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
Wikipedia Itself
Several Wikipedia articles directly address validity, reliability and the use of Wikipedia
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
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,
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
Would you believe that Wikipedia provides one of the more comprehensive explanations of source validity and reliability?
This is a lesson plan in itself; the good, the bad and the ugly of Wikipedia's use for research.
This may be the definitive statement on the use of Wikipedia that schools can use to guide students. And it is from wikipedia itself.
"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
Postive
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
Scroll through this quickly to realize that the wikipedians are people
School Sites
Media Center and Library guides to Wikipedia and school policies
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?
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.
11 brief bullet points on the Library page of a public school in Illinois provides students with a guide to wikipedia
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"
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.
The library at Long Island University show students how they can cite Wikipedia through MLA
The University of St. Thomas at Houston also tells students how to cite Wikipedia
Negative Opinions
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.
Truly scary interpretation of wikipedia - the dumbing down of the world and reversal of progress in knowledge
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.
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
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
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"
31 items | 6 visits
Articles, opinions, guides and school policies regarding the use of Wikipedia
Updated on Jan 15, 16
Created on Nov 24, 13
Category: Schools & Education
URL: