Talk:Wikipedia





Normal  0               false   false   false      EN-US   X-NONE   X-NONE                                                     MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

Response to Wikipedia

I think Wikipedia is a wonderful idea in which anybody can put information out on the web for others to read and/or edit. Wikipedia is a great way for students to work on a group paper or project allowing each group member to write collaboratively and edit each other’s work all on the same document. It also allows other students in the class to view other group projects to make comments and discuss the topic.

The only problem I have with Wikipedia is the fact that anybody in the world can edit information on the web page and seem credible as a source of information. This can make Wikipedia seem unreliable and a false source. Although, the argument being discussed on this topic of authenticity makes a valid point and that is this type of web page would help students realize the importance of researching multiple sources to reinforce accurate information. The article uses the example of a doctor; when we go to the doctor and that doctor reads us results that something came back positive, we would automatically want a second or third opinion. Anyone can create websites as well and most people take those websites as credible when really those web page creators could give false information. We really have to be careful when finding information on the internet and kids should be taught ways to use their common sense and weed out false information given to us.

I believe students would feel empowered if given the opportunity to create and edit a Wikipedia to display information. It is a way to virtually collaborate with their peers on topics being discussed in the classroom. It also allows students to share their work with parents and other students.

Laura Smith EDT 630

Comment
Response to Wikipedia Is Wikipedia accomplishing its purpose? What was it designed for? I believe that it is the goal of Wikipedia to educate the world on an infinite number of topics. However, because it can be so easily edited, readers must be aware that the validity of the article should be verified if referring to it for research purposes. False reporting may not be the intention of many of the users, but the possibility for errors is great. Wikipedia also has the potential to communicate biased information to its readers. I confess that I have referred to Wikipedia on several occasions and trusted its accuracy. However, I do not think this is a reliable source for teachers and students when researching information that is factual. Wikipedia has become a primary research tool for students because many students begin researching a topic at Google and Wikipedia articles are often one of the first search results.

I think that Wikipedia could be very useful as far as providing a bulletin board of opinions and reflections. Students could create or edit Wikipedia articles to learn how to write about factual information and most importantly to experience the process of peer review and revision.

I like Wikipedia too because provides links pertaining to the topic that I am searching. For instance, when facilitating a web quest for my fourth grade students, Wikipedia provided links to other sources concerning the Iron Bowl. In this case, Wikipedia was a great tool to get started on our research about the Iron Bowl.

When using Wikipedia as a tool to develop critical thinking, researching, and writing skills, I think the goal is being accomplished. If Wikipedia is being used as a resource or reference tool to regurgitate knowledge, then the purpose of Wikipedia has failed because it does not truly educate its users.

I would agree with Laura Smith when she says that students could feel empowered by be able to contribute information on the web.

by Mary Morton EDT 630