Analyzing Rhetorical Strategies in Our 19th Century Curriculum"

I this post I will be analyzing the rhetorical strategies Kessler uses while writing his article and how effective they are.

geralt. "Pair, man, woman, discussion..." May 2015 via pixabay.
Public Domain 

Logos:
Throughout the text Kessler only links one thing, an example, but when I researched him more I found him very credible. He has written multiple books, and has written for many high end news sources, such as New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and Forbes Magazine. His experience here, as well as the fact that he graduated from Cornell University, makes me feel like he is very credible. Kessler also uses strong and confident word choice, paired with an authoritative tone that makes him sound like he knows exactly what he is talking about and could not be wrong. I never felt like it was condescending, I feel like Kessler wrote his strong ideas well enough with examples and rhetorical questions that it did not feel like he was talking down to his readers.

However, Kessler did not provide counterarguments to his ideas. This he ignored almost entirely, and that could take away credibility from him. However, I still feel that his original argument was strong.

Kessler used these strategies to make bold statements that would (hopefully) convince readers of his opinion. In the beginning of his article, Kessler stated, "despite the 3.8 million job openings...A whopping 1.5 million recent graduates just aren’t qualified for outstanding jobs—not a ringing endorsement of higher education." These numbers are shocking, and by using this Kessler has made the matter important to many more people.

Kessler wrote in a way that was easy to follow, and because of his tone and word choice I felt he was very knowledgable. This made me feel as though he was credible, with definitely increased the effectiveness of his argument. Kessler has written and done many things throughout his life, but his bias may come from his own higher education. However, this does not effect his credibility, as it would be a personal experience (at Cornell nonetheless) that would give him more credence to comment on education.


Pathos:
Kessler does not employ as much pathos in his article, he mainly sticks to facts or ideas he has about the curriculum. However, he does use some language that is not formal, and this humorous language gives more life to the text. For example, at one point Kessler wrote, "they are indoctrinated by economics textbooks that start out with some gobbledygook." This word is just one example of how Kessler uses funny language to connect more with readers and paint a better picture of what he believes is going on inside classrooms (the example above his from an economics class).

Kessler wants his readers to feel shocked at first, as he starts out with those statistic on college graduates, but afterwards he wants readers to realize what he is saying. It's like he wants people to start agreeing with him as he starts writing, and by the end be just as enthusiastic as he is himself.

I already know a bit about this general subject, and the beginning hook did not surprise me as it may have a reader a few years ago. I did, however, agree with Kessler as he explained and continue to agree throughout the text. Kessler provides a good, organized article that explains his points well.

Since Kessler's audience can be anyone effected by education, either directly or indirectly, these types of feelings are good. It catches more peoples' attention and then keeps it throughout the text.

These emotional appeals did not take away from the credibility for me. Even though Kessler says, "geeky backwater" when describing advancing technologies in education that are (were) almost unheard of, this makes him seem more like a real person. I know that he has credibility from his past experiences, and this language just makes it easier to connect with someone most people would think of as a scholar.

Ethos: 
Kessler organizes his article in an easy to follow way, and even though there are two pages I did not feel overwhelmed at the size while reading it. He also employs some statistics and facts, such as when he says, "over half of college graduates with bachelor degrees under the age of 25 don’t have jobs or are underemployed." He only presents these hard numbers in the beginning of his article, as the rest he breaks down with his own ideas in specific areas, like computer science and economics.

By using these strategies in the beginning, Kessler is trying to shock readers, and this way get them to keep reading. These statistics could also be a way to give readers more background info before he explains why education needs to change so fundamentally.

When reading, I felt very similar to this. The numbers made me pay attention (as a college student myself) and opened the gates to the rest of his ideas and why they made sense.

For this audience, these strategies are effective. Most people know little about the topic, and the information (shocking as it is) gives people the knowledge necessary to understand where Kessler is coming from in the rest of the article.


Reflection: 
After reading Lia and Zayla's posts, I mainly learned that I have to be careful about the author's bias and seeing if he has one. Lia's post was about use of water, and the scientist that wrote it seems very passionate. It made me realize that I may agree with the author and completely miss his own bias, so I will need to watch for that.