Hi All,
I assess a masters module using Wikipedia-based assignments and it has gone very well. There are lots of gaps in relation to human geography and environmental studies, and it really motivates the students knowing that they are writing for a public audience. The style of writing required is useful to them as a transferable skill and perhaps best of all it makes them more aware of the pros and cons of using Wikipedia as an information source.
I've pasted in a short T and L write-up of using wiki assignments below... if anyone would like more information feel free to get in touch off the list.
Best
James
James Evans
Senior Lecturer
School of Environment and Development
University of Manchester, M13 9PL
Director of Undergraduate Studies (Geography)
Environmental Governance
Urban Regeneration in the UK
Rescue Geography
Sustainable Futures: the Geography of Transition
Wikipedia is the largest source of knowledge in the world, and it is entirely free. It is no surprise then that students love it. More surprising is our response as academics to this state of affairs, which is largely to ignore it or, like Victorian parents, demonise it as some scourge to be avoided at all costs. Whether this is true or not is irrelevant as students will use Wikipedia regardless, so it is worth educating them about how to use it, ahem, ‘safely’. Further, given that both we and our students are in the business of producing knowledge, and Wikipedia is a collective knowledge base to which everyone can contribute, our lack of formal engagement is strange. As such in early 2011 I decided to experiment with getting students to write their coursework as Wikipedia contributions. This article briefly recounts my experiences.
The course is a Masters level unit titled Environmental Governance, which attracts between 25 and 40 students per year and is assessed entirely through coursework. This used to consist of a single 4000 word essay on a topic of the student’s own choosing, which was transformed into two Wikipedia assignments, comprising a short (500 word) contribution to an existing Wikipedia page, and the creation of an entirely new page (2500 words). Each assignment was to be posted on Wikipedia, and submitted as a pdf through Blackboard accompanied by a 500 word reflective commentary.
The first assignment was designed to give students experience of using Wikpedia and was worth 20% of the overall mark. This piece of work was set in week 3, submitted in week 7 and returned in week 9, allowing detailed feedback before the second deadline in week 12. Plenty of support was provided, including a detailed handout, a teaching assistant to help with technical queries, discussion time in every class, and faq discussion threads on Blackboard.
As an academic who uses Wikipedia but knew very little about its actual workings, the process of working in Wikipedia was fascinating. Wiki pages have a set style and format, which differs from traditional essays in that they must be less judgemental and discursive. While a minority of students complained about this, producing balanced overviews of specific topics in which material is thoroughly referenced is not only highly rigorous, but a potentially more useful skill to graduates in the workplace than the ability to write an attractive essay. It is critical however to alter the course ILOs and marking criteria to reflect this.
Wiki-etiquette dictates that usernames are anonymous, relating neither to real names or institutional affiliation, and each user gets a sandpit in which to experiment. The sandpit can be accessed publicly, but does not show up in searches. In other words, only invited people can use it, which would be very useful if setting the assignment in groups.
Very few technical issues arose – Wikipedia is genuinely easy to use. Far more critical and time consuming was topic selection, and the majority of negative student comments related to this aspect of the assignment. I gave feedback on topic selection through a discussion thread, but also highlighted that identifying a coherent gap in knowledge is a skill in its own right. The work was generally of a higher quality and was more interesting to mark, as students raised their game for a public audience. In fact, the satisfaction of ‘putting something out there’ was cited as the main positive comment from students in their reflective commentaries and UEQs, and really added a buzz to the course.
Perhaps the biggest eye-opener for me was the role of gatekeepers on Wikipedia, who carefully police contributions to specific subject areas. This allayed my concerns about polluting the knowledge commons because poor quality work is purged quickly and not attributed, and greatly increased my confidence in Wikipedia as a resource. Ironically, the students drew an opposite lesson, expressing surprise that ‘even people like them’ could contribute and suggesting that they would use Wikipedia more carefully in future.
In conclusion, using Wikipedia for coursework has been a very rewarding experience. It requires more support and time, and is riskier than setting conventional essays (no one ever complains about writing essays) but was a valuable learning experience for both the students and myself. Going forward, the main thing I would improve would be to highlight the skills that are gained. In terms of rolling this kind of coursework out to larger undergraduate courses, working in groups and presetting topics would be critical.
________________________________________
From: A forum for critical and radical geographers [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Deb Ranjan Sinha [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, April 02, 2012 11:40 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: FW: Wiki Writing?
interesting project....wonder if something like this can be done for geography?
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Jensen <[log in to unmask]>
The folks at Wikipedia are promoting the idea of university classes
incorporating Wikipedia projects. That is the students would made
additions to Wikipedia articles, for class credit. The professor
would monitor the quality, and the folks at Wikipedia would provide
all sorts of technical help.
I'm one of those helpers--and I've been editing a lot of Wikipedia
articles, including some on India and Japan. Looking at hundreds of
history articles, my take is that the average Wiki contributor is a
male undergraduate who is mostly interested in military or political
history, and is generally not familiar with social or cultural
history, nor with historiography, nor with the scholarly
literature. The articles need help. Since they are the #1 source
used by students any upgrading would be a public service. But it also
may teach the students to write and cite--and get instant feedback,
with their work actually published for the world to see.
The program is in startup mode and is operating mostly in the USA
right now. The project covers all academic disciplines, and has been
endorsed by the Sociology and Psychology associations, which have
activities underway.
There will be an online training program for teachers this summer,
plus a help desk and maybe even on-campus help. I edit a private
discussion list you can join. Anyone interested in giving it a try
for next year should contact me at [log in to unmask]
Richard Jensen
[log in to unmask]
There is some information on the Wikipedia program at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ambassadors/Resources
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ambassadors/Current_ambassadors
on the sociologists see
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/11/18/sociology-association-encourages-members-help-improve-wikipedia
James Evans
Senior Lecturer
School of Environment and Development
University of Manchester, M13 9PL
Director of Undergraduate Studies (Geography)
Environmental Governance
Urban Regeneration in the UK
Rescue Geography
Sustainable Futures: the Geography of Transition
________________________________________
From: A forum for critical and radical geographers [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Deb Ranjan Sinha [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, April 02, 2012 11:40 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: FW: Wiki Writing?
interesting project....wonder if something like this can be done for geography?
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Jensen <[log in to unmask]>
The folks at Wikipedia are promoting the idea of university classes
incorporating Wikipedia projects. That is the students would made
additions to Wikipedia articles, for class credit. The professor
would monitor the quality, and the folks at Wikipedia would provide
all sorts of technical help.
I'm one of those helpers--and I've been editing a lot of Wikipedia
articles, including some on India and Japan. Looking at hundreds of
history articles, my take is that the average Wiki contributor is a
male undergraduate who is mostly interested in military or political
history, and is generally not familiar with social or cultural
history, nor with historiography, nor with the scholarly
literature. The articles need help. Since they are the #1 source
used by students any upgrading would be a public service. But it also
may teach the students to write and cite--and get instant feedback,
with their work actually published for the world to see.
The program is in startup mode and is operating mostly in the USA
right now. The project covers all academic disciplines, and has been
endorsed by the Sociology and Psychology associations, which have
activities underway.
There will be an online training program for teachers this summer,
plus a help desk and maybe even on-campus help. I edit a private
discussion list you can join. Anyone interested in giving it a try
for next year should contact me at [log in to unmask]
Richard Jensen
[log in to unmask]
There is some information on the Wikipedia program at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ambassadors/Resources
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ambassadors/Current_ambassadors
on the sociologists see
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/11/18/sociology-association-encourages-members-help-improve-wikipedia
|
