First, I did not really think about Wikipedia being a wiki site. I know that as a teacher that I am constantly telling the students that you cannot use information posted to Wikipedia because it can be written by anyone. It never fails that in their research papers the students will cite Wikipedia. Well, a wiki site is a web page that can be viewed or modified by any person using the internet.
Wiki’s are excellent tools that teachers can use to allow students to collaborate on certain topics. This summer one of our high school language arts AP teachers created a wiki on her Wetpaint webpage and students had to post discussions about their summer readings. It was amazing how enthusiastic the students were with the summer work assignment. In their words, the students said, “We only had to post and not write an essay”. The students never realized it was the same assignment but the discussion board served as their writing portion of the summer assignment.
I would use a Wiki in my media center so students could write books reviews on books that they read. This is an excellent way for students to interact with others on their reading interest. Of course, the drawback would be that someone might post inappropriate thoughts but of course the student’s name would be attached to his posting. Other opportunities for wikis in the media center could include calendar sharing and live AV conferencing.
I think Wiki’s are great collaboration tools and maybe some people only consider Wiki’s as storage cabinets. The difference between the two would be how the person using the Wiki perceives its usage. The more thought and input that the wiki designer puts into the site the more useful the site will become to students. In this digital age, students will use high order thinking skills if there is a link to technology.
The drawback at my school would be that we do not allow chat rooms. I would just have to convince my technology department the educational value of using this tool. A solution may be to host our own wiki on the school server or locked some pages of the wiki from public view.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
While this was primarily a discussion of wikis as an educational tool in general, Coach Martin raises some points about Wikipedia I have been thinking about, as well. “I know that as a teacher that I am constantly telling the students that you cannot use information posted to Wikipedia because it can be written by anyone. It never fails that in their research papers the students will cite Wikipedia.” This seems to be a common feeling, Coach Martin.
ReplyDeleteI, too, have been wrestling with the use of Wikipedia as a resource for student research. To me it had always seemed as if Wikipedia was an amateur’s soapbox to expound on his/her ideas about a topic and not a true reference for real knowledge or expertise. Lately, I have been investigating Wikipedia as I have begun to see more and more use of it in educational circles. Can we trust Wikipedia’s legitimacy? Can we justify using it for student research?
An Attempt to Fix Wikipedia’s Trust
Aira Bongco is a social media analyst who studies social media culture and audiences. She has written a new post, dated 09/01/09, in which she discusses WikiTrust, a Wikipedia self-checking system that will color code Wikipedia authors’ past contributions and the time the text is staying on the page. Questionable text will be highlighted in orange. Re-editing by the original author will eventually turn the orange highlighted text into white. “Trust Scores” from WikiTrust will range from 0-9. New authors will show up in different colors. As “Trust Scores” for various editions gain points, the author with more “Trust” points will prevail. See Bongco’s article “WikiTrust—the reason why you can now trust Wikipedia” at http://airabongco.com/internet-news/wikitrust-the-reason-why-you-can-now-trust-wikipedia/
Bongco is an admirer of Wikipedia’s instant convenience and its self regulation attempts to get good information out there. While I like to know about the newest things, too, I am wary of those who write things as fact that are not wholly based in accuracy. Brian Williams, of NBC “Nightly News” has a comical experience with Wikipedia called “What a Rush!” that he shares at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/17761522#17761522 (You’ll have to endure a commercial and the video is curiously shot in varying angles, but the message is interesting.)
Use of Wikipedia for Student Research
In its own article Wikipedia: Researching with Wikipedia available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Researching_with_Wikipedia
Wikipedia admits its place in the world of research. “You should not use Wikipedia by itself for primary research (unless you are writing a paper about Wikipedia).” Wikipedia continues, “In a wiki, articles are never ‘finished.’ They are continually edited and (usually) improved over time . . . . Users should be aware that not all articles are of encyclopedic quality from the start. Indeed, many articles start out by giving one—perhaps not particularly evenhanded—view of the subject, and it is after a long process of discussion, debate, and argument that they gradually take on a consensus form.” (The page I looked at was revised in July 2009, but you can always check the revision you are viewing by clicking the history tab at the top of the page.)
Should we be using Wikipedia in the classroom? I would say Yes, but that would be a “qualified” Yes. I think Wikipedia is a great first spot to begin an investigation of a topic. It usually gives a good overview of the topic and has additional sources listed below. On its own, Wikipedia should not be the ONLY source students use for information. As shown in its own comments above, Wikipedia does not see itself as a primary source. Since Wikipedia’s articles are under constant revision, we should look at other viewpoints from the Internet and from printed sources such as encyclopedias, scholarly journals, and other carefully researched resources, as well.
You did a great job of researching this point. Of course, students should always make sure their source is reliable and they can only do that by investigating their source and topic in depth.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was interesting that you said as a media specialist you would have students write reviews on books they read, but the drawback would be they might post something inappropriate. Interesting coming on the heels of our "filtering" debate! Imagine that?!?! High school students choosing to go for the inappropriate?!?! Mostly for shock value I think...and attention. But...what I wanted to share was our county-wide cataloging system, Destiny, has a new face this year called "Destiny Quest". It allows students several options, but one is they can write a review to share with friends. The beauty of this system is the media specialist gets to see the review before it gets posted. Censorship? You bet! Necessary though...as you stated above...and an interesting point and fear that students get to post to a wiki without that censorship.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad that there was someone else out there who recently made the connection between Wikipedia and the wiki. Me, too. I suppose it's because we knew about the forbidden website (my words) prior to knowing the term for the Web 2.0 tool. It makes sense now--various contributors, continuous online revisions.
ReplyDeleteI just recently saw the feature on Destiny Quest where a patron can share a review of a book. When I saw it, I unblocked that feature making it available for student use, but I haven't had any takers yet. I think it's good, at least at the elementary level, that the reviews are previewed by the media specialist or system administrator. The contributor might appreciate the review being cleaned up (if necessary) before it is put out there for peers to see.
This discussion of the possibility of users posting inappropriate things on wikis make me ask the question, Since wikis are dynamic, not static, what if wikis develop a different purpose or "attitude" than what the original developer had in mind? Since it's open for contributions, postings can be made that the originator might think unnecessary or even contrary? Does the originator have any "governing powers?" Just some questions I have.
Ruthie -- thanks for sharing about wikipedia. I thought I was the only one.
ReplyDeleteWhen I first heard of wikis, I also thought of wikipedia and how unreliable that site is. I wondered why teachers would want to create a site like that one, but then I realized a wiki really is a good tool if used correctly. I think wikis would be a great way to discuss books. It is funny that students thought their assignment was "fun" because they were able to post to a website, rather than write on paper. I think this shows that students are worn out the paper and pencil, so as teachers and media specialists, we need to think of more creative ways to facilitate discussions. I think setting up a wiki for students to comment on the books they have read it an excellent idea. This might make others want to read the book you just finished reading.
ReplyDeleteWikis are great tools for collaboration among students and teachers. The idea that your AP teacher had was a great way to get students writing about their reading in a way that didn’t feel like “writing”. The fact that they were able to use to the tool in while not actually at school proves that this type of technology works well in connecting people not matter where they reside! Some teachers do consider Wikis as a simple storage device, but the more I learn about them, (and I’m a novice to Wiki) the more potential for use in the classroom, media center and in various content areas in school.
ReplyDelete