Alfie Kohn’s The Dangerous Myth of Grade Inflation is a lengthy essay illustrating his position on the counter argument to the recent trend of claims in the academic world, the rise of grade inflation. Kohn takes a firm stance on the absurdity of the idea of grade inflation possibilities, that in fact “it is hard to substantiate even the simple claim that grades have been rising” (62). Kohn makes an intelligent, well-developed argument as shown by his length in content, essay format, and appeal of ethos.
Although the essay did take quite a bit of time for me to read, I believe the length of Kohn’s essay helped to strengthen his argument. Kohn used plenty of citations of statistical research in the first half of his essay to show facts and figures before he explained his own theory, such as, the analysis of the reports completed by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and Harvard University (63). This tactic was very strategic, because it gave the reader a chance to read the content that is typically more dense before he or she could process the meat of his essay. He then continues to go through the claims of his opposers, “the assumptions that seem to underline the grave warnings about grade inflation”, and how he believes the claims can be defeated (65). The format of Kohn’s essay exercises the appeal of ethos by spending a few pages on the background of the topic before he addresses his own opinions, establishing his credibility to the reader.
My personal response is focused on the major weakness I found in the piece. This weakness came to mind while I was analyzing a sub-point off of Kohn’s use of ethos in his essay, his use of language. I found his use of language to be intimidating, which made it unclear if I (a freshman in college) was a part of his intended audience. With large, complex sentences like “A focus on grades creates, or at least perpetuates, and extrinsic orientation that is likely to undermine the love of learning we are presumably seeking to promote”, I felt a sense of distance from Kohn’s ideas because I had to look up the definitions of the words he used so casually. This use of wordy language made it hard for the reading to flow, due to the constant need to re-read the passages. I was constantly pausing to try and understand what I just read, and found that I took a lot of breaks and got distracted. I believe I could have developed a stronger opinion on the topic if I could understand what he was talking about in all point of his essay. Kohn’s sophisticated essay is a strong argument on the myths of grade inflation intended for an audience as intelligent as he is.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Reader Response #1: Violent Media is Good for Kids
Gerard Jones’ Violent Media is Good for Kids is a media studies piece that uses powerful
testimonies and logic to persuade the reader that violent media liberates children from their fears and dependencies. This passage was engaging and relatable. Jones successfully caused me to think twice about the way I associate media violence and the child development. He explained that regardless of how much violence we are exposed to, “Children will feel rage” (232). Not only do children feel the need to act out as Jones argues, but they need a way to learn how to expose of it and deal with it, otherwise “we shelter them not against violence but against power and selfhood” (233).
After reading the essay I realized violence for Jones and many other kids was used as the tool for the same kind of escapism I used as a child. I grew up in a daycare center for most of my childhood, so I know what it is like to use your fantasies and imagination as a way to develop social skills and overcome fears. I admit to being a introverted, shy child; but, I was able to overcome that through playing with my friends in imaginary worlds and story lines that did consist of violent themes and characters. Remembering back, I recall yes, there were imaginary guns; yes, we could die in our games; and yes, most of us are all civilized young adults today. When children play games with “good guys” and “bad guys” they are distinguishing the general difference between right and wrong, and what those character traits include. Jones’ essay reminded me to not jump to any hasty conclusions, but to re-think this topic and reflect on how I used to play games as a child.
Jones’ article used to appeal of logos to persuade the reader of his stance on this argument. H used testimonies such as the story of one little girl and her aggressive play times and another of an older girl who turned to rap music for a form of expression. Both girls were mentally stable and successfully functioning in society. The two stories contrast in content, but help Jones come to the conclusion that “it’s helped hundreds of people for every one it’s hurt” (232). By using these personal stories, Jones makes a valid point in his argument defending the imagination of children and their violent stories.
testimonies and logic to persuade the reader that violent media liberates children from their fears and dependencies. This passage was engaging and relatable. Jones successfully caused me to think twice about the way I associate media violence and the child development. He explained that regardless of how much violence we are exposed to, “Children will feel rage” (232). Not only do children feel the need to act out as Jones argues, but they need a way to learn how to expose of it and deal with it, otherwise “we shelter them not against violence but against power and selfhood” (233).
After reading the essay I realized violence for Jones and many other kids was used as the tool for the same kind of escapism I used as a child. I grew up in a daycare center for most of my childhood, so I know what it is like to use your fantasies and imagination as a way to develop social skills and overcome fears. I admit to being a introverted, shy child; but, I was able to overcome that through playing with my friends in imaginary worlds and story lines that did consist of violent themes and characters. Remembering back, I recall yes, there were imaginary guns; yes, we could die in our games; and yes, most of us are all civilized young adults today. When children play games with “good guys” and “bad guys” they are distinguishing the general difference between right and wrong, and what those character traits include. Jones’ essay reminded me to not jump to any hasty conclusions, but to re-think this topic and reflect on how I used to play games as a child.
Jones’ article used to appeal of logos to persuade the reader of his stance on this argument. H used testimonies such as the story of one little girl and her aggressive play times and another of an older girl who turned to rap music for a form of expression. Both girls were mentally stable and successfully functioning in society. The two stories contrast in content, but help Jones come to the conclusion that “it’s helped hundreds of people for every one it’s hurt” (232). By using these personal stories, Jones makes a valid point in his argument defending the imagination of children and their violent stories.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)