Wikipedia: Reliable and Real

I was first introduced to Wikipedia by a friend who, after hearing I had started university again said, “Just don’t ever quote from Wikipedia!” He then laughed and made me think Wikipedia must be really inaccurate and unreliable referencing material. Needless to say, I never used it, until I saw the reports on Wikipedia Vs Britannica. Cauchi (2005) reported that studies done by Nature Magazine revealed scientific entries from both encyclopaedias contained errors. The average entry in Britannica contained three errors in comparison with Wikipedia’s four errors. So Wikipedia isn’t far from a trusted referencing source such as Britannica.

So, how can educators use this tool? I searched Wikipedia for an answer and found it on the page, Wikipedia: School and University Projects. The page suggests Wikipedia be used for students to add and edit Wikipedia entries for school projects on any subject. This is a great idea considering all the hard work that goes into assessment items, only to be tossed in the bin after a grade is given. Wikipedia however, could preserve all the hard work and research and make it available to the rest of the world.

Kearsey and Schneiderman’s (1999) engagement theory supports students “relating” to the real world, “creating” solutions and “donating” them back to the community. Wikipedia provides a perfect platform. There are other wiki sites and webquests that could be used for this purpose, but students may not consider these sites well known by the population. When using Wikipedia however, students know this website is viewed by almost everyone who regularly uses the internet, making their task more authentic.


References:

Cauchi, S. (2005, December 15). Online encyclopaedias put to the test. The Age. Retrieved August 18, 2009, from http://www.theage.com.au/

Kearsey, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1999). Engagement theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Retrieved July 19, 2009, from http://home.sprynet.com/~gkearsley/engage.htm