Rhetorical Analysis: What Teachers Should Know About Common Core

Source 1 : What teachers should know about common core

In examining how the Common Core State Standards have been presented, and comparing this public image to what is factual, I researched a number of articles, books, and other academic works. One such article is called What Teachers Should Know About Common Core. In my analysis of this article I will demonstrate the author’s use of rhetorical tools and how effectively he presents his information and any argument.
When analyzing any document, the first thing to look at before scrutinizing rhetorical content should be the source itself. Where it is found is a primary indicator of the source’s academic context. In this case, the work is a very recently article published only last month. It
The author specifically writes with people unfamiliar with or unknowledgable about Common Core in mind. From the very tagline of the article, Shanahan places himself as a knowledgeable authority figure, calling the essay a “guide for the perplexed” and also with his title caption he states that “Teachers are being asked more and more questions about the Common Core State Standards. Here are some authoritative and reliable answers.” Interestingly, the author seems to simultaneously see his audience as academics with equal standing as fellow educators, while occasionally talking down to them. One example is on the article’s second page where he begins a response flatly stating, “I challenge the premise of the question.” This would probably be less problematic to a reader if his questions were ones that were actual, sourced parental questions, rather than rhetorical ones he created to suit the narrative he wishes to present. This all affects not only how the author connects with his intended audience, but may color how they perceive even the factual information that he is trying to disseminate.
Throughout the article, Shanahan does provide good factual information, such as his explanation of the Common Core State Standards’ development. However, due to his potentially patronizing tone and the subjective
I came to this conclusion because at the time when this article was published, the Common Core State Standards were only beginning to be adopted, and had yet to be officially implemented in any state. Throughout the article, the authors’ use of terminology assumes that the reader has an educational background, but familiarity with the Common Core in particular is not necessarily assumed. Assumptions that are made are one’s about the reader’s feelings about standardized testing, classroom differentiation, and about the educational philosophies that any reader might hold in general. Public opinion on the Common Core was mixed at the time -- though professional opinion remained cautiously optimistic, the Common Core were largely untested at the point in time when the article was written. Brooks and Dietz’s article is a testament to that, because despite their stated misgivings, they conclude their article