Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it.
yep this is a tedious process that some of us on this list had to go thru a few years ago, with entries for furtherfield, cyberformance UpStage. it was pretty frustrating the process for getting things undeleted working out the wikipedia rules processes was pretty circular. but in the end we managed to salvage everything. it does require people to contribute - which is not a bad thing in itself. just that at least in the past, the majority of people contributing place knowledge about obscure science fiction characters as being of more importance than established productive arts organisations. this is changing as more of us start to contribute, the more of us who contribute, the easier it is for all of us to contribute because we don't have to spend months defending the legitimacy of clearly legitimate things. h : ) On 20/03/10 1:19 PM, Jim Andrews wrote: Bearcat is clearly a deletionist. They are a real problem, and not just for well-referenced notable articles about art. They are convinced (and convince each other) that they are making Wikipedia better by removing articles based not so much on technicalities as on ostentatious ignorance of Wikipedia's own stated aims and criteria. They are wrong. - Rob. Given our discussion, I determined to give trying to get that article on wikipedia another go. And I find that the article has been undeleted, now, which is good. Though there is no indication who undeleted it in the 'history' section. No history of the deletions at all, actually. I see it has been worked on by several people, now. Including the ding bat deletionist who deleted it three or four times, three of which were for bad reasons. They added internal links and categories. I hadn't checked on it in a couple of months, was getting tired of the stupid deletions for bad reasons. My account had also been deleted. Had to recreate it today. ja http://vispo.com ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour -- helen varley jamieson: creative catalyst he...@creative-catalyst.com http://www.creative-catalyst.com http://www.avatarbodycollision.org http://www.upstage.org.nz ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it.
wikipedia gets gazillions of hits but it's free for all. yet is clearly not a free-for-all concerning its internal processes. an interesting 'architecture'. re simon and 'social media'. one wonders what has kept it being free for all. because in some ways it's worth millions of dollars. the answer, of course, is if it wasn't free for all, few people would use it. there's the catch 22. also, what makes wikipedia unique and alive is its openness to public contributions together with its mainly volunteer, steeply numerous 'personnel'. some say it will eventually work out a revenue model, beyond donations, that capitalizes on its economic potential. i'm not so sure of that. it seems to be doing ok as it is. as an exciting, relevant, very ambitious contribution to humanity's access to erm knowledge. does the continued success of the project actually depend, fundamentally, on refining this pseudo-corporate, pseudo-socialist architecture of volunteer contributions and keeping it free for all without being a 'free-for-all'? i expect it does. so probably if there is a business model, it revolves around other related projects, rather than messing too much with what is quite successful, in its own way. my experience of getting a legitimate article on wikipedia was like a game of snakes and ladders or something. and the 'editor' i mainly encountered was not knowlegeable about the field he was editing. and i encountered philistineosphies and rumoured sects of m:deletionism, m:inclusionism and m:eventualism. i think the 'm' is for 'meta', as in http://meta.wikimedia.org very odd. but 'eventually' it seemed to work out, as was also your experience, helen, apparently. one is not left with a sense of firm conviction in the ability of the fleshy mechanism to do the right thing. rather, one is surprised when it does. and it takes quite a while. but we both eventually planted the articles successfully. ja http://vispo.com ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
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 marc.garr...@furtherfield.org Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Subject: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:29:45 + 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 NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it.
I think most Profs are fully aware that students use Wikipedia. I would hazard a guess (in fact I wouldn't I know for a fact) that lot of the material on there is contributed by profs :) I think we need to be careful about stereotyping here.. 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 marc.garr...@furtherfield.org mailto:marc%20garrett%20%3cmarc.garr...@furtherfield.org%3e *Reply-To*: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:netbehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3cnetbehavi...@netbehaviour.org%3e *To*: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:netbehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3cnetbehavi...@netbehaviour.org%3e *Subject*: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. *Date*: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:29:45 + 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 NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it.
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 s.bi...@eca.ac.uk si...@littlepig.org.uk 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 ruth.cat...@furtherfield.org Reply-To: ruth.cat...@furtherfield.org, NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:56:44 + To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org 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 marc.garr...@furtherfield.org mailto:marc%20garrett%20%3cmarc.garr...@furtherfield.org%3e Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:NetBehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3cnetbe havi...@netbehaviour.org%3e To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:NetBehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3cnetbe havi...@netbehaviour.org%3e Subject: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:29:45 + 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
Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it.
Tom is totally right. However, whilst a good proportion of Wikipedia will be authored by academics they will not use it as a reference. The same is true of the encyclopaedias, many of which are authored and/or edited by the top experts in the field. However, as the author¹s identity is left anonymous these are not considered verifiable sources. It is no big deal for the student to find a useful reference. Most Wikipedia entries cite sources. Many of these sources are accessible on line, through Google books, Project Gutenberg or Amazon. If not then there are these places called libraries... Best Simon Simon Biggs s.bi...@eca.ac.uk si...@littlepig.org.uk 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: tom.corby tom.co...@btinternet.com Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 10:45:44 + To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. I think most Profs are fully aware that students use Wikipedia. I would hazard a guess (in fact I wouldn't I know for a fact) that lot of the material on there is contributed by profs :) I think we need to be careful about stereotyping here.. 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 marc.garr...@furtherfield.org mailto:marc%20garrett%20%3cmarc.garr...@furtherfield.org%3e *Reply-To*: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:NetBehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3cnetbe havi...@netbehaviour.org%3e *To*: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:NetBehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3cnetbe havi...@netbehaviour.org%3e *Subject*: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. *Date*: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:29:45 + 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 usebut it seems that students believe what their profs don't know won't hurt them. http://tinyurl.com/yjjq9o9 ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201 ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it.
On 19/03/10 07:52, Simon Biggs wrote: It is no big deal for the student to find a useful reference. Most Wikipedia entries cite sources. Many of these sources are accessible on line, through Google books, Project Gutenberg or Amazon. If not then there are these places called libraries... Yes Wikipedia's a good jumping off point. I wish more students would *edit* Wikipedia. Having people who have the knowledge fresh at hand add it to the site, and having people who are good at debating defend those changes, would really help improve Wikipedia as a reference resource. - Rob. ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it.
I agree with Simon, for academic purposes you of course need a more substantial source than an encylopedia to substantiate any argument or hypothesis you are going to make. This isn't to do down wikipedia which is an amazing project and an invaluable tool to get you going on research projects and point you at the original sources of material. t. --- On Fri, 19/3/10, Simon Biggs s.bi...@eca.ac.uk wrote: From: Simon Biggs s.bi...@eca.ac.uk Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Date: Friday, 19 March, 2010, 11:52 Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. Tom is totally right. However, whilst a good proportion of Wikipedia will be authored by academics they will not use it as a reference. The same is true of the encyclopaedias, many of which are authored and/or edited by the top experts in the field. However, as the author’s identity is left anonymous these are not considered verifiable sources. It is no big deal for the student to find a useful reference. Most Wikipedia entries cite sources. Many of these sources are accessible on line, through Google books, Project Gutenberg or Amazon. If not then there are these places called libraries... Best Simon Simon Biggs s.bi...@eca.ac.uk si...@littlepig.org.uk 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: tom.corby tom.co...@btinternet.com Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 10:45:44 + To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. I think most Profs are fully aware that students use Wikipedia. I would hazard a guess (in fact I wouldn't I know for a fact) that lot of the material on there is contributed by profs :) I think we need to be careful about stereotyping here.. 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 marc.garr...@furtherfield.org mailto:marc%20garrett%20%3cmarc.garr...@furtherfield.org%3e *Reply-To*: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:netbehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3cnetbehavi...@netbehaviour.org%3e *To*: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:netbehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3cnetbehavi...@netbehaviour.org%3e *Subject*: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. *Date*: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:29:45 + 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 NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201 -Inline Attachment Follows- ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it.
Wikipedia is terrific. I use it all the time but only for a quick check of something. Not for information I would cite. Simon Biggs s.bi...@eca.ac.uk si...@littlepig.org.uk 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: TOM CORBY tom.co...@btinternet.com Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:27:23 + (GMT) To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. I agree with Simon, for academic purposes you of course need a more substantial source than an encylopedia to substantiate any argument or hypothesis you are going to make. This isn't to do down wikipedia which is an amazing project and an invaluable tool to get you going on research projects and point you at the original sources of material. t. --- On Fri, 19/3/10, Simon Biggs s.bi...@eca.ac.uk wrote: From: Simon Biggs s.bi...@eca.ac.uk Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Date: Friday, 19 March, 2010, 11:52 Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. Tom is totally right. However, whilst a good proportion of Wikipedia will be authored by academics they will not use it as a reference. The same is true of the encyclopaedias, many of which are authored and/or edited by the top experts in the field. However, as the author¹s identity is left anonymous these are not considered verifiable sources. It is no big deal for the student to find a useful reference. Most Wikipedia entries cite sources. Many of these sources are accessible on line, through Google books, Project Gutenberg or Amazon. If not then there are these places called libraries... Best Simon Simon Biggs s.bi...@eca.ac.uk si...@littlepig.org.uk 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: tom.corby tom.co...@btinternet.com Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 10:45:44 + To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. I think most Profs are fully aware that students use Wikipedia. I would hazard a guess (in fact I wouldn't I know for a fact) that lot of the material on there is contributed by profs :) I think we need to be careful about stereotyping here.. 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 marc.garr...@furtherfield.org mailto:marc%20garrett%20%3cmarc.garr...@furtherfield.org%3e /mc/compose?to=marc%20garrett%20%3cmarc.garr...@furtherfield.org%3e%3e *Reply-To*: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:NetBehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3cnetbeha vi...@netbehaviour.org%3e /mc/compose?to=NetBehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3 cnetbehavi...@netbehaviour.org%3e%3e *To*: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:NetBehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3cnetbeha vi...@netbehaviour.org%3e /mc/compose?to=NetBehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3 cnetbehavi...@netbehaviour.org%3e%3e *Subject*: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. *Date*: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:29:45 + 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
Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it.
Oh Gawd! I wasn't suggesting Wikipedia as the sole source of research-that would be daft-just that it provides a really good starting point. I think it gives students more autonomy in finding their subject as they can circle a subject more easily to find the thing that they are really interested in. I agree with Rob that it would be great if more students edited too. I know lots of profs who use it but I do come across others who regard any use of Wikipedia as a proof of declining standards in education. Thanks Simon though for setting out the academic argument so clearly. I will pass it on to my students; ) Ruth -Original Message- From: TOM CORBY tom.co...@btinternet.com Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:27:23 + (GMT) I agree with Simon, for academic purposes you of course need a more substantial source than an encylopedia to substantiate any argument or hypothesis you are going to make. This isn't to do down wikipedia which is an amazing project and an invaluable tool to get you going on research projects and point you at the original sources of material. t. --- On Fri, 19/3/10, Simon Biggs s.bi...@eca.ac.uk wrote: From: Simon Biggs s.bi...@eca.ac.uk Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Date: Friday, 19 March, 2010, 11:52 Tom is totally right. However, whilst a good proportion of Wikipedia will be authored by academics they will not use it as a reference. The same is true of the encyclopaedias, many of which are authored and/or edited by the top experts in the field. However, as the author’s identity is left anonymous these are not considered verifiable sources. It is no big deal for the student to find a useful reference. Most Wikipedia entries cite sources. Many of these sources are accessible on line, through Google books, Project Gutenberg or Amazon. If not then there are these places called libraries... Best Simon Simon Biggs s.bi...@eca.ac.uk si...@littlepig.org.uk 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: tom.corby tom.co...@btinternet.com Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 10:45:44 + To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. I think most Profs are fully aware that students use Wikipedia. I would hazard a guess (in fact I wouldn't I know for a fact) that lot of the material on there is contributed by profs :) I think we need to be careful about stereotyping here.. 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 marc.garr...@furtherfield.org mailto:marc%20garrett%20% 3cmarc.garr...@furtherfield.org%3e *Reply-To*: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:NetBehaviour%20for% 20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20% 3cnetbehavi...@netbehaviour.org%3e *To*: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:NetBehaviour%20for% 20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20% 3cnetbehavi...@netbehaviour.org%3e *Subject*: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. *Date*: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:29:45 + Most students use
Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it.
i recently attempted to put an article about an important contemporary artist on wikipedia. it was repeatedly deleted by 'bearcat'. he said the artist wasn't notable enough to merit inclusion in wikipedia. i cited articles about him in the guardian and nytimes, and books in which his work is written about. and his prix futura. and his work also as a producer for the bbc, in addition to his independent work. this 'editor' bearcat just doesn't seem to like his work, i guess. i also got one of the admins to undelete the article. but that didn't prevent bearcat from deleting it again. i use wikipedia quite often to check stuff also. not art stuff. as something concerning art, it seems like it is more or less useless. the spirit of openness and intellectual honesty seems to be missing in the actual creation of the encyclopedia, often. you don't so much see enlightened 'editors' as ignorant guards. ja http://vispo.com ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it.
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:14:45 -0700, Jim Andrews j...@vispo.com wrote: i recently attempted to put an article about an important contemporary artist on wikipedia. it was repeatedly deleted by 'bearcat'. he said the artist wasn't notable enough to merit inclusion in wikipedia. i cited articles about him in the guardian and nytimes, and books in which his work is written about. and his prix futura. and his work also as a producer for the bbc, in addition to his independent work. this 'editor' bearcat just doesn't seem to like his work, i guess. i also got one of the admins to undelete the article. but that didn't prevent bearcat from deleting it again. Bearcat is clearly a deletionist. They are a real problem, and not just for well-referenced notable articles about art. They are convinced (and convince each other) that they are making Wikipedia better by removing articles based not so much on technicalities as on ostentatious ignorance of Wikipedia's own stated aims and criteria. They are wrong. - Rob. ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it.
Actually many academics do spend substantial amounts of time contributing to Wikipedia and have done since its inception. Wikipedia is also of course a great knowledge transfer tool. Like all encyclopedias it offers a very good general overview of diverse subject areas and has great reach. It does not however produce depth of analysis. It's an encylopedia. It's strength is in developing horizontal structures but not so good at digging deep into often arcane but nevertheless important subjects. Sadly it's often only academics who are interested in researching and publishing these things . I guess we're good for something eh ;-) I'm all for collaborative knowledge development both inside and outside of the acadamy but lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater. As Simon has already pointed out, there are already many open publishing initiatives and all publically funded UK research will have to be made free at the point of access in future and much of it already is. Despite what climate change deniers will try to tell you. all the best tom --- On Fri, 19/3/10, James Wallbank ja...@lowtech.org wrote: From: James Wallbank ja...@lowtech.org Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org Date: Friday, 19 March, 2010, 15:39 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 marc.garr...@furtherfield.org mailto:marc%20garrett%20%3cmarc.garr...@furtherfield.org%3e *Reply-To*: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:netbehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3cnetbehavi...@netbehaviour.org%3e *To*: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org mailto:netbehaviour%20for%20networked%20distributed%20creativity%20%3cnetbehavi...@netbehaviour.org%3e *Subject*: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it. *Date*: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:29:45 + 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
Re: [NetBehaviour] Most students use Wikipedia, avoid telling profs about it.
keep at em..:) On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Jim Andrews j...@vispo.com wrote: Bearcat is clearly a deletionist. They are a real problem, and not just for well-referenced notable articles about art. They are convinced (and convince each other) that they are making Wikipedia better by removing articles based not so much on technicalities as on ostentatious ignorance of Wikipedia's own stated aims and criteria. They are wrong. - Rob. Given our discussion, I determined to give trying to get that article on wikipedia another go. And I find that the article has been undeleted, now, which is good. Though there is no indication who undeleted it in the 'history' section. No history of the deletions at all, actually. I see it has been worked on by several people, now. Including the ding bat deletionist who deleted it three or four times, three of which were for bad reasons. They added internal links and categories. I hadn't checked on it in a couple of months, was getting tired of the stupid deletions for bad reasons. My account had also been deleted. Had to recreate it today. ja http://vispo.com ___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour -- glimpsecontrol.com baiowulf.com attachment: bookmark.png___ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
