This passage clarifies and further explains the definition of “crowdsourcing” in a resolute yet humble tone. Davidson starts the passage in a conclusive manner to signify the reader the central point of the passage: crowdsourcing is far different from expertise. Immediately, she places the two terms in opposing camps and begins a direct comparison of the hierarchies of expertise and collectivity of crowdsourcing. First, she points out the feature of expertise: “the more expert …the more likely we are to be limited…”. “Expert” and “limited” are tied together and naturally generate a uninviting image of narrowly minded experts due to their professional yet exclusive perception of a subject. Later, the parallel of the adverbial “individually” and “collectively” further highlights the difference between the two terms. And by using the first person pronoun “we”, Davidson enhances the sense of unity and the pride of companionship, which coincides with the “collectively” tied up with crowdsourcing, making it a more favorable choice. At the end of the paragraph, she fully adopts the humble tone and urges “we” to drop the expertise and brilliance to embrace the possibilities of more insights and improvement. The repetition of “no matter” acknowledges readers’ pride, while the repetition of “we can” instills a faith and resolution in them.
This passage helps introducing the principle of the new style learning in the essay. As a part of discussion of the iPod experiment, Davidson introduces the idea to demonstrate the importance of shared resources, and an open mind, which in turn criticizes the traditional education dedicated to creating expertise. On the other hand, the concept also implies the success of iPod experiment, an interactive education “reform” that brings positive feedback. Consequentially, the success backs off her central proposal: an intriguing and inviting education system that teaches students how to learn, but not what to learn.
Wow! What a great summary of the Davidson reading. Personally, I had a little bit of trouble understanding how experts could be more limited in terms of learning and how experts could hinder the process of learning, especially in their turf... but I think you understood it well. I wonder if you found yourself favoring the method of crowdsourcing or would you still prefer the old-fashioned traditional and (Davidson would definitely say) outdated expertise model?
ReplyDelete