The topic that the author chose for this essay had the potential to convey some great points of view that may not have been considered by most readers; however, the way the information was conveyed caused her argument to fall short. In my analysis of Pampillonia's essay "The Benefits of Single-Sex Education", I will not be focusing on the problems of her transitions or paragraph structure, but instead on the way that she presents her information. The author not only used her sources inappropriately, but also did not present her own unique point of view which led to a very biased feeling argument on the benefits of single-sex education.
In my own research for the Exploratory essay, the best sources I found not only gave me objective information, but also informed me of outside factors that might effect the data. Applying this to Pampillonia's essay I noticed that the sources she chose did not address outside issues such as income, resources, or demographics which play a huge part in the American education system. Her argument for the benefits of single-sex would be much …show more content…
The first statement she makes is "[t]his research proves those who are against the single-sex education system due to inequality, sexism, and stereotypes are completely wrong" (Pampillonia, 29). A little later one she uses Hillary Clinton and Dianne Feinstein to state that "[b]oth are highly respected women who have the strength, motivation, and confidence to take on stereotypical male political positions... this further proves the single-sex system's ability to raise confidence, thus breaking career stereotypes" (Pampillonia, 30). This is the logical fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc (a caused b just because b came after a). This is an ill use of her sources to make her argument, and she may have been better suited to show how much better most students are doing economically after single-sex
In my own research for the Exploratory essay, the best sources I found not only gave me objective information, but also informed me of outside factors that might effect the data. Applying this to Pampillonia's essay I noticed that the sources she chose did not address outside issues such as income, resources, or demographics which play a huge part in the American education system. Her argument for the benefits of single-sex would be much …show more content…
The first statement she makes is "[t]his research proves those who are against the single-sex education system due to inequality, sexism, and stereotypes are completely wrong" (Pampillonia, 29). A little later one she uses Hillary Clinton and Dianne Feinstein to state that "[b]oth are highly respected women who have the strength, motivation, and confidence to take on stereotypical male political positions... this further proves the single-sex system's ability to raise confidence, thus breaking career stereotypes" (Pampillonia, 30). This is the logical fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc (a caused b just because b came after a). This is an ill use of her sources to make her argument, and she may have been better suited to show how much better most students are doing economically after single-sex