As educators, scholars, and students debate the place Wikipedia should play within the educational landscape, I believe they are debating the wrong subject. So many people are quick to point out the flaws in the wiki model; they begin to lose focus of the real problem. Instead of taking the approach of Middlebury College by simply banning the use of Wikipedia, students should be educated on why Wikipedia is not a citable source. The issue here is not the accuracy of content you find on Wikipedia. In many respects, Wikipedia articles will be far more accurate than print books. You can find many a book which would tell you that there are 9 planets in the solar system. Meanwhile, Wikipedia had the article on Pluto updated the second the International Astronomical Union announced its decision. However, Wikipedia does have its drawbacks as well – I will be the first to admit that. Occasionally, people will purposefully change articles so that the information becomes inaccurate – whether for political, moral, or mischievous reasons. This small group of troublemakers represents a tiny percentage of the immense Wikipedia community. Wikipedia is often more accurate than its print counterparts.
The real problem we face is that students are not learning to use primary sources and are not checking facts against alternative sources. Even in 8th grade, I am taught that we should only use primary and secondary sources when writing research papers. Tertiary sources, such as encyclopedias, should only serve as a method of finding other sources and learning background information about a topic. If Middlebury College allows Encyclopedia Britannica to be referenced, but still chooses to ban the use of Wikipedia, then there is a serious problem of educational neglect. The issue here is that students are not learning to distinguish appropriate sources and to check all facts with multiple sources.
0 Responses to “Wikipedia”