A couple of things. Wikipedia is great and that is mainly down to its
openness. However, it is not peer reviewed in the same way as formal
journals are and there are many pages where there are clear errors or biased
opinion being presented as fact. Peer review on Wikipedia is dynamic and
played out in public (good) but can also carry wrong and, sometimes
damaging, information (bad). There have already been a number of high
profile legal disputes about this sort of thing, where people have sued and
counter-sued. Because of this Wikipedia has changed its guidelines as to who
can be an author and reviewer and it is no longer as open as it was.
However, Wikipedia continues to have a lot of noise in its system and you
have to be careful about how you use it. Many readers, whether students or
teachers, are not well placed to be able to tell the signal from noise .

Secondly, the changes James is championing are gradually happening
elsewhere. More and more institutions are making the knowledge they produce
freely available online. The UK funding councils are in the process of
formalising guidelines that will require all publicly funded research in the
UK, that is not subject to a non-disclosure condition (in medicine and some
other areas some information is extremely sensitive and should be, for
ethical reasons), to be made freely available on line. These changes will
make a big difference to how knowledge is consumed and therefore produced
(as knowledge begets knowledge).

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: James Wallbank <[email protected]>
Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
<[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:39:50 +0000
To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs
about it.


 From my experience, I'd suggest that nowadays most professors also use
Wikipedia - they're just sensible enough not to admit this to other
researchers!

As an open, free, and peer-reviewed (think about what this means)
information resource, Wikipedia kicks the living hell out of academic
journals in terms of reach, dissemination and knowledge transfer. It
challenges the whole structure of academic hierarchy. It might (horror
of horrors) even suggest that knowledge development and innovation
happen more quickly and more effectively outside academic institutions
than inside them.

Ouch, ouch, ouch! Prepare in the next few years to see systematic
assaults by established academic institutions and their funders on the
whole concept of open knowledge sharing. But wait... that's happening
already!

Let's face it, the easiest, and most effective way for academia to
improve the quality of Wikipedia would be for them to engage with the
process and edit inaccurate pages. If well informed students and tutors
spent an hour a week... However, this runs counter to academic
hierarchies' primary mission, which is to ration (not to encourage)
dissemination of knowledge to preserve their own business models.

Look at the language in which many academic articles are couched -
deliberately obfuscated, opaque, incomprehensible. The oft-touted
suggestion that clarity and comprehensibility are "inaccurate" or
"imprecise" is nonsense - an intelligent writer can make the most
complex subject seem comprehensible to any reasonably educated reader if
they so choose.

The ONLY correct answer to dissemination and knowledge transfer is free,
open online dissemination. The Institute for Network Cultures in
Amsterdam already does this. Many research funding bodies are gradually
coming to this conclusion, and making open publication a requirement of
research funding.

The only catches are that: (i) open publication does not have an easily
understood income generation model, and (ii) it fundamentally undermines
academic institutions' claims to be uniquely empowered to develop knowledge.

Best Regards,

James
=====

Ruth Catlow wrote:
> 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%3cnetbehavi
[email protected]%3e>>
> *To*: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
> <[email protected]
> 
<mailto:NetBehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3cnetbehavi
[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] <mailto:[email protected]>
> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to