In the article, “In Praise of the F Word” Mary Sherry argues that flunking students is a method that has been effective in the past and is still effective todays day, and anyone needs to see is as a positive teaching tool. Sherry indicates that flunking students is a method that motivates students to study more and to be more responsible for what is their responsibility. Students challenge is not to get an A or B, but to succeed or to fail. Being in front of this challenge students try to work harder in order to succeed. In the article, Sherry uses pieces of evidence from her personal experience and examples to support her thesis. Also, her article is well-organized, and Sherry uses an academic language. However, Sherry do not consider many aspects that might affect students. She gives to much importance the example that she gives with her son. But can only a person represent all students? As a result, her argument is not convincing, and her try to persuade her audience fails.
The first reason why Sherry’s argument is unconvincing is because it lacked evidence. She uses as evidence her personal experience and the example with her son, but she does not support her thesis on studies or researches that shows that flunking students is an approach that has given positive results not only in her case. In the article, Sherry points out that “young people generally do not have the maturity to value education in the same way my adult students value it” (560). Which means high school students even if they know that the teacher will fail them, they still do not consider school as their main goal. Some students after knowing that the teacher is going to fail, they demoralize. They lose the desire for learning and going to school. When the teacher says them that he/she is going to fail them, they do not think teacher is doing that because he/she wants them to improve their learning skills, or because teacher wants them to be prepared for the future career. In my experience, what students think in this case is that teacher do not like them, or teacher is doing that with purpose and they are afraid to go school. Or in the worst case students think that they are going to fail anyway, there is no reason for attending school. Sherry mention that “‘She’s going to flunk you,’ I told my son. I did not discuss it any further. Suddenly English became a priority in his life. He finished out the semester with an A” (560). Beside all, he is the son of a teacher. She might has her effect on the change that her son made suddenly. From a student whom teacher was going to fail, to an excellent. There will not be the same situation if the guy will be the son of a housekeeping or the son of a habitually worker.
Secondly, by not considering all environments from where students came and all problems that they have, make Sherry’s argument weak. Sherry emphasize that “We excuse this dishonest behavior by saying kids can’t learn if they come from terrible environments. No one seems to stop to think that – no matter what environments they come from—most kids don’t put school first on their list unless they perceive something is at stake” (560). According to her, students must put school as their first priority, even if when they go home, they find their parents fighting because their father is drunk and has spent all the weekly incoming that they will use for buying food and other services that family need. What if students do not have a shelter when to put their head and sleep at night. What if there is nobody to take care of them, to cook and they go at school without anything on their stomach. Should still be school the first priority of these students? I do not think so, there are other vital priority for these students. School is another problem for them because instead of searching for a place when to sleep at night, or finding food to survive another day, they have to go at school too. Passing more then half of the day there, and then going back at their bitter reality. Sherry adds “ I know one example doesn’t make a case, but at night I see a parade of students who are angry and resentful for having been passed along until they could no longer even pretend to keep up” (560). She does not give any evidence to support her counterargument. She just mentions it and then goes back to her first point, giving details and examples to support her thesis. This makes her argument less convince because looks as she is not interested to see what happened on the other side, flunking makes her son to be better and that’s how it will work with all students, that’s what she lets readers understand.
Finally, Sherry’s audience is made up by teachers and parents, but she does not include students which makes another weak point in her article. The entire article talks about students and their studies, but at the end she excludes them from her audience. This is a topic that has to do directly with students and weather includes or not they are part of her audience. They are more interested then anyone else to know the positive and negative effect of flunking. Knowing more about flunking and why flunking is a good teaching tool as Sherry said, will make students seeing flunking in a different way, it will make them to see the positive side of flunking. For example, if they repeat the class, they are more prepared compared with other students because they had done these lessons before and it is going to be much easier now, they have advantages from other students. So, if they work a little bit harder they will succeed without any problem. Also, her thoughts are in contrast with each other because one time she said that it does not matter from which environments students come. Which means they are not affected form family or sociality, but now Sherry emphasizes that “It would mean that teachers would have to follow through on their threats, and parents would have to stand behind them, knowing their children’s best interest are indeed at stake” (561). So, her thoughts are unclear, and this makes her argument unconvinced for readers.
In conclusion, in the article “In Praise of the F Word” Sherry do not consider many aspects that might affect students study. Her argument is not based on evidence or researches, it is based only in her personal experience and examples. The attitude that she keeps is not the attitude of a teacher and so much less of a parent. She looks very immature and it makes her argument ineffective, so her try to convince her audience fail. Excluding students from the audience is inevitable because they are the center of the discussion. However, Sherry leaves them out, she made up her audience by teachers and parents. How can teachers find a compromise between flunking and students? Well, it will happen if students pay more attention to studies and teachers be more reasonable with students.
