Slashdot Mirror
Some Colleges Cautiously Embrace Wikipedia (chronicle.com)
Megan Zahneis, writing for The Chronicle of Higher Education: Academics have traditionally distrusted Wikipedia, citing the inaccuracies that arise from its communally edited design and lamenting students' tendency to sometimes plagiarize assignments from it. Now, LiAnna Davis, director of programs for Wikipedia's higher-education-focused nonprofit arm Wiki Education, said, higher education and Wikipedia don't seem like such strange bedfellows. At conferences these days, "everyone's like, 'Oh, Wikipedia, of course you guys are here.'"
"I think it's a recognition that Wikipedia is embedded within the fabric of learning now," she said. One initiative Davis oversees at Wiki Education aims to forge stronger bonds between Wikipedia and higher education. The Visiting Scholars program, which began in 2015, pairs academics at colleges with experienced Wikipedia editors. Institutions provide the editors with access to academic journals, research databases, and digital collections, which the editors use to write and expand Wikipedia articles on topics of mutual interest. A dozen institutions, including Rutgers University, Brown University, and the University of Pittsburgh, are participating.
"I think it's a recognition that Wikipedia is embedded within the fabric of learning now," she said. One initiative Davis oversees at Wiki Education aims to forge stronger bonds between Wikipedia and higher education. The Visiting Scholars program, which began in 2015, pairs academics at colleges with experienced Wikipedia editors. Institutions provide the editors with access to academic journals, research databases, and digital collections, which the editors use to write and expand Wikipedia articles on topics of mutual interest. A dozen institutions, including Rutgers University, Brown University, and the University of Pittsburgh, are participating.
Even in the old days, you wouldn't use an Encyclopedia to get a general overview of a topic that you were unfamiliar with. For a topic you cared about, you would look for something more in-depth.
Wikipedia is better than the old days because of the citations, and because of its greater breadth. However, it's not an authority on anything, and is often wrong. If it's a topic you care about, you need to look at the sources and citations. You can't use it for anything more than an entry-point to knowledge.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
That is the biggest "crossed wires" insanity of Wikipedia: Citations are never checked but blindly believed as making somthing autoritative, while original research is literally *forbidden*.
WHILE having an article on "argument from autority" being a logical fallacy.
The cognitive dissonance there is hopeless. The entire culture is as cluelessly pseudoscientific as an esoteric new age convention hosted by a church.
And then on top, "anyone can edit" has become a blatant lie. Sure, you can edit. And it's gonna be reverted to the POV of an admin in mere minutes! If not outright blocked for a "review" where "delete" is he only option ever used. Admins that are the unemployed mentally unstable disgruntled type in a dirty wifebeater and no underwear. Because those who can... do. Those who can't do, ... teach. Ant those who can't teach, ... become admins for Wikipedia.
But only if they can both echo what they memorized about the scientific model, and entirely miss its point and not understand it, at the same time.
The whole point of higher education is that you are getting educated from a reliable source, and that the tuition you pay justifies it. If colleges are just going to tell you to read Wikipedia for four years then why bother going?
Yes that doesn't work. It's usually blindingly obvious when the student has copied a source (paragraph swapping not withstanding) because 99 times out of 100 the writing is far more coherent.
I think he was saying to use the article for you outline, and write your own text. As organizing your thoughts and presentation can take some time, I can see how this would help. But you would still be writing out the text, and may even have different conclusions... Disclaimer: When I was in school, there was no wikipedia...