Jonathan Kozol's structure consists of an introduction to the topic, his body of information and examples, and a summation of what we should take from his essay. His plethora of very human stories is an effective way to drive home the point on the scope of the problem. Giving examples instead of solely spitting out countless statistics is a way to appeal to the reader's pathos, and it works well. His structure seems to be presenting facts about the daily living of an illiterate and then following it up with a quote or example from a real life story. He gives a variety of examples from both genders and different ages groups to show the pervasiveness of the problem, although some do not invoke pity as the person has obviously squandered their opportunities away, as in the example about the illiterate girl who had just finished her school career.
             His structure of balance of pathos with logos, or hard facts with emotional stories of real Americans interspersed, is very effective because your mind and heart are targeted, which is a good method. You see the numbers and then you can connect with the individual illiterate, and the message is compelling for you to sympathize with the non-privileged. We who are literate take this most basic skill for granted so often, and this essay tries to dispel the notion that everyone around us also shares this ability. It shows how crippling it is to not posses this essential ability, and how it destroys some of the values of our country by not having a fully educated voting base.
            Although the examples mostly follow after the hard facts about the existence of an illiterate are presented, there is a section of the paper that is essentially quotation after quotation, each outlining a different experience in which the illiterate person feels inadequate and incapable. It is a bit overwhelming, but at the same time it brings a shock and wow factor that really speaks to the reader in an intimate way. Kozor is successful in his structure as it allows his writing to be understood and remembered very effectively, and because he uses a balance of presentations to get his point across. He couldn't have picked a better structure or else the argument and point he was interested in relaying would be very one-sided and only reach a certain type of person, whereas this paper was more all-encompassing.