Assignment

Assignement

Part 1: Watch Ken Robinson’s “Do Schools Kill Creativity?”

Link to Ken Robinson’s “Do Schools Kill Creativity?”: https://www.ted.com/talks/sir_ken_robinson_do_schools_kill_creativity?language=en#t-20665

You are supposed to watch Robinson’s TedTalk. In it, Robinson argues that schools are “killing” creativity. You have to write a post in which you make a case that Robinson’s argument is either effective or ineffective. Whatever position you choose, you have to write about two specific things Robinson does in his video that help make his argument effective or ineffective. You then have to explain why/how those two specific things are working to make Robinson’s argument effective (or ineffective if that’s what your position is). Some things you might discuss in this post, just to name a few: the sort of evidence he brings to bear in his argument and how he uses that evidence; appeals he makes to ethos, logos, or pathos (remember those from 1301?); his use of humor (I’m especially interested in this myself). Minimum 250 words.

Part 2: You will be responsible for writing a response to one of the posts (obviously not your own) in which you play the role of devil’s advocate. Your classmates just made clear, evidence-supported cases as to why Robinson’s argument is effective or ineffective. Respond with a post in which you push back against the case your classmates make. (Even if you really agree with what they post, pretend you don’t.) Notably, you are not simply responding to their position by restating your own. You are responding directly to the ideas and reasoning they brought to bear in their posts, as in I see what you mean when you say this, but have you thought about it in these terms; I don’t agree with your interpretation of X for these reasons, etc. But again, your job is not to “demolish” your classmates’ arguments—remember, that is a sure way to damage your own ethos. Rather, your job is to create a thoughtful and persuasive rebuttal to your classmates’ initial post.