The "hook" discussed in education is always important to capture your audience and I think the illustration and explanation in the beginning of this paper were great. Painting pictures for your audience tend to draw your readers in and get them to thinking while they are reading. Although this paper involved research, there was more personal knowledge, which isnt a bad thing, but some areas did need more research to support the argument. Although each section was written in good detail, the flow of the paper was not present due to the lack of transitional phrases or the ability of the reader to stay connected throughout the entire paper. Overall, the writers have extensive knowledge in the content, but more research would need to be incorporated to support the arguments or statements. Thanks.

Mary Jones

3 ( THREEE!!)

The "hook" discussed in education is always important to capture your audience and I think the illustration and explanation in the beginning of this paper were great. Painting pictures for your audience tend to draw your readers in and get them to thinking while they are reading. Although this paper involved research, there was more personal knowledge, which isnt a bad thing, but some areas did need more research to support the argument. Although each section was written in good detail, the flow of the paper was not present due to the lack of transitional phrases or the ability of the reader to stay connected throughout the entire paper. Overall, the writers have extensive knowledge in the content, but more research would need to be incorporated to support the arguments or statements. Thanks.

Mary Jones

3 ( THREEE!!)

Again, I have noticed papers that have a nice, smooth word flow. This is great to allow the reader to feel as if the writers are knowledgeable of the content. This paper did provide useful, informative information for any novice who wishes to know the simple and complex world of educational technology. I would recommend more input from the writers with the mixture of supported resources, opposed to research then supported comments. Overall, this paper was well written, supported by resources other than the main source. The writers did include examples to illustrate the content. Overall, I think it was a well-written paper. Great! :)

Thanks,
Mary

4 ( FOURR!!)

Hello Group 1,

5 (FIVEEEEE!!!!)

From the beginning of the paper, I was immediately informed of the topics,arguments,etc. From reading the introduction alone, I knew that this paper would flow quite well. I was always taught in English to provide a point,illustration, and explanation. You have supported your paper with numerous sources besides the textbook, which shows that you have provided in-depth knowledge based on more than one perspective. You have provided illustrations of the usage technology, highlighting the various tools of use and level of knowledge needed to utilize these tools. Each paragraph supported your topics and they transitioned with ease. This paper was written with a concrete knowledge of the topic, which allows for the reader to not feel confused, but well able to follow the "path" of the paper very well. Sentence structure and word usage were not too technical or mediocre. Although formatting may have been off here, Im sure it was correct in its original format. I honestly feel that this paper deserves a five because of the detail of the topic, sentence structure, word flow, and sources used to provide an in depth perspective. Thanks!

Mary Jones