Wikipedia as a source, and not to suggest to students when on practicum to use Wikipedia as a source. I have always found this a little bizarre and way to biased for my usual standard. I have always believed that, where you can, you use all the resources at your disposal. This would include Wikipedia in an educational setting.
On the weird front, I use "wikis" as a means of providing information to students and as a means of allowing students to post and share information amongst each other. It is an excellent learning tool. It is also a tool I need to get better at using and utilising. I have no qualms about admitting to being a technology novice. I, am though, keen to incorporate as much technology into my classroom as I can. Let's face it, technology is the way of the future. I would be negligent if I did not learn to use it and facilitate my students in using it.
So, back to Wikipedia. What I have been taught is that "crowd sourcing" is code for unreliable. Simply, any one can post any old garbage online in, or on, a Wikipedia page. This is in fact true. However, part of the learning process is teaching students to be discerning in how they locate information and how they address issues of usefulness, reliability and bias. Strangely enough, I think, particularly in Years 11 & 12 that students are more than capable of making these judgment calls, and they must be afforded the opportunity to do so.
I encourage my students to use Wikipedia, often as a first point of call. One of the earlier lessons in my programming deals with Wikipedia and how to use it as a research tool. The beauty of Wikipedia is that it is a wonderful resource. The vast majority of pages contain links to other material, usually the source material for the Wikipedia page itself. Therefore, if students know where to find these links on a Wikipedia page, then they might only be one, two, or perhaps a mere three 'clicks' away from the pot of gold at the end of the Wikipedia rainbow, the primary source.
The other point of interest that most people seemingly fail to recognise is that most Wikipedia pages include a disclaimer at the top when the content / material is deemed to be of a questionable standard. This disclaimer tends to suggest that there are problems with the citations, or lack thereof, with the Wikipedia page. I would argue that most students would read the disclaimer and recognise that there were 'issues' regarding usefulness and reliability. I encourage my students to separate "the sheep from the goats" (I used this line on my last practicum :D).
Final point. Wikipedia is not the be all to end all with respect to research. There will be times when students are required to look beyond the internet, perhaps even do some hard yards in a real library as opposed to a virtual one. But, with the ever-increasing amount of material being digitised and uploaded to the virtual realm, it is possible to research and write an academic essay or paper without leaving home. I, for example, can access my university library (University of Western Sydney) and all the digital resources it has by using my student card and logging in remotely.
So, why are some educators scared of Wikipedia?