I have to agree. I like what wikipedia is. I don't like what many of its consumers (including many students) believe it is. As Stacy suggested, it can be a quick and dirty but effective way to get started. I do, however, strictly forbid my students from using it in formal citations. Perhaps what we need to do is assign students an exercise in which they "peer review" a wikipedia entry of relevance to our courses. Have them explore the sources and biases. Ask them to consider why someone would believe or want others to believe that their entry is factual, and why they would choose that medium to disseminate their "knowledge." Discovering its limitations for themselves may serve as a kind of aversion therapy. Or at least it will teach them to more carefully consider the biases and qualities of the sources they use. We can hope.
Jonathan > As a graduate student...and one who remembers spending endless hours in > the > library making sure to copy exactly all the relevent information from > various books in order to hand write papers in my early school years and > an > avid "Googler", I'd like to suggest Wikipedia as an optional starting > point > for reference. While I do not consider Wikipedia a resource for my > research > on international environmental policy, endangered species and natural > resource management, it was certainly useful in helping me to explain > "off-sides" during the World Cup. > > Wikipedia has a place in providing knowledge to society, but I think > students gain a better appreciation for research and in the development of > their own ideas from actually having to conduct literature research and > from > learning to distinguish credible sources from the non-credible. It's easy > to > select the easiest way to conduct research with all the technology that > becomes available, and though I'm very happy to use any internet source > that > can speed up the process, I frankly do not consider Wikipedia a credible > resource, though in some cases it may reference credible sources for its > content. If this is the case, I suggest the student go straight to the > source. > > my two cents... > > ruba > > On 9/13/06, Paul Steinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> The way I cast this argument is to note that the "quantity of >> information" problem has been solved (to put it mildly), and the new >> challenge is to identify quality information. This leads to a >> discussion about peer review. More broadly, the challenge is to find >> shortcuts that can help the student to access quality sources. >> >> One trick is to include the word "syllabus" in google searchers; >> professors serve as information filters as we sort through a mass of >> books and articles on a given topic in search of something worth >> assigning. References that appear on several syllabi are likely to be >> key sources. >> >> Another trick is to think in terms of brand names. Even a computer >> science major is not going to disassemble a computer before buying it; >> rather, s/he will likely rely on brand name as a short cut to indicate >> quality. Including "brand names" like the National Academy of Sciences >> and other reputable research sources (organizations, individuals) in >> one's searches is a way to access quality research. Once can also limit >> google searches with <site:.edu> >> >> But how can a student (and citizens generally) distinguish brand >> quality? To the non-specialist, the Foreign Policy Council appears >> indistinguishable from (to make up a name) the Foreign Policy Analysis >> Center, which could be no more than an individual with strong opinions >> and a big bank account. This is an area in which faculty can provide >> some guidance. But what of the citizen, outside of academia, who would >> like to become informed about an information-intensive social >> controversy like global warming or "intelligent design" of impacts of >> pesticides? I believe Google Scholar could be a very significant part >> of the answer; I looked into it this summer and it certainly outperforms >> my library's search engines. But the peer-reviewed work it pulls up is >> made inaccessible to the public, unless one pays a fee. And why pay, >> when there are these free (and often misleading) information sources out >> there on the web? >> >> To my mind the democratization of knowledge - and the informed >> participation of citizens - will require less wikipedia and more free >> access to scholarship. >> >> This is where I include a disclaimer acknowledging the importance of >> non-scholarly sources for many research endeavors, both to escape the >> assumptions and emphasis of the academy and to access cutting edge >> insights from the grey literature. >> >> >> Paul >> >> -- >> Paul F. Steinberg >> Assistant Professor of Political Science & Environmental Policy >> Harvey Mudd College >> 301 E. Platt Boulevard >> Claremont, CA 91711 >> tel. 909-607-3840 >> >> > -- Dr. Jonathan Rosenberg Department of Political Science P.O. Box 756420 University of Alaska Fairbanks Fairbanks, AK 99775-6420 907-474-6502
