TOW #13: Even Gifted Students Can't Keep Up by The New York Times Editorial Board

In the past few decades, American education has slowly fallen behind other nations such as Belgium, Switzerland, and Japan. The New York Times Editorial Board attributes this to the lack of attention given to gifted students. These young minds, the board argues, are the future of the nation, the driving force behind innovation and scientific progress. Throughout the article, statistics support their claim of fact that the US in behind other countries. Instead of simply identifying the problem, however, they offer some recommendations on amending curriculum and government funding to better support advanced students.

This article seems to be directed towards those involved in education. Specifically, it appears to be aimed towards politicians who have say over issues regarding the funding of schools, and those in charge of schools or districts who have say in curriculum. Since this piece was originally published in the New York Times newspaper, it is very likely that many subscribers, a portion of whom are involved in education, read it. Furthermore, since this paper is nationally read, there is a good chance that it has been received by educators and politicians across the country.

This exposure is key to this article’s purpose, which is to persuade those in power to reform the United States education system to better compete with foreign nations in accelerated learning. The reform that the article asks for will most likely take a while to become reality, so while technically the authors didn’t achieve their purpose, they may someday once their recommendations are actually applied to the country. The Editorial Board of The New York Times has a wide range of expertise among 19 contributors, in fields from immigration to science, to education. This article was probably written mostly through the guidance of Brent Staples, who holds a Ph.D. in psychology and has been on the board since 1990.

Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/15/opinion/sunday/in-math-and-science-the-best-fend-for-themselves.html?ref=opinion

TOW #12: Quiet by Susan Cain (IRB Post)

I have always found it difficult to chose books, largely due to the seemingly unlimited amount of choices. Quiet, fortunately, was easy to discover because of its popularity, and its subject appealed to me. In this book, Susan Cain, a former instructor of negotiation skills who has since become a writer, discusses “The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking”, as written on the cover. Cain begins by taking a look at how society’s values have shifted from character to personality, consequently putting an emphasis on extroversion over introversion. She then begins discussing the advantages introverts have over extroverts in order to highlight the problem with an extroverted world.

Throughout this book, Cain uses a wide variety of examples, ranging from Tony Robbins, a prime example of an extrovert, to an introverted evangelical minister who finds the churches extroverted ideals troublesome, to various tests proving and disproving the ideas of brainstorming and independent work, among others.

Cain, who identifies herself as an introvert, seems to be writing this book in order to clear up the misconceptions that glorify extroverts and degrade introverts, in order to create a more efficient and functional society that recognizes people’s specific attributes. Given the fact that this book is essentially a detail of introverts’ power, most of Cain’s audience is probably composed of introverts.

So far, I have gained a lot of insight on the meaning of the terms introvert and extrovert, and have been surprised to find that many of my preconceived ideas about collaboration and teamwork, which have structured most of my educational career, have been challenged as being better than independent learning. Cain certainly supports her conclusions with a multitude of evidence, so it is hard to disagree. Therefore, I believe she has achieved her purpose in part one of the book.

TOW #10: Political Cartoon by Steve Sacks

Wal-Mart has been known for its issues concerning the wellbeing of its workers. Recently, Wal-Mart’s low wages have received much attention in all forms of media, including political cartoons. Steve Sack joined the protest by drawing a political cartoon juxtaposing a Wal-Mart employee with two impoverished people. Standing beside a road with their palms outstretched, the three characters hold signs that say “Broke”, “Homeless”, and “On my break—work at Wal-Mart”.

While the first two signs describe very unfortunate situations that put someone at the bottom of society, the third seems ridiculous. Someone who is employed should be capable of finding a place to live and having some amount of money set aside, and yet, as this cartoon asserts, Wal-Mart has not met these expectations. Though the message would have been clear had the employee’s sign read “Work at Wal-Mart”, Sack adds the fact that he is on his break to show how Wal-Mart has not only stripped its employees of necessary pay, but also of their leisurely time. Both of these criticisms of Wal-Mart support the author’s argument that Wal-Mart’s policies are unjust and need reform. His purpose would therefore be bringing attention to this issue so that people will act on it.

            This cartoon was published right before Thanksgiving, and more importantly Black Friday, which has now managed to seep into Thursday thanks to corporations like Wal-Mart. The attention to Wal-Mart as a result of their earlier opening time lends to the effectiveness of this cartoon, since it is especially relevant during this time. Sack’s audience, which is made up of readers of the Minnesota-based Star Tribune, probably came across his cartoon while reading local news. Therefore, their views may not be as radical or strong as someone who searches for political commentaries. This probably benefits Sack, as those who are indifferent are more easily persuaded to accept a point of view. Sack won a Pulitzer Prize in 2013 for his editorial cartoons, and has been drawing them since 1981. Given how simply and clearly Sack’s perspective is argued, along with the ideal context of the cartoon and Sack’s moderate audience, I believe his purpose was achieved.