Richard Kahn’s “Toward Ecopedagogy” is the first article for this class that I have not enjoyed reading. He spends a good portion of the article throwing out facts about the environment: mass extinction statistics, pollution levels, etc. If one is reading this article, obviously he/she knows that the environment is in danger and that is due mainly to human activities. Kahn could have reduced the four pages he spends explaining environmental problems to probably one page, and it would have had just the same effect. This rhetorical strategy Kahn uses is meant to have a drastic impact on the audience, when reality it bores the audience and serves little purpose.
After Kahn’s pages of extended environmental information, he finally starts the article about four pages by stating that environmental revolution “will require a pedagogical revolution equal to its present socio-economic counterpart.” Once he starts explaining this main idea, the rest of the article picks up and is much more interesting and informative. Kahn uses the example of the “Zoo School” as a rhetorical strategy to mention an environmental initiative that on the surface seems to be benefitting the students as well as the environment by teaching the students valuable environmental skills. Kahn then picks apart this model and explains why it is not useful, and why it is not helpful ecopedagogy. This is a strength of Kahn’s that is highly effective because it helps the audience understand what exactly ecopedagogy is. However, once again this portion of the article is too long and too drawn out. It would be much more effective if Kahn was more concise with his explanations because the reader would have an easier time at knowing exactly what Kahn is suggesting.
Though I do agree with Kahn’s major points, that ecopedagogy is an integral part of environmental revolution, I do not think his rhetorical strategies are the best way to convey this information to the audience. Ecopedagogy is definitely necessary, and our education system should have a reform in which they include ecopedagogy in the curriculum. However, this article is not persuasive enough to convince the public that this is necessary. It is too long and too drawn out for most readers to pay attention to. Kahn should be much more “to the point” so that his audience does not get lost in translation and in turn stop reading.
I agree with you 100%. I honestly am not even sure what exactly he said within the first few pages of this article because it was so boring and I even read the article three times. He spends so much time talking about nothing, that when he does finally start talking about something (the Zoo School) it's almost like a relief. I also agree that his rhetorical strategies need work. The need for environmental education is definitely needed in our society if we want any hope of a better future, but for Kahn to bash the new "Zoo School" kind of seems as though he believes nothing is good enough for his high standards. It's not encouraging as a reader to have someone, like you've stated, "pick apart a model and explain why it is not useful," even though this school has had such positive effects. Overall, this is definitely not an article that I could ever possibly include in a paper that I write for ENG 101 because I simply am not even sure what his major points were... aside from education of course.
ReplyDelete