7 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
-
Recent Comments
Nicholas Ortiz on Talking field projects: 3… Melissa Cafcules on Talking field projects: 3… nicenice on Vygotsky, ZPD, and scaffo… Peicheng on What’s missing? Demet Metan on What’s missing?
Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
Ali: Thanks for getting us started with an outstanding presentation.
I’d like to offer two further examples of wikis being used in K-12 settings:
First, a former student is doing his student teaching this semester and is using a wiki as a frame for a massive amount of student work. Check it out here.
Second, the most stunning match between content, pedagogy, and technology that I’ve seen to date is a wiki-based project done by Dan McDowell, a high school teacher in San Diego. Check it out here–in case you have trouble grasping what’s going on, it’s a set of student-created branching narratives about the Holocaust. And yes, it’s done on MediaWiki, which we know Ali likes
Comment by tchammond — September 11, 2007 #
Ah, wikis. The “easy and quick” website. Wikis are fun to work with but there definitely have there issues when they are mainstream websites like http://www.wikipedia.org. The majority of students think that everything they see on Wikipedia is true and although changes can be restored and monitored by the “community” at large, it still brings on the issue of how credible the information and the source are.
If a teacher is looking to use Wikipedia as a learning tool, the easiest activity that I can think of is to have them compare entries in Wikipedia to entries in a “real” encyclopedia.
Comment by dabrace1984 — September 13, 2007 #
Doug: Good thoughts about wikipedia. And there is a body of research in which selected topics are compared between wikipedia and more formal, vetted sources; I thought the general trend was wikipedia’s info quality on those issues was about as good. Someone feel free to re-direct me on that. But yes, wikipedia is treated as an authority, and it shouldn’t be. It’s not garbage, either, but some third thing that I can’t quite describe to my satisfaction. But I think one thing to help illustrate to students what it is and isn’t is to use the history feature. For example, I started the first entry on Over-the-Rhine, a neighborhood in my home town. You can see the original entry here and the current version here. Obviously it’s changed over time; a demo like this would help students recognize that what you get on wikipedia is only what you get THIS DAY on wikipedia; it’s different than yesterday and will be different tomorrow. Hopefully that will help give them a more critical lens on it as a source. But to sort out wikipedia from other wikis, what do you all think? What are the strengths & weaknesses? Affordances & constraints?
Comment by tchammond — September 13, 2007 #
Firstly, I would like to thank Ali for giving detailed information on Wikki family. I have to admit that I did not know that there are so many different tools that emerged from Wikki.
I would like to add a comment on the previous discussion by focusing on one of the weaknesses of wikipedia. In this last couple of weeks, I encountered so many times to the fact that wikkipedia, as a source, can be totally unreliable when it comes to get information on private companies. From the nature of wikkipedia, we know that everybody can go ahead and edit the infomation that is already there. Unfortunatelly, I have learned that members of some private companies track the information under that company’s name in the Wikkipedi and edit some of the unwanted truth in order not to be a notorious company in the eyes of the public. Wage rates and discrimination policies are only a couple of examples among many sensible topics for such firms. Companies definitally do not want Wikkipedi to display any kind of bad truth that might work against them.
Therefore, keeping this fact in mind, we can say that wikkipedia is not a good source for learning especially about private companies. Do you think that the youth of today is aware of this fact? or What proportion of students question Wikkipedia in this sense, especially when they are looking for jobs after college? I do not think there is many.
Comment by Demet Metan — September 15, 2007 #
I have always been a bit scared of Wiki’s for some reason. Thank you for providing an overview of some wiki hosts that you feel support the novice user. I especially found the information provided in the “what makes a wiki remarkable” and the “what is a wiki good for” sections of the presentation very useful in providing learning options for use in the K-12. Wiki’s are such a hot topic right now I am glad to have this overview and resource to refer and reflect on.
Comment by Tim McCann — September 16, 2007 #
BTW, what Demet was talking about (two comments up) is what has come to light following the advent of Wikiscanner, which helps trace wikipedia edits back to the owner of the IP address. Look at wikiscanner itself and read an article about wikiscanner in Wired magazine. But again: I’m interested in looking at wikis BEYOND wikipedia. And yes, I agree with Demet (and others) that using wikipedia as just another source of info (as opposed to a contested platform for info, as you can see in the History and Discussion tabs) is a bad idea. (And, for the record, more traditional info sources such as the NYT make factual errors all the time; they rarely correct them in anything resembling a public, accessible format; and they are often used as conduits for spin/misinformation by corporations and governments. Don’t think the problem begins and ends with wikipedia.)
Comment by tchammond — September 17, 2007 #
I find very exciting the comments starting with Doug, then TCH, and Demet. I see how our blog is really creating awareness and collaboration. I think I have similar conception (that wiki comments may not be totally reliable) however, TCH brought out a very valid point about the so called “traditional info sources”. My conclusion is that we carefully consider how we intend to use information and sources. Whatever is worth doing is worth doing well. It goes to say that if any would post to wiki for any reason, it should be worth the effort. A good consumer is prudent all the time. Do a careful examination, consider multiple sources to ensure authenticity.
Finally, I believe Ali has done a lot to highlight the several wiki-wiki-wiki. It takes a good initiative to start something like TCH did with his hometown and it will make no sense for anyone who has no beneficial input to “contribute”.
Comment by Abimbolu Odusola — September 21, 2007 #