Truley's Argument Analysis

. No one can be refused his or her right to education, but this does not mean they can attend the school of their choice.

Perry starts out his argument in the article by saying that even the black communities have gotten it wrong about parent’s role in raising their children to become successfully educated. He claims that this conception is strongly misguided and has even made its way into having the president confused:

In his speech, “Remarks by the President in a National Address to America’s Schoolchildren,” Obama effectively argues his claim, that kids should go to school and try very hard to succeed to schoolchildren around the U.S. He effectively argues his claim because he uses supporting details and stories of students that have undergone tough situations, but still overcame those obstacles to succeed and school. Also, he is trying to tell kids that they should do well in school to get a good job and make a difference. He also uses rhetorical appeals to help with the supporting details. One of supporting evidence that he brought up was that if someone wants to become something such as a doctor, or lawyer you will need a good education to do

Romney warns and quotes, “Dividing people and pitting one side against another produces nothing but failure and mediocrity.” If thought about, this statement is so true. Nothing in life can be accomplished without cooperation and teamwork. This quote is also related to how Mr. Romney stated that a child’s compliancy in school has a lot to do with the school he or she is attending. He wants the child and parents to have a say so in where the child receives their education.

Imagine if you were in high school and you weren't the brightest student, which resulted in bad grades, and then there was a policy made where you couldn't even get your driver’s license until your grades got up and stayed up. This is a policy that is being debated on by some legislators who think it’s a good policy and some who don’t think it’s such a good policy. I would be siding with the legislators who don’t think it’s a good policy. It’s not a good policy because I feel like it’s not really the legislators place. Also, students would be getting good grades for the wrong reasons. Lastly, someone’s academic in school doesn’t have anything to do with the ability to drive. Legislators

Every child should have a choice or say in what they wish to do in the future. Especially in High School, where kids are breaking free and beginning to discover who they are and what they wish to be in the future. Kids should be able to make decisions on their own with no outside influences to change their decision, to be able to have many options, and the ability to be whomever they wish to be.

I will be focusing on my point of view for Holt’s argument. I don’t support some of the author’s point of view. He states in his writing that children are not allowed to be themselves anymore they do what they are told to do not what they want to do. School is a very important part of the child’s life they should attend to school. In some primary schools the children are the ones that create their day there in way the teacher only provides them with a schedule. He states that children are like prisoners that they have no option to say also teachers can tell the children what they want them to in their class. In my point of view children should attend school for their own good so they can get an idea of what might happen when they enter an elementary school.

To prove his point he cites an example with regard to the upbringing of a child at home by the parents and the educational assistance that a child gets from the school. In order to mould a child into a good and responsible citizen the schools teach discipline, respect

and that this issue is an important issue to discuss and to solve. He addressed that he wants all children to be able to get out of poverty and graduate high school, and possibly college. He said that to the able to break out of poverty, it is important to break the cycle of violence.

In the article, he explains that while he understands that raising high school to this level and opening college to everyone who would like to pursue it,

Ryerson believed that the purpose of education was to shape children into becoming “perfect” adults, and this was accomplished through setting restrictions on their development (Prentice 2004, 33). However, this is a concept that is unfamiliar in the present due to students being encouraged to be “free” in the way that they pursue their own interests. This contemporary notion of “freedom” is something Ryerson would disagree with: "The helplessness and innocence of infancy look up to us for its future destinies. Children were clay, to be moulded into vessels of honour or dishonour - to be made the ornament or disgrace, the benefactors or the plagues, the blessings or curse of their race” (Prentice 2004, 32). For example, in the classroom there

In the speech he explained that teenagers fall into two groups. Seventy five percent are the ones that are not trying hard enough- they are followers and procrastinators, they drink, smoke, and party. In comparison, there is the other group, the 25 percent. The other percent is the teenagers that behave themselves, follow the rules, study, work hard, and get very good grades. The 25 percent are smart and driven and know what they want from life.

Devotees of school choice point out that under the current public school system, parents with economic means already exercise school choice by moving from areas with failing or dangerous schools to neighborhoods with better, safer schools. Their argument is that

However, Murray goes on talking about how we should be teaching students in earlier years if college is right for them or not. He states that “K-8 are the right years to teach the core knowledge, and the effort should get off to a running start in elementary school” (Murray 236). In this viewpoint, Murray just talks about how the core knowledge lends itself to students in an academic ability. He also fails to mention about public schools for children and how the potential to an academic performer and want to go to college but their school doesn’t have the proper material. In saying that public schools are somewhat poorly operated and that why the educating is failing and the school district is underfunded and can’t provide students the education

He gives an example that no single person can educate all of the youth in the world and still expect good results. He believes that they need different teachers so that they are all learning a different variation of the same thing, that this will teach them to think differently than others. Then, he says that they can work together to solve our greatest problems of all just because they had different teachers for the same subject back in high school. With some many schools and so many different levels of education and different styles of teaching, the amount of “separate” thinkers we must have in this country right now is insane! It’s all just a matter of selecting the right few to be leaders in order for Obama’s idea to fully work. If the next president picks all his friends to be in his cabinet, chances are they probably grew up together, meaning they went to the same school, had the same teacher, and think just alike, meaning that if the world really does come at us with all its might, we have yet to be able to resolve the conflict together, as