Comparison/contrast Analysis of Health Articles

TO: Denise Burgess, English 102 Professor

FROM: Jami Fryer, college student

DATE: February 14, 2008

SUBJECT: Comparison/Contrast Analysis

“Redefining Fitness for Health and Fitness Professionals” and “College Eating and Fitness 101: A Guide for College Students” are two articles that discuss fitness and nutrition. Their topic matter may be the same, but the way they approach their discussion and the information they include are quite different. “Redefining Fitness for Health and Fitness Professionals” is a scholarly article that uses an eloquent tone, researched statistics, and a complicated format. “College Eating and Fitness 101: A Guide for College Students” is a popular article that uses a creative, easy-to-read format to express main points of fitness and nutrition. The two articles target different audiences by using different styles, tones, and layouts. The articles prove that the same topic matter can be discussed in far more ways than one.

Target audience of each article

The chosen audience in the scholarly article, “Redefining Fitness for Health and Fitness Professionals,” is professional. The article covers in-depth research that can only be fully understood with prior knowledge of the scientific side of fitness and nutrition. The scholarly article targets an audience that is seeking specific, comprehensive research. On the other hand, the chosen audience in the popular article, “College Eating and Fitness 101: A Guide for College Students,” is directed toward a scholarly audience’s polar opposite. The target audience of the popular article is college students. The title even includes its audience. They target any and all college students concerned with fitness and nutrition. Unlike the scholarly article, prior knowledge is not necessary to grasp the articles concepts. Intuitive thinking, required to comprehend “Redefining Fitness for Health and Fitness Professionals,” is not necessary. The targeted audience of the scholarly article is certainly different than the chosen audience of the popular article.

Context of each article

Much like the audiences of the two articles differ, the context of the articles do as well. “Redefining Fitness for Health and Fitness Professionals” was published in Lorman, Mississippi in 2001 by Alcorn State University. The article was written by Ph.D A. Akande and his colleagues, C. Van Wyk, and J. Osagie. The twelve pages are filled with significant research and include more than twenty outside sources. “College Eating and Fitness 101: A Guide for College Students” was published in Boston in 2005 by The Center for Young Women’s Health. The article was written by the Children’s Hospital League. The attractive couple pages contain interesting facts and appealing graphics. Although both articles are written in concern with fitness, the context of the two varies in accordance with their targeted audiences.

Style of each article

The styles of the two articles follow suit with their appropriate audiences and therefore, have a difference in style. “Redefining Fitness for Health and Fitness Professionals” is set up in a more complex style. The language choice used is for people on a more professional level with higher education. The sentence structures