The obvious problem I see is that adding a lot of bytes to an article doesn't necessarily equate to adding a lot of *value* to an article. On enwiki at least, it's probably very easy to inflate the bytecount by inserting superfluous templates and the like into an article, without actually adding any content. At most I'd recommend using it as a rough guide for students as to when an article *may* be ready, and then assess the articles qualitatively after that.
Cheers, Craig On 28 January 2014 11:12, Juliana Bastos Marques <[email protected]>wrote: > *NOT a CFP!* ;) > > Hello all! > > I have been thinking about using the criterion of a minimum number of > bytes to evaluate the students' edits for my next course - together with > content, of course. This came up because I noticed some students were > editing as little as possible, and this time I want the whole group to > start new articles from scratch. > > Has anyone used this approach? Pros/cons? What would you consider a > reasonable number for the minimum of bytes in the final article? > > Juliana. > > -- > www.domusaurea.org > > _______________________________________________ > Education mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education > >
_______________________________________________ Education mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
