Hi all The ³profs² are in the loop on this and most institutions have a policy on Wikipedia use. Generally it is treated the same as publications like the Encyclopaedia Britannica. These are publications where the author of the work is difficult or not possible to determine. As academic references require an identified author to be cited it is generally accepted that these are not acceptable references. The Harvard citation system, the most widely used, requires the author¹s name first up. Others use different systems but they all require the author¹s name. Wikipedia is also considered to be a tertiary reference source and therefore neither an original reference or research output (a primary reference) nor a scholarly reference to an original (a secondary reference). The regulations are generally quite clear on this. In practice what most academics would do is indicate it is OK to use Wikipedia or similar kinds of reference source for an initial sweep of information but that if the student wishes to reference something specific they should find a solid published reference that is verifiable (eg: peer reviewed or published by a recognised publisher). In practice this is sometimes not possible and then each instance has to be evaluated on its own merits. It can be a bit of a mine field. However, it is a common situation and there is a SOP to deal with it.
The key factor here is the value of the source of the information. 1. It is accessible and in the public domain. 2. It has been peer reviewed or authored by an identified and reputed individual or individuals and preferably published by a reputable publisher. 2. It isn¹t likely to materially change without appropriate further peer review or authorial identification being clearly indicated. The exception to this is when a student is putting forward original knowledge. Then other factors come into play as clearly there will be no prior references to support it. The student will be required to show in great detail how that new knowledge was discovered or created. This is usually PhD level work and will require a great deal (like 10¹s of thousand of words) of contextual material be provided to show that the foundations of the new knowledge are solid. This might all sound like a big bore but if somebody wishes to use the knowledge you produce at a later stage they want to know it was arrived at rigorously and to be able to see how. Not all knowledge is of the same value. When the argument you are making is important it is wise to use high value sources for your information. Anything flaky, like Wikipedia, will be unlikely to stand up to examination. Putting forward information that is not referenced (eg: hiding its source) will not work either. Academic essays need to cite all their sources. Information that is not supported will be treated as opinion or hearsay and discounted. Students should be taught all this so if they don¹t use references correctly they either haven¹t listened, don¹t care what grade they get or had a poor teacher. Best Simon Simon Biggs [email protected] [email protected] Skype: simonbiggsuk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ Research Professor edinburgh college of art http://www.eca.ac.uk/ Creative Interdisciplinary Research into CoLlaborative Environments http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ Electronic Literature as a Model of Creativity and Innovation in Practice http://www.elmcip.net/ From: Ruth Catlow <[email protected]> Reply-To: <[email protected]>, NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity <[email protected]> Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:56:44 +0000 To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. if this is really true the profs need to wise-up. Wikipedia is a great first stop for research allowing students to do a proper broad sweep to find their subject. Its also a useful tool for reflecting on the ways in which knowledge is constructed (demonstrating concepts such as hierarchies of authority, filtering, peer-review, gate-keeping, competition, contested knowledge etc). Ruth -----Original Message----- From: marc garrett <[email protected] <mailto:marc%20garrett%20%[email protected]%3e> > Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity <[email protected] <mailto:NetBehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3cnetbe [email protected]%3e> > To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity <[email protected] <mailto:NetBehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3cnetbe [email protected]%3e> > Subject: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:29:45 +0000 Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. By Jacqui Cheng. Surprise! Most students use Wikipedia at some point during their research on a paper or project, and they usually do so early on in the process. Online peer-reviewed journal First Monday recently published the findings of its research on student Wikipedia use and said that the service often serves as a starting point for the students who use it, allowing them to gather information for further investigation elsewhere. This is despite the fact that their professors still frown on Wikipedia use<but it seems that students believe what their profs don't know won't hurt them. http://tinyurl.com/yjjq9o9 _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
