To Wikipedia or not to Wikipedia?

As students (or anyone) Google information on a specific subject, Wikipedia entries are usually at the top of the search, and, the information, is often trusted as fact.

(Even as I Google “Wikipedia Controversy,” the first entry was a Wikipedia entry! It is about a person who was editing on the popular site and wrote that a well-known journalist actually had been a suspect in the assignations of his friends JFK and Robert Kennedy, Jr. The post remained up on Wikipedia for four months, subsequently, tarnishing the journalist’s image-and hurting his feelings–of course. There are many more stories like this, most are quite entertaining.  If you are bored, Google: “Erdosville, Nebraska” or “Shane Fitzgerald”.)

Back to the topic at hand.  There are two conflicting sides to this well-known internet encyclopedia: To trust or not to trust.

Those leading the charge that Wikipedia is not to be trusted believe as John Bambenek (who was listed as a sex offender for over an hour and a half on Wikipedia and was later deleted because he was not ‘notable’ enough). He argues that the people who edit the site, themselves, are untrustworthy, “Business people and executives are generally far too busy to edit. That leaves a small subset of people… generally not experts in what they are editing…”  He goes on to state, “The fact is that Wikipedia is untrustworthy as anything other than a quick place to look to find other sites with reliable information.”  My personal argument is that the editors are unpaid. You get what you pay for.

The nay-sayers’ argument begins and ends the same: anyone and everyone can edit.

Molly Lewis sums up her experience with Wikipedia in song,

Supporters of the website are just as passionate, though none admitted to being accused of a heinous crime on the popular site. One supporter of Wikipedia, who wrote on Tech Savvy Teachers stated,” all sources (since they were created by people) can have errors and should be evaluated. Wikipedia can (and does) contain errors, but so does the Encyclopedia Britannica and many other sources.” Another positive feature of Wikipedia is that it is easy accessible and readily available in so many languages.

As Michael, from NBC’s The Office, so eloquently and optimistically states:

In addition to its supporters, the journal Nature researched and concluded that Wikipedia’s entries are about as dependable as Britannica’s.

Nonetheless, the teacher quoted above also agrees with Bambenek, “Basically my policy (and I believe many other teacher’s) is that Wikipedia is a great source to get basic information, but don’t use it as a cited source.”  Many believe Wikipedia has a place. A starting place.

So, as both sides agree on at least one thing, I believe we shouldn’t have to worry about a Wikipedia World War –of course, we could edit history ourselves and see how long it lasts.

As you decide for yourself to Wikipedia or not, there is one more important aspect to consider. Remember that Britannica charges a $60 a year for online access, given that it has to pay thousands of dollars to edit articles for accuracy, and, since Wikipedia is edited by the masses on a volunteer basis, it is offered free.

However, feel free to donate. They will accept money (in any language).

Guest Blogger: Logan Prevette has been an elementary school teacher for the past seven years working with second and third graders. She received her bachelor’s degree from the University of North Carolina in 2003 and worked in N.C. for five years. She recently moved to Memphis and is currently working on her graduate degree from the University of Memphis in IDT. She plans to stay in education (in some fashion) after the completion of her coursework. She will probably never be deemed notable enough by Wikipedia editors.

Matching new literacies with new learning environments

Sharon Smaldino

by Sharon Smaldino

As part of the 21st Century Partnership (www.21stcenturyskills.org/index.php) with a number of states, there is an emphasis on ensuring that students have learning opportunities that prepare them for their futures. Media literacy is one topic area within the suggested curricular areas and it is evolving as technologies related to social media and mobile technologies advance. Both teacher education and K-12 schools need to address these new literacy skills within learning situations. In order to harness the potential benefits from social media and mobile technologies, educators need to help students develop new media literacy skills that span across reading, writing, research, technology, critical analysis, and interactions with other participants.

Beyond the matter of core subject content is the ability for K-12 students to become literate in the ways of gathering information, interpreting the data, and engaging in communication with a variety of audiences. Theses students are encouraged to seek a variety of sources for their information, reaching beyond the traditional resources and seeking information across a vast array of experts. The need for clear and competent communication is critical for them. Further, a work-ethic that fosters interest in working collaboratively with teams of peers and experts expands the opportunities for learning. And, finally that students need to become reflective about their learning process to understand better how academic knowledge is a related component to future career choices.

photo credit: dougbelshaw

K-12 students need guidance and to become aware of their collective responsibility within online learning communities that they take a role. Without a systematic approach for addressing these new media literacy skills, many schools across the nation view that student participation in social media sites and cell phone use are distractions or in some cases harmful to formal school activities. However, there are an increasing number of schools that have embraced these technologies for their potential benefits and purposefully began using these technologies for educational purposes.

Teacher education programs need to embrace a philosophy that encourages their candidates to think beyond the limits of the current resource sets and into the new generation of technologies that embody social networking tools, such as the new mobile resources. The challenge is to find ways to not only model the use of these tools, but to find ways to address reluctance on the part of schools to include them. Clearly, there is a need to move outside the traditional approach to teaching technology integration courses and into the new century’s view of media literacy. It may be time to shift our perspectives on how IT faculty fit into teacher education and advocate for a more integrated approach within the curriculum. It may be time to no longer offer the “course” but rather as faculty, to become a member of the instructional team for teacher education coursework.

About the Author: Dr. Sharon E. Smaldino holds the L.D. and Ruth G. Morgridge Endowed Chair for Teacher Education in the College of Education at Northern Illinois University (NIU). She was a professor of Educational Technology at the University of Northern Iowa for many years prior to moving to NIU. In her current role, she is focused on working with faculty and P-12 teachers to integrate technology into the learning process. Dr. Smaldino has served as president of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) and on the board of directors for the International Visual Literacy Association. She is currently serving as the editor of TechTrends, an AECT publication.