Notes from the Wikipedia Workshop

What to do about Wikipedia

Teaching Our Students to

Evaluate Information

Presented by Lynn Kanne & Kelley McHenry - November 6, 2008

a definition

A wiki is…

A page or collection of pages designed for collective editing. Every change is tracked.

Wikipedia is…mass collaboration:

A constantly growing free online encyclopedia

• Run by a nonprofit
• Created by “peers”
• Over 9 million pages in 250+ languages…and growing

Wikipedia is not…

A complete repository of all knowledge or a final destination for research.

A directory, publisher of original thought, or a manual

Source: Broughton, John. Wikipedia: The Missing Manual. Cambridge: O’Reilly, 2008. (Available in the library)

everyone is an editor

• Anyone, anywhere
• Any age
• Any experience or qualifications
• About half live in the US; most others in English speaking countries
• Motivations
• Essjay controversy

"The ethos of Wikipedia is that anyone can contribute, regardless of status… What's relevant is their knowledge as judged by other readers, not whether they are professors or not – and the fact the student [Essjay] was exposed shows it works."^[53]

Standards for Wikipedia articles

• Cite reliable sources – all articles must be based on cited information
• Respect copyright
• Article Grades (Featured articles meet the highest standards; wikipedia has developed a rubric for evaluating other articles. Grades are indicated on the discussion pages.)
• Obscure facts: Siegenthaler Incident
• Topic guidelines

These articles didn’t make the grade (thankfully)

o Evil Tutorial

o Famous watermelons

o Lame drivers

o More

evolution of an article

Writing by committee…

• Stub (the very beginning of an article)
• Refinement (content is added)
• Compromises & discussion – view the discussion section of the article to follow its development
• Content disputes
  

Work it out informally
Help from a more experienced editor
Third opinions
Formal mediation (mediation committee – with binding resolutions)

Trail of crumbs…example

perspectives: student

"I trust wikipedia, i don't care what people say, anything listed on the article is cited at the bottom and most if not all are from trusted encyclopedias, I actually think wikipedia is better because there's more infomation [sic] than any other encyclopedia and its FREE!!”

(From a comment on “How (much) to trust Wikipedia,” a youtube video)

perspectives: researchers

Giles, Jim. "Internet Encyclopaedias go Head to Head. " Nature 438.7070 (2005): 900-1. Research Library Core. ProQuest. Seattle Central Community Coll. Lib. 3 Nov. 2008 http://www.proquest.com.ez.sccd.ctc.edu:2060/

• 42 articles reviewed
• 8 major errors, 4 in each
• 162 minor errors in Wikipedia; 123 in Britannica
• 17% of Nature readers consult Wikipedia
• Less than 10% contribute

other perspectives

An Internet entrepreneur…

Keen, Andrew. Cult of the Amateur. New York: Doubleday, 2007.

other perspectives

Wikipedia?

…might be the best source…about itself: reliability & criticism

Blogosphere?

“A document that anyone in the world can edit sounds like utter anarchy, yet the high quality of the majority of Wikipedia articles disproved that assumption. The reason? Because editors have a greater incentive to fix pages than vandals have to break them. Over time, articles get better and better.”

“Another great advantage of Wikipedia; we know it’s flawed. Subsequently we might even learn to read critically, check sources and perhaps think independently -rather than accept a premise just because it’s there in black and white.”

“Wikipedia isn’t an encyclopedia, it is more like the Guinness book of World Records, you use it to settle stupid bets that no other book is going to touch.”

From: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/johnson/202

Workshop group brainstorm – how to help students evaluate Wikipedia

• Compare to other sources
• Review citations in Wikipedia for quality
• Consider the meaning of the peer review concept
• Emphasize the idea of fact versus opinion
• Have them review the article grading system and consider what it means
• Review date or currency of articles
• Look at the quality of the writing/language used
• Look at the edits and the number of contributors and their activity in Wikipedia
• Ask them to consider whether the writer is biased or if the article is promoting a particular idea or object
• Use Wikipedia as a way to discuss how knowledge is constructed – what it means to “know” something

Workshops Coming Your Way

Library Open House - October 9 2-3:30
We'll pack this hour with an overview of the exciting information tools at your fingertips, answers to your questions about the library, and of course, delicious treats. New faculty are especially encouraged to attend and all are welcome.

What to Do About Wikipedia - November 6 2-3:30
Wikipedia: Google searches and students' bibliographies are peppered with it. Some of it is authoritative, some of it not so much. Is there a place for it in academic work? Come learn what researchers are saying about the quality of Wikipedia and explore how to help students learn to make responsible use of information, whatever the source. Bring your ideas, concerns, questions and anecdotes.

Library 2.0?

Everyone is talking 2.0, a term that implies improvement, but Andrew Keen argues in The Cult of the Amateur that Web 2.0 is elevating amateurs above experts and ruining our culture. The prime examples of Web 2.0 are wikipedia and youtube. Many sites rely on user generated content to draw eyeballs to the advertising space they sell. Keen believes sites like these, along with illegal content downloads (primarily music but video is just down the like), are edging out the professionals who produce content (news, music, video, etc.) for a living in favor of amateurs who work for free. He argues that this phenomenon is bad for culture because it offers few rewards for the hard work that creativity requires.

His is a compelling argument if you can get past his occasional potshots at the ACLU, but it only goes so far. It is difficult to ignore the fact that many creative people create with very little promise of compensation. They do it for love. It is also difficult to imagine that the marketplace for creativity won't help sort the good from the bad.

The library world is also abuzz with 2.0 because we compete with it and because we could use more of it: our catalogs should provide the amazon.com style functionality that allows readers to share reviews. Database users should be able to save, notate and annotate the information they find. So 2.0 has great applications to library resources, if our Web 2.0-trained users can ever find them. And that is what worries me. Some students seem to believe that anything outside the world of web is irrelevant or unworthy of the effort. But if they cannot or will not use published sources, they still need to be able to distinguish high quality information from schlock, and Web 2.0 doesn't always make that so easy.

Retreat Follow Up = IL Action Plans

For some participants, the retreat led directly to IL action plans. For others, the event led to new partnerships and new thinking about teaching and learning.

• Carin & Cynthia have recommended that the Distance Learning committee adopt IL as an additional requirement for distance learning course grants. The DL committee as well as proposing faculty will need support for understanding and evaluating information literacy outcomes.
• Michael plans revisions to Humanities 105 (Intercultural Communication) - he is making structural changes to the course to improve student involvement in presentations.
• Denise reported that ESL 096, 097, and 098 - a group is planning to get together to work on curriculum plans to coordinate the content of these three courses.
• Nursing faculty are collaborating on an incultural communication/awareness assignment
• Karen reported that through interaction at the retreat, nursing and ESL faculty discovered they have much to collaborate on -- and they've made plans to do so.
• Yun suggested creating a "learning respository" -- including information literacy content -- for a given course (for example, MIC 101) to share course information among the several faculty who teach it. Angel was suggested as a useful platform for sharing information.
• Liz reported that Science & Math faculty are planning to present on IL to their colleagues at their fall retreat. They'll brainstorm IL connections in science and math courses.
• Nada and Karen will offer a plagiarism workshop in fall 2007.
• Jim is revisiting his music research assignments to improve the IL component.

More Fellowships Available! We still have several grant-funded IL fellowship opportunities for faculty. The purpose of the fellowship is to teach your colleagues about IL. Grants provide $150 per facutly participant; groups are encouraged to apply. The planning and content must be developed by July 15, but your presentations may be done in fall. Contact Karen Michaelsen (x4098) ASAP if you plan to apply for a fellowship.

For example, you could…

• Write an article about your experiences with IL
• Develop a model curriculum component to present to collegaues
• Develop a more general IL presentation
• Develop training materials to accompany the research model

Taking Action - May 11 retreat

Goals for the day:

• Strengthen participants’ awareness of IL in their curriculum
• Enable participants to promote IL among their colleagues by sharing its value and teaching and learning strategies
• Prepare participants to leave retreat with an IL action plan

Defining IL: Kelley presented IL concepts and issues facing us and our students. Since some participants have been to other IL workshops while others had not, this presentation and the following activity helped to make sure that all present had a common understanding of IL. Following the presentation, small groups created a poem, song or picture to describe the information literate person. Please see Appendix 1 for descriptions of the group presentations. The PowerPoint for Kelley’s presentation is available to participants on the “IL Toolkit” CD and to others who are interested.

From Library Skills to Information Literacy: Three faculty members, Tracy Lai (history), Jim Cauter (music) and Kate Wolfe (psychology), presented their experience integrating IL into their courses. They described the experience of improving their assignments over time and collaborating with librarians to give their students a richer experience. A common thread to their stories was how IL assignments enriched their courses and teaching and developed their students’ ability to successfully find and use appropriate information.

The SCCC IL Model: Lynn presented the graphics for the IL Model and library logo. The artwork, posters, bookmarks and other collateral have been made possible through a marketing grant from the Washington State Library. Tracy and Jim facilitated a brainstorm about how the model can be used for instruction and then groups of participants created assignments addressing different parts of the IL process “puzzle.” Selected assignments are described in Appendix 2. For the record, the instructions for this activity were not as clear as they might have been and there was some confusion over the task. If this exercise is repeated, ‘evaluation’ should be integrated in the other aspects of the IL process rather than as a separate aspect.

Plan for Action: Participants were invited to complete an IL Action Plan individually or as a member of a team. The action plans were to define one action to be taken at the personal, course, program, or institution level. Participants were actively engaged in this activity, but there was no time allowed at the end of the day for individuals and groups to tell us what their plans were. As a result we are planning a follow-up event so participants can share their plans and learn about resources and support for carrying out the plans for action.

Perfect IL Person Activity

A song:

A student went to SCCC
To see what she could see, see, see
And all that she could see, see, see
Was the big, bright world through liter’cy

Word Poems:

Critical
Ubiquitous
Relevant
Inquisitive
Open-minded
Unstoppable
Successful

Passionate
Organized
Willing to wonder
Evaluative
Resourceful

Pictures:

An IL person balancing plates full of the following qualities:
inquisitive engaged
persistent open minded
thoughtful efficient
multi-disciplinary practical

People connected to other people, books, computes, cell phones, and the world, over a birth to next-life timeline.

A person juggling books, electronic devices, and standing on a globe with the words: Information = Power Flexible Adaptable

IL Assignments Activity

Selected assignments resulting from IL Model Brainstorm

Access: Select a topic (such as Executive Order 9066) and use each of the following tools to locate resources on that topic:
- Library Catalog
- ProQuest
- Ethnic NewsWatch
- NY Times Historical
- Britannica.com
- Google or Yahoo
Describe and compare how you searched each tool and the types of resources each provides.

Strategize: Identify and evaluate scholarly secondary sources related to the experiences of WWII veterans (1945-1960).
- Assessment strategy:
o Source addresses the correct topic
o Source is or is not a scholarly secondary source
o Student can explain why they chose a certain article
o Degree of relevance

Evaluate: Select a nursing topic and find articles from Google.com and ProQuest. Compare the results and articles from the searches and address:
- Quality
- Usefulness
- Ease
Write a citation and description for each article.

Synthesize: Prepare and deliver a training model for a software application.
- Students need to know methodologies for teaching and learning
- Students practice different presentation formats

Google Books

Historians weigh in on the quality of the books scanned in Google:

http://blog.historians.org/articles/204/google-books-whats-not-to-like