I'll tell you a story. Type of. It's actually more of a vague analysis of what I think about a few quotes and then my personal experiences I had in college. Or rather, that’s what my draft was. I'll try to add a little more content this time. It’s time for the second formal writing assignment in pairs! I will maintain that my thesis is that Pratt's speech may be correct for the times, but too old to be entirely relevant to modern times, and that the Los Rios quote is nothing more than nonsense. unnecessary flair that has no impact on how the school or staff actually operate. So the quote we are supposed to look at from Pratt's side is: "If a classroom is analyzed as a unified and homogenized social world with respect to the teacher, everything the students do other than what the teacher specifies is invisible or abnormal to the teacher. "(Page 1) The Problem Pratt's claim that the classroom is "analyzed as a unified and homogenized social world in relation to the teacher" is largely false these days, with most analyzes based on how students react or interact, with the teacher simply there as a single tool to guide the students instead of controlling them However, Pratt says "IF a class is analyzed... in relation to the teacher", she. could therefore mean that the result is only like that when you analyze it in this way. In this case, her statement makes no sense since it would mean that she is saying "the things that students do are useless. ...if you ignore everything they do and only analyze the teacher", which is a stupid thing to do if you want