The initial reaction towards “Writing for their lives” was quite astounding as it opened my eyes on how many challenges a student in high school may have to face even if there are no problems with literacy and with the process of writing per se. The introduction was a bit confusing because the authors of the article initially posed the text as yet another scientific (Read boring) piece of writing with lots of data and conclusions written in quite bloated language, which is not easily understandable for an average reader. Yet when the authors started moving away from citing the words and conclusions of Heath and Scriber, and move on to the up close and personal look at Keisha and Troy, things become interesting indeed.

I saw two bright individuals who are not only extremely creative but immensely productive as well. Yet the standards accepted at school prevent them from expressing themselves freely in the presence of teachers for fear of being judged and unaccepted as per the standards enforced within the current system of education. The article is right that incorporating non-school literary practices is of vital importance. Times are changing as fast as the language does meaning that coming up with the best thesis out there for an essay is not the way out but only a temporary stop towards learning how to write. Even more, sometimes the students do not need to learn how to do it, because they possess an innate skill of structuring their thoughts so that the message would be effectively delivered to their target audiences.

The writers perfect connect the aspects of science and the personal meaning that despite going into the personal experiences of two separate students and analyzing their works on the subjective level, the article is still scientific as it is heavily based on the research of other scientists regarding literacy, its importance, and how it is perceived within different societies. The target audience of the article is, naturally, students. It is meant as a message for them so as not to become discouraged when it comes to writing and expressing their thoughts. The article is also clearly meant to turn the attention of the powers that be within the educational sphere as some changes have to be implemented without a doubt.

The language could be more effective, because it is very heavy and filled with numerous complicated constructions. What I could use in my own writings is this personal approach. Without the stories of Keisha and Troy, the article would have never dealt the impact it had done on me and, I am sure, other readers. Science and data is all wonderful, but when the reader has something to connect to, on a personal level, the message will be heard, and attention of the reader will remain undivided for the remainder of the text.

I agree with the statement of Ms. Parks that education does not only take place within the confines of the classroom. Moreover, I humbly believe that most education of any person happens beyond classroom. Life is the most relentless, cruel, and yet efficient teacher. I understand Ms. Parks’ reasoning for such a remark, because she is one of the few teachers who realize that everything is relative and the demands made by the curriculum in schools do not apply to each student equally well. Moreover, such demands serve as boundaries thus at times having the potential of killing a particular student’s desire to acquire additional help and guidance from the teacher, as has been illustrated by the dialogue between students and the teacher about thesis, who eats them up, and whether anyone even wants them in the first place. She has the progressive way of thinking, which is vital for the further effective development of the educational system in the country.