Gwendolyn+Greer

http://illinois.edu/db/view/25/2064?count=1&amp;ACTION=DIALOG

The article "Spelling counts at the Spelling Bee, but in the age of the Internet, should it count anywhere else?" is exactly what the title suggests; Dennis Baron argues the practicality of the ability to spell considering the availability of technology. His idea is to put more emphasis on comprehension and other practical uses of the English language. He also asserts the idea that children should not be put through the stress of spelling competitions, explaining that there is much work put in by the kids that does not have any long term effect; in a few years the skill is quickly lost without persistent and vigorous practice. Baron effectively proves his point relying almost solely on logic, he makes many points that most would find very reasonable. The simple concept of the eraser is mentioned, his way of showing that spelling errors are simple to revise, not something to be focused on when writing. An arguable fact in the article is many great English writers, for example Jane Austen, had difficulty with spelling. Demonstrating the same point, Spelling Bee winners are not known for their success in the literary world- demonstrating that spelling and a general literary understanding do not go hand in hand. The use of ethos is not quantitatively used much for persuasion, however, he mentions that at the Spelling Bee competitions there is a psychologist present for the non-winners of the competition- a strong point of persuasion. After his clear demonstration of the perhaps almost uselessness of spelling, he mentions how stressful the competitions are, for well, nothing but a title, really. The competitors spend large amounts of time and money, hiring coaches and other means to win the coveted title of spelling bee champion. So once a competitor has been eliminated, they go to a back room at the competition and speak to a psychologist about the loss. For a reader, there is shock when one realizes how much is put into the competitions. The idea of this intensity persuades the reader into acknowledging that Spelling Bee competitions are, as I conclude from the article, more coveted than their worth. Pathos in the article only exists once, as Baron mentions that he was a smart and nerdy child. However, I take it from the website that he is perceived as a true source of news on the English language, inserting a certain amount of trust into all of the writing in his blogs and other sources. The audience of his writings are likely to be those interested in new ideas and takes on the language, most likely those who are writers themselves. The only problem I find to be in this article is the fact that although he suggests we retire spelling bees for a more practical competition, he does not suggest any solutions. It is understandable that there is no way to determine competency subjectively for parts of English such as reading, but I feel as though not many people would agree to just drop the idea of Spelling Bees, especially without another academic competition for replacement. Overall, the writing is very persuasive and effective. His logic and reasoning very successfully cause the reader to see his view and persuade him or her to agree with the ideas about the usefulness of spelling and spelling competition.


 * // Gwendolyn - //**
 * // A very nice summary and analysis. Clearly you read the directions (which is a great start) but also summarized well and thought about the article well. A quote or two to support your ideas are usually a good idea in an analysis, but otherwise you did well. CHECK PLUS ~Prof. Wendt //**