The article “School Uniform Policies in Public Schools” written by David Brunsa reflects upon pros and cons in regards to uniform school use and its efficacy in placing equality. The author frames the policy inherent in numerous public schools that are becoming, even more, popular in comparison to others. The thematic analysis of the chosen topic indicates that the movement represents an important subject for discussion.
Several effects could be outlined after reading the question. The article is based on the research that was done throughout the decades. Initially, the author refers to the decade in the 90s and presents outcomes of wearing school uniforms. What’s more, one could note that the author provides classifications between implications in rural and urban areas which had different effects on the movement. The text is also based on different chronological implications which comprised of different elements of contextualization. Thus while looking at the very detail how the topic has been addressed, one may note that the contextualization is based on the two following aspects: at first, the author presents the research and confirms with the respective data on the topic. Besides that, personal experience comprises an essential part of the research which one cannot deny, given the fact that the other does include a personal vision of the use of school uniforms in the broader context.

You're lucky! Use promo "samples20"
and get a custom paper on
"Entering the Conversation through the Textual Analysis"
with 20% discount!
Order Now

What is also important to mention, is the way how arguments are constructed in the text. Initially, the argument construction is commonly based on responding to question “why.” For instance, “The school uniform movement continues to be tooted in pure speculation, without any scientific evidence to support anecdotal arguments for its effectiveness”. Thus, the author questions commonly perceived social norms. Even though the initial responses are based on rather personalized answers, one can surely find a proof that they were supported with references related to both, public policy analysis and political science. The arguments are also based on differentiated approach, where one may note distinctions between age groups and social factors that were decisive in basing the conclusion.

The structure of the text is certainly clear, as one may also note that there are elements that refer to the arguments in favor in the beginning with the further references to the arguments against, where both quantitative data and qualitative data is included. What’s more, the visual element is also present in the text and influences the audience in the general perception of the topic. Besides text and other visual elements, one can also find tables with a differentiated approach that are further explained in the text, too.

The subdivision into subchapters of the different topic also plays an important role in the way how an argument is constructed. The best-constructed argument is formulated with the starting question “how”, so that it creates a different effect on the audience, too.

While making a critical summary of the text, the following aspects should be taken into account. First of all, the author could have avoided personalized responses, as these undermine the presented data. Even though arguments are supported with the well-respected data, several issues in that regard indicate that such personalized responses create the sense of bias on the author. However, what makes the text respectful is the fact that these arguments are based on the references, which the author provides at the end of the text. What’s more, to make clear sense for the audience, the author provides a set of conclusive remarks, summarized in the bullet points at the end of the text.

To sum up, one may note that an overall impression of the text is certainly positive, given the fact that the topic is clearly defined, and a set of arguments support the ideas conveyed by the author with the supplementary textual instruments.