Nelson Flores, Blog 7

March 16, 2019 AndreaP1224

Nelson Flores’s “Making Millions Off of 30-Million-Word Gap” overall is about the purpose of what the 30 million word gap is supposed to serve, yet what it is actually doing. The 30 million-word gap is introduced in the beginning of this article as an argument that goes as follows: “Low in-come children of color hear 30 million fewer words within the first three years of life than their more affluent peers.” (Flores, Paragraph 1). It stresses the issues with academic inequality and how it perpetuates racism. Flores, then goes on to introduce perspectives from other people such as Douglas Sperry, Linda Sperry and Peggy Miller and how it goes against the grain of the 30 million-word gap that was conceptualized by Betty Hart and Todd Risely. Flores finally goes into his own perspective of the 30 million-word gap, Sperry, Sperry and Miller’s arguments, and Hart and Risely’s concept. His own critique is that while the purpose of it was to go against the structure of racism, it actually perpetuates it with this idea that low income children of color need to be “fixed”, instead of simply being granted the same opportunities as their affluent peers. Flores argues, that it is more important to invest the money into the resources of the teachers and the schools and build on the strengths of the kids as oppose to trying to “fix” them. 

What Flores does here, is introduce the concept of the 30 million-word gap, then he brings different perspectives of what the 30 million-word gap actually is, then he puts his own perspective in. By doing this, he is able to give the reader knowledge on what the topic of this essay is about, the opposing arguments from others outside of himself, and then introduce his own argument and why he feels that way. Flores’s frame to informed, introduced objectivity, then brought in his own argument . This frame leaves the reader to develop his or her own perspective. This is because we’re informed on what the 30 million-word gap is, we hear the purpose it’s supposed to serve, we hear what it’s actually doing, from both allied and opposed sides, then we get the writers perspective.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Entry Filed under: Uncategorized

1 Comment Add your own

  • 1. Eunjeong Lee  |  March 18, 2019 at 5:09 pm

    This is a great analysis on Flores’s argumentation, Andrea. But I also want to push you a bit further about his use of framing of the original argument. How is the way he argues effective to those who abide by the “scientific research” (or this frame)?

Leave a Comment


Required, hidden

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to comments via RSS Feed




March 2019
« Feb   Apr »

Most Recent Posts