The main difference between the two texts was the way they were presented.
In our text book, Sloan's text is "neutral", meaning that it is not as appealing to the eye as the hypertext.
The hypertext, though, has much more "bling": it has pictures, links, etc.
I would say that the online version is more effective in putting the reader in context. The pictures help visualize what Sloan is talking about.
What bothered me with the hypertext, though, is that part of Sloan's story is not included, more specifically the part about her father's friend. I believe that this was one of the most important parts of her text because her father's friend is the ultimate symbol for being caught between cultures, which is basically what all of Sloan's text is about. The hypertext was not effective in portraying this aspect of her story.
Regarding the presentation of the two texts, I would say that the effectiveness depends on the reader.
In the textbook, the presentation is boring and uniteresting: usual academic style. But the fact of having an actual book, with paper, is much more appealing to the reader who has trouble reading on a computer screen. I hate reading on the computer, that is why I prefer having a book to hold and pages to turn.
Again, what I liked about the hypertext were the pictures, which really help put the reader in Sloan's shoes. I didn't find the links to be distracting, they actually helped place you in context as well because, by clicking on one, you could learn more about an artist or an event that she is describing.
Again, the effectiveness of the two texts depended on the reader. The hypertext is better for students like us, and the book might be better for the elderly. The hypertext definitly is more appealing to the eye, but the fact that it excludes an essential part of the story brings the two texts at equality.
I like the way you compared the effectiveness of the two versions of the texts. The way you showed the pros and cons of each definitely made a good argument for both versions of the text. I also enjoyed how you pointed out some things that I did not notice/think of when comparing the two texts. For instance, I did not think that reading on the computer/the text would be different based on the age of the audience which is a very valid point although I believe that you made a couple generalization when it came to the audience's preferences, you had valid proof so it worked well.
ReplyDelete