“A Teen Take on Ed Tech” was an article written by Soraya Shockley. This article is about using technology in education. Like everything, this article has its strengths and weaknesses. I felt that the organization, the clarity of the main points, and the focus made this a strong article, even though I felt that the inconsistency of the vocabulary weakened the article, overall I feel that Shockley has a well-written article.
In Soraya Shockley’s article teens discuss their point of view, and the pros and cons of using technology in education. They mention things such as; tablets in the classroom, teachers building websites, using social media as a part of education, online tutors, Google classroom and drive, also the expensive clunky white …show more content…
What I mean by this is I felt that she did not do a good job using the vocabulary level of the audience she was trying to reach. She also did not keep the vocabulary consistence. Shockley transitioned from what I felt was a high school level vocabulary to a more complicated, scholar level vocabulary. For example, “My favorite thing about Google drive (sarcasm alert) is doing online group projects (Shockley).” is written as a high school level vocabulary and “While I still have qualms about where ed tech is today, I predict that with time, there will only be more technology saturation, more tech-literate kids, and more opportunities to use tech in the classroom (Shockley).” is a more scholarly level sentence. I felt that if she would had been consistent throughout the entire article it would have been fine either with the high school level vocabulary or the scholarly level.
Overall, I felt that “A Teen Take on Ed Tech” is a well-written article. The organization, the clarity of the main points, and the focus defiantly stood out in a positive way. In more of a negative way, I felt that the vocabulary stood out. If the vocabulary would have been more consistent I wouldn’t be able to point out a negative. But, the strengths outweighed the weaknesses. So I feel that Soraya Shockley has a strong, well-written
In Soraya Shockley’s article teens discuss their point of view, and the pros and cons of using technology in education. They mention things such as; tablets in the classroom, teachers building websites, using social media as a part of education, online tutors, Google classroom and drive, also the expensive clunky white …show more content…
What I mean by this is I felt that she did not do a good job using the vocabulary level of the audience she was trying to reach. She also did not keep the vocabulary consistence. Shockley transitioned from what I felt was a high school level vocabulary to a more complicated, scholar level vocabulary. For example, “My favorite thing about Google drive (sarcasm alert) is doing online group projects (Shockley).” is written as a high school level vocabulary and “While I still have qualms about where ed tech is today, I predict that with time, there will only be more technology saturation, more tech-literate kids, and more opportunities to use tech in the classroom (Shockley).” is a more scholarly level sentence. I felt that if she would had been consistent throughout the entire article it would have been fine either with the high school level vocabulary or the scholarly level.
Overall, I felt that “A Teen Take on Ed Tech” is a well-written article. The organization, the clarity of the main points, and the focus defiantly stood out in a positive way. In more of a negative way, I felt that the vocabulary stood out. If the vocabulary would have been more consistent I wouldn’t be able to point out a negative. But, the strengths outweighed the weaknesses. So I feel that Soraya Shockley has a strong, well-written