PAPER A SOURCE

Aquatic Readiness: Developing Water Competence in Young Children
By Stephen Langendorfer, Lawrence D. Bruya
Published by Human Kinetics, 1995

Page 9

Argument: WATCO of Treated Swimming Pool Water on Development of Harmful Bacteria and Parasites
Claim: Pool Water Prevents the Growing of Harmful Bacteria
Reason: Because Treated Pool Water Because They Must Comply and Meet State Minimums

Audience: Experienced Aquatic Professionals who are attempting to draw the public into the pool and hear many common myths. These individuals would be well educated on the overall workings of swimming facilities, but probably lack extensive knowledge of the chemical processes they enlist.

Goal: To spread the truth about the safety of the pool setting to communities through community expertise.

Ethos: This author developed a strong relationship by first acknowledging that there is a common myth about swimming pools as a breeding ground for bacteria and parasites that are immune to the effects of chlorine or bromine. Acknowledging this to those who have probably heard the myth or may even believe it creates a sense of unity between the reader and the author showing that they have had similar experiences. The author also establishes credibility by using formal terms and historical events in aquatic history indicating they are well equip to address this matter.

Pathos: This author told stories of the origin of this myth to draw the reader into the article and make it more interesting and applicable but besides this there was little emotion solicited by the authors because they hope to debunk unfounded myths not by creating new unexplained facts

Relevant: The information used by the author is extremely relevant especially when they explain where the myth had received it start. Using this information it is becomes easier to accept this as a myth, but the authors did not explain further what state minimums are, only that they are sufficient. All the information is relevant, but the information more relevant to the actual claim is rather sparse. The authors also limit their arguments to swimming pools which are require to meet state minimums and explicitly state that other facility the spread of bacteria could be possible.
Effective: The argument was very effective primarily because of the ethos. The author did not rely on a lot of jargon or scientific formulas to assert their claim but establishing credibility and a relationship with the reader they were able to lead a logic based conclusion that the audience would have been able to follow and accept. By establishing credibility the authors did not need to be overly specific but more specific to their audience.