The author in this comment critiques the political decision that was made by the State of Texas in the year 1995 when Texas government adapted the "Zero Tolerance Policy", for all public schools in Texas.
First, the author gives an informal introduction to the topic, which makes it not really clear to the reader, what the author want to comment on. But, towards the second paragraph, it gets pretty clear, what the article or comment critiques on.
In general the author follows the guidelines of a well
written, editorial. The author represents the topic, which is discussed.
Furthermore, she gives the reader a short overview and a little bit of background
information about the topic, which is; Why and when Texas law decided to adapt
the “Zero Tolerance Policy”. Then, she states facts about the present and
introduces the reader to the new law, that will change the “Zero Tolerance Policy”, into a different way of “thoughtful
decisions on expelling students”.
The author gives us some examples that can defend her opinion, but the comment needs more details or facts about why Texas schools would benefit from the new law that would change the “Zero Tolerance Policy. “
The author’s tone in this commentary is sometimes informal for instance the expression “ cracked down hard”, would usually not be used in a formal newspaper. But, since it is editorial, I think, it is fine.
All in all, the article gives the reader a slightly overview about the
topic “Zero Tolerance Policy“, but I critique the author´s lack of given
examples to defend her opinion and that she does not tell the reader , what the
“Zero Tolerance Policy“, actually represents.
No comments:
Post a Comment