The authors also have differences in their delivery of information about Web 2.0. The intended audiences for the two pieces differ slightly. Batson primarily addresses educators and faculty members. This is apparent, for example, in this idea: "the textbook of this age is the work that students generate under your guidance and under your design." Batson is directly speaking to educators and those responsible for students' education. Alexander's piece seems to be aimed at a broader audience because he never addresses specific groups of people. Another contrasting point between the two articles is their tone. Batson uses a friendly, relatively impersonal tone when expressing his information and opinions. He also clearly supports the integration of Web 2.0 into the classroom. Alexander takes a more neutral, informative approach in relaying his ideas. His article was more factual, yet less exciting to read.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Web 2.0: Compare and Contrast
The articles "Why is Web 2.0 Important to Higher Education" by Trent Batson and "Web 2.0: A New Wave of Innovation for Teaching and Learning?" by Bryan Alexander both give their topic in the title, leaving the reader to assume that the information presented will be about Web 2.0 and its place in the academic environment. The articles each touch on the idea of revolutionizing the classroom teaching approach to incorporate networking and expand knowledge. These changes also entail a greater degree of collaboration among students and educators. Batson states that "with so many ways to create knowledge now very rapidly and collaboratively, we are freed from the necessity of a singular approach to teaching." Alexander makes a similar point by saying that networked computing can "connect people in order to boost their knowledge and their ability to learn." Each author addresses the benefits of implementing Web 2.0 into the classroom.
Great job and I agree! Alexander's piece was informative but boring. I actually had a hard time reading it because his language was not enticing and his introduction failed to grab my attention or make me care about what he was going to say. Baston's Article was much easier to read since his paragraph's and ideas were shorter and his language seemed less formal and more passionate.
ReplyDeleteI did not consider comparing the differences in tone; you made a good point that Batson used a more informal tone. I also agree that Alexander’s article was strictly informative and not subjective. I like your point that both authors had titles that clearly stated what the article was about. Good use of quotations in your argument. Excellent job.
ReplyDelete