Comments on: ยป Students and Wikipedia post from Educational Origami http://wsliblog.wordpress.com/2007/12/14/%c2%bb-students-and-wikipedia-post-from-educational-origami/ "What is to give light must endure burning." Thu, 10 Sep 2009 13:40:21 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Kathy http://wsliblog.wordpress.com/2007/12/14/%c2%bb-students-and-wikipedia-post-from-educational-origami/#comment-19 Kathy Sat, 15 Dec 2007 15:24:59 +0000 http://wsliblog.wordpress.com/2007/12/14/%c2%bb-students-and-wikipedia-post-from-educational-origami/#comment-19 Wikipedia is a very large player on the Web. It's usually the first item that appears in a Google search (and I'm not saying Google is the be all and end all search engine so don't mistake that). We can't ignore the elephant in the room or if we do, it's is totally to our disadvantage. We need to play along. There is a saying, "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer." I'm saying Wikipedia gives us lots to use in teaching information literacy to students. It's our loss not to. Study: Wikipedia as accurate as Britannica | CNET News.com http://www.news.com/2100-1038_3-5997332.html "For its study, Nature chose articles from both sites in a wide range of topics and sent them to what it called "relevant" field experts for peer review. The experts then compared the competing articles--one from each site on a given topic--side by side, but were not told which article came from which site. Nature got back 42 usable reviews from its field of experts. In the end, the journal found just eight serious errors, such as general misunderstandings of vital concepts, in the articles. Of those, four came from each site. They did, however, discover a series of factual errors, omissions or misleading statements. All told, Wikipedia had 162 such problems, while Britannica had 123. That averages out to 2.92 mistakes per article for Britannica and 3.86 for Wikipedia. "An expert-led investigation carried out by Nature--the first to use peer review to compare Wikipedia and Britannica's coverage of science," the journal wrote, "suggests that such high-profile examples (like the Seigenthaler and Curry situations) are the exception rather than the rule."" Wikipedia is a very large player on the Web. It’s usually the first item that appears in a Google search (and I’m not saying Google is the be all and end all search engine so don’t mistake that). We can’t ignore the elephant in the room or if we do, it’s is totally to our disadvantage. We need to play along. There is a saying, “Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.” I’m saying Wikipedia gives us lots to use in teaching information literacy to students. It’s our loss not to.

Study: Wikipedia as accurate as Britannica | CNET News.com http://www.news.com/2100-1038_3-5997332.html

“For its study, Nature chose articles from both sites in a wide range of topics and sent them to what it called “relevant” field experts for peer review. The experts then compared the competing articles–one from each site on a given topic–side by side, but were not told which article came from which site. Nature got back 42 usable reviews from its field of experts.

In the end, the journal found just eight serious errors, such as general misunderstandings of vital concepts, in the articles. Of those, four came from each site. They did, however, discover a series of factual errors, omissions or misleading statements. All told, Wikipedia had 162 such problems, while Britannica had 123.

That averages out to 2.92 mistakes per article for Britannica and 3.86 for Wikipedia.

“An expert-led investigation carried out by Nature–the first to use peer review to compare Wikipedia and Britannica’s coverage of science,” the journal wrote, “suggests that such high-profile examples (like the Seigenthaler and Curry situations) are the exception rather than the rule.”"

]]> By: Infidel http://wsliblog.wordpress.com/2007/12/14/%c2%bb-students-and-wikipedia-post-from-educational-origami/#comment-18 Infidel Fri, 14 Dec 2007 19:53:09 +0000 http://wsliblog.wordpress.com/2007/12/14/%c2%bb-students-and-wikipedia-post-from-educational-origami/#comment-18 Wikipedia has gotten a lot of positive press lately? You must be living on another planet: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/dec/06/wikipedia?gusrc=rss&feed=technology http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/04/wikipedia_secret_mailing/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/06/wikipedia_and_overstock/ If there has ever been a moment to realize that Wikipedia should never ever, under no circumstances be used in an educational environment, then it is now. Wikipedia has gotten a lot of positive press lately? You must be living on another planet:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/dec/06/wikipedia?gusrc=rss&feed=technology
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/04/wikipedia_secret_mailing/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/06/wikipedia_and_overstock/

If there has ever been a moment to realize that Wikipedia should never ever, under no circumstances be used in an educational environment, then it is now.

]]>