One of the biggest issues I have with the webtext in its current state is that I have no idea who your audience is. As you explained in class it seemed as if you meant it to be for all of academia, however the arguments seem to be directed towards teachers specifically. Seeing as how teachers are not the ones who make the decisions regarding curriculum, perhaps administration would be a better-suited audience for this piece.
Another major concern I have is with the rhetorical aspect of the text. The tone is very aggressive, and it feels like more of an attack than anything else. Most of the wording is very unprofessional, and not in a creative way. Rather it is unprofessional in a way that reduces the legitimacy of your argument. One of the stances many academics take against new media is that it sets up for the abandonment of traditional grammatical rules. These rules are what separate our language apart from others, and make it one of the most analytic languages on the planet. If you want to be taken seriously, perhaps, the professionalism of the text within the document should reflect that sincerity.
The navigation can be a bit tricky at times. For someone who is fairly accustomed to navigating webtexts similar to this, I caught on relatively quickly. However, if you are really trying to change the minds of teachers (or administrators, if you heed my advice) who aren’t as web savvy, you might want to consider a more straightforward layout. Nothing seems to be connected. Like we discussed in class, if you were to link the author’s biography directly from their articles or vice-versa, the text would be much more fluid. In Daniel’s (aka Paper Weight) piece, I have a hard time seeing what exactly the point is. I never really understood what the point of your project is in the first place to be honest. Much of what you say is already understood. Yes, there is a lack of creative use of technology in classrooms, but hasn’t that already been stated? Isn’t that kind of the point of Kairos in the first place? I don’t think you’re bringing anything new to the Kairos table.
As for the Manifesto, I am pleased to see that you included a transcript of it. I really don’t see why the manifesto had to be done through a video. I really felt that the video, while technically is a manifestation (oooh) of multimodality, it is an unnecessary, and in a way takes away from the aesthetic appeal of the website.
I understand that there is a limit to the availability of software, a lack of masterful knowledge in coding, and other various factors, and with that understanding I must say that the format of your webtext is very well done. Even though it may not have the clean cut look of some of the professionally done ones, it certainly looks better than to be expected from a group of people with little-to-no background in web design.
All that being said, I think that if you make some adjustments to your arguments your text could definitely be a well-done student piece. Even if it isn’t the freshest argument, much of what you say is true, and even though I can’t read McKenzie’s or Andrew’s pieces, I’m sure they will pertain nicely.
