I think that the idea of Wikipedia not being a "valid resource" is almost
ironic. I don't recommend the use of the website, but I have had several
teachers who think it is the "living, breathing World Book of the modern
world"---and I cringe. Although this site is questionable, I see the irony
of discrediting this site all the while we see contradictions in the "main
media" being presented to us through television, radio, magazines, and
newspapers, but continue to use them as our main source for information.
The idea that there is "one or two authoritative" sources above all others
has become less defined.
Using Wikipedia (and other sources of information, including print,
television, radio, and website resources) as a teaching lesson for students
to determine what is or is not valid for classroom research can also be
transferred to life skills tools (something that we all need today!). For
those individuals who take ALL information presented to them as "factual"
there are problems. Many times, these individuals are adults / educators
(who should know better, but who have grown up trusting the media / printed
word). These people feel that the information presented to them should not
be questioned...and that worries me more than anything else.
I'm finding more students than teachers are skeptical of the information
that they find. This is due, in part, because of our (librarians)
instruction in evaluation procedures; however, Wikipedia is one resource
that can be used to instruct not only our students but also our teachers in
how to evaluate information. In fact, it might be a great in-service
presentation to your faculty, especially if you find them relying on these
types of websites as valid research sites.
Shonda Brisco, MLIS
US / Technology Librarian
Fort Worth Country Day School
Fort Worth, TX
sbrisco021@charter.net
"It can take a master carpenter to build a barn, but any jackass can kick it
down....."
~Lyndon B. Johnson
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Carvin" <acarvin@EDC.ORG>
To: <LM_NET@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 6:01 AM
Subject: [LM_NET] Turning Wikipedia into an Asset for Schools
Here's a short essay about Wikipedia I posted on my blog last night that I
thought might be of interest... -andy
Turning Wikipedia into an Asset for Schools
http://www.andycarvin.com
permalink: http://www.andycarvin.com/archives/2005/07/turning_wikiped.html
Art Wolinsky and I went to dinner tonight just outside of Atlantic City,
where I'll be leading a two-day workshop on documentary making for a group
of elementary school teachers. During dinner, Art and I talked about what
I'll be presenting tomorrow morning, as well as fun Internet topics such as
video blogging, podcasting and Wikipedia.
On Wikipedia in particular, we talked about the hostility that many
educators have towards the website, particularly their concerns that it
can't be considered a reliable source. It's the classic dilemma of a wiki
website - because wikis allow any site visitor to edit or add content, you
raise the risk of getting content that isn't up to snuff. And the fact that
young and old alike often go to Wikipedia and see that its name ends
in -pedia, they assume it's just like any other encyclopedia and they should
take its content as vetted, accurate information, which ain't always the
case.
I explained to Art the community of Wikipedia volunteers known as
Wikipedians who have created a system of checks and balances to improve the
quality of content and avoid problems with virtual graffiti and
inaccuracies. But it's not a perfect system, so it's not a huge surprise
that a lot of educators just don't want their students utilizing the site.
I had a flashback; a group of us on the WWWEDU email list had tried to
create a "Kidopedia" - an online encyclopedia written entirely by kids -
back in 1996, hosted by St. John's University. It didn't get very far
because all encyclopedia entries were being posted manually by real people;
that, and the fact that it was hard to articulate a compelling case as to
why kids should be doing this in the first place.
While I understand educators' concerns about directing kids towards
"reliable" reference sources, the more I think about it, the more I think
Wikipedia's flaws actually make it an ideal learning tool for students. That
may sound counterintuitive, of course - how can you recommend a tool that
you know may not be accurate? Well, that's precisely the point: when you go
to Wikipedia, some entries are better referenced than others. That's just a
basic fact. Some entries will have a scrupulous list of sources cited and a
detailed talk page on which Wikipedians debate the accuracy of information
presented in order to improve it. Others, though, will have no sources cited
and no active talk pages. To me, this presents teachers with an excellent
authentic learning activity in which students can demonstrate their skills
as scholars.
Here's a quick scenario. Take a group of fifth grade students and break them
into groups, with each group picking a topic that interests them. Any topic.
Dolphins, horses, hockey, you name it.
Next, send the groups of kids to Wikipedia to look up the topic they
selected. Chances are, someone has already created a Wikipedia entry on that
particular subject. The horse, for example, has an extensive entry on the
website. It certainly looks accurate and informative, but is it?
Unfortunately, there are no citations for any of the facts claimed about
horses on the page.
This is where it gets fun. The group of students breaks down the content on
the page into manageable chunks, each with a certain amount of facts that
need to be verified. The students then spend the necessary time to
fact-check the content. As the students work their way through the list,
they'll find themselves with two possible outcomes: either they'll verify
that a particular factoid is correct, or they'll prove that it's not. Either
way, they'll generate a paper trail, as it were, of sources proving the
various claims one way or another.
Once the Wikipedia entry has been fact-checked, the teacher creates a
Wikipedia login for the class. They go to the entry's talk page and present
their findings, laying out every idea that needs to be corrected. Then, they
edit the actual entry to make the corrections, with all sources cited.
Similarly, for all the parts of the entry they've verified as accurate, they
list sources confirming it. That way, each idea presented in the Wikipedia
entry has been verified and referenced - hopefully with multiple sources.
Get enough classrooms doing this, you kill several birds with one stone:
Wikipedia's information gets better, students help give back to the Net by
improving the accuracy of an important online resource, and teachers have a
way to make lemons into lemonade, turning Wikipedia from a questionable
information source to a powerful tool for information literacy.
I can already see it now: an official K-12 Seal of Approval put on Wikipedia
entries that have been vetted by students. Wish I were more handy in
Photoshop. -andy
--
-----------------------------------
Andy Carvin
Program Director
EDC Center for Media & Community
acarvin @ edc . org
http://www.digitaldivide.net
http://www.tsunami-info.org
Blog: http://www.andycarvin.com
-----------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
All LM_NET postings are protected by copyright law.
To change your LM_NET status, e-mail to: listserv@listserv.syr.edu
In the message write EITHER: 1) SIGNOFF LM_NET 2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL
3) SET LM_NET MAIL 4) SET LM_NET DIGEST * Allow for confirmation.
LM_NET Help & Information: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/
Archive: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/archive/
EL-Announce with LM_NET Select: http://elann.biglist.com/sub/
LM_NET Supporters: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/ven.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
All LM_NET postings are protected by copyright law.
To change your LM_NET status, e-mail to: listserv@listserv.syr.edu
In the message write EITHER: 1) SIGNOFF LM_NET 2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL
3) SET LM_NET MAIL 4) SET LM_NET DIGEST * Allow for confirmation.
LM_NET Help & Information: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/
Archive: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/archive/
EL-Announce with LM_NET Select: http://elann.biglist.com/sub/
LM_NET Supporters: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/ven.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LM_NET
Mailing List Home