This article only gives facts towards one side of the topic, leading me to believe that the purpose of this article is to inform. The article does not give any information towards the “against” side of the topic and only boosts the pro recess side of the argument. For example, the article states, “According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, free unstructured play is essential for keeping children healthy and helping them reach important reach important social, emotional, and cognitive developmental milestones. Unstructured play also helps kids manage stress and become resilient.” This quote only provides information on how recess improves children’s growth. This article does not use opinions to try and persuade the reader, but the way it provides only positive information on one side of the topic leads me to believe that the author’s viewpoint is that recess should be kept in schools to improve the learning of students. The subtitle says, “School children who receive more recess behave better and are likely to learn more, according to a large study of third-graders conducted by researchers at Albert Einstein College of Medicine at Yeshiva University.” This quote provides states that recess is helpful to children, and it cites its source to improve the reliability of the information. This article was posted on January 26, 2009. I could not find the name of the author, but the information is reliable compared because it is similar to information found in other reliable sources. Due to the date of post and the reliability of the information, I can conclude that this source is accurate.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
http://www.nytimes.com/1998/04/07/us/many-schools-putting-an-end-to-child-s-play.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
Just by the title of this article you can find a little bias. The title is, “Many Schools Putting an End to Child’s Play” and the use of the phrase, “Child’s Play” causes the reader to think that recess is unimportant. Even though the title does show bias, the author’s purpose seems to be to inform because it offers information on both sides of the topic. For example, the author uses quotes like, “But educators cite a panoply of reasons besides academic pressures to explain why recess is going the way of the inkwells in so many schools: a fear of lawsuits if children become injured, a concern about the possibility of unsavory adults lurking at the edges of playgrounds,” and, “To experts on child development, virtually without exception, it seems preposterous to eliminate recess at a time when so many young people are growing obese, and when so many disorders linked to restlessness are being diagnosed among children.” The first quote gives reasoning for annexing recess from schools (against), while the second quote tells of why eliminating recess will have a negative impact on children (pro). Though this article’s purpose is to inform, I believe the author’s viewpoint is against having recess in schools due to the word choice he uses and the amount of facts he puts towards eliminating recess. The author uses words like “lollygagging” and “child’s play” as a way of diminishing recess. After reading this article, the reader is not left with a slant in opinion. This article was published in the New York Times, and written by Dirk Johnson. It was published on April 7, 1998. Even though this article is outdated, the information is still strong, and it was written in the New York Times, a reliable newspaper. I would consider this source reliable.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/28/school-recess-improves-behavior/
This website’s use of facts and statistics towards one perspective on the topic lead me to believe that the author’s purpose is to persuade. “When teachers were asked to rate children’s behavior, the children who received 15 minutes of recess scored better than those who didn’t get recess.” This quote shows that kids tend to have improved behavior if they have recess, leading the reader to believe that recess is helpful to the kid’s efficiency at school. After reading the article, the reader is left wanting recess to be kept in schools, meaning that there is a slant towards one side of the topic. The author also increases her reliability by quoting from Dr. Barros, a pediatrician and an assistant professor at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, “At recess, students ‘use all the things they learned in the classroom. When they are doing hopscotch, they are using math skills. Kids learn a lot of social skills during recess, such as playing, sharing, being the leader, following somebody. It’s all very important.’” By using a primary source from a professional, the author persuades the reader into believing in her side of the topic. The author only seems to give facts towards one perspective on the topic, leading me to believe that she has a viewpoint towards allowing recess in schools. The author includes a text feature (image) of children playing at recess. This image uses pathos by showing what kids will be losing if recess is taken out of schools, and then causes the reader to want the kids to continue having recess. This article was posted on January 28, 2009. It was published in the New York Times, a very prestigious newspaper, and was written by Tara Parker-Pope. Based on the newspaper this was published in, the recent date, and the use of many facts, I can conclude that this is a reliable source.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)