Analyzing Message in "Pay Teachers More"

In this blog post, I will analyze the message and overall purpose of the editorial, "Pay Teachers More." I will go about doing this by answering the questions given and referring back to Student's Guide information on page 180 through 181.

Seth Sawyers. "Purpose." 05/14/2009 via Flickr.
Attribution 2.0 Generic License. 

• Out of all the bullet points listed for "Message and Purpose" on page 181, which two or three seem most relevant to the goals of your text's author/s? Why?
• For the editorial I chose, I think the author intended to express an idea or opinion, inform the reader about a topic that is often misunderstood and persuade the audience of something.
• express idea or opinion: As the author is writing an editorial, he is clearly suggesting that he has a strong view of this particular issue. He also uses personal pronouns such as "I" or "me," as he directly gives his opinion. 
• informs the reader about a topic that is often misunderstood: Kristof calls out fallacies that are often associated with the topic, and tries to clarify and offer a full explanation of the situation. 
• persuade the audience of something: The author uses pathos, ethos and logos throughout the text to evoke emotion and ultimately persuade the reader to take on a new perspective. Also, the tone that he uses is very passionate and slightly aggressive, which allows helps the writer to incline the reader towards or against something. 

• Which bullet points do NOT seem relevant to the goals of your text's/author/s? Why not?
• Although the author intended to do most of the listed items, he did not seem to analyze, synthesize or interpret. 
• The author did not provide details and specific accounts of the topic--he provided an over-arching summary that was intended to inform, persuade, and evoke emotion.

• Are there nuances and layers to the message the author(s)/speaker(s) is/are trying to get across? If so, what are they? If not, why not?
• Yes, I believe there are some different components hidden underneath the overall message. He suggests that a way to help and aid poverty is to pay educators more. This is a huge underlying message--poverty can be solved, or at least be helped through increasing teacher's salaries? He seems to be expressing the need for overall change--change in education, change in society's perceptions of teachers, change in salaries, change in society. But, if the reader only read or skimmed this article once, or maybe even twice, these nuances would not be recognized by them.

--Jenny Bello