Skip to main contentdfsdf

Mr Maher's List: Wikipedia in K-12 Social Studies

  • Wikipedia Itself

    Several Wikipedia articles directly address validity, reliability and the use of Wikipedia

  • Dec 10, 13

    Trying to figure out how wikipedia works and how it can be used can lead to many articles and sites that emphasize one quality or another. This is the most comprehensive explanation of wikipedia

  • Nov 24, 13

    The five pillars of wikipedia are not like the five pillars of Islam, but they are useful to know. They establish that Wikipedia is (1) an encyclopedia, (2) written from a neutral point of view, (3) free content that anyone can create, modify and distribute, (3) a site in which editors treat each other with respect and validity and (4) wikipedia does not have firm rules,

  • Nov 23, 13

    This disclaimer direct from Wikipedia itself shows that it cannot be replied upon for anything.  This may be a great place to start thinking about the instructional use of Wikipedia, but not the end of it

      • You can't get stronger language than this - Wikipedia itself says that nothing in it may be fit for any purpose or any use whatsoever

    • That is not to say that you will not find valuable and accurate information in Wikipedia; much of the time you will. However, Wikipedia cannot guarantee the validity of the information found here. The content of any given article may recently have been changed, vandalized or altered by someone whose opinion does not correspond with the state of knowledge in the relevant fields.

    1 more annotation...

  • Dec 10, 13

    Would you believe that Wikipedia provides one of the more comprehensive explanations of source validity and reliability?

  • Nov 24, 13

    This is a lesson plan in itself; the good, the bad and the ugly of Wikipedia's use for research.

  • Nov 24, 13

    This may be the definitive statement on the use of Wikipedia that schools can use to guide students. And it is from wikipedia itself.

  • Sep 26, 11

    "Straight from the horse's mouth" - This statement of reliability with links to official third-party studies is from Wikipedia itself. Although sources for research studies, like wikipedia itself, is of mixed quality, there are enough reputable sources to establish a stronger case for validity

    • Reavley et al. (2012) compared the quality of articles on select mental health topics on Wikipedia with corresponding articles in Encyclopaedia Britannica and a psychiatry textbook. They asked experts to rate article content with regard to accuracy, up-to-dateness, breadth of coverage, referencing and readability. Wikipedia scored highest on all criteria except readability, and the authors concluded that Wikipedia is as good as or better than Britannica and a standard textbook.
      • Postive

  • Dec 10, 13

    Although this page from Wikipedia provide information on how to cite Wikipedia, it also explains why it is better to use an alternative source to cite information

  • School Sites

    Media Center and Library guides to Wikipedia and school policies

  • Nov 24, 13

    Brief statement directs students to use Wikipedia for background information and exploration, but not as cited source. But in claiming that it should be used because the credentials of the author can't verified includes the implicit assumption that students can judge the credentials of sources other than wikipedia - and this is dangerous. Ask anyone at an online university diploma mill. They have "university" in their name, does that make them reputable? Is Pearson publishing reputable?

  • Nov 24, 13

    Hillsborough High School's student guide to Wikipedia is to direct students to a Wikipedia page. Asbury Park high school posts the same type of page with the same link.

  • Nov 24, 13

    11 brief bullet points on the Library page of a public school in Illinois provides students with a guide to wikipedia

  • Nov 24, 13

    Scroll down to read the five reasons students shouldn't use Wikipedia. The problem with this is that students are being taught that
    1 "Experts are correct and can be trusted"
    2 "If you know someone's name, you can trust them"
    3 "Sources other than wikipedia are not trying to convince you of something that is not true"
    4 "There is such a thing as a "real" encyclopedia
    5 "You should not trust someone that tells you not to trust them, but you should trust someone that says "trust me"

  • Sep 26, 11

    An English professor from the University of California wrote the Wikipedia use guide and policy in 2006. By first describing the special nature of encyclopedias, the articles details the necessity of using vetted primary or secondary sources. From this perspective the special nature of Wikipedia can be more comprehensively considered. (Be sure to catch the shower analogy used to call attention to the "history" tab.

  • Dec 15, 13

    The library at Long Island University show students how they can cite Wikipedia through MLA

  • Dec 15, 13

    The University of St. Thomas at Houston also tells students how to cite Wikipedia

  • Negative Opinions

  • Nov 23, 13

    Written by Edwin Black, author of "IBM and the Holocaust", this article details many crimes of wikipedia, focusing on historical revisionism and vandalism.  Relating the story of his fight to defend the integrity of his research against anonymous posts attempting to re-write history, Black shows the dark underworld of wikipedia, where the identify of both the writers and the editors of wikipedia itself are hidden behind ridiculous pseudonyms.

    •  If Wikipedia's almost unstoppable momentum continues, critics say, it threatens to quickly reverse centuries of progress in the sharing of verifiable knowledge with its highest aspiration being genuine fact.  In its place would be a constant cacophony of fact and falsity that Wikipedia's critics call a “law of the jungle.”
      • Truly scary interpretation of wikipedia - the dumbing down of the world and reversal of progress in knowledge

    5 more annotations...

  • Using Wikipedia for Instruction

    Articles and examples of assignments and lesson plans in which the creation and editing of Wikipedia pages is central to instruction.

  • Nov 24, 13

    This is one of the reasons why articles and opinion regarding wikipedia before 2010 are outdated - college courses incorporating content creation into their coursework. Look at the powerpoint slides linked from the Educause workshop to see how college professors are incorporating wikipedia into their classes

  • Nov 24, 13

    Another experience of Wikipedia writing integrated into a college course, this time at the University of Montana. Becuase students saw their articles attacked or some deleted because they did not supply adequate documentation, they learned why they needed documentation. A professor who requires three sources and takes off points for less than three teaches nothing. Students who see their published work on Wikipedia cut to shreds for lack of adequate sourcing learn the importance of citation

  • Nov 24, 13

    Detailed experience of two professors at Lycoming College who integrated the creation of Wikipedia articles into a "Rise of Islam" course. Through the process, students gained a better understanding of "what Wikipedia is and what it is not"

1 - 20 of 31 Next ›
20 items/page
List Comments (0)