Analysis Of Learning By Degrees By Rebecca Mead

694 Words2 Pages

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.

Open Document