Hyperlinks on Steroids

There are many times in which I want to insert two links on a word or phrase as opposed to just one, but I haven’t figured out a good way to do this. 

I thought about splitting the word and putting one link on the first half and another link on the second half like this: voicethread, but then most might not even notice that there are two links and become confused when they experience that clicking the word does not lead them to the same place every time. 

It's still confusing even when there are multiple words such as: Digital Native because then it looks like the link on Digital is supposed to explain only the word Digital.

There are also times in which I want to add some explanations to my links like I tried in my post called Digitally Native with Pictures. I wanted to specify that I was specifically referring to the 4th paragraph of the article I referenced, but I wasn't quite sure about how I should format that either.

I also considered doing it this way: voicethread (also try this voicethread), but I feel like this would start making the text as a whole look cluttered.

Which brings me to my second pondering: Is there such a thing as too many hyperlinks? Do they crowd and overwhelm or are they always a good choice? I think there is potential that there could be such a thing as having too many, but on the other hand, some Wikipedia pages glow with blue links to other pages and I don’t ever feel as though that is a hindrance. I actually like it because I know that if I don't understand what something is or want to learn more about it I can just click on it.... but then why do I still feel concerned about using too many links in my own blogs?

I’m also wondering about linking to people when mentioning them in a blog or site. What should you link their name to? Their site? Their blog? Something they have written? I guess it depends on what the options are. Should I ask for permission to link to them or at least notify them? 

Not that I want to create an internet version of the MLA/APA monster (a couple reasons described in Copyrights in Education), but an optional guideline or etiquette could be helpful. On the other hand, perhaps I should just try things out and see how it develops. I think I appreciate the method of informal trial and error as opposed to one person or group sitting down and deciding the right way for everyone.

Any ideas on any of this stuff?

DIGITAL TEXTS

How I feel about it:

I am a supporter of any method or medium from which students can get information. For example, I have heard many talk about comic books and newspapers as lower literature. However this table (Reutzel, et al.)shows the number of new words kids can learn from reading such “trash.” Yes, perhaps Superman isn’t the “classic literature” that Jane Eyre is, but if it gets kids reading then who cares? I feel the same way towards the digital text form. If it works in getting people to read, then use it. Isn’t that what we want?

Why do we want students to read in the first place? Our goal is to help them become productive citizens in the community of the world. To do that, they need to be able to read to some extent in order to function and they need to be able to obtain information. There are multiple ways of obtaining information such as listening, conventional reading, reading Braille, looking at pictures, and watching sign language. It shouldn’t matter which way is used. At the same time I would not refer to all of those as “reading.” I, personally, find this confusing because it does not fit my own schema of what reading is which is something I can change. However, I find it unnecessary to refer to all of them as reading in order to make them equal. People who can listen to a book and cannot read it still CAN’T read even though they can listen. Therefore they are different. Distinguishing the two and keeping them separate does not automatically make one inferior or superior than the other. They are just different.


Looking to the Future:

Digital text lines up with the movement towards being eco-friendly. As a student, I love saving money by not having to buy books or print everything out. After all, ink is the most expensive liquid on the planet, supposedly. These are just a few reasons why digital texts are becoming so popular and will potentially replace hard copies.

I think printed materials will still be widely used for another generation or two as the older generations adjust to technology and/or die out. I’m not even referring to the elderly exclusively. I am in my twenties and I still prefer buying printed novels over reading them on a kindle. However, I would rather read my academic articles on the computer. That is simply my level of adjustment at this point in my life. A few of my friends have a kindle and even read them at the beach. Others of my friends refuse to buy one. In the end, I see the possibility for a certain amount of printed materials always being needed. At the same time, I definitely see them dying out just as much as vinyl records are antiques.