The editorial “Ignoring Superman,” written by Dan Haley, eludes to the film Waiting for Superman and its effects on society. The documentary tells the story of five kids attending inner-city schools and their low opportunities for receiving a good education. The film shows less fortunate parents trying to send their children to charter schools where there are higher passing rates and graduates, unlike the community public schools. The education offered at the private schools will allow these poor kids to succeed in this competitive country. It states that if the education of the inner-city public schools does not change, the future of the children will be a disappointment; one without well-paying jobs. Dan Haley states that this movie “is one of the most important films in years.” He argues that “if you care about the future of our country,” you will watch it. While Haley argues all people should watch this film, the film itself also has an argument of its own; inner-city schools are not receiving the education they need to and it is because of the teachers’ poor teaching.
Kairos refers to this article in terms of its immediate effects to the city of Denver. Denver does have a few inner-city schools that do not have a great teaching staff. While Haley watched the film at a theater in south Denver, it was ironic that parents had gathered in northeast Denver to “debate massive changes being considered for Montbello High School and its many feeder schools. Of every 100 freshmen who start at Montbello, only six graduate and go on to college without needing remedial work.” This issue is happening right now all around the country and something needs to be done to get these children a decent education for their future. The opportunity to do something about it is right in front of us. Recently, a controversial law was approved that made it easier to get rid of bad teachers, or so we thought. Through Haley’s use of evidence, it is proven that only 1 in 2,500 teacher have lost their right to teach after the making of this law. Their teacher unions protect the majority of them from being fired. The issue at hand is to find a way to hire new teachers who will provide a better education for the kids, but also to fire those who are doing just the opposite. In this film, there are both heroes and villains; education founders and creators versus the teacher unions. As the community of Denver, and almost any area in the United States, citizens believe that education is a priority for children. In order to become successful later on in life, the kids today must be taught well. These are the children of the future who will be making the big decisions in the corporate world, running our businesses, or leading our nation. We should want them to succeed now as well. Don’t we all want to be successful? Nobody wants to be uneducated and on their own in this world. The only way to reach that goal is to start at the root of the issue: eliminating and replace unqualified teachers.
Haley begins his editorial with a brief introduction of his thoughts on the film; “I’m no film critic, but I think it’s fair to say a movie has impact if you feel like you’ve been punched in the gut after watching it, or it causes a slight watery, salty discharge to well in your eyes.” This quote defines Haley’s ethos. Through his first sentence, he captures the reader by using a slight bit of humor contrasted with all seriousness. He could have easily said, “this movie impacted me and made me cry,” but his use of figurative language describes his considerate feelings towards the film. At the end of the first paragraph, he adds, “(I don’t cry at movies unless they involve old dogs).” Haley utilizes punctuation, specifically parenthesis, to decrease distance between himself and his audience. Through his use of ethos, he portrays himself as a sincere guy who has feelings towards the education of children. The audience can definitely relate to him and respect his honesty. By beginning in the first person, Haley constructs himself as a trustworthy narrator. The editor comes straight out and says “If you care about the future of our country, watch it.” This single sentence sums up his main claim for his piece.
Dan Haley not only tries to create himself as an author, but by doing so he connects with his audience. In his use of pathos, Haley demonstrates that he honestly cares about the film and the future of these less fortunate children. After portraying his personal reaction to the film; “I don’t cry at movies unless they involve old dogs,” the readers believe that if a grown man will cry over such a strong important issue, it ought to be worth the while to do something about it. Throughout the article, the reader experiences both sorrowful and shocking emotions. The fact that Haley is informing people of this documentary and the importance of it also give them a sense of hope towards the end. Haley’s ending quote, “but we'll be waiting for Superman forever if we resist the progress underway,” convinces the reader to develop a strong opinion about the situation. They feel almost obligated to not only go out and watch this documentary, but also to do something to change the school systems because they know that it will affect not only their future, but their children’s too.
This “both infuriating and heartbreaking” documentary, illustrates the important issue of not only Denver’s, but the entire nations, education system. Through his use of kairos, ethos, and pathos, Haley argues that if we resist the program and refuse to do anything about it, nothing will happen. We will be here “waiting for superman.” As a community, we need to reach out and do something to help fix this issue and get kids the education they need and deserve to have.
No comments:
Post a Comment