Introduction
The following essay compares two editorial pieces reflecting opposing perspectives on school lunch rules. Examining the reasoning provided by both authors can help find all the relevant points that make it possible to understand all the causes and consequences of the problems. The opening piece, “Fed or Fed Up? Why We Support Easing School Lunch Rules”, San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial Board supports the Trump administration’s move to ease some rules. The second editorial, “Keep Up Fight Against Childhood Obesity,” published in the Democrat and Chronicle, argues against lowering dietary requirements.
Comparative Analysis of the Articles
Overview
In the San Diego Union-Tribune and Democrat and Chronicle articles, both authors appeal to the audience using ethos and pathos to convince them that changes in school meals are needed to improve children’s health. However, the Democrat and Chronicle uses more robust logos to support their ideas. One of the main rhetorical techniques in articles is to appeal to facts and give multiple examples of why a particular problem should be solved. In the context of obesity and excessive food waste, the authors present evidence in different ways that help better assimilate the stated position.
Audience and Purpose
Readers worried about the applicability of school lunch restrictions and food waste problems appear to be the target audience of the first piece, published in the San Diego Union-Tribune. The second essay appears to be directed at readers worried about childhood obesity and its effects on kids’ long-term health. The first writer’s purpose is to prove that changing the rules of nutrition in schools will reduce waste. The purpose of the author of the second article is to raise awareness about the problem of obesity and that schools should come up with a way to get children to eat healthier food.
Logos
The manifestation of logos in the article by the Democrat and Chronicle is more evident, as most of the statistics are explained and analyzed. Therefore, the program that monitors children’s nutrition needs to be improved to provide healthier school meals. However, the article that deals with the current policy regarding excess food waste does not pay attention to the reports of the original explanation of the problem. This leads to the fact that considering issues and their potential solutions is relatively concise and cannot fully lead to a comprehensive solution. More detailed design and development of an issue resolution strategy could lead to a better consensus.
Ethos
Both authors try to establish ethos and persuade readers of their knowledge, reliability, credibility, and trustworthiness. The rhetorical technique of ethos is significant in how the authors use it to show how ethically essential the issues are. The moral dimension of food waste and rising obesity is gaining attention as people worry about children’s health and excessive food costs.
Bias
The author shows a bias in the first article about loosening the regulations. For instance, the author refers to the regulations as “school lunch rules backfired” and highlights the decline in student participation and wasted food costs. “Keep Up Fight Against Childhood Obesity” expresses a bias against easing up on the nutritional criteria.
Structure and Organization
In both articles, the organizational pattern can be assessed as logical. In the first article, the author references studies estimating the decline in student participation and the cost of wasted food in school cafeterias. In the second article, the author cites the Centers for Disease Control statistics regarding childhood obesity rates in the United States.
Credibility and Reliability
Linking to reliable sources and providing crucial evidence is an important aspect that can reinforce the authors’ statements. It demonstrates a commitment to informed reasoning and strengthens the overall argument. The Democrat and Chronicle uses various links and metrics to help readers understand the issue of childhood obesity in depth. At the same time, the San Diego Union-Tribune provides contextual links to other news and academic articles.
Argumentation and Reasoning
Both articles could strengthen their arguments by addressing potential counterarguments, considering alternative strategies, and providing a more nuanced analysis. The authors’ logical reasoning is natural and does not contain errors. The authors’ conclusions in both articles are logical, as the writers have built a competent and consistent narrative structure.
Toulmin Analysis
“Fed or Fed Up?”
Using Toulmin analysis, the first author claims that the decision to reduce school meals was justified. The data the writer provides in support of the argument also coincides with logical thinking when writing the argument. A warrant is defined in the article as a statement that strict rules resulted in food being thrown away. As backing, the author cited authorized persons who confirmed the excessive waste.
A rebuttal is also present, as the author says some dangers were not considered when implementing mitigations. In the qualifier article, the author concludes the incompleteness of the nutrition program based on the data provided. In addition, the critical findings in both articles are based on data that indicate what competencies should be present to monitor the implementation of child nutrition standards.
“Keep Up Fight Against Childhood Obesity”
Using the Toulmin analysis on the second author, who claims that the food mitigation decision did not achieve the goal of reducing obesity, can help determine the extent to which it is validated. To show the importance of the policy invalidation problem, the Democrat and Chronicle Editorial Board provides statistics highlighting the extent of the problem. A warrant is defined in the article as a statement about the incorrectness of the decision made.
The author uses data from the statistical center supporting concerns about increased obesity due to school meals. The author does not appear to be accurate in the rebuttal. In the qualifier, the author argues that schools need to continue to work on nutrition for children.
Induction and Deduction
Induction and deduction can become important when demonstrating evidentiary aspects in any article. Thus, the authors who have written about the waste associated with school meals make a logical argument by disclosing significant facts from smaller ones. The issue of excessive food waste is seen in the context of children not wanting to eat what the school offers. Thus, this allows one to understand the issue’s essence better and find potential solutions to the problem.
In the article that deals with obesity, one can also trace examples of the deduction that children continue to suffer from obesity due to the failure of programs regulating school meals. The deductive reasoning in these articles involves drawing a logical conclusion from the presented data.
Limitations and Recommendations
Each article’s specific weaknesses and bottlenecks can complicate the perception of the necessary facts. Thus, the article on excessive food waste does not provide enough disclosure and analysis of a side article that provides an initial perspective. A lack of explanation of the policy that was introduced and that created the existing problem may create misunderstanding for readers unfamiliar with the law. To do this, it is essential to review the problem to consider why the situation requires intervention and what complicating factors exist.
In addition, an essay dealing with obesity from food in schools should offer more detailed steps to overcome the problem, rather than insisting on its solution without providing specific principles for the operation of the food management system. The authors of articles should pay more attention to the principles of operation of the systems in question.
Conclusion
These two editorial articles offer divergent perspectives on school lunch regulations. The first article argues for relaxing the regulations to address wasted food and student dissatisfaction, while the second article advocates for maintaining strict nutritional standards to combat childhood obesity. The evidence used by the authors in both articles is illustrative and shows data that may be useful to uncover the essence of the issues.
The problem of obesity and increasing food waste is an acute social problem that needs to be addressed in the development of education. In addition, concern for the organization’s decision-making process regarding food issues should be based on the fact that changes in school meals should be tested to ensure they work. The authors’ biases, rhetorical appeals, use of evidence, logical fallacies, and reasoning strategies contribute to the overall effectiveness of their arguments.
Works Cited
“Fed Or Fed Up? Why We Support Easing School Lunch Rules.” San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial Board, 2017. Web.
“Keep Up Fight Against Childhood Obesity.” Democrat and Chronicle Editorial Board, 2017. Web.