Rhetorical Analysis
In response to Karl Taro Greenfeld’s article, Robert Pondiscio’s “Poor Students Need Homework” aims to convince readers of the need of homework for low-income children. Pondiscio effectively persuades his audience that while wealthy children may not necessarily need homework, kids who are born into poverty do in order to increase their lack of opportunities through the use of cause and effect based arguments, analogy, and generalization.
Pondiscio begins his article by disagreeing with a quote of John Dewey that the best and wisest parents know what is best for all children. This immediately begins his argument and ultimate point. Pondiscio claims that these parents should be more concerned about the quality of assigned homework instead of the quantity of it. He asserts that although eliminating homework altogether would have little to no ill effect of children like Greenfeld’s, it would be harmful on less fortunate kids from low-income families. Pondiscio presents an analogy of the rich and poor students. He introduces the Matthew Effect: kids that are rich in language and knowledge only get richer while the kids that are poor just continue to fall further behind. Pondiscio is concerned about what will happen to these kids and wants people to understand the Matthew Effect. Although these poverty stricken kids have catching up to do, it is nearly impossible for them to do so based on their circumstances resulting in them falling further and further behind.
Switching from analogy to generalization, Pondiscio generalizes that children on the rich getting richer side of the Matthew Effect have a much easier time learning, where the kids on the other side have an unfair disadvantage of a much more minimalized vocabulary and very few enrichment opportunities. He is afraid for these kids because he knows that if they do not learn it at school, they never will. This leads to his argument presented by cause and effect that kids that are born into poverty will grow
Pondiscio begins his article by disagreeing with a quote of John Dewey that the best and wisest parents know what is best for all children. This immediately begins his argument and ultimate point. Pondiscio claims that these parents should be more concerned about the quality of assigned homework instead of the quantity of it. He asserts that although eliminating homework altogether would have little to no ill effect of children like Greenfeld’s, it would be harmful on less fortunate kids from low-income families. Pondiscio presents an analogy of the rich and poor students. He introduces the Matthew Effect: kids that are rich in language and knowledge only get richer while the kids that are poor just continue to fall further behind. Pondiscio is concerned about what will happen to these kids and wants people to understand the Matthew Effect. Although these poverty stricken kids have catching up to do, it is nearly impossible for them to do so based on their circumstances resulting in them falling further and further behind.
Switching from analogy to generalization, Pondiscio generalizes that children on the rich getting richer side of the Matthew Effect have a much easier time learning, where the kids on the other side have an unfair disadvantage of a much more minimalized vocabulary and very few enrichment opportunities. He is afraid for these kids because he knows that if they do not learn it at school, they never will. This leads to his argument presented by cause and effect that kids that are born into poverty will grow