David Figlio, the article’s author, is a professor of Education, social policy, and economics at Northwestern University. The article was published in 2017. In the article, he highlights the need for high school hours to be pushed. The importance of the argument is that it helps in dealing with the exceptional adolescents’ sleep patterns, which vary from those of adults and toddlers. He advocates for students to start their studies in high school at later hours as this will need optimal grades. The main argument is that adolescents’ sleep patterns are different from other life stages and thus require more sleep hours. However, other factors, such as resources, impact an institution’s ability to implement this. Faglio claims that commencing school earlier deprives high school learners of critical sleep hours, influencing their academic performance.This rhetorical essay will highlight that the argument presented in the article is compelling in convincing the reader of the argument because it is arranged chronologically, comparison and contrast are used, and the author uses logos.
Figlio provides a compelling argument since the essay justifies why high school students need more sleep hours, which appeals to the audience’s logos. Unlike children and adults, the author argues that adolescents’ sleep patterns tend to change; thus, starting school earlier means they would lose some hours of sleep. Faglio’s argument is convincing in tempting the audience’s logos, as he validates the necessity for more hours of sleep founded on the unique sleep patterns of adolescents. Unlike adults and children, the author claims that adolescents encounter a transformation in sleep patterns, offering a logical reason for transforming school schedules. By stating this, the author allows the audience to understand why it is essential for school schedules to be shifted. The author also backs up the information with the information that has been researched by other authors on the issue of high school students requiring more sleep hours. An audience who has ever encountered this issue can understand and support this argument since he does not use complicated biological terms. The essay’s use of facts, evidence, and reasons was quite clear (Jakubik 6). The issue is summarized so that the audience, regardless of background, can easily comprehend it.
Moreover, the information in the article is arranged chronologically. Once the issue of why high school students need to start their classes later is highlighted, the author explains the
factors that impact this. He highlights issues such as needing more resources (Figlio). Thus, schools with more resources can start their classes later and get better results than those with limited resources, who can only begin classes at regular hours. These findings are also backed up by evidence from other authors. All these study findings support and further reinforce the author’s argument and provide evidence that high schools implementing later school hours have better outcomes. Generally, the audience gets to understand the flow of the essay right from the start, and as it unfolds, one builds on the knowledge and understanding of why high schools should start in later hours.
The essay also highlights why this solution is the most effective in improving high school students’ grades through comparison and contrast. The author suggests that other solutions to this issue were either costly or challenging regarding finances or the politics surrounding its implementation. The information’s organization within the article is chronological, hence directing the readers via the reason past the necessity for later school hours and the variables impacting it. Figlio discusses resource needs, pinpointing that schools with more assets can execute later classes, thus leading to better results than those with constrained resources. The solution to start high school later is quite feasible. It would not interfere with other school processes, such as transportation, and would ensure that high school students perform better (Figlio). Right from the beginning of the essay, this solution would have a positive impact and fewer challenges regarding its implementation. The students would only have to wake up later and thus become more prepared to study, while their teachers would have an easier time
teaching them since they are not struggling. However, it could take some time to adjust to the new schedule. Figlio claims that alternative solutions are either expensive or encounter implementation complications, making the suggested solution more feasible. The solution, however, has been described so that the audience can understand why other solutions could not work and why the proposed one could effectively improve high school students’ grades through comparison and contrast.
However, one might argue that the essay could be more effective since the proposed solution has several implications for other stakeholders and lacks anecdotes. As much as the essay highlights that this would positively impact high school students, these students have parents and siblings who play an essential role in their success. Also, the issue highlighted by the author is that the students who participate in after-school activities would have to arrive at school later. Figlio discusses resource needs, pinpointing that schools with more assets can execute later classes, thus leading to better results than those with constrained resources. So, children from disadvantaged backgrounds would not benefit from this solution. Overall, the author highlighted some of these challenges, which means he was neutral in the essay’s approach as it does not only lean on one side. Moreover, the lack of anecdotes bases the argument on findings on a small population that have yet to be implemented in real-world experiences.
The article is compelling and organized chronologically, with comparisons, contrasts, and logos. The chronological order is seen in the way ideas are organized and presented. The factual data is seen in how the evidence is retrieved from other researchers. The author also justifies why the solution is needed and effective. Also, this solution would highlight the challenge of socioeconomic status since schools that are better equipped would have an easier time implementing this and thus have better results compared to those with minimal resources. However, there was a counter-argument since the solution would only widen the socioeconomic status gap of students, and other stakeholders would be negatively impacted. However, the author highlights all sides of the coin, enhancing the study’s credibility. According to Figlio, the socioeconomic status gap is a significant concern, as better-equipped schools could discover it easier to execute transformations, potentially broadening the educational disparities. Figlio deals with such problems, showcasing a balanced viewpoint and sustaining the credibility of the essay.
Overall, Figlio’s article is well structured, adopting chronical order, logos, comparison, and contrast to back up the claim for later high start times. Whereas possible complications and counter-arguments are recognized, the author’s examination of different viewpoints improves the argument’s general credibility. The article successfully communicates the necessity for transformation for change while acknowledging the complexities engaged within its execution.
Works Cited
Figlio, D. “Start high school later for better academic outcomes.” (2017).https://www.brookings.edu/articles/start-high-school-later-for-better-academic-outcomes/
Jakubik, Maria. “Searching for practical wisdom in higher education with logos, pathos and ethos. Case: Finnish Universities of Sciences.” Philosophies 6.3 (2021): 63.
write