Rhetorical Analysis Of Every Kid Needs A Champion By Rita Pierson

1116 Words3 Pages

Advocate: Show Kids Their Worth More Than They Think
Growing up in a small town, there are two groups of people, the haves or the have nots; they either came from money or they did not. There is no in-between. The school system is also a little less forgiving to those who are deemed less fortunate. It seems like the poorer students are treated as if they have a contagious disease, while the wealthier ones can get away with things they should be punished for. Kids see money as an equivalent to being smart and important in the eyes of their peers. Unless a person has a lot of money they are considered to be a nobody and are easily forgettable. In Rita Pierson’s speech “Every Kid Needs a Champion”, she discusses what it is like for a child …show more content…

Pierson appears to be someone anyone would want to have a conversation with. She uses this appeal to her advantage along with some humor to engage the audience. Having tangible facts would have made this speech more appealing because everyone has their own story. It seemed that this speech was geared toward educators in only poor, uneducated communities. She talked about education reform, but she did not elaborate on what types of reform worked and which ones did not work. It would have been helpful for a future educator to know what worked and what did not so the past does not end up repeating itself. When Pierson stated, “We know why kids don’t learn … We know why” (Pierson), she was only talking about how the effect of poverty, attendance, and the influences of student’s peers had on the students. What about the students with learning disabilities, the ones that are in the foster system, or the ones who just don’t care? Don’t they matter too. Only pinpointing a certain group makes her argument seem one-sided. She speaks about human connection and then goes on to quote James Comer, a educator and George Washington Carver, a botanist and inventor. Pierson also recants her childhood growing up and states she herself has been in education for 40 years. These two things combined make her seem more credible because who is going to question someone with a background like

Open Document