Amanda M. Labrado ENGL 100 Prof. Webb 2/28/10
Amanda M. Labrado ENGL 100 Prof. Webb 2/28/10
Amanda M. Labrado ENGL 100 Prof. Webb 2/28/10
Amanda M. Labrado
ENGL 100
Prof. Webb
2/28/10
An Analysis of Rhetoric
fictional narrative about an experienced teacher named Horace Smith. Mr. Smith works at
Franklin High School. Over the years, he has witnessed the problems that force teachers to make
compromises – such as the overload of students, or the insufficient amount of time the teachers
have for each student – which hinder their ability to produce great students. Horace wishes to fix
these problems, and even has given up the option of retirement to do so; however, neither he nor
his colleagues have any power to change the system. Horace and his colleagues are under the
jurisdiction of the state and the district, which control all aspects of the school that need to be
changed (185). Though, if the way the school operates were to be changed, anything altered
would affect everything else, “an honest evaluation of the school’s compromises will open a
Pandora’s box. Everything in the school affects everything else” (185). For example, more time
cannot be given to the teachers to get to know and help their students as individuals. This is
because a time change would affect the teacher’s salaries, and most likely cost the school more.
Such a dilemma has caused Sizer to use Horace’s character to argue that high schools are often
“not nearly what [they] could be”(179), and even though many high schools may be seen in a
“good light” by their surrounding communities, “The good light in which [a] community sees [a]
school is not deserved”(179) because the kids are not doing as well as they possibly can due to
the high school system’s problems. Sizer successfully persuades his audience to believe his
arguments by using Horace’s thoughts and life story to appeal to their emotions; Sizer’s readers
Labrado 2
can readily believe Horace because he always presents both the faculty side of the issue and the
student side – and he is given veteran status, the audience can hold interest in Horace’s character
throughout the presentation of the argument because Horace is associative, and they can pity
Horace as a result of the aspects of Horace’s life that Sizer has strategically positioned
Horace Smith is credible because he is introduced as a fifty-nine year old English teacher
with years of experience. Mr. Smith is considered an influential faculty member by parents and
graduates, and is “respected by his colleagues” who “find him the professional’s professional,
even to a fault” (179). From this, the reader can surmise that Horace is wise, experienced,
respected, and trustworthy, because he is a “veteran” teacher at Franklin High school who is
respected by both parents and graduates. These distinctions convince the reader that Horace is
credible because he epitomizes the ideal teacher. Furthermore, because Horace has universal
characteristics, he could easily be similar to someone the reader knows, or he might be the
person the reader would like to be, causing the reader to be inclined to believe Horace. The
reader’s inclination to believe Horace drives them to recognize the reasons why the
aforementioned “good light is not deserved”. In addition, the reality is that the audience is not
given a straight argument – with which they could probably find grounds on which to argue –
nor are they given facts about why the “good light is not deserved” at Franklin High; instead they
are shown what is wrong with the school from Horace’s perspective, that is to say, from Sizer’s
experience. By being persuaded through the credible perspective of Horace, the audience’s
opinions also sway toward Sizer’s other argument – that high schools “are not nearly what they
could be” – mainly because Horace’s experiences and observances are irrefutable. For example,
when Horace describes how kids make treaties – regarding what is on their tests, what grades
they will receive, the requirements of their papers, and when they need to read a number of pages
Labrado 3
by – with their teachers to “lessen the work, lessen the pain of thinking anew. […] Treaties to
protect the Good Life” (180), Sizer gives no concrete evidence that can be disproved. Just to
make sure that this example cannot be argued against, Sizer has Horace call himself a cynic and
bring the adults into the situation as well, “What a cynic I am. Aren’t we adults that way too,
excessively so? What are all of us coming to?” (180), by doing this Sizer reveals to the audience
that Horace doubts society, but wishes to change it through education and understanding. By
making Horace a cynic, Sizer is able to present his arguments fairly because Horace’s
personality forces him to look at both who contribute to the issue; Sizer believes that it is a fault
of the system which brings the negative characteristics out of both the teachers and the students.
Sizer’s argument that “The good light in which [a] community sees [a] school is not deserved”
(179) is also fairly presented by way of Horace’s cynicism when Horace explains that the
subjects, most of which are poorly defined and each of which is planned in almost total isolation
from the others. The stuff of these subjects is offered up to students in fifty-two-minute slivers of
time, rapid fire […]”(185). Horace’s cynicism plays an important part in the fair presentation of
the issue presented in this quote because he uses derogatory phrases such as “poorly defined”
and “total isolation” to refer to the organization of the school’s curriculum, giving any effort to
solve the “curriculum”-matter a sense of futility. The phrase “rapid fire” allows the audience to
assume that the students must try to makes sense of all the subjects they are learning given a very
short amount of time to comprehend each. “Rapid fire” also shows that an attempt to change the
curriculum would be futile because the teachers wish to concentrate on their own individual
subjects, as illustrated by the sentence that follows, “the mathematics sequence has no planned
connection with science courses; and the teachers of literature, art, music, and drama pay
attention only to each art separately […]” (185). This quote shows that the teachers set up their
Labrado 4
courses in a manner that makes it difficult for the students to understand the practical
applications of each subject and make it hard for the students to understand how their subjects
have anything to do with one another, so much to that point that “Making sense [of it all] is even
tough for adults […]” (185). Sizer goes on to mention that “The faculty doesn’t like to hear any
sort of fundamental criticism. We’re tired of being the butt of all the griping, they say […]”
(185), showing that the teachers feel that they cannot do anything about what the students are
learning or about whether they are comprehending it all; therefore one can assume that the
teachers are complacent with the school, and don’t want to see any changes. Sizer then states that
Horace and his coworkers give the colleges what they want, and school the kids in “intellectual
chaos” as to make the colleges happy; in short the teachers at Franklin High “Give a little, get
along, compromise […and] the kids compromise too, taking what is offered, observing that to
which they are exposed, more or less cranking out the tests, and then forgetting most of it.
Feeling good is important, not only about oneself but also about the school. Franklin Pride”
(185). The author includes that “the kids compromise too” to show that they are not helping the
problem at all either. The last sentence of the quote is meant to illustrate to the audience that in
the end, no matter what Horace does, both the teachers and the students live with the issues at
their school and both still go home happy, but not Horace. Horace sees the real deal, and Horace
thinks the reason the good light is not deserved, is because the kids can’t make sense of their
Ultimately, Horace and Sizer are credible because no reader can refute someone’s – in
this case Horace and Sizer’s – experience taking place, or about someone observing something.
Experiences and observances are also very easy to relate to, and many of the teacher’s who may
read Horace’s Compromise may be familiar with many of the observances Sizer presents
Horace is a critical character in Sizer’s narrative because he makes it easier for the
audience to hold interest in Sizer’s argument. The reason for this is because Sizer has given
Horace the characteristics of someone the audience can relate to, meaning he has given them
something to look forward to; Horace’s attributes and experiences may be familiar to them
because they may experience them in their everyday surroundings. Sizer essentially uses
common ground to induce acquiescence toward his argument. One example of the common
ground Sizer finds to induce acquiescence is when Sizer asserts that students bargain with their
teachers for less work: “The kids play a game with the school, making deals with us, striking
bargains. What will be on the test, Mr. Smith?” (180).This quote is implying that students are
trying to make school easier on themselves. Sizer also implies that students should not be
allowed to do so because he refers to the students’ bargaining as a “game”. By saying that the
kids “make […] deals with us”, Sizer suggests that teachers are subjects of immoral and covert
actions that should not be done. Most teachers can say they have had this experience because I
myself have done this to them, and so do other students all the time, teachers just might not think
because most teacher’s can relate and can effortlessly agree. A second example of Sizer’s
attempt to gain common ground to win over his audience is when Sizer presents the fact that
“age grading hurts some kids [because] young people grow intellectually, physically, and
socially at different rates […and teachers] cope […] largely by not being careful, by deliberately
not attending to the record and specialness and stage of growth and disposition of each
youngster” (183): Through this quote, Sizer illustrates that teacher’s may be hurting some of
their kids through “age grading”, or by presuming that their students “all know the same
things”(183); In this quote, Sizer is both presenting his experience, and constructively criticizing
the teachers so that they will know that “age grading” is wrong, and hopefully do their part to fix
Labrado 6
it. Sizer’s audience can acquiesce with his argument that age grading hurts kids because they
may have witnessed that fact that young people grow at different rates. Sizer uses Polysyndeton
to prove to his audience that they are not paying attention to some of the most important aspects
of the student. He creates a climax by repeating “and” because he begins at “record”, then goes
on to “specialness”, then to “stage of growth”, then finally to “disposition” which all of the
former constitute, putting an emphasis on that fact that teachers are not taking into consideration
the “disposition of each youngster” when they teach; meaning that some teachers will respect
Sizer – for showing them their mistakes –, and others will just agree with his argument because
they know each of their students is unique. In addition to the problem of age grading, Sizer puts
forward that teachers are also given an insufficient amount of time to work with their students,
meaning some will not do as well as possible because they may not be able to get all the help
they need. Sizer uses his observance of the lack of one-on-one time that is “valuable for
students”(182) as something his audience can relate to as a way to create in them an incliniation
to agree with him effectively when he says, “Horace knows he should insist on a writing
assignment from [them] every day […] but with 120? Impossible”(182). Sizer knows that with
more than 100 students, it is hard to grade the students’ papers, and work in general, in a manner
that will help them. Students need to understand why they got something wrong, and one of the
best ways for them to learn this is from one-on-one sessions with the teachers. Teachers know,
though, that it is almost impossible to do so adequately with such a large load of students,
meaning that Sizer successfully induces acquiescence because the teachers understand how
Finding familiar ground with his audience and frequently referring back to it, allows
Sizer to hold the attention of his audience throughout the presentation of his argument.
Labrado 7
This technique also allows him to control the thoughts of his audience on his argument by
triggering their emotions instead of their logic. For example, Sizer brings up the hardships
Horace faces outside of Franklin High school to make the audience feel pity for him: “And this
in addition to all the rest he has to do outside those contact hours in class with the kids, not to
mention his evening work at the family’s liquor store to help meet the household bills” (Sizer
182). In this instance, Sizer is talking about the time Horace must spend with his students going
over their school work that cuts into the time it takes him to do other things, such as work. In
essence, Sizer gains support from his audience mainly through an emotional appeal that involves
hardship, suffering, and determination; Sizer uses an appeal to emotion, instead of logic, to
create a logical fallacy. This is because Sizer is able to use Horace’s thoughts and perspectives
on the quality of the school and the improvements it needs as a medium through which he has the
power to persuade. Sizer is also able to appeal more to his audiences emotions than to their logic
because Horace is the ideal person: he’s passionate, hardworking, determined, altruistic, and
given his background, wise because of his age and trustable because of his status; Horace does
not seem to have any flaws. Sizer tells the story, but includes Horace to comment on the aspects
of his story that he finds especially moving. For instance, Horace comments on how many
students he has, and the futility with which he states this fact gives the matter emphasis, grabbing
the audiences’ attention, and triggering their emotions, keeping them focused and interested.
Horace is an innocent medium that cannot be judged like the author can making is easy for the
audience to proclaim Sizer’s narrative is credible. Through Horace’s Compromise, Sizer has
successfully created an appeal to his audience’s emotions to gain their support for his arguments,
and create a desire in them to better the high school education system through Horace’s