Alfie Kohn, the author of “Poor Teaching for Poor Children…In the Name of School Reform,” is also the author of many other books regarding education and human behavior. His article, published in Education Week magazine, discusses his belief that standardized tests justify sub-par teaching methods and that they are counter-productive in closing the education gap between urban and middle-class students. Although no reader will disagree that poor children should suffer sub-par teaching, certain parts of Kohn’s argument are weak because he used biased language, misrepresents opposing viewpoints, and fails to support some claims.
No one wants inequality in schools, so when Kohn claims that poor children aren’t being taught well, he effectively appeals …show more content…
For example, Kohn quotes Martin Haberman, a professor at the University of Wisconsin. Haberman describes “teaching in most urban schools” as “overly directive, mind-numbing…anti-intellectual acts.” (qtd. in Kohn 32) In this instance, the terms “mind-numbing” and “anti-intellectual acts” are overly dramatic and inaccurate. The purpose of teaching, even in a poor urban school, is to stimulate and challenge the minds of the students; no matter how bad some people consider the quality of teaching in urban schools, it is not likely that the intent of any teaching is to reverse intellectual growth. In addition, Kohn quotes from Natalie Hopkinson’s book The McEducation of the Negro. In her text, Hopkinson argues that most inner-city teachers stress rules and rule-following to their African-American students, not “critical thinking…not creativity... It 's about how to correctly eliminate three out of four bubbles” (qtd. in Kohn 32). Kohn selects these quotes because he wants to portray the quality in urban schools as dramatically poor; however, Haberman and Hopkinson’s exaggerated language reflects negatively on their credibility and, in turn, diminish Kohn’s …show more content…
A specific example of this is found when Kohn declares that both reformers and the “general public” are paying “much less attention to what happens inside classrooms” (32). Kohn offers no set of data outlining the decline in inner-classroom concern among reformers, or even a statistic indicating that the media (which would portray the focus of the “general public”) is publishing fewer stories about inner-classroom productivity. In fact, the PBS program Frontline recently aired a program called Dropout Nation, which examines several different schools, including poor schools, to determine why kids drop out and what can be done about it. Granted, the program hadn’t aired when Kohn published his editorial, but many readers will be familiar with media stories that show how politicians and people like Bill Gates are raising questions about what teachers do and how they can improve. Dropout Nation and the existence of many well-known education reformers contradict Kohn’s argument that no one is paying attention. Asserting one obviously questionable claim undermines a reader’s faith that his other claims are accurate. Although Alfie Kohn’s intentions are good, he ultimately puts forward a weak argument. Unfortunately, even when a person means well, if she or he does not present a well-reasoned, well-supported argument, then even the best of intentions are likely to
No one wants inequality in schools, so when Kohn claims that poor children aren’t being taught well, he effectively appeals …show more content…
For example, Kohn quotes Martin Haberman, a professor at the University of Wisconsin. Haberman describes “teaching in most urban schools” as “overly directive, mind-numbing…anti-intellectual acts.” (qtd. in Kohn 32) In this instance, the terms “mind-numbing” and “anti-intellectual acts” are overly dramatic and inaccurate. The purpose of teaching, even in a poor urban school, is to stimulate and challenge the minds of the students; no matter how bad some people consider the quality of teaching in urban schools, it is not likely that the intent of any teaching is to reverse intellectual growth. In addition, Kohn quotes from Natalie Hopkinson’s book The McEducation of the Negro. In her text, Hopkinson argues that most inner-city teachers stress rules and rule-following to their African-American students, not “critical thinking…not creativity... It 's about how to correctly eliminate three out of four bubbles” (qtd. in Kohn 32). Kohn selects these quotes because he wants to portray the quality in urban schools as dramatically poor; however, Haberman and Hopkinson’s exaggerated language reflects negatively on their credibility and, in turn, diminish Kohn’s …show more content…
A specific example of this is found when Kohn declares that both reformers and the “general public” are paying “much less attention to what happens inside classrooms” (32). Kohn offers no set of data outlining the decline in inner-classroom concern among reformers, or even a statistic indicating that the media (which would portray the focus of the “general public”) is publishing fewer stories about inner-classroom productivity. In fact, the PBS program Frontline recently aired a program called Dropout Nation, which examines several different schools, including poor schools, to determine why kids drop out and what can be done about it. Granted, the program hadn’t aired when Kohn published his editorial, but many readers will be familiar with media stories that show how politicians and people like Bill Gates are raising questions about what teachers do and how they can improve. Dropout Nation and the existence of many well-known education reformers contradict Kohn’s argument that no one is paying attention. Asserting one obviously questionable claim undermines a reader’s faith that his other claims are accurate. Although Alfie Kohn’s intentions are good, he ultimately puts forward a weak argument. Unfortunately, even when a person means well, if she or he does not present a well-reasoned, well-supported argument, then even the best of intentions are likely to