Monday, March 5, 2012
Web 2.0: Wikipedia
Wikipedia is a wonderful resource. It's also the death of student learning. I
teach my students that it's a wonderful site as a place to begin their
research, but to ALWAYS double-check their findings with another site.
Wikipedia is definitely a few steps above getting their answers from a forum (I
looked up "Does water have calories" and got back "NO! Water's
pure and natural!" ... that made me sad). But students still need to be
wary over what they read there because in the end, anyone can go edit pages;
yes, it's peer-reviewed, but what about before someone "fixes" it?
Also, I've read many "scientific" Wikipedia pages that were so
technical that only an expert realizes that it's all wrong. Even the person
writing it thought that everything they said was fact. So that's an example of
one that's difficult to peer-review, but what about a page I found that should
have been fixed quickly: "Rolly Polly" was written to be a blood
sucking demon which attacks children in their sleep and drags them off to a
land without sun (no joke, I printed it out and it's my example for high school
students as to why they can't use Wikipedia as their only resource).
Wikipedia
is truly a wonderful resource, and I encourage students to utilize its vast
wonders... but like I said, they need to always check their findings with a
credible source. This is why it should never be listed in their "works
cited" on a research paper. Instead, "real" peer-reviewed cites
should be listed. What's a shame is that students do not seem to be taught how to conduct research anymore (at least that's what I observed in my high school biology classroom). It's baffling because one (at least I) would think that in a world where the internet was literally at our fingertips and in our pockets, students would be researching all day. You'd better believe that every time I have a question about anything I immediately whip out the smart phone. Teachers should be encouraging this is class; "I don't know the answer to that. Extra credit to whoever finds the answer first: pull out your smart phones and GO!" Of course this means that schools will have to figure out what to do about this cell phone phenomenon instead of throwing their hands in the air and saying, "Uh... no phones in schools! That'll fix that."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I always felt like the research we learned to do in elementary school through high school is now an ancient art. When was the last time you made note cards that were alphabetized to match your individual bibliography cards? I think the appeal to Wikipedia is that people are essentially doing the research for you, and so it could be taken as a "one-stop-shop" for the different kinds of topics of one subject that you need. But you are correct, and I can't believe you found that about Rolly Pollies (though that rolly polly in the picture you posted sure looks like one bad egg...).
ReplyDeleteI think I still feel skeptical about letting students freely use their smart phones as an on-hand tool in the classroom. Yes, we are approaching a time where all information is immediate, but we also need to make sure that our students can handle that easy accessibility. I feel like it would take more modeling from the educator. I like how you said that it's ok for teachers to admit, "I just don't know," but I feel that to be a great opportunity to research something as a whole class or in small groups. Perhaps you can see this happening more easily than I can; I know you have experience in a high school class. I only had student teaching experience in a first grade class. My only experience with high school children is when I was in high school myself, and I cannot imagine my year being allowed to have encouraged access to their phones in class. I know a lot of students would abuse it.
Hi Steve,
ReplyDeleteI can relate to your post. I've had similar experience with my students in the past and they came up with the term "WP research" for wikipedia research.
Cheshta
I think the key point of your whole post for me, Wikipedia aside, is "What's a shame is that students do not seem to be taught how to conduct research anymore". We do not teach students how to research, and beyond that, we do not teach them how to research in the MODERN world. When I was in middle school I learned the whole alphabetized, color coded note card bibliographies from 40 pound encyclopedias that Amanda mentioned. Then when I got to college and my professors started talking about online databases with peer reviewed, scholarly articles, I had no clue what they were talking about. But I understand that I was on the cusp of the internet age. What disturbs me is that my younger sister (she’s still in high school) had to go through the exact same “learning” experience as me; with no internet supplementation. The long and the short of it is that we are not doing our jobs and we are not teaching our students how to find exceptional and appropriate resources. How can we fault and penalize our students when we fail to teach them?
ReplyDelete