Consider the source and audience.
The argument found in the article is between members of the Texas Education agency. This article was found in the Dallas Morning News without a certain columnist being recognized for writing the article. The article is written to inform everyday normal citizens. The arguments presented in the story are not meant entertainment purposes so there is nothing to change to help keep an audience.
Lay out the argument and the underlying values and assumptions.
The basic argument is between two different parties, the Texas Education Agency, or TEA, and Chris Comer. The TEA is forcing Comer to resign because of an e-mail that she sent which the TEA says it show that Comer is not neutral about intelligent design and evolution. The e-mail that comer sent announced "a presentation being given by the author of Inside Creationism's Trojan Horse. In the book, author Barbara Forrest says creationist politics are behind the movement to get intelligent design". The values that the TEA find important is being neutral and they believe that Comer supports one side stronger than the other.
Uncover the evidence.
The argument between the two parties are supported with facts and evidence. The TEA came strait out and talked about the e-mail and why what Comer did was unacceptable. The TEA as a whole decided they did not want the upcoming ideas or curriculum to be talked about outside the agency which is what they believed she did when when she sent the e-mail.
Evaluate the conclusion.
I believe the argument is successful because I can see why the TEA believes Comer should not have done what she did. It does convince me that TEA was justified with the forced resignation of Comer. The reason I believe that is because if your job or boss requires something of you and sets guidelines you have to follow those or there are consequences. The article did not change any of my beliefs because of what I just said. If your boss tells not to do something and you do it anyway you will face repercussions.
Sort out the political implications.
The political significance of the argument is that it can influence the way intelligent design and evolution are presented in classrooms across the state. This article shows me that the political world is just like any job were you have a boss. There is always somebody higher than you that you have to answer to.
The article commented on above can be found bl clicking here.