Should Wikipedia be in your Classroom?
There are people out there who think Wikipedia should be banned. Senator Ted Stevens, believes you should Ban Wikipedia in all schools and libraries. This is the same man who famously described the Internet as a “series of tubes.” He doesn’t have what you could call cyber street cred, so he’d be easy to dismiss, but he’s not the only person taking action.
A librarian in Seattle has hung up signs that read “Just Say NO to Wikipedia.“ Apparently she thinks students use it as a definitive source for information, which isn’t the case according to this study. There are school districts all around the country that have banned access. Any of you locked out?
For this post, I’d like you to take a stand in the comments, and back up your reasons why wikipedia should be banned, or why it should be allowed. Maybe you think we should teach Wikipedia and use it as an opportunity for students to cite sources, and improve the free encyclopedia, like this professor.
Hat tip: My inspiration for this post came from Will Richardson’s post on the topic, which has some very interesting discussion in the comments.
Filed under: Uncategorized
Richardson had it right. Even if Wikipedia is banned in our schools, the students will still read it in other places, other times. To deny this is to fall for the Ostrich Syndrome. Let’s stick our heads in the sand and pretend there’s nothing wrong. To me, banning it or failing to instruct on it is the same as parents pretending that there are no situations/dangers in the world that need to be explained. (strangers, matches, drugs, etc) Granted, wikipedia is no way a danger but it’s something that kids should be instructed upon. We should help guide them in their understanding of the format and how to discriminate in their usage of the internet, especially in identifying resources that are reliable and accurate. Wikipedia is not going anywhere. It’s here to stay. Should we let our kids use it without our help and guidance or should we help them understand it for what it truly is. Neither bad nor good but a definite part of this new world of “tubes “.
I really don’t care if someone uses it or not– it depends on what it’s being used for. For instance, I will not allow it as a source in a research essay. If it has valid information, students could find the information elsewhere as well, and it’s always a good idea to check your sources. However, for a quick reference or answer to a question, it’s reliable enough for that.
Are search engines blocked in classrooms? I’m not a teacher, so I don’t know, but if search engines are available, then there’s no reason Wikipedia should be blocked either. Unreliable information can be found on more sites than just Wikipedia. The real issue here is teaching students to determine reliable from unreliable information, and to detect bias. Recognizing bias is an objective that even appears in state standards (I don’t remember for which grade, though). Using Wikipedia can actually help strengthen research skills as students must determine what is credible and look for biases. It’s better to teach someone how to use something than to pretend it doesn’t exist.
Wikipedia is blocked in my district, as is just about anything valuable on the internet, something I am against. I agree with the Richardson that students are going to use it on their own time regardless of what we think about it, so the best bet is to teach them to use it well in the classroom. I think the university professor who had students create entries instead of term papers was definitely on to something. Her students had a valuable, enriching experience. They had to research topics, endure peer review, and probably worked harder and with more motivation than they would have on a conventional paper. I’m of the opinion that all knowledge is constructed by people, and that the books that some of these critics consider the sacred repositories of knowledge were likewise constructed. Why not let students participate in the worldwide community, learn to evaluate what is true, and help to share in the construction of the knowledge that is out there.
Wikipedia is a perfect resource for students. There is no better site for discussing the benefits and dangers of the Internet. My students are not the most computer-literate people and have a tendency to believe anything they see on a computer. (Why is it everything in a computer is supposed to be infallible? Don’t you love it when you’re arguing with someone, such as a bank officer, and they point to their computer screen, and utter something like, “Well, that’s what the information we have says.” As if it was put there by the hand of God instead of some overworked, stressed-out, underpaid clerical staffer!) I use Wikipedia as a broad source of largely reliable information, but one that my students should never take a face value, (much like whatever information they’re receiving from their parents . . . or teachers, for that matter.) I always have them look at another source to see if Wikipedia’s information checks out, and it usually does. When I teach my kids how to do an annotated bibliography, Wikipedia is almost always one of the sources they use, and I see nothing wrong with that. It just won’t be the only source they use.
One of the neat things about starting a wiki for the class is that the students get to see how easy it is to alter documents that are supposed to be factual. I think, as they create their glossaries, they will notice that not everything they and their peers are producing is correct, and that they will bring this mindset to how they view the web as a whole.
If we want our students to be critical thinkers, then why not have them use and evaluate wikipedia. Part of my class’ curriculum is thinking about fact, opinion, bias — my favorite example is reading from an old biography about Father Serra that makes it sound like the indians loved the missions. If they know what wikipedia is, how it is created, and how they should be using it then why not? It’s another opportunity to exercise critical thinking, which they should be doing with everything they read. I’m not sure what kind of misinformation people think is on wikipedia anyway. The wikipedia community seems to be very active and self-monitoring. Besides, isn’t fact usually something that everyone agrees is true — a consensus.
I liked the article about the professor that had his class write wikipedia entries instead of a paper. It is always a challenge to make learning authentic. I can see creating a wikipedia of sorts through collaboration of classrooms across the state/country. For example, a Missions Wikipedia where different students from different schools all contribute entries pertaining to the subject.
I agree with Tedd, as a quick reference Wikipedia is great, Heck, why not? It’s there and easy to access. I use it at home and with my COMET work so I would allow it in my classroom. To be honest, I have never tried to access it from my school. I will when I get back though. If I am speaking very honestly, I would have to share that I really never used it until this summer. I didn’t gravitate to it right away and didn’t feel I had a need for it. However after being exposed to it in class, I found myself using it for my 570 projects. So Wikipedia if you want, wikipedia til your hearts desire!
I have no problem with any of my students using wikipedia as a tool as long as they cross-check their findings with another source. This usually prompts them to use another source anyway since I would not accept a wikipedia entry in a formal bibliography in a research paper. It is still available at the moment at our school site. But I would not be surprised if it eventually joined the growing list of resources that our district bans (they already started banning educational podcasts).
I don’t think it should be banned, however. As some have already stated, banning it at school would probably not stop students from using it. Students are always looking for that short-cut especially in regard to the research process. Wikipedia is great because it’s usually easy to find exactly what you’re looking for. I think that’s also it’s greatest danger. Since kids are apt to believing whatever they read on the Internet as true, it’s important to teach our students to think critically when analyzing ANY source they get from the Internet. It’s always important when getting any sort of information to consider the source. I think this would be especially true with wiki technology since the source could be anyone. There are a lot of “sources” out there who are able to publish practically anything to fulfill their own agendas. It is important that we teach our students to recognize this.
Wikipedia has always been banned in my district, SDUSD. We can use Wikispaces, but we can’t get onto Wikipedia. Since I spend so much of my time at my school site, I haven’t ever gotten into the habit of using Wikipedia. I can see why it would be a challenge as there are things that are inappropriate that come up on Wikipedia, and we seem to get by okay without this resource. Truthfully, most of my students speak English as a second language and many are struggling readers, so I find Wikipedia is really too difficult for them. Due to our limited access at school, I just haven’t found a need for Wikipedia. There are some great sources in sites that our school subscribes to like Groliers and Scholastic that are in kid-friendly language. I think these are sufficient, but then again, I’m a Wikipedia novice.
No I do not agree with banning wikipedia from the classroom, it is a good resource for students. I do think that students need to be taught about wikis and the new technologies. If students are taught that the correct usage, that anyone can post of wikipedia therefore, there may not be true facts. When I was teaching older kids we had lessons where I taught them about wikipedia and they would go into wikipedia and then to worldbook to compare the information. The information on wikipedia was almost always the same and many times more up to date.
We do not want to ban our children from their future technologies. As long as the students are taught well the advantages and dangers of using information from wikipedia I do not see a problem.
I think that the idea of a body of knowledge that anyone can edit is scary for those who oppose the use of Wikipedia in the classroom. It is our job to help students learn to be wise consumers of information, in whatever form it takes. I’m a fan of teaching kids to look both ways before crossing the street rather than closing the street.
Wikipedia can be used as a quick reference, to open a discussion about the validity of an article, or as a jumping off point to related information. Students can be required to validate or justify the use of information found in Wikipedia when used as a reference.
In a culture where everyone thinks the same, no one thinks deeply. That paraphrases a quote I saw a recently (but can’t cite the author or the source). Contributing to wikipedia in a casual, unthinking manner may be a source of some inaccurate information. And other facts are malicious fabrications. Some of our little angels at BVHS loaded so much misinformation on the site that Wikipedia blocked the school from contributing. Because the site can trace computer hardware addresses and isp addresses, I was unable to use my laptop to contribute from school, but from home there were no blocks.
Wikipedia is often a starting point for my high school students when they begin research projects. The site often provides ideas for further pinpoint searchs. It’s unfortunate I can’t allow them to use information from the site without a second source to confirm the information.
I am a bit torn between banning and allowing Wikipedia in the classroom. I feel it is a great tool for students to use, because what is the difference of having the students type a report about some topic and having them add to Wikipedia. For both assignments they will have to research the topic prior to giving feed back. I think the Wikipedia entry will engage the students a lot more than writing another boring report.
The only problem I have with Wikipedia is the credibility of the people who are contributing to the Wikipedia topics. the students may be reading something that is completely biased to the writers who have contributed to the topic, but then again text books are biased in the same way.
I say use it, but I can’t in my district, because it is blocked.
Wikipedia is blocked at our school also, and this situation seems so reactionary. Like the district decided to block what ever they were unfamiliar with.
Wikipedia is just another resource that students use. Teachers need to instruct students in how to use resources and how to evaluate whether their information is accurate. What better resource to do that than Wikipedia.
Another cool aspect of Wikipedia that I never knew before is that subject experts regularly verify information of Wikipedia, so it would benefit teachers to show the students how to recheck the sources prior to using them.
I loved the college professor who had her students post a Wikipedia page as a project. That was so clever because the subject experts could verify the facts, and if the article was still available, the instructor would know whether or not the students report was good or not. Provided that the professor informed the students of the formatting and style of a Wikipedia page.
I can’t use it in my class, but teachers need to be aware of its availability and teach its use, just as we would any other resource.
I
I allow my students to use wikipedia for general information as well. I teach students to respect the power of wikipedia, but I also try to get them to understand why the information is not always credible. I do like for them to use it as a starting point because it is easy for them to follow. Whenever they do have to do research for a project I have them include at least two other sources. If the other two sources say something different than wikipedia, they will hopefully realize that at least one of the sources is wrong.
We do not have Wikipedia banned and I am crossing my fingers that I don’t return to find it blocked for saying it. Personally, I think Wikipedia is a great reference, especially for high frequency topics (as more edits and watchers are probably monitoring the entry). In my experience, students have found it good as a starting point and sometimes is overwhelming for the students. As a teacher, we have to teach them how to use the web responsibly and educate them on Wikis.
When my students research, they must first use our school provided databases such as Infotrac, ProQuest and SIRs prior to letting them loose. They either go straight to Google or Wikipedia and build on what they already have, or read it in a different way. regardless, it is a valuable tool. Last year, I assigned my sophomores a research paper on one of the genocides of the 20th century and asked for such a specific layout for the paper that the students had to go to multiple sources. There is no single site on the web that the students could visit to copy and paste from. I also provided writing frames to help them organize their paper. As a result, I could not catch one student who just copied and pasted text (The prior year when I did not guide them as much, over half the kids just copied and pasted.
I guess what I am saying is that I defend the use of Wikipedia in the class. I could throw up a biased, inaccurate website and make it look credible and there will be no way for a student to know it is not trustworthy, whereas Wikipedia has a way to right the wrongs and offers references or lack of. Knowing this, we need to stop being such flat Earthists (unless it is Thomas Friedman’s version of the flat Earth). I think when districts ban sites it is out of fear of losing control of the minds of students (a mind is a wonderful thing that we waste too often). Fear that we might, as a system, have to radically change the nature of our business and people who have traditionally held the reigns will become the novice. Wikipedia is just one of many tools, along with social networking sites, cell phones and texting, that the students are learning without guidance. We are losing out on opportunities to connect our kids the world and teach them skills they will need if we hinder technology because it means more work for us.
Wikipedia isn’t going away anytime soon. And I know that anytime something is banned, not only does that make people who already engage in whatever is banned find new, covert ways to engage in said banned activity, it also encourages curious others to find out what all the fuss is about – thus engaging more people. The academic justifications for not allowing its use are not very valid to me. Most of what I have read are academics saying that Wikipedia shouldn’t be used as a primary or sole source of information – that students who rely on it for the bulk of their ‘research’ won’t get credit. No big deal….Teach them to use more than one source. EXPECT them to use more than one source.
On the flipside, I can guess that textbooks and more ’scholarly’ printed material has most likely contained factual errors throughout the last several centuries.
Here is one example: http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/controversy_bias_in_textbook.html
I say let Wikipedia be used. Use if for instruction. Find EXAMPLES of inaccurate or distorted or biased information and TEACH from it. Teach the kids how to rectify inaccuracies. Help them actively learn. I could use some remediation on that, too!
Wikipedias- “To be or not to be, that is the question!”
The jury is still out on wikipedias. I love the ability to collaborate with others, sharing ideas and gaining inspiration and ideas form colleagues. But I don’t like the idea of someone else editing an idea that may be near and dear to me. And I love the idea of allowing students to share their wild and crazy thoughts about a problem, but I don’t want a child to be destroyed when someone else doesn’t agree with their ideas.
For now, I will teach our educators how to use them and rally the troupes around the flagpole. But I will also make sure that those same educators take the time to share the existence of wikis and their purpose with their students.
One of the most useful ways to use a wikipedia is to have learners compare information from a wikipedia site against an established research site. Teachers can stress the use of the Big 5 and information literacy techniques to point out the importance of accuracy, relevance and bias in reporting.
I will put them to use in my District as an effective collaboration tool and I will teach my colleagues and students their benefits and shortcomings. Great practical potential and misuse, but worth taking the risk!
I agree with everyone on the post that we shouldn’t be afraid of wikipedia. It is a great place to start your research. Usually there are great links to the “source” at the bottom of an entry.
What I always find incredible is the desire for control over the Internet. We don’t worry about censoring what students say at school to each other, what they draw on their paper, or what contraband books are brought to school. Suddenly when the possibility for an unauthorized opinion or image is being brought via cyberspace there is a desire to lock it down and block it out. I agree that the best strategy for anything related to the Internet (not just wikipedia) is to enlighten students about how to be safe and conscientious cyber-citizens.
This is a very interesting topic. I read a lot of different points of views on this topic and feel that as long as Wikipedia is used as a secondary source of information, it should be used. My district blocks Wikipedia, and it bothers me. I like to use it! I find a lot of interesting information on Wikipedia.
Most teachers require primary sources for research, but there’s nothing wrong with having a secondary source. It’s important to teach students about resources and how to authenticate them. I think Wikipedia is blocked in our district because they are worried it contains information about too many topics (some explicit and inappropriate), not necessarily because the information it contains is incorrect. I think that students should be able to Wikipedia it if they are monitored and given the parameters.
Yes, I do think Wikipedia should be allowed in the classroom. However, it should be treated like any other internet source. An extensive conversation should be made with students about the pros, cons, and nature of a wiki. I tell my students about how there used to be an entry for World War III on Wikipedia — does that mean it’s factual?
Wikipedia should not be treated as if it is the final word on anything. If students are doing a research project, they would need to have more than one resource anyway, so I would not mind if Wikipedia happened to be one of them.
To Wiki or Not to Wiki…
I love Wikipedia and I think it is an excellent source for student work. I am not saying it should be the sole source for research, but it is a great starting point for research on a multitude of topics.
The reasons I like Wikipedia for schools is:
1.) It is peer reviewed for accuracy and bias on a continual basis.
2.) It is available in dozens of languages, including simple English.pl[[p
3.) Most substantial Wikipedia articles have shortcomings flagged and identified, as well as a list of sources at the bottom.
4.) Any source in the world including newspapers, magazines, books, and websites can be flawed and biased. Many are not subject to revision, fact-checking, or critical peer review.
I don’t think wikipedia should be banned.
I do agree that all the information is not correct and it should not be used as a primary source; though I am sure that wikipedia is making those same claims.
I agree with Anderson is stating the students “need better instruction and tools to guide their research.” This is completely true. It is up to us as educators to share where to go to find valid information and where to go to find other information that you are able to share and is interactive, such as wikipedia.
Going through high school myself, research was always confusing to me and the whle idea of plagiarism. I feel as though it was never really explained that well to me so I went with what I thought was right. I believe kids are confused today and doing the same thing, which may include going to wikipedia as a primary source.
Blocking the site is not the answer however, it is teaching where to go to find the valid information. Lastly, to quote Richardson, “errors are everywhere.” Any tpe of media we see, hear, etc., may have errors, such as the tv, newspapers, and the Internet. If we start by blocking wikipedia, where does that lead to next?
I am a Wikipedia fan. I love the fact that you can find information on almost anything. In term on whether it should be used by students, I feel that the use of Wikipedia is ideal for a lesson of double-checking your information and filtering facts from falsities and finding the truth. Some students today believe everything they read or hear without crosschecking their facts. Teaching them lessons on finding new information and checking the new information with multiple other sources is good research. As a society we are slowly moving away from the nightly news for our source of world information. Younger generations are finding new sources like the Internet to help form their opinions. As educator it is our job to teach them how to seek the whole truth not just the first bit of information they find on the subject. Wikipedia give educator a platform in which to catapult truth-seeking research.
I do not think wikipedia should be banned at all. However, I do think you should monitor students use. I also believe that just like anything else this should not be the end all, be all resource. Many times for my second graders wikipedia is not the resource that is helpful for them. They need something a little more on their level. I am definitely a wikipedia fan and think its a great classroom resource.
[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The poster sent us ‘0 which is not a hashcash value.
Being a technology pioneer, I see nothing wrong with using wikipedia. I would definitely not ban it in my classroom. In fact, I use it to look up answers to questions that I do not know all of the time in class! Because so many people are constantly checking, updating, and verifying the information that is put up on wikipedia, I see nothing wrong with students using it as a starting point for their research, Of course, since I teach history I would never allow students to use it as their only source of information. You want them to have multiple sources in order to substantiate the claims that they make. You also want to teach them how to research; nonetheless, I see nothing wrong with them using it as a starting point for research.