examples are reliable for readers because he uses factual references and examples which is one of the techniques in article “Thinking and Reading Critically”. His idea is strengthened by using this technique. For example, in “Let Them Die”, he says “Today, biological notions of racial difference have fallen into disfavor, largely as a result of the experience of Nazism and the Holocaust”.(Malik 86) Nazism and the Holocausts are very famous institution and event in world history as everyone knows. People are likely to think about how much the author wants to discourage preservation of dying language. These examples show how you can convince people well because factual example can be a reliable evidence, and support claims to make easy to understand for
Kennedy`, David, Lizabeth Cohen, and Thomas Bailey. The American Pagent. Fourteenth Edition. Boston: Wadswoth Cengage learning, 2010. 782-83. Print.
Crusius, Timothy W., and Carolyn E. Channell. The Aims of Argument: A Text and Reader. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print.
Graff, G., Birkenstein, C., & Durst, R. K. (2009). The Growing College Gap. "They say/I say": the moves that matter in academic writing : with readings (p. 379). New York: W.W. Norton & Co.
In addition, this articles overall effectiveness was not what I was expecting. The article was overwhelming because of all the people she mentioned and then she tried elaborating what they all said after each interview! “For my most recent bo...
As we worked our way through the semester we moved from the Change Project to the Public Argument. I was able to look back at how one essay was developed into multiple essays. The type of paper I was writing determined how I was able to persuade my audience. The audience of the papers changed throughout the semester making the way I developed my paper also changed. In one essay I used the sources to persuade the readers towards agreeing with me. In the other essay I used my own words and thoughts to grab the reader’s attention and have them agree with my point of view on the issue. While one essay was a more formal audience and another was more informal the both required persuasion and attention grabbers. One audience was grasped by the use of facts while the other was grasped by talking about experiences and explaining how the topic related to the audience. While the paper was different each paper required some type of persuasion.
Wilson, M. & Clark, R. (n.d.). Analyzing the Short Story. [online] Retrieved from: https://www.limcollege.edu/Analyzing_the_Short_Story.pdf [Accessed: 12 Apr 2014].
Imagine two people are arguing; one person is clearly right, but the other person is obviously winning. Why is this? People that make convincing arguments are usually the ones who can vouch for their character and make the audience think that they should believe them. Along with making people think they are trustworthy they must also appeal to human emotion. Change the way they feel and it will change the way they think. Finally, the argument must be reasonable and logical to the people who need convincing. The person who wins the argument isn’t always right, but they were able to convince an audience that they were by vouching for their character, appealing to human emotion, and by creating a reasonable and logical justification. In the essay,