I'm so sorry this took so long! I've been semi-busy and when I wasn't busy I was tired as fuck from being busy. Y'know how it goes. With an increasing number of parents seeking to push their children to achieve their best academically, debate has surfaced as to how hard children should be pushed.
Good. In the article “Good, Better, Best – Never Let it Rest?” from an ongoing education series, columnist J. Rodd contends in an informative tone that many parents are placing too much pressure on their children, and are focussing
spelling solely on academic achievements as a measure of their success.
Good. I'd mention target audience and give an overview of persuasive techniques. The visual supports this view, depicting a condescending parent treating their child as an animal
Interestingly, the animal is also in the shape of a garbage heap - or perhaps I'm just creating images? What do you think?. This discussion highlights the extent parents are willing to go to in order to ensure their child’s success, and whether or not such extents are truly beneficial.
Good. I'd just include aforementioned things.J. Rodd
you refer to him as J. Rodd throughout this piece. I think it'd be better if you just said Rodd. begins his article by posing the reader a question;
previous sentence screams "commentating" instead of "analysing". “who wouldn’t want the best for their children, but what, after all, is ‘best’?” This initially catches the attention
does it really? Could you provide a source that says 100% of people reading had their attention caught? Negatory. We say "has the potential to" or "is intended to" etc etc 
of parents through the use of the inclusive term “who wouldn’t”.
You don't analyse how? You just provide evidenceThe rhetorical question “what is best?” causes
we can't speak in such definite terms. you'll do this throughout the piece, I won't worry about stopping for feedback, just know that you can't use such concrete language when you're talking about emotive impact the reader to define their perception of best for their children, which is likely not to be an overworked and pressured upbringing in order to achieve satisfactory grades
You've said what someone's perception is not likely to be and haven't analysed it or related it back to the article in any wayy.. The author further denigrates such perceptions through quoting interviewees from a study of 48 Chinese mothers. Statements such as “academic achievement reflects successful parenting” and “if a child does not excel, then parents are not doing their job”, appeal to the reader’s sense of logic
, as.... Terms such as “parents not doing their job” imply that poor results are a result of failure in parenting, causing the reader to further disagree with the narrow-minded approach. Readers are therefore more inclined to adopt the perception of success shared by the author; that success is not solely dependent on academic achievements.
Nice enough writing, just shallow analysis in terms of the impact on reader. Also shallow things to analyse, rhetorical qst etc. You gotta get right in there, nice and deep like. You gotta feeeeeel it. Think "how" and "why" of who/what/when/where/why/howFurthermore,
J. Rodd suggests throughout the article that failure is not a result of bad parenting, but is merely part of the learning experience for children.
I like this method of opening a paragraph better, it provides a nicer umbrella for discussion than just signposting a PLT. stick to it.This view is embedded in the reader’s mind through a featured quote from Michael Jordan; “I’ve failed over and over and over again in my life and that is why I succeed.” This quote further affirms the credibility of the view, in that an individual who the reader considers to be highly successful has explicitly stated that failure was necessary. The repetition in the quote, namely “I’ve failed over and over and over” illustrates that failure is not a rare occurrence, but is instead common and necessary in order to succeed. Alongside this, J. Rodd includes additional quotes stating that “we put children’s learning at risk when we refuse to allow them to engage with challenges which they may or may not master.” This further supports that children learn from failure, and that failure is certainly not a sign of “parents not doing their job”.
You're quoting like a text response, don't waste your effort. If you aren't analysing it, don't quote it. The really big quote two sentences back, waste of space. Such a big quote and you didn't analyse any of it. You just said Rodd includes it and that it spports his argument. Gotta get the depth of analysis. This paragraph should usually be longer than this because you've lots to analyse. Your writing is fine and the way you write your essays is fine, you just need to analyse more. I picked up the skill from my teacher who would go through articles with us and just point out what was going on in insightful ways.J. Rodd finally proceeds to attack the “tiger mother” style of parenting, outlining that such measures can do more harm than good.
Yeah, again, a better starter than P1.A large cartoon is placed in the centre of the article such that it immediately catches the reader’s attention. This visual depicts an enraged Asian mother whipping a child, who is portrayed as an animal, while calling them “garbage”.
I'd also discuss the shape of the 'pet'... This leads the reader to empathise for the children who have to endure such treatment from their parents, through appealing to the reader’s emotions. The visual denigrates the “tiger mother” style of parenting, leading the reader to conclude that it is not the “best” for their children.
Yeah really no analysis again. We could talk about the horror that could be evoked by seeing a mother with a whip, the connotations of calling a child garbage and the emotions this could evoke; guilty? anger? disgust? pity? and how this helps his argument. Analyse what about the image is intended to aim for these things. J. Rodd also utilises evidence to strike fear among readers, revealing that “excessive parental expectation has been linked to medical conditions”. The negative connotations associated with the term “medical conditions” leads parents to fear the “tiger mother” style of parenting, and in turn, not support it.
What connotations? What's it targeting? How does it lead them to fear?The article by columnist J. Rodd makes use of appeals to emotion, logic and fear, and quotes to support its point of view. The article appeals to parents of children currently attending school, and is effective in conveying the contention, that children should not be pushed to breaking point in order to achieve exceptional academic results.
Bit short. Nothing wrong with it. Maybe aim for three sentences. I used to see it as a really condensed, backwards introduction (sort of-ish).Nice writing for this time of year
, needs more analysis, and that analysis needs to be deeper.
Home
Help
Search
Login
