Michael Peel wrote:
Having said that, I've just looked at the original document:
http://www.ofqual.gov.uk/files/2009-12-24-plagiarism-students.pdf
It actually does a pretty good job at giving advice on how to use
Wikipedia. It's just the Telegraph that chose the choice quote and
ignored
Perhaps a quick note about Special:Cite?
...said... == ...stated..?
-Original Message-
Michael Peel wrote:
Having said that, I've just looked at the original document:
http://www.ofqual.gov.uk/files/2009-12-24-plagiarism-students.pdf
It actually does a pretty good job at giving
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/6943325/Schoolchildren-told-to-
avoid-Wikipedia.html
Perhaps Ofqual are the first people we should be aiming the schools
project at, to teach them how to use Wikipedia properly so they can
pass that guidance on?
Mike
Having said that, I've just looked at the original document:
http://www.ofqual.gov.uk/files/2009-12-24-plagiarism-students.pdf
It actually does a pretty good job at giving advice on how to use
Wikipedia. It's just the Telegraph that chose the choice quote and
ignored the advice. ;-)
It even
2010/1/6 Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
We should issue a statement supporting the Ofqual report and
correcting the Telegraph article:
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Press_releases/Ofqual_report
See the Wikipedia guide for teachers thread from 6
Charles Matthews wrote:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
We should issue a statement supporting the Ofqual report and
correcting the Telegraph article:
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Press_releases/Ofqual_report
See the Wikipedia guide for teachers thread from 6 December for some
online refs I
Thomas Dalton wrote:
I agree - my first draft starts off talking about how we support the
Ofqual guidance and just mentions the Telegraph at the end. The former
part should be expanded. The Ofqual issuing this guidance is
newsworthy, as evidenced by the Telegraph writing about it, so we
2010/1/6 Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
I agree - my first draft starts off talking about how we support the
Ofqual guidance and just mentions the Telegraph at the end. The former
part should be expanded. The Ofqual issuing this guidance is
newsworthy,
2010/1/6 Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
My draft includes a link to such a guide on Wikipedia - do we need to
write another one?
Yes, to address the British teaching profession [[Wikipedia:Researching
with Wikipedia]] isn't really the concise guide
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
■ you can find a pre-checked Wikipedia collection
of 5,500 articles targeted around the national
curriculum at http://schools-wikipedia.org.
Wow! I've been volunteering on Wikipedia since 2004, during some
periods
It might be worth mentioning simple.wikipedia.org?
2010/1/6 Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
My draft includes a link to such a guide on Wikipedia - do we need to
write another one?
Yes, to address the British teaching profession
2010/1/7 Douglas Gardner microchi...@btinternet.com:
It might be worth mentioning simple.wikipedia.org?
Probably not. Simple is good for people just learning English (either
non-native speakers or young children) and I don't think the Ofqual
guidance is really aimed at them. We should keep an
On Thu, 2010-01-07 at 01:21 +, Thomas Dalton wrote:
2010/1/7 Bod Notbod bodnot...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
wrote:
■ you can find a pre-checked Wikipedia collection
of 5,500 articles targeted around the national
curriculum at
2010/1/7 Brian McNeil brian.mcn...@wikinewsie.org:
There is always the suspicion that those, such as the Telegraph, who
might fear this change to a more critically thinking populace will
dismiss and condemn it. Then again, I, personally, highly value critical
thinking and a more long-term
14 matches
Mail list logo
