+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 18
  1. #1
    mattbrent is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Lottsburg, Virginia
    Posts
    1,602

    Use of Wikipedia Instead of a Textbook

    Alrighty, folks! I'm looking for some advice.

    I was chosen to receive a grant to put together a Western Civ course using Open Educational Resources. I'm sitting in Day 2 of a two-day workshop on OER materials. The instructor was showing us how to use Google to search for them. Of course, the first hits are usually always from Wikipedia. I voiced my concern about using Wikipedia as a resource when traditionally we advise students NOT to use Wikipedia as a reference source. The presenter's response was "Why not just let your students use Wikipedia?"

    The presenter is a PhD who teaches at BYU and heads a group that focuses on OER resources. He's clearly got clout, but I'm just having some issues accepting Wikipedia as a textbook replacement.

    What are your thoughts?

    Thanks!
    Matt
    BA in History - Christopher Newport University, May 2004
    MSEd (Curriculum, Instruction & Assessment) - Walden University, February 2008
    MAIS (History & Political Science) - WNMU, May 2011
    PhD in Leadership - The University of the Cumberlands, May 2017
    http://www.mattbrent.net

  2. #2
    Ted Heiks is offline Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Ottawa County, Ohio
    Posts
    13,352
    I think you're right to be suspicious of Wikipedia.
    Theo the Educated Derelict
    BA, History/Political Science, Western State College of Colorado, 1984
    MBA, Entrepreneurship, City University of Seattle, 1992
    MBA, Marketing, City University of Seattle, 1993

    Politics is made from two words: "poly" meaning "many" and "ticks" meaning "blood-sucking insects."

  3. #3
    cookderosa is offline Resident Chef
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Illinois--> North Carolina
    Posts
    3,882
    Wikipedia is a secondary source (granted, so is a textbook) but it's open for editing by anyone without verification. The presumption with a text is that you have access to the author's point of view and can guide them. I have used Wikipedia to locate primary research, it's easy and all in one easy place. The thing that might make that hard for most people, however, is that I have access via my university library, so I can look up something using Wikipedia, and then go pull it. The average student can't do that without paying.

    Also, did you view the Saylor dot org bookshelf? They have many you might be able to use. Bookshelf « Saylor.org – Free Online Courses Built by Professors
    Jennifer
    MS Applied Nutrition, Canisius College
    AA & BA Social Science, Thomas Edison State College
    AOS Culinary Arts, Culinary Institute of America

    The placebo effect should be kicking in any minute.

  4. #4
    SteveFoerster is offline Resident Gadfly
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Northern Virginia & Dominica, West Indies
    Posts
    10,891
    I heartily second the recommendation for the Saylor Institute. The Global Text Project is also great.

    As for Wikipedia, it's a phenomenal resource, and you can even easily tie the articles together to make textbooks out of them using their Book Creator tool.
    BS, Info Sys concentration, Charter Oak State College
    MA in Educational Tech, George Washington University
    PhD in Leadership, U. of the Cumberlands (in progress)
    More at http://stevefoerster.com

  5. #5
    mattbrent is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Lottsburg, Virginia
    Posts
    1,602
    Thanks guys! Our goal in this project is to use things that are licensed under creative commons, which wikipedia is. I was worried about the fact that anyone could just randomly change articles, but after expressing additional concern with the facilitators, they pointed out that I could simply export the information into a PDF or something similar so that it can't be changed anymore. I can evaluate the information for accuracy and then save it. With that done, I really don't have any more concerns. It solved my problem of the potential for misinformation.

    -Matt
    BA in History - Christopher Newport University, May 2004
    MSEd (Curriculum, Instruction & Assessment) - Walden University, February 2008
    MAIS (History & Political Science) - WNMU, May 2011
    PhD in Leadership - The University of the Cumberlands, May 2017
    http://www.mattbrent.net

  6. #6
    cookderosa is offline Resident Chef
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Illinois--> North Carolina
    Posts
    3,882
    Quote Originally Posted by mattbrent View Post
    Thanks guys! Our goal in this project is to use things that are licensed under creative commons, which wikipedia is. I was worried about the fact that anyone could just randomly change articles, but after expressing additional concern with the facilitators, they pointed out that I could simply export the information into a PDF or something similar so that it can't be changed anymore. I can evaluate the information for accuracy and then save it. With that done, I really don't have any more concerns. It solved my problem of the potential for misinformation.

    -Matt
    I just realized that option (after exploring Steve's tutorial!) THANKS!
    Jennifer
    MS Applied Nutrition, Canisius College
    AA & BA Social Science, Thomas Edison State College
    AOS Culinary Arts, Culinary Institute of America

    The placebo effect should be kicking in any minute.

  7. #7
    RAM PhD is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    963
    Wikipedia is informative (of course, so is the Farmers' Almanac), but it certainly doesn't qualify as a scholarly source.

  8. Advertisement

  9. #8
    SteveFoerster is offline Resident Gadfly
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Northern Virginia & Dominica, West Indies
    Posts
    10,891
    Quote Originally Posted by RAM PhD View Post
    Wikipedia is informative (of course, so is the Farmers' Almanac), but it certainly doesn't qualify as a scholarly source.
    No encyclopedia does, but he's not conducting research, he's putting together curricular materials. There's a big difference in what's acceptable between the two use cases, so I think for this it's very useful.
    BS, Info Sys concentration, Charter Oak State College
    MA in Educational Tech, George Washington University
    PhD in Leadership, U. of the Cumberlands (in progress)
    More at http://stevefoerster.com

  10. #9
    ebbwvale is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    581
    i am sure that there has been research done that has shown that Wikipedia is an accurate secondary source of information or should I say valid. I will have a hunt around and see if I can find it. Wikipedia was frowned upon for universities here but suddenly it became more acceptable because of this research.

    The question is where is the research? i will get back to you on it.

  11. #10
    ebbwvale is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    581
    Here is what Wikipedia has to say about its accuracy:
    Reliability of Wikipedia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Apparently there is research published in "Nature" (a journal) that states that it is as least as accurate as one encylopedia. Here is the web address for the article by Wiles
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...l/438900a.html

  12. #11
    SteveFoerster is offline Resident Gadfly
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Northern Virginia & Dominica, West Indies
    Posts
    10,891
    That "one encyclopedia" being Britannica, to name names.

    The thing is, if you're an expert and you do happen to see something that's incomplete, inaccurate, or biased in Wikipedia, you can simply fix it yourself before using that article in a textbook or otherwise as a curricular resource. But I think you really have to get into really obscure topics before that's at all likely.

    By the way, it turns out I did have a rough draft of my paper on turning Wikipedia articles into OER textbooks. Forgive its imperfections, I haven't polished it at all, but I thought some might want to see it rather than endure that video presentation.
    BS, Info Sys concentration, Charter Oak State College
    MA in Educational Tech, George Washington University
    PhD in Leadership, U. of the Cumberlands (in progress)
    More at http://stevefoerster.com

  13. #12
    Randell1234 is offline Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    7,768
    Here is what I post for each class I teach - it says it all-

    ***Using Wikipedia for research information***

    Here is a good story - don't believe everything you read online - especially in wikipedia! That site is great and I use it a lot but I also know to double check the information if I am really going to "use it". Did you realize ANYONE can add or change what is posted on Wikipedia? It is purposefully designed for everyone to contribute to the knowledge of the world. By definition a Wiki is "a collaborative Web site that comprises the perpetual collective work of many authors. A wiki allows anyone to edit, delete or modify content that has been placed on the Web site, including the work of previous authors."


    Gotcha! Student's Wikipedia Hoax Fools Mainstream Media

    When he posted a fake quote on Wikipedia and watched it leak into newspapers around the world, Shane Fitzgerald demonstrated the dangers of relying on the Internet for information.

    Gotcha! Student's Wikipedia Hoax Fools Mainstream Media

  14. #13
    SteveFoerster is offline Resident Gadfly
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Northern Virginia & Dominica, West Indies
    Posts
    10,891
    Quote Originally Posted by Randell1234 View Post
    Did you realize ANYONE can add or change what is posted on Wikipedia?
    That's a strength, though. It means that when someone engages in vandalism, which does happen, that those who want to make the resource better rather than worse can fix it just as quickly. Most purposeful defacing of Wikipedia information gets fixed within minutes, because editors who care about a subject will set up alerts to let them know when a change has been added to an article on their watch list.

    That's why that incident was so noteworthy -- because it was rare, not because it happens all the time.
    BS, Info Sys concentration, Charter Oak State College
    MA in Educational Tech, George Washington University
    PhD in Leadership, U. of the Cumberlands (in progress)
    More at http://stevefoerster.com

  15. #14
    rmm0484 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    618
    Quote Originally Posted by mattbrent View Post
    Thanks guys! Our goal in this project is to use things that are licensed under creative commons, which wikipedia is. I was worried about the fact that anyone could just randomly change articles, but after expressing additional concern with the facilitators, they pointed out that I could simply export the information into a PDF or something similar so that it can't be changed anymore. I can evaluate the information for accuracy and then save it. With that done, I really don't have any more concerns. It solved my problem of the potential for misinformation.

    -Matt
    I love Wikipedia for what it is. I tell my students that they cannot cite it as a source, but it is a great start for finding sources, and a general sense about a given topic. Most Wikipedia entries are maintained by people who take ownership of the subject, and they update it frequently. As an example, when the Queen of the Netherlands recently abdicated in favor of her son, Wikipedia was all over that.
    MBA Cal Coast
    MSM Florida Tech
    PhD in progress (dissertation phase), University of the Free State

    "I beg the Lord to grant us more politicians who are genuinely disturbed by the state of society, the people, the lives of the poor."
    _ Pope Francis

  16. Advertisement

  17. #15
    expat_eric is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    74
    Wikipedia is a great resource. It is often one of the first places I look when trying to pull my thoughts together for a paper or article. While it is never acceptable as a source in itself, it is often helps me find good sources. I think that universities and teachers in general do students a disfavor when they demonize Wikipedia.

  18. #16
    RAM PhD is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    963
    As I said, Wikipedia contains some good information. The site has merit and value for many. The caveat is that one needs to verify and confirm the content.

Similar Threads

  1. Textbook frogger
    By Pelican in forum Off-Topic Discussions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-11-2011, 09:13 PM
  2. Need help finding a textbook
    By NorCal in forum Off-Topic Discussions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-25-2011, 06:49 AM
  3. Research, Publication, and Wikipedia
    By imalcolm in forum Off-Topic Discussions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-31-2011, 08:01 AM
  4. Textbook Costs
    By Ian Anderson in forum General Distance Learning Discussions
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-01-2004, 06:41 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts




1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15