Please Login or Register
Advanced search

"[T]hey are living entities"

Submitted by jasminabad on Sat, 10/11/2008 - 10:31pm

Parry, D. (2008).  Wikipedia and the new curriculum.  Science Progress.

I've always been interested in the Wikipedia debate.  It has become the go-to resource for many of students, and why not?  Most of the time, it's the first hit in their Google search.  One of my concerns is that often times, it is their only resource.  Moreover, depending on their level of information literacy, they may or may not realize that some of the articles they find may contain inaccuracies at any given time.  Thus, I've begun including an "About Wikipedia" portion in my digital resources presentation.  Honestly, while I do not discourage my students from using Wikipedia as a starting point for their research, I dissuade them from citing it a source, which I've found is the general attitude of many informational professionals I've had a conversation with regarding Wikipedia.  Like many others, I applaud the the idea of Wikipedia.  I use it myself in some circumstances.

This blog post a useful resource because it provides an interesting insight into Wikipedia, describing it as an "organic entity," which can serve as an instructional tool in the direction in which knowledge is now being created, shared, and stored.  What I found even more engaging is the conversation that ensues through the comments in response to this article.

Jazmin, thanks for bringing

mciocia's picture
Submitted by mciocia on Sun, 10/12/2008 - 9:05am.

Jazmin, thanks for bringing up this interesting article and reflections on Wikipedia’s use in a school setting. While I took LIBR210 we read an article titled Wikipedia as Accurate as Britannica regarding an accuracy analysis performed on both sources deeming that the difference between them was 3 mistakes to 4. Although Wikipedia is interesting in its nature (free web-based with cooperative content), I think its weakness is also related to this same nature because its content can be easily manipulated and editorial vandalism is prevalent. I think the importance of the expert knowledge within a field, and signed articles in an encyclopedia, still ensure quality yet not always popularity.

Good attitude! When I teach

meredithfarkas's picture
Submitted by meredithfarkas on Mon, 10/13/2008 - 2:09pm.

Good attitude! When I teach information literacy sessions to our Freshman, I always ask "how many of you have been warned or threatened under penalty of death not to use the Wikipedia for anything, that it's totally useless?" Usually all or almost all of them raise their hand. I then go on to teach them how to be critical of sources, ALL sources, so that they can make good decisions about the millions of websites out there that aren't reliable. I think so many teachers focus only on the Wikipedia as if there aren't tons of other sites that students shouldn't be citing in their papers. Much better to teach them to think critically about this -- to understand that things are rarely black-or-white/good-or-bad -- than to just say "the Wikipedia is bad! Don't use it!"

Syndicate content