Critical Thinking Article Review by Danaa Ross for Management 350 written January 08, 2004
This article addresses the usefulness of children searching the web during school hours. It asserts an opinion against the use of the web by students for the purpose of inquiry. The decision is primarily based on the children's difficulty in obtaining relevant, useful data in a timely manner. While the article is acceptable in content, I would not say it is particularly well written. It does present some issues for consideration.
In this article review, I will look at several areas. These areas are as follows: perception, assumption, emotion, language, argument, fallacy, logic, and issue/problem resolution. The overall tone of the article is presented in a rather informative language, the language does not have an overall argumentative tone; however, it does try to argue a point. The point being, we must not have our children wasting valuable classroom time searching the web, only to come up empty handed.
It doesn't use such strong language, but it doesn't need to in order to get its point across.
I did identify an assumption immediately at the beginning of the article. "Thirty copies of the same, outdated book is not good enough, and the yearly $200 available to the school's library for all the subjects for new acquisitions is not going to do it either." (ProQuest) Every budget for every school is $200, assuming all budgets are set the same simply sounds foolish.
A fallacy identified in the same paragraph, "Where else are kids going to get the information resources they need but from the Web?" (ProQuest) The web is the only place to get information resources if the library doesn't have them? This statement is post hoc ergo propter hoc, because it is...