Comparative Rhetorical Analysis Of Peg Tyre's Article "The Writing Evolution"
The constant debate on education in America has become increasingly popular as the teaching curriculum continues to change in schools across the country. The most popular difference of opinion revolves around which style of teaching writing proves to be more effective in how a student goes about writing. The articles published in The Atlantic, "Are We Learning the Right Lessons From New Dorp High School?" by Jim Fredrickson and "Creativity is Not the Enemy of Good Writing" by Bob Fecho and Stephanie Jones, express differing solutions to the problems addressed in Peg Tyre's "The Writing Evolution."
Fredrickson explains that teaching writing and language skills will improve students' writing instead of the reasons stated in Tyre's article. Fecho&Jones explain that instead of sticking to a strict writing curriculum, teachers should cater to the needs of each student's creativity to improve the student's writing. Both articles write to teachers, and Fredrickson's article also speaks to educational leaders. Although the authors are trying to persuade teachers and educational leaders to change their minds about the way of teaching writing, Fredricksen is more likely than Fecho&Jones to succeed in accomplishing his goal because the writer offers more credibility than Fecho&Jones and offers evidence that his readers will likely find more compelling.
Both authors are credible in some way. They both wrote for The Atlantic, but Jim Fredricksen is a "co-author on three books on the teaching of narrative, argument, and informational texts" and a "National Writing Project teacher". Fredricksen is more likely to gain the audience's trust because the audience will understand that he is qualified enough to accurately comment on the process of writing. Teachers and educational leaders make up a discourse community that value someone who has experience in academics, so the appeal to ethos is appropriate because the audience will associate themselves with the author and agree more with his standings.
While Fredricksen offers his professions as a way to get his audience to trust him, Fecho&Jones offer no explanation of who they are, so the audience is less likely to trust their stance on the issues brought up in the article. They only use other sources to prove their points such as, "New York City's own ‘Teachers College Reading and Writing Project". While using a constructed ethos to show credibility is a way to establish trust, as Fecho&Jones did, teachers and educational leaders will respond better to Fredricksen's situated ethos because he was able to use his personal experience to construct a stronger ethos. Fredricksen has a more effective ethos than Fecho&Jones because of the audience's values as a discourse community. Fredricksen and Fecho&Jones both appeal to logos with their claims and evidence, but Fredricksen has a stronger appeal by having an article full of sound reasoning. Fredricksen is very clear about what is points are by having a logical step by step approach. This is appropriate for his audience because teachers are more likely to respond to this rhetorical strategy because they can see the right steps to take to improve their way of teaching.
After pointing out Tyre's claim that teachers can work together to solve the issues of students' struggles with writing, Fredricksen then offers his reasoning, "By giving its teachers the opportunity and time to systematically inquire into their own practice, New Dorp cultivated a culture where people learn from and with one another." Fecho&Jones focus less on factual reasoning, and instead, focus on describing the problem by using hostile language, which does not appropriately appeal to the audience. Fecho&Jones say, "perhaps teachers became less interested in assigning blame" and "when teachers teach as if they do give a shit". Using language like this doesn't appropriately fit the audience because teachers are not as likely to respond well to that enough to change their way of teaching. The audience is more likely to respond to a more academic approach to research because of their discourse community, which shares the same values. Fredricksen is more appropriate in his appeal because he tends to the values of academics the audience favors to explain his reasoning for the way he views the writing evolution that took place at New Dorp High School.
Teaching writing in America has become a more relevant argument recently due to the questions of preferable styles of teaching writing appearing. The two articles tackle the problems addressed in Peg Tyre's "The Writing Evolution," and provide their solutions on how to teach writing. After reading both articles, it is apparent that Jim Fredricksen's argument in "Are We Learning the Right Lessons from New Dorp High School?" is more rhetorically appropriate for the audience made up of teachers and educational leaders than Bob Fecho and Stephanie Jones's, "Creativity is Not the Enemy of Good Writing." Fredricksen uses a stronger ethos to establish trust and credibility with the audience and he also uses a better appeal to logos by having his article packed full of reasoning to back up his claims. Fredricksen is able to connect to his audience and illustrate appropriately how his approach to teaching writing, compared to the style described in Tyre's article, is more effective because of his solid appeals to ethos and logos.
