RE: Public goods really easy piece? and Wikipedia
just a word of endorsement for Beth's approach. We often assume that students know about peer review and editorial processes, as well as the different functions of a citation, when there is no particular reason to believe that they would have been taught or discovered this. It is also a good way to help students understand what it isw that professors do all day--a mystery that many of them never solve and that leaves a rankling dissatisfaction that is usually unjustified. Angus From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of mbetsill Sent: Wed 9/13/2006 9:01 AM To: Global Environmental Politics Education ListServe Subject: RE: Public goods really easy piece? and Wikipedia I'm using the same approach (in my own work as well). Wikipedia can be a handy starting point but I think a good degree of skepticism is useful as well. Michele >= Original Message From "VanDeveer, Stacy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> = >Kate and all, >I tell me students they should not use it as a citation, generally, but they can use it to help them find other cites, difinitions, names, and such that will them get started in finding more authoritative citations. I normally tell them that, if they do this, they will often discover both how useful wikipedia can be and how off base or biased in can also be... > >--sv > > > > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Kate O'Neill >Sent: Wed 9/13/2006 10:28 AM >To: Raul Pacheco; Global Environmental Politics Education ListServe >Subject: Re: Public goods really easy piece? and Wikipedia > > >Raul and others, > >I'm posting this to the list because I'm usually uncomfortable with letting students rely on Wikipedia as a source. But, as it happens, the wikipedia piece on public goods is pretty good (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_goods) and certainly meets accessibility criteria on both counts. In fact, it's pretty much a public good itself, at least for anyone with an internet connection. > >So, my question is: does anyone know of a set of guidelines for students' use of Wikipedia? > >I assigned a research paper to my class last semester, and nearly all of them used wikipedia in their citations, in fact, as their fundamental source for definitions etc. I'd not anticipated this, so we hadn't talked about it. I tend to use it to refresh my knowledge, and would rarely see it as authoritative, unless I can verify it myself. But, banning students from citing it also doesn't seem a constructive way to handle this. > >Thanks for any attention to this... > >cheers, > >Kate > > > >At 2:00 AM -0700 9/13/06, Raul Pacheco wrote: > > Dear all, > > A few of my students are having a really hard time grasping the notion > of public goods (and global public goods). I asked them to read Hardin's 1968 seminal article and also a paper by Scott Barrett on the global public goods framework (which might be interesting for people who were recently discussing the Sunstein article comparing Kyoto and Montreal - Barrett does compare both as well). Still, they have had a hard time. > > Can anybody point out to a really easy, accessible source that defines public goods in a clear, coherent way? > > Thank you sincerely, > Raul > > -- > - > Raul Pacheco-Vega > Institute for Resources, Environment and > Sustainability > The University of British Columbia > 413.26-2202 Main Mall > Vancouver, British Columbia > Canada V6T 1Z4 > -- Michele M. Betsill Associate Professor Department of Political Science Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523
Re: GEP - Wikipedia
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 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
RE: Public goods really easy piece? and Wikipedia
I'm using the same approach (in my own work as well). Wikipedia can be a handy starting point but I think a good degree of skepticism is useful as well. Michele >= Original Message From "VanDeveer, Stacy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> = >Kate and all, >I tell me students they should not use it as a citation, generally, but they can use it to help them find other cites, difinitions, names, and such that will them get started in finding more authoritative citations. I normally tell them that, if they do this, they will often discover both how useful wikipedia can be and how off base or biased in can also be... > >--sv > > > > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Kate O'Neill >Sent: Wed 9/13/2006 10:28 AM >To: Raul Pacheco; Global Environmental Politics Education ListServe >Subject: Re: Public goods really easy piece? and Wikipedia > > >Raul and others, > >I'm posting this to the list because I'm usually uncomfortable with letting students rely on Wikipedia as a source. But, as it happens, the wikipedia piece on public goods is pretty good (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_goods) and certainly meets accessibility criteria on both counts. In fact, it's pretty much a public good itself, at least for anyone with an internet connection. > >So, my question is: does anyone know of a set of guidelines for students' use of Wikipedia? > >I assigned a research paper to my class last semester, and nearly all of them used wikipedia in their citations, in fact, as their fundamental source for definitions etc. I'd not anticipated this, so we hadn't talked about it. I tend to use it to refresh my knowledge, and would rarely see it as authoritative, unless I can verify it myself. But, banning students from citing it also doesn't seem a constructive way to handle this. > >Thanks for any attention to this... > >cheers, > >Kate > > > >At 2:00 AM -0700 9/13/06, Raul Pacheco wrote: > > Dear all, > > A few of my students are having a really hard time grasping the notion > of public goods (and global public goods). I asked them to read Hardin's 1968 seminal article and also a paper by Scott Barrett on the global public goods framework (which might be interesting for people who were recently discussing the Sunstein article comparing Kyoto and Montreal - Barrett does compare both as well). Still, they have had a hard time. > > Can anybody point out to a really easy, accessible source that defines public goods in a clear, coherent way? > > Thank you sincerely, > Raul > > -- > - > Raul Pacheco-Vega > Institute for Resources, Environment and > Sustainability > The University of British Columbia > 413.26-2202 Main Mall > Vancouver, British Columbia > Canada V6T 1Z4 > -- Michele M. Betsill Associate Professor Department of Political Science Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523
RE: GEP - Wikipedia
Frank (and all): I do not think you are old fashioned at all; I do not allow my students to use wikipedia since, for their papers, only peer-reviewed scholarly work can be used (except, of course, for secondary sources such as established newspapers). j. Jordi Díez Assistant Professor of Political Science University of Guelph Room 539, Mackinnon Building Guelph ON N1G 2W1 Tel. (519) 824-4120, Extension 58937 www.uoguelph.ca/~jdiez -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frank Biermann Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 11:19 AM To: Kate O'Neill; Raul Pacheco; Global Environmental Politics Education ListServe Subject: GEP - Wikipedia Kate and others, after having made the same experience as Kate -- that is, students increasingly relying on Wikipedia for definitions, core concepts, references, and summaries of definitions -- I decided not to accept any reference to Wikipedia in student papers anymore. Wikipedia is easy since you don't have to leave your desk, but not authoritative. But it would be interesting to learn about the views of the community in this respect - am I oldfashioned? ;-) Best Frank From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Kate O'Neill Sent: Wed 13/09/2006 16:28 To: Raul Pacheco; Global Environmental Politics Education ListServe Subject: Re: Public goods really easy piece? and Wikipedia Raul and others, I'm posting this to the list because I'm usually uncomfortable with letting students rely on Wikipedia as a source. But, as it happens, the wikipedia piece on public goods is pretty good (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_goods) and certainly meets accessibility criteria on both counts. In fact, it's pretty much a public good itself, at least for anyone with an internet connection. So, my question is: does anyone know of a set of guidelines for students' use of Wikipedia? I assigned a research paper to my class last semester, and nearly all of them used wikipedia in their citations, in fact, as their fundamental source for definitions etc. I'd not anticipated this, so we hadn't talked about it. I tend to use it to refresh my knowledge, and would rarely see it as authoritative, unless I can verify it myself. But, banning students from citing it also doesn't seem a constructive way to handle this. Thanks for any attention to this... cheers, Kate At 2:00 AM -0700 9/13/06, Raul Pacheco wrote: Dear all, A few of my students are having a really hard time grasping the notion of public goods (and global public goods). I asked them to read Hardin's 1968 seminal article and also a paper by Scott Barrett on the global public goods framework (which might be interesting for people who were recently discussing the Sunstein article comparing Kyoto and Montreal - Barrett does compare both as well). Still, they have had a hard time. Can anybody point out to a really easy, accessible source that defines public goods in a clear, coherent way? Thank you sincerely, Raul -- - Raul Pacheco-Vega Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability The University of British Columbia 413.26-2202 Main Mall Vancouver, British Columbia Canada V6T 1Z4 --
Re: Wikipedia
"Kate O'Neill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 at 10:28 AM -0500 wrote: >So, my question is: does anyone know of a set of guidelines for students' >use of Wikipedia? I haven't written a set of guidelines for Wikipedia generally, but I talk *a lot* about citation in ways that have implications for its use. I talk about the multiple functions of citation (the "CYA" function in case someone questions your info, the "here's where to go for more research on this subject" function and the "distinguishing -- by citing -- the source from which an idea came versus -- when not citing -- your own ideas" function). In the process, I talk about which types of sources can be useful for these different functions, and explain a bit about the publication process, how peer review works, how editing works, and the advantages of sources where someone -- i.e. a press -- is actually staking their reputation on not publishing something wrong. The one way I have more recently addressed wikipedia is by posting links to stories about the (deliberate) misuse of wikipedia (like http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-11-29-wikipedia-edit_x.htm) to show that, even though it can be a useful reference and studies have shown that it is often right, there's no one attesting to the fact that it is at any given point and that it CAN be misused, which makes it a problematic source for academic writing. Beth
GEP - Wikipedia
Kate and others, after having made the same experience as Kate -- that is, students increasingly relying on Wikipedia for definitions, core concepts, references, and summaries of definitions -- I decided not to accept any reference to Wikipedia in student papers anymore. Wikipedia is easy since you don't have to leave your desk, but not authoritative. But it would be interesting to learn about the views of the community in this respect - am I oldfashioned? ;-) Best Frank From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Kate O'Neill Sent: Wed 13/09/2006 16:28 To: Raul Pacheco; Global Environmental Politics Education ListServe Subject: Re: Public goods really easy piece? and Wikipedia Raul and others, I'm posting this to the list because I'm usually uncomfortable with letting students rely on Wikipedia as a source. But, as it happens, the wikipedia piece on public goods is pretty good (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_goods) and certainly meets accessibility criteria on both counts. In fact, it's pretty much a public good itself, at least for anyone with an internet connection. So, my question is: does anyone know of a set of guidelines for students' use of Wikipedia? I assigned a research paper to my class last semester, and nearly all of them used wikipedia in their citations, in fact, as their fundamental source for definitions etc. I'd not anticipated this, so we hadn't talked about it. I tend to use it to refresh my knowledge, and would rarely see it as authoritative, unless I can verify it myself. But, banning students from citing it also doesn't seem a constructive way to handle this. Thanks for any attention to this... cheers, Kate At 2:00 AM -0700 9/13/06, Raul Pacheco wrote: Dear all, A few of my students are having a really hard time grasping the notion of public goods (and global public goods). I asked them to read Hardin's 1968 seminal article and also a paper by Scott Barrett on the global public goods framework (which might be interesting for people who were recently discussing the Sunstein article comparing Kyoto and Montreal - Barrett does compare both as well). Still, they have had a hard time. Can anybody point out to a really easy, accessible source that defines public goods in a clear, coherent way? Thank you sincerely, Raul -- - Raul Pacheco-Vega Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability The University of British Columbia 413.26-2202 Main Mall Vancouver, British Columbia Canada V6T 1Z4 --
RE: Public goods really easy piece? and Wikipedia
Title: Re: Public goods really easy piece? and Wikipedia Kate and all, I tell me students they should not use it as a citation, generally, but they can use it to help them find other cites, difinitions, names, and such that will them get started in finding more authoritative citations. I normally tell them that, if they do this, they will often discover both how useful wikipedia can be and how off base or biased in can also be... --sv From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Kate O'NeillSent: Wed 9/13/2006 10:28 AMTo: Raul Pacheco; Global Environmental Politics Education ListServeSubject: Re: Public goods really easy piece? and Wikipedia Raul and others, I'm posting this to the list because I'm usually uncomfortable with letting students rely on Wikipedia as a source. But, as it happens, the wikipedia piece on public goods is pretty good (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_goods) and certainly meets accessibility criteria on both counts. In fact, it's pretty much a public good itself, at least for anyone with an internet connection. So, my question is: does anyone know of a set of guidelines for students' use of Wikipedia? I assigned a research paper to my class last semester, and nearly all of them used wikipedia in their citations, in fact, as their fundamental source for definitions etc. I'd not anticipated this, so we hadn't talked about it. I tend to use it to refresh my knowledge, and would rarely see it as authoritative, unless I can verify it myself. But, banning students from citing it also doesn't seem a constructive way to handle this. Thanks for any attention to this... cheers, Kate At 2:00 AM -0700 9/13/06, Raul Pacheco wrote: Dear all,A few of my students are having a really hard time grasping the notion of public goods (and global public goods). I asked them to read Hardin's 1968 seminal article and also a paper by Scott Barrett on the global public goods framework (which might be interesting for people who were recently discussing the Sunstein article comparing Kyoto and Montreal - Barrett does compare both as well). Still, they have had a hard time.Can anybody point out to a really easy, accessible source that defines public goods in a clear, coherent way?Thank you sincerely,Raul---Raul Pacheco-VegaInstitute for Resources, Environment andSustainabilityThe University of British Columbia413.26-2202 Main MallVancouver, British ColumbiaCanada V6T 1Z4--
Re: Public goods really easy piece? and Wikipedia
Title: Re: Public goods really easy piece? and Wikipedia Raul and others, I'm posting this to the list because I'm usually uncomfortable with letting students rely on Wikipedia as a source. But, as it happens, the wikipedia piece on public goods is pretty good (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_goods) and certainly meets accessibility criteria on both counts. In fact, it's pretty much a public good itself, at least for anyone with an internet connection. So, my question is: does anyone know of a set of guidelines for students' use of Wikipedia? I assigned a research paper to my class last semester, and nearly all of them used wikipedia in their citations, in fact, as their fundamental source for definitions etc. I'd not anticipated this, so we hadn't talked about it. I tend to use it to refresh my knowledge, and would rarely see it as authoritative, unless I can verify it myself. But, banning students from citing it also doesn't seem a constructive way to handle this. Thanks for any attention to this... cheers, Kate At 2:00 AM -0700 9/13/06, Raul Pacheco wrote: Dear all, A few of my students are having a really hard time grasping the notion of public goods (and global public goods). I asked them to read Hardin's 1968 seminal article and also a paper by Scott Barrett on the global public goods framework (which might be interesting for people who were recently discussing the Sunstein article comparing Kyoto and Montreal - Barrett does compare both as well). Still, they have had a hard time. Can anybody point out to a really easy, accessible source that defines public goods in a clear, coherent way? Thank you sincerely, Raul -- - Raul Pacheco-Vega Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability The University of British Columbia 413.26-2202 Main Mall Vancouver, British Columbia Canada V6T 1Z4 --
Public goods really easy piece?
Dear all, A few of my students are having a really hard time grasping the notion of public goods (and global public goods). I asked them to read Hardin's 1968 seminal article and also a paper by Scott Barrett on the global public goods framework (which might be interesting for people who were recently discussing the Sunstein article comparing Kyoto and Montreal - Barrett does compare both as well). Still, they have had a hard time. Can anybody point out to a really easy, accessible source that defines public goods in a clear, coherent way? Thank you sincerely, Raul -- - Raul Pacheco-Vega Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability The University of British Columbia 413.26-2202 Main Mall Vancouver, British Columbia Canada V6T 1Z4 --
Public goods really easy piece?
Dear all, A few of my students are having a really hard time grasping the notion of public goods (and global public goods). I asked them to read Hardin's 1968 seminal article and also a paper by Scott Barrett on the global public goods framework (which might be interesting for people who were recently discussing the Sunstein article comparing Kyoto and Montreal - Barrett does compare both as well). Still, they have had a hard time. Can anybody point out to a really easy, accessible source that defines public goods in a clear, coherent way? Thank you sincerely, Raul -- - Raul Pacheco-Vega Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability The University of British Columbia 413.26-2202 Main Mall Vancouver, British Columbia Canada V6T 1Z4 --
