Wikiality Blog
“Why do we have to read this if the answer can already be found on Wikipedia?” This thought probably pours through many of my students as they sit analyzing primary sources on Afghanistan, Iraq, and India. Instant gratification: our society has become obsessed with getting the answer (or anything for that matter) immediately. Whether the answer is the truth or not really does not seem to matter at all anymore. That is why I push myself and my students to never settle for the easy answer, to avoid using Wikipedia, and to always strive to discover the material.
Stephen Colbert, in his satire “Wikiality”, states, “Any user can change any entry and if enough other users agree with it, it becomes true.” He then adds, “All we need to do is convince a majority of people that some factoid is true.” This point is reason number one that I instruct students to avoid Wikipedia when researching. Students do not know if they are accessing information that is inaccurate and thus are learning the wrong information. To them, however, they will think that they are correct, and ultimately, their perception of reality has been negatively impacted.
Often when discussing the problem of using Wikipedia when researching, students will inquire, “How do we know that books or academic websites have ‘the truth?’”. I am happy when students ask questions like this because it means they are grappling with the concepts of academic research that I am trying to teach instead of doodling and drooling on their “ancient books”. I explain that books and academic websites are put together by experts who have dedicated their lives to studying specific topics and have had their work scrutinized by colleagues. This, I doubt, probably will not turn the average 15-year-old into being an anti-Wikipedia force-fighter, however. I, in teaching why not to use Wikipedia, have to go beyond this.
Perhaps the more critical concept I try to convey to students is the importance of hard work. From Day One, I preach that hard work and dedication will gain success. Using Wikipedia is to hard work and dedication like kryptonite is to Superman. Once students use Wikipedia, it creates a strong feeling and desire of attraction. The answer is there. Google it. Click on the blue text link. Bam! The answer is there. Not needed are reading strategies that I and the rest of their teachers have taught them. Gone is the ability to synthesize information from various sources. Eliminated is the entire thought process. Soon, students (and the rest of society for that matter) may be conditioned into asking, “Why should we go to school if everything’s on Wikipedia.” Trip Gabriel’s article “Plagiarism Lines Blur for Students in Digital Age” highlights this major issue of academic laziness. In his article, he quoted an Indiana University senior named Sarah Wilensky. In the article, Wilensky said plagiarism "'does not foster creativity, it fosters laziness.'" I completely agree with this and it is another reason why I explain to students the negative consequences of Wikipedia use. Further, I want them to be prepared for the academic rigors of collegiate-level research and writing. Letting them simply look things up in Wikipedia will doom them in the future. Wilensky also noted that high schoolers are not ready for the coursework of college. I do not want my students to fall into that category.
Some may argue that money can be saved by not using textbooks and relying solely on the computer. In Ashlee Vance’s July 31’s article “$200 Textbook vs. Free. You Do the Math.,” Scott G. McNealy, a co-founder of Sun Microsystems, argues, “’We are spending $8 billion to $15 billion per year on textbooks. It seems to me we could put that all online for free.’” Although he did not argue for the sole use of Wikipedia in the classroom, he did argue for the abandonment of books in the classroom to save money. Everything could be put online. The idea of saving money is great. However, what is being lost is the opportunity for students to view a variety of texts – books, journals, magazines, blogs, educational websites, YouTube clips, and so on to synthesize information. This is something that is priceless and students must be aware of the importance of accessing and analyzing a variety of information to form conclusions.
It is without question that I am fully against the use of Wikipedia in education. Teachers, however, cannot just say, “Don’t use Wikipedia” and be done with it. They must logically explain to students the problems – academic and social – and, ultimately, the ramification of using Wikipedia for the quick answer. Otherwise, the students we have now will be teaching their kids that Africa’s herds of elephants have quintupled since they were in high school.
Works Cited
Colbert, Stephen (Producer). (2006, July 31). The Colbert Report (Television broadcast). New York, NY: Comedy Central. Retrieved from http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report- videos/72347/july-31-2006/the-word---wikiality.
Gabriel, Trip. (2010, August 1). “Plagiarism Lines Blur for Students in Digital Age.” The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/02/education/02cheat.html?pagewanted=1.
Vance, Ashlee. (2010, July 31). “$200 Textbook vs. Free. You Do the Math.” The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/01/technology/01ping.html.
 |
It is absolutely imperative that students understand the importance of evaluating texts from a variety of sources. Not settling for instant gratification from Wikipedia is something I stress to my students on a daily basis, especially when in the computer lab. |
No comments:
Post a Comment