Rhetorical Analysis Of Do Schools Kill Creativity

Sir Ken Robinson's main point of his TED Talk is that school systems, worldwide, segregate the arts to a lower level of learning. This segregation of the arts in schools drains students of creativity.

Do Schools Kill Creativity? TED is a non-profit organization that serves to present ideas that are worth spreading through strong rhetoric and persuasive appeals. In his eminent Ted Talk, Sir Ken Robinson discusses how public education systems today disregard creativity as an important component within the academic growth of students. Robinson focuses on the importance of creativity by creating a variety of arguments, which persuades the audience to take action upon this heavily ignored issue. His use of pathos, ethos, and logos makes an entertaining case for creating an education system that nurtures rather than undermines creativity. Throughout his speech, Robinson emphasizes pathos by his use of humor and discussion of personal

As children continue their education, they are forced to suppress their creativity and strictly follow uniform ideas that have been used throughout generations. This concept leaves children no room for exploration despite its effectiveness in schools. Students need to learn that it is acceptable to solve problems using different methods. They must break free from the confines and uniform traditions of society; they must think for themselves. Countless novels and movies revolve around the idea of being unique and the importance of defying normality; however, its portrayal in real life is counterintuitive. The question remains: how can we depict a concept so universal without knowing how to first hand use it ourselves? Students need to learn that being unique is the first step to successes, and that creativity helps form a world of endless

In the TED talk video "Do Schools Kill Creativity?" by Ken Robinson, his main argument is the lack of focus of art in the education system in favor for activities that rely mainly upon the use of the brain. The stigma against pursuing careers in the arts according to Robinson causes a child to lose their creativity, he states that because of the stigma the child will never discover talents that they may have. The main point in his argument is his criticism of the education system that his striped people out of creativity in focus on an ideal commodity. Robinson states that “So you were probably steered benignly away from things at school when you were a kid, things you liked, claiming you would never get a job doing that. Is that right? Don't do music, you're not going to be a musician; don't do art, you won't be an artist.” Throughout, his speech Robinson uses a variety of ethos, pathos, and logos to get his main point across, that the education system is killing creativity. A big portion of Robinson’s speech relies heavily on humor to help deliver his message that the school system disregards creativity.

In his speech, pathos is the tool that Robinson was using to persuaded his audience about the education system need to be change. Robinson (2010) claimed that one of the major reasons education has been changing is because of the economic issues. Robinson (2010) stated that most of the developed and developing countries are out looking for a better way to educate their children to comfortably engage in the current economic system. As people can see that Robinson was using successfully the tool of pathos in his speech; because education is one of the most important issue that people always concern for their children. Agreeably, it is quite a reasonable fact since no one can anticipate the turn of the economy in the coming days or weeks. The second reason that Robinson gave for the changes taking place in education is for cultural reasons. Robinson (2010) explained that people need to know their origins and backgrounds and figure out a way that they can teach their children to have the sense of cultural identity and pass that to the coming generations. The only challenge that can be said and society would agree with Robinson, is that people are trying to do what they did in the past. As it has been in the

Kaufman and Beghetto (2014) further suggest that creativity can be fostered in children to a certain extent by providing them with opportunities to express their own unique ideas.

The beauty of creativity is that it is abstract, yet ubiquitous: in art, music or how one decides to compose an essay. However, creativity has recently been declining among the human population. According to an article, named, “The Creativity Crisis,” by Newsweek.com in July 2010, authors, Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman, state, “the Torrance Test … indicates that the public’s “creativity quotient” has steadily crept downward since 1990” (Prompt 1). Bronson and Merryman report that the test, which evaluates one’s creativity, had been dispensed to myriads of people across the globe, and have concluded that creativity has been slowly diminishing. Kyung Hee Kim, professor at the College of William and Mary, also comments that this is most prevalent and grave among students from kindergarten through sixth grade (Prompt 1). Consequently, society, or in this case, the world fears that current students and future generations will not be nourished with the creativity required to thrive as individuals, affecting the world as a whole. Ultimately, this poses the question whether a creative thinking class, which solely focuses on the education of creativity, should be taught in the school. This school should impose a creative thinking class, due to the fact creativity is a vital element for the future and is the solution to the creative crisis.

Class after class, day after day, I often sense a massive amount of repetition with school. Each lesson feels more like a chore than an actual learning experience. That’s the way school has always been though, like a job. It is hard to note that there is any sort of progress being made in terms of the everyday learning experience. In his essay, Against School, educator John Taylor Gatto claims that the everyday boredom of school is truly meant to demoralize and dumb down students, destroying individuality and the ability to create independent and critical thinkers. Gatto explains how children are not really growing up, they are only getting older, indicating that public schools exist only to “cripple our kids.” By using his experience in the classroom, Gatto creates an element of pathos and develops a structure which almost fools readers into inferencing what his opinion truly is. Gatto ultimately, through these rhetorical devices, wants to ignite thoughts about what the true purpose of school is, displaying the modern day public school education as a factory to create a mindless population of students.

Schools with music programs have a higher estimated graduation rate estimated at 90.2% and a higher attendance rate around 93.9% (11 Facts about Music Education 7). In comparison, schools without music programs; however, average a72.9% graduation and an 84.9% attendance (11 Facts about Music Education 7). Additionally, students who study art are four times more likely to be recognized for academic achievement and three times more likely to be awarded for school attendance than those who do not (11 Facts about Arts in Education 2). Despite the benefits of having a music and art program, they are often the first things to go when a school starts budget cuts. Due to, schools today focusing on four main core values: Math, Science, English, and History. Consequently, by focusing on these four main core values schools are crushing the creativity of students. Ken Robinson successfully argues this viewpoint in his TED Talk, “Do Schools Kill Creativity?” By enthralling the audience with humorous rhetorical questions, creating connections with the audience through logical and relatable examples, and by keeping a fairly concerned tone throughout his speech to convey the urgency of the issue at hand Robinson effectively and subtlety attacks the modern world’s education system while at the same time informing his audience how schools are squandering the creativity of their students

If you search almost anywhere on the internet about creativity and public schools you will run into a video by a man named Sir Ken Robinson. He emphasizes that schools kill creativity in every way. On the other hand, President Barack Obama disagrees whole heartedly. Both of these men agree that creativity is important to children and schools but they disagree on whether or not creativity is being implemented in schools. Robinson stated in his lectured at TED 2006, “I believe this passionately, that we don’t grow into creativity, we grow out of it. Or rather, we get educated out of it” (Ken Robinson. TED2006). He goes to say that

Albert Einstein once said, “It is the supreme art of the teacher to awaken joy in creative expression and knowledge.” This quote describes the responsibilities and standards of teaching children. I believe that teachers should be held to high standards for being the foundation of a student’s education and well-being. For my future students, my responsibilities as a future educator include supplementing the growth of a variety of students’ knowledge and creativity, abiding as a role model for students and colleagues, and understanding the issues in the foundations of education.

According the most recent national assessment recorded in the Washington post, “the nations high school seniors have shown no improvement in math and reading performances since 2009.” In the most recent years, education has taken a huge downfall. Since 2010, over 45% of students drop out. Many students have problems with the grading system, so many different testing programs and having to follow a set of rules and not expand on those rules. The education system needs to induce more creativity, enforce the ways on how education is important and elaborate more on the rules of grading.

Creativity is equally as important as literacy, and we need to start treating it that way in schools around the world. According to Ken Robinson’s claim in his, “How Schools Kill Creativity” speech, he believes this to be exceptionally true. All children are creative and talented, however, we have grown up in a world where we believe that it’s wrong to exemplify our creativity. Robinson uses both, pathos, and ethos to help make his claim. He arises emotion in you; he causes you to really think, to trust him, and to question ultimately, how things are being done in the educational system. We as a world have become so consumed with the idea of putting each child into a category of what they’re going to be successful in, regardless of their creativity or passions. You’re either good at math, science, or English; everything is based on your academic ability. What happens then to the people who aren’t academically smart, but are more creative? They are then made to feel that what they have to offer the world simply isn’t good enough, but the truth is, it is good enough. Over time however, we are taught out of our creativity. Schools around the world kill creativity by instilling a sense of fear in the child that what they are doing, and how they feel is wrong, this ultimately discourages them, and they fall victim to the industrialized educational system that we have present day. Robinson believes now more than

The other week, our colloquium watched the video below as a recommendation from Alice Campbell. First of all, Ken Robinson is hilarious and has a talent for tossing humor into every story he tells. His story about the little girl drawing a picture of God and telling her teacher that everyone will know what God looks like when she’s finished is adorable. I also love the story of the three little boys in the role of wise men for the Nativity Story, when the third boy delivers frankincense and says “Frank sent this.I found this video interesting because he talks about the importance of creativity in education and relates it back to children and the worldwide education system. According to Ken Robinson, all education systems across the world have

Robinson made the point that the current education system has a defined starting point and ending point, which is what makes it so mechanical in nature. He said this makes education focus on conformity when it should function like the principles of agriculture. He used an analogy that compared people to fruit. Different students have different abilities and interests. Therefore, different students need different things to grow and prosper. The current educational system does not feed the spirit or provide it with the nurturing it needs to needs to grow. He stated that students are opting out of long-term education. Education is not organic.