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?
Viva Wikipedia!
13 comments:
Hi Rob,
You are right, nowadays we should use everything available including Wikipedia especially for research.
If we are in doubt about what the Wiki says, we can always check online dictionary.
@ Harry...
Not so much for definitions. I am focusing more on the information and data that is available on Wikipedia.
The idea simply being that crowd sourcing allows pretty much anyone to be an "expert". But, sometimes, there is a need for these experts to be vetted by some "real experts" who are acknowledged leaders in their respective fields.
Not just Wikipedia, the teachers seem to be wary of the whole web as a source of information. I find children being constantly told not to download any information but find it on their 'own'. I wonder what that means. Educators probably are afraid of the challenge the net offers to their knowledge.
@ Anonymous...
Really? Not to use the internet as a source? That is a little silly. particularly when the internet provides access to refereed journal articles among other 'solid' resources and sources.
It does challenge teacher's knowledge. However, the challenge is that teacher's really need to know their content and material.
I still think technology is a valuable resource that needs to be incorporated into lesson planning and lesson delivery. This technology also includes the doors to information and data that are unlocked in the process.
I think one of the problems, which I also hear about from my teacher friends, is that more often than not research stops with wikipedia....
In the old days you would have gone to the library and (ideally) have had a wide variety of good material at your disposal.
I think the only remedy is if teachers stress that Wikipedia can only be a starting point (I mean I use it in my own academic work, but of course would never cite it). Maybe deduct points/fail them for the assignment in question if they don't give any other sources other than Wikipedia?
This might also be relevant:
http://thewikipedian.net/2009/04/29/the-kids-are-alright/
@ Kris...
I guess that was my point to a certain extent. If this is the case then it is up to the teacher to adequately explain how they want Wikipedia to be used, or what is legitimate use.
Most, if not all, of the assessment tasks that I issue include a marking rubric / criteria. Students are so much better informed about expectations now than I remember being in my high school days.
Thanks for the link.
The danger is that if teachers accept Wikipedia it becomes the norm. Students will come to believe that all information stops at it. I often wonder how come the Wikipedia sites always come to the top when using google.
@ Lawbugger...
No, it doesn't. No, the students won't make that assumption.
As an educator, perhaps it is about time educators took a little more responsibility for how they "teach".
Wikipedia is a tool that students, and some teachers, should take the time to access.
Wikipedia sites come at the top because there is a deal, isn't there. The fact that there is a deal should not make anything found on a Wikipedia site worthless.
Going back to my original post and the comments since, Wikipedia is a resource that allows students to get a big picture view of a topic. It also allows them to follow the html trail and access primary sources.
Some teachers and educators should probably take the time to educate themselves about Wikipedia before writing it off as an always unreliable crowd-sourcing application of little or no value.
What is the "deal" you talk about. Surely this is relevant to understanding Wikipedia.
Im watching the Merapi wikisite evolve at this very moment. very informative. You might try to unravel the information regarding the cancelling and reactivation of international flights so happening due to an australian advisory, and the flak here in INdonesia once more, concerning this. This little piece of very vital news-chronology is hard to fathom. Hate to be booked on one of those flights on the last two days.
I think Wpedia is great but I dont have the confidence that you have regarding students ability and energy to critically appraise it. Crit-lit is a slog in itself; harder even with multiauthored stuff. (Btw What was your remark about only being a historian about?)
I might add that http://www.angkasapura2.co.id/# was tits on a bull as far as getting any reliable info about the flights
@ Lawbugger...
I recall, perhaps inaccurately, that I read somewhere once that there was a deal that positioned Wikipedia at the top of the search chain. A "deal" did not intend to suggest that it was something sinister or underhanded.
I have not bothered to look for anything to link to. If you are really interested I am sure you could do the Google search yourself and turn up the relevant Wikipedia page ;)
Flight cancellations. I am guessing similar to the volcanic eruption in Norway or wherever it was that closed down European airports. Perhaps a little over-cautious. When the relevant people thought about it, they changed their collective minds and resumed international flights.
As far as I can tell, Qantas did not cancel any flights because of Merapi (they had other things to worry about as far as I can tell).
Perhaps, my confidence is self-confidence in my ability to assist students in gaining this understanding.
Spot on. The sources cited on Wikipedia are excellent time-savers.
@ Kekasih...
I guess they are. The point was how best to use them :)
Post a Comment