|
Wikipedia:
A democratic source of information?
Or
an unreliable one?
By
Julie Weiss
To
the teacher:
After
Sarah Palin recently described Paul Revere's ride incorrectly,
some people - presumably her supporters - changed the account
of Revere's ride on the online encyclopedia Wikipedia to match
Palin's version. After a tug-of-war over whose story would remain
on the site, Wikipedia froze the Paul Revere entry so that no
one could make any more changes, at least for the time being.
The
incident reignited a controversy that has come up before about
this hugely popular online encyclopedia, which anyone can contribute
to or edit. Some people believe that Wikipedia democratizes knowledge
by eliminating the traditional gatekeepers like newspaper editors
and book publishers - along with their profit motive. It allows
everyone to be an expert, and makes available information that
might not otherwise reach a wide audience.
But
not everyone agrees with that analysis. Some people, including
many teachers, question Wikipedia's validity as an information
source. If everyone can write entries, they argue, then anyone
can slant a story any way they want, or even falsify it (like,
for example, Palin's supporters).
In
this lesson, students complete a jigsaw activity in which they
learn about three Wikipedia controversies. Then they decide whether
they think Wikipedia is a reliable information source.
Goals:
- To
understand reading and share information
- To
understand a controversial issue
- To
decide whether Wikipedia is a reliable information source and
explain how they reached the decision
1.
Divide the class into three groups. Assign each group one of the
following articles to read:
The Online
Credibility Gap (San Francisco Chronicle, 12/6/05)
David
Rivera's War with Wikipedia (Politico, 4/7/11)
Shedding
Hazy Light on a Midnight Ride (New York Times, 6/13/11)
Explain that each person in the group should read the article,
and then the group should discuss it. In the discussion, each
group should identify and write down the most important points
in the article, as well as any questions that the article raises
for the group. At the end of the discussion, each group will choose
a representative to tell the class about the content of its group's
article. The goal of each presentation is to give class members
enough information about the article's content that everyone knows
as much as if they had all read all the articles.
2. Use the following questions to guide a class discussion,
which will help prepare students for the final activity. If the
class needs more information to answer some questions, you might
assign students to research them.
- What
is the purpose of Wikipedia? What goal does it aim to achieve
with its content?
- Who
writes Wikipedia's entries? Who edits them? Who verifies their
accuracy?
- How
does the writing, editing, and verifying of Wikipedia entries
compare to the processes used by traditional encyclopedias?
- What
does it mean to say that internet content is "too much
information, not enough judgment"? Do you agree? Why or
why not?
- Have
you used Wikipedia for research projects? Why or why not? Would
you use it now? Why or why not?
3. Tell students that for the next part of the lesson, they
will take the role of a teacher. Ask them to write an essay that
responds to this scenario:
You're a teacher and have recently gotten many research papers
that use Wikipedia as a source. You and your colleagues disagree
about whether Wikipedia is a legitimate source for student research.
You have been asked to write a position paper for your fellow
teachers explaining your point of view: Would you allow your students
to use Wikipedia as a source for writing research papers? Explain
why or why not, and use evidence that you gather from at least
three sources to support your decision.
Closing
After
students have submitted their papers, ask the class: Has your
thinking about Wikipedia changed? If so, how and why? If not,
why not?
We
welcome your comments. Please email them to: lmcclure@morningsidecenter.org.
Back
to top
|
