Exercise 6, “Why can we hit our kids?” p. 42.
(Introduction: start with Dr Johnson’s views and her reason for writing.)
(Paragraph 1: comment on the author’s professional voice and standpoint; See p. 10: i.e. how does Dr Johnson use her professional experience; discuss the implications of her professional experience and specific examples of her words that seek to attract (or court) the reader’s support, eg. She presents herself as a defender of the vulnerable.)
- As a counsellor with considerable experience, Dr Johnson impresses upon her primarily adult audience the importance of revising outdated smacking laws. She is critical of laws that treat children as second class citizens. (In this paragraph, focus on the implication of these laws and give examples of her word choices.) Using a combination of jargon and analogies to reach both an expert and a lay audience, Dr Johnson explains the legal inconsistencies that allow parents to smack their children. (Explain the specific impact of two phrases.) Her claim of “reasonable chastisement”, is bound to kindle sympathy for children because of the logical consequences – children are being treated in an inferior manner to strangers. (Expand with examples of her typical word choice, eg. use of jargon to establish a professional voice. Then give an example of the analogies presented to make her claims more accessible to a lay-person.) Sensible lawmakers are likely to react (explain the likely impact of her reasons)
(Paragraph 2: set up the paragraph by analysing her depiction of parents: emotive language, dysphemisms – negative language – such as “whack” and “bully”; results of a survey that seek to criticise parents who abuse their authority.
Include comparative comments with the cartoon. Identify the most obvious similarities. Refer to a significant point of evidence used by Dr Johnson, such as the survey. Draw attention to a key strategy such as the depiction of the parents and then analyse the cartoonist’s specific graphic representation.)
- Furthermore, Dr Johnson immediately places parents who smack on the defensive through the suggestion that (give an example) . Such negatively-charged terms position parents to feel (what is the purpose?) , as does the reference to the fact that it is a legal anomaly (mistake) that parents can use physical force against the “weaker…”. Readers would infer that (describe the depiction of the parents). Echoing Dr Johnson’s views, the cartoonist also depicts a parent who appears to be abusing their trust and authority in much the same way as the counsellor suggests that parents are often indifferent towards those in their care. The cartoonist graphically represents what Dr Johnson identifies in the findings of the survey – (explain the similarities and the descriptions and purpose.)
See Sample Student Responses and annotated comments on this article.