Analyze the article "The Changing Metaphors of Education" in terms of the way it constructs its central argument, its subsidiary arguments, and the way in which it uses outside resources to develop its ideas.

Some questions you should address in your analysis:

• What appears to be the purpose of the article (not necessarily what its thesis is, but a larger implication of what it's trying to do and for whom it’s trying to do it)?
 
• What sorts of information does this article assume the reader to have a prior understanding of and how does this impart information about the discourse community or communities for whom it is intended?


• Does the article rely more on primary or secondary sources or blend them fairly evenly? Does this help give any insight into its purpose? Does this help give insight into the discourse community to which it is oriented How would considerably greater reliance on one or the other (i.e., primary or secondary) possibly change this focus?


• Is the progression of the argument ultimately successful (i.e., does it make its point effectively) or could it use more development in certain areas? If so, where? What kinds of additional proofs would you have wanted more of?