Assignment Requirements
I will provide you with two resources that i want you to read and include cited sentences in the essay. The other two you will have to provide. The two you are going to provide must be articles from the internet and i want a soft copy each ( send to me via email). The articles main topic should be about the censorship in publishing, and freedom of speech inside high schools. The essay is written to be persuade whether you are with or against the strong censorship high schools are practicing on student nowadays especially in their weekly high school newspaper. The structure of this persuasive essay will also be provided by me.
HIGH SCHOOL PAPERS GROW UP
Jerry Carroll
Carroll, a reporter, writes about topics being covered in some California high school newspapers. Unlike most of the country, the Hazelwood School District V. Kuhlmeierdecision will have little effect in California because an amendment to the State Education Code says that school authorities will have no say in what the newspapers print with the exception of materials that are libelous, obscene or slanderous, that “create a clear and present danger of unlawful acts . . . [or that] cause substantial disruption to the orderly operation of the school.” Nonetheless, people in California feel strongly about the decision.
San Lorenzo journalism teacher Richard Lloyd remembers when high school newspapers did not deal with anything more weighty than cars, sock hops and football games. OK, maybe the lousy food at the cafeteria.
How times have changed. . . . “Right now, my students are writing in-depth feature stories about alcoholism in the home, AIDSand a sociological study of our school,” said Lloyd.
The gradual but startling shift in high school journalism – from covering campus high jinks to reporting on such serious issues as date rape and teenage pregnancy – is such that last week the Supreme Court gave school administrators greater powers of censorship.
Justice Byron White wrote in the majority opinion that schoolofficials “must be able to take into account the emotional maturityof the intended audience in determining whether to disseminate student speech on potential sensitive topics, which might range from the existence of Santa Claus in an elementary school setting to the particulars of teenage sexual activities in a high school setting.”
The case involved a Missouri high school where a principalrefused a student newspaper permission to publish an article aboutteenage pregnancy and the effect of divorce on students.
The ruling has no effect in California, where Lloyd and a few other high school journalism teachers successfully lobbied in the early 1970s for an amendment to the State Education Code that ensured broad press freedom for students. . . . The education code language prompted the principal at Homestead High School in Cupertino last week to reverse a decision to stop publication of an article in the newspaper there about a 17-year-old student who tested positive to HIV virus, which can lead to AIDS.
Written by Kathryn Pallokoff, 17, the article is a careful and responsible account of the problem, giving figures on the spread of the disease and warning of the importance of “safe sex.”
Other articles in the newspaper detailed complaints about students being harassed by Army recruiters, Governor George Deukmejian’s spending plan for schools, and the risks involved in drinking and driving.
The AIDS article wouldn’t raise a brow if seen in another publication. But reports like it will not be seen in high school newspapers in most of the rest of the country after the Supreme Court decision.
Even though it doesn’t apply in California, high school journalists and their newspaper advisers view the ruling with scorn.
“My students are very much offended by the idea they are not considered mature enough to handle these topics,” said Steve O’Donoughue, the newspaper adviser at Fremont High School in Oakland. “They feel in general – and I’m sure it’s just not my students – that it is hypocritical, especially when the two topics in the original case, divorce and teen pregnancy, are common topics in the lives of these kids.
“I don’t know when it changed, but I’d say certainly in the ‘80s, despite the image of students being wrapped up in their Esprit outfits and MTV that a lot of the high school press has been covering what you might call the hard topics, the topics they feel affect them. These include AIDS, teenage pregnancy—the topics the Supreme Court ruled the principal had the right to censor.
“I think students are more aware of topics that earlier generations wouldn’t even talk about. They can talk a lot more clinically about sexual topics. Just listening to student discussions about AIDS amazes me how detached and informed they are.”
Donal Brown, faculty adviser to the Redwood Bark at Larkspur’s Redwood High School, said the switch from fluff to substance in student newspapers coincided with “the awareness of young people that they have to do something about the problems they are facing.”
He said the Redwood Bark last spring did an article about the rape of a 16-year-old girl who had become drunk at a party.
“It was extremely important for our community that this come out. It increased the awareness of students of how evil this was. We had an editorial talking about how students should give each other support and not allow these things to happen. There were a lot of people at the party who could have been more aware and protective of the girl who let herself get drunk,” Brown said….
He said allowing students to come to grips with the real problems that lie beyond the campus gives them the sense “they can improve things, help shape the society. They don’t have to be passive robots taking their place in some sort of totalitarian enclave.”
Said Rebecca Jeschke, 17, one of the editors in chief: “If you give kids responsibility, they rise to the occasion.”
| Author: | Jerry Carroll |
| Article title: | High School Papers Grow Up |
| Book Title: | Text and Context: A Contemporary Approach to College Writing |
| Editor: | William S. Robinson and Stephanie Tucker |
| Edition: | 7th edition |
| Year of Publication: | 2006 |
| Place of Publication: | Australia |
| Publisher: | Wadsworth Cengage Learning |
| Pages: | 329-331 |
| WRI 101 | ||||
| Persuasion: Essay Plan | ||||
| INTRODUCTION | ||||
| Background | ||||
| Frame of reference | ||||
| What is the issue??? | ||||
| What is the nature of the problem (cultural, political, educational, etc or even a combination of those) | ||||
| Historical Background (you don’t want to get into the specifics but just general statements to help the reader understand the beginning and development of the controversy) | ||||
| Far past (beginnings: when did the issue start becoming a controversy) | ||||
| Near past (development, generally and briefly) | ||||
| Development/lack of development of the controversy | ||||
| Changes in the role/function of the controversy and topic | ||||
| 3 | Presently | |||
| Clear statement of the current status of the issue (resolved/unresolved) | ||||
| Division in attitude towards the claim (what are the existing ‘camps’) | ||||
| Rationale for approaching the issue (why is it important to continue discussing this matter?) | ||||
| Assumptions (while these are necessary in argumentation, it is good to know ahead of time on what basis are you making the claim?) | ||||
| Assumption 1 (briefly) | ||||
| Assumption 2 (briefly) | ||||
| Claim : an eloquent statement that reflects your clear position on the controversy; avoid announcements and try to keep the personal pronouns out of it. | ||||
| DEVELOPMENT | ||||
| Premise 1 (Reason why claim is worthy of trust) | ||||
| Definition of terms (this does not have to be a section on its own; definitions may be incorporated where needed; this is being audience conscious) | ||||
| Denotation | ||||
| Connotation | ||||
| Narrative research and/or empirical research (evidence) | ||||
| Expert opinion / Case Studies and / or testimonials (another kind of evidence) | ||||
| One more strategy (process or illustration) | ||||
| Premise 2 (Reason why claim is worthy of trust) | ||||
| Definition of terms (this does not have to be a section on its own; definitions may be incorporated where needed; this is being audience conscious) | ||||
| Denotation | ||||
| Connotation | ||||
| Narrative research and/or empirical research (evidence) | ||||
| Expert opinion / Case Studies and / or testimonials (another kind of evidence) | ||||
| One more strategy (process or illustration) | ||||
| Causal analysis chain | ||||
| If claim is faulty àeffect 1àeffect 2àultimate effect | ||||
| If claim is true à effect 1àeffect 2 à ultimate effect (be creative and don’t just add the opposite) | ||||
| Comparison as an illustration (a good strategy to make things clearer; the alternate form us simple to understand and more concise; use universal examples that the reader can relate to; choose to second i ) | ||||
| Criteria 1: | ||||
| Item A | ||||
| Item B | ||||
| Criteria 2: | ||||
| Item A | ||||
| Item B | ||||
| 3 | Criteria 3: | |||
| Item A | ||||
| Item B | ||||
| CONCLUSION | ||||
| Summary of main points | ||||
| Confirmation of the claim/your position | ||||
| Future prospect | ||||
| Call for action (mental, emotional, behavioral or a combination) | ||||
| A suggestion of a process to implement change | ||||
| Limitations of the paper (no need to get into details but a general statement e.g while this paper has tried to cover as many aspects of the issue, it remains limited in its scope) | ||||
| Suggested further subtopic (this is usually a very relevant issue which will take the issue further; general simple statement e.g. further exploration of the X can enhance the chances of Y) | ||||
Order Now