The assignment given to determine whether the given web sites were valid or invalid and to give reasons why or why not seemed daunting at first. I feel I can now examine web sites with a critical eye and would not be fooled "by the seduction of "cool" graphics or the weakness of poor logic." I know now that I also need to pay attention to the author's credibility and to be more critical of the things I read especially when they are on the internet. My new found confidence can be attributed to a book I discovered in the library. The author points to three fundamental questions that might be used to begin with when one encounters a web document.
Ethos: What individual,organisation or institution created this document?
Logos: What argument does this document make and is it a logical,coherent one?
Pathos:How does this document attempt to persuade its readers through emotional appeals(visual,aural or textual)?
The author believes that there's good reason to begin with ethos testing the credibility of a source before examining the quality of its content.(logos). Furthermore it's wise to investigate logos before turning to the pathos of imagery. As teachers we need a strategy for improving students' critical reading of web sites leading them to "subject the entire document to a rhetorical analysis adopting a systematic approach rather than a random one."
No comments:
Post a Comment