Research Analysis on No Child Left Behind

Rhetorical Analysis of Evaluating No Child go away Behind When edition the 2007 hold by command expert Linda Darling- Hammond c each(prenominal)ed Evaluating No Child left wing Behind, Darling- Hammond goes into depth and criticizes just how much the No Child go away Behind Act (NCLB) accomplished in five years. The author begins by using a neutral and agreecapable tone with how the imp subterfugeiality was vatical to be a victory for American children. She also genuinely acknowledges that the nonoriously known NCLB Act initially brought high hopes for us Americans to imbibe a sophisticated and reformed education system for our children.But close to just as fast as she agrees that the law was intended for good, she gets right to her fleck that she opposes the law by using much of intelligence and connects pathos and ethos along the lines. Darling-Hammond uses logos precise fast(a)ly and acknowledges that the NCLB Act was created to help American children succeed educat ionally. She doesnt fully bash the law without implementing clear ideas and alternatives as to what the government should make to do next in order to effectively make our education system stronger after her criticisms. She asks the rhetorical question, What happened? Not only does this tell us that she was baffled with the outcome of what came to be of this law, but that clearly, it took a complete180 degree release from what she and others thought it would. She says, high-profile Republicans argon expressing their disenchantment with the NCLB, magic spell many newly elect democrats are seeking a major overhaul as well. She measuredly wrote this to show that many people- regardless of political party- are not in favor of this law. What Darling- Hammond claims is that the NCLB Act backfired and left more negative effects schools than authoritative ones.She expresses that the law has been protested by more than twenty states and dozens of school districts that have voted to r esist specific provisions. Clearly stating that despite all these protests, it is still keep without true positive outcomes or benefits. She is very firm throughout the article and believes that the government must make and appeals to the ratifier in trying to add reasonable and realistic options because the 100 percent proficiency by 2014 is in no way realistic in her opinion and that 85 to 99 percent of schools are considered to be failing. Paying off educational debt is ultimately the answer in which Darling-Hammond believes will begin to assure that schools are be more productive because there would be more curriculums to be offered and better programs for scholars. She also believes in equal funds going into all schools-most especially for the schools that need it the most, taking this idea from achieving countries that have successfully do this. Throughout the article, Darling- Hammond also expresses pathos, but she does so while still universe logical and reasonable.Sh e openly admits the NCLB contains some major breakthroughs and that flagging differences in student performance by race and class, it shines a spotlight on longstanding inequalities and could trigger attention to the needs of students neglected in many schools. By saying this and shortly expressing her short-lived praise for the act, she is dead appealing to the readers emotion and even giving some of her personal feelings on the law. One of the harsh truths that Darling- Hammond expresses very openly is that the ultimately to her, the real business in education is racial inequality.She lists and focuses on what minority students do not have that their suburban counterparts do. She writes that in more than twenty- five states, low- income students of color go to a school with crumbling facilities, overcrowded classrooms, out-of-date textbooks, no science labs, no art or music courses and a revolving door of untrained watchers all while other white students have all those resour ces to a point where it is almost unnecessary due to their fewer needs.She reminds us approximately the unequalised and unfair distribution of resources for students of color in America and that unfortunately, problems with race and pauperization are still an issue. Darling- Hammond additionally gives off a great arrest of the NCLB Act, as she is a person in the educational field, which makes her extremely plausible for talking about this topic. She has also been following the act since President George scrubbing approved it. She also writes very formally and articulately, but the reader is able to follow along with her points and her suggestions on repealing the act.She also makes a valid point that more money was being spent on the war with Iraq than on education. Of course, spending it on education would have been more beneficial for our students because about 40,00 teachers would have been able to be qualified due to properly teach students due to high-quality preparation. Darling-Hammonds article on the No Child Left Behind Act shows logic, pathos, and ethos. She is, however, a writer that understands the opposing view and thinks very reasonably and looks at the bigger picture throughout her article.She wants to make it absolutely definite that the reader understands that if we continue with the act the way that we are, Students will not learn at higher levels without the benefit of good teaching, a strong curriculum and adequate resources. It is no secret that our children are struggling with the educational system and something needs to be done about it. Work Cited Darling- Hammond, Linda. Evaluating No Child Left Behind The Nation. The Nation 21 May 2007 1-5. CQ Researcher. Web. 12 Mar. 2013.