Pay it Forward
The essay “Pay it forward” addresses the issues of American students’ malnutrition due to the significant poverty rate. The author points out that the schools are important institutions for children’s socialization and development on top of the educational process. The central thesis of the essay is concise and easily identifiable in the opening paragraph: “The government should enforce their funds on not only the learning part of education, but on activities that support the development of children”.
Classical Argument Style
The author has chosen to write the essay using a Classical argument style. In order to catch the readers’ attention, the introduction offers a number of arguments in favor of the main thesis. The statistics behind the issue is grimly impressive, urging the reader to find out what can be done to solve the situation. Once the audience is won, the number of well-chosen arguments strengthens the author’s positions. Students are dropping out early to earn a living while the military funding is ridiculously high – such contrasts constitute the proof base of the essay. The reasoning may seem a bit emotional, but there is a firm logic nevertheless. The essay concludes with a suggestion that the children’s well-being is no less important than the other key government projects. Whatever reader’s or potential opponents’ views on the subject, the essay does not leave a single weak argument to challenge.
In the context of the essay’s thesis, the only effective argument scheme is the classical one. It is difficult to imagine a reason for the Rogerian style being used here, as it would imply opponent’s disagreement with the idea of the proper students’ nutrition. All classical style features, such as interesting introduction, logical arguments, factual proof and effective conclusion are present in the essay. All parts are well interlinked, following the thread of the master thesis.
The author declares five reference sources, four of which are clearly identifiable in the paper. The assumption is that the fifth source is paraphrased somewhere in the text, although the proper citation would have reinforced the argument. The same goes for quoting the defense and scientific research expenses, as the reader can only deduce the source that had been used. A bit more attention to the numbers would not hurt as well. Some boring critic would inevitably point out that figures “750 million a year on defense … 104 million on scientific research” are nothing: these are billions in reality. Nevertheless, the references are chosen with care and placed properly, stressing the author’s point. The statistics’ quality is faultless for the purposes of this essay, especially with regard to the striking figures on the poverty levels and associated age groups. Overall, the referenced materials make the essay’s thesis and arguments highly convincing.
Structurally, the essay is well-composed. Once initially defined, the master thesis remains the central line throughout the essay. The strength of arguments does not abate as well, presenting no easy target to the opponent. However, the arguments’ accuracy and the evidence’s logic might be improved. For instance, the author mentions the cost of state-funded scientific researches, regarding most of them “being meaningless”. While it may be perfectly true, neither author nor the majority of readers can be qualified as experts competent to assess the spending appropriateness. Also, the essay would benefit if the author were a bit more cautious with suggestions. Of course, both the poverty and education issues are extremely important, but it does not mean they should be funded “instead of”, as implies from some of the author’s statements. With these small improvements, the essay would stand a solid chance in a dispute.