Rhetorical Analysis Of Do Schools Kill Creativity

664 Words2 Pages

The TED presentation "Do Schools Kill Creativity," presented by Ken Robinson, argues that the standard institutionalization of school can strongly suppress creative thinking in people. Using his natural authority as an educator, his witty humor and expertise on human creativity, Robinson creates a pathologically appealing argument. However, his challenge to the ideas and methods used at educational institutions tend to lack clear evidential basis and rely too heavily on anecdotes and inductive reasoning. His use of pathos, ethos, and logos makes for an entertaining case for implicating an education system that nurtures rather than undermining student’s creativity. The comedic side of Robinsons presentation lightened the mood of the room allowing …show more content…

Since Robinson was a teacher, this allows him to be viewed as a trusted source with a vast knowledge about education. As Robinson continues to delve into his argument, he adds narrative to the humor to romanticize creativity. The story about his son cast as Joseph in the nativity play, shows how the idea of creativity in our youth is positive, and as we grow we tend to lose our creative side due to being scared to try new things or be embarrassed. He references Shakespeare as a child, and stories about an aliens’ perspective on our current educational system, to show his opinion of public education. Throughout his speech, Robinson emphasizes pathos by his use of humor and discussion of personal experiences to persuade the audience on the importance of creativity. Firstly, he uses humor to recount a story of when he was a university professor and what he observed, regarding creativity, during his career. While teaching, he noticed that many of the other professors were one-sided by only focusing on a single perspective and refusing to look at it any other

Open Document