Critical Argument Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Critical Argument - Essay ExampleNotably is the Wikipedia where its users/audience sack up edit, modify, revise and even exchange the original work allowing for the content to improve as more audience use it. Unlike in blog where the content is exclusively from the point of deal of the author, Wikipedia is a result of a collaborative work among its sundry(a) users improving it over time. In Wiki, all of its visitors can be its collaborators and therefore it is more of a discussion platform than blogging (Davis 2006). These visitors who could edit, add and even modify the original work anonymously without reward are Wikis strongest feature known as clustering sourcing. According to Engstrom &Jewett, Wiki is primarily a collaborative research that analyzes divergent points of view (2005). Wiki is indeed a good tool for collaborative work that involves a adult number of people because it does not put a limit on a number of people who could edit and improve the original work. The p age can excessively be edited or modified over a number time without capping the frequency of the changes made in the original work. This way, the original textbook is enriched by the contributions and collaborative work of its visitors making the content better as time goes by. This was validated in one of my education course class where our prof asked everyone in the class to work on one broad subject during the semester. The exercise revealed that everyone was engaged on the wiki page and the broad subject was eventually subdivided into various categories as time and student progresses illustrating how collaborative tools such as wiki can improve and provide an opportunity to share knowledge and perspective to other people. Moreso, Wikis has in any case proven that by itself, they are also an effective teaching tool because it engages the student in the learning process. Wikis efficacy can be impart in Cynthia Haven argument in her paper that states todays kids dont just writ e for grades anymore. They write to shake the world. The most celebrated feature of the Wikipedia is Crowd-sourcingwhen multiple people contribute to a site to make it better (anonymouslywith no reward), people devote their time and energy on the website not just for grades or any repay. They write to communicate, to share their own knowledge, to get a sense of power. With various and mass information provided, more and more students victimisation Wikipedia as their reference on their writing. At the same time, more and more antiwiki professors and scholars are dismissing wiki as incomplete and downright false for it to be abandon in academic study. The precaution of the academics against Wikipedia is not without basis and I believe that every student who uses the platform should be aware of its caveat. True, Wikipedia has many benefits but it also has its own downside. The source had fatal information errors that included false remainders reports, libel and miscellaneous hoaxes and mistakes and therefore is susceptible to false information. At top of the false death report Ted Kennedys death, the wiki page falsely reported the death of Sen. Edward Kennedy, while he actually did suffer a seizure during the post-inaugural luncheon for Barack Obama. This has been corrected by an anonymous user but still the incidence demonstrated the vulnerability of the platform towards inaccuracy