Wikipedia?

I learned a lot about Wikipedia from the required readings, and I was motivated to read further about this pervasive source. In previous years, as a high-school English teacher, I was aware that students frequently turned to Wikipedia for information. I drew their attention to the possibility of bias, omissions, and inaccuracies, and I stipulated that students could not use Wikipedia as a source in their research papers, although they were welcome to visit the site as a starting point during the research process. Now, having read several articles about Wikipedia, I realize that I could have spent more time working with my students to examine and evaluate Wikipedia--in comparison to the online encyclopedia and databases purchased by our district--as an exercise in critical analysis.

Although I recognize that no encyclopedia is perfect, I have always trusted the authority of established encyclopedias, such as World Book or Britannica, over Wikipedia. Recently, however, I have been hearing that Wikipedia is becoming more reliable. The readings for Lesson 6 have helped me to better understand the value and the flaws of Wikipedia.

I learned from Berinstein that only verifiable information can be included in Wikipedia and that there is a "no original research" policy. Also, Berinstein points out that all changes are tracked and can be viewed via the History tab on each page. Although errors can occur unintentionally or purposefully, most are corrected quickly, as Alexander M.C. Halavais, an assistant professor of communications at Quinnipiac College, revealed when he deliberately planted thirteen errors in various Wikipedia articles. Within three hours, Wikipedia editors had found and deleted all of the false information (Read). Some errors can exist for long periods of time without being discovered, as the case of John Seigenthaler Sr., illustrated. A Wikipedia article claimed that he was involved in the Kennedy assassinations, and the article remained uncorrected for 123 days (Berinstein). Since then, Wikipedia has required every contributor to be a registered user, but anyone can register. "The logic behind the change is that forcing people to register will slow down the creation of new pages and allow quality checkers to keep up" (Berinstein). Wikipedia articles have been evaluated by different experts with differing results: some articles are excellent, some are poor (Read).

According to Berinstein, "because of Wikipedia's known methodology and vulnerabilities, it provides opportunities to teach (and learn) critical thinking." I agree that with middle and high-school students, it is important to look at the creation process of Wikipedia and teach students how to evaluate this source. As Chris Harris points out, students and many of their parents are consulting Wikipedia frequently (26). If we prohibit its use entirely, or fail to teach students how to evaluate Wikipedia, we are not adequately preparing students to think critically--a skill they will need to succeed in post-secondary education and to make informed decisions in their adult lives. Harris presents three rules for research that should be taught to students:
1.At least three sources are required to verify research.
2.General encyclopedias like Wikipedia are a great place to get started, however …
3.Serious research projects cannot cite general knowledge encyclopedias.(26)

Not all librarians see the benefit of starting with Wikipedia, however. In a letter responding to Harris' article, Sandy Miller argues that teacher-librarians should be promoting the use of databases purchased by school districts. She also points out that "the rule of three sources for fact verification does not necessarily apply to Web sites. You can easily find multiple Web sites that replicate-that is, plagiarize-incorrect information on a particular topic. A better idea is to encourage students and their tax-paying parents to use edited online database sources first. Why begin with bad information?" (11).

As a teacher-librarian at a K-5 school, I agree with Miller that I should first be teaching students to access and use effectively the online databases available through our district's web site. Young students have less ability to evaluate sites, and some parents are very particular about the sites their children visit online.

Older students, however, must be taught to think critically about all information that they encounter. According to Berinstein, "the flap over Wikipedia was significantly overblown, but contained a silver lining: People are becoming more aware of the perils of accepting information at face value. They have learned not to consult just one source. They know that authors and editors may be biased and/or harbor hidden agendas." These comments may be true of some adults and teens, but many students still do not know that they should check more than one source (or, in some cases, can't be bothered to do so). After having read these four articles about Wikipedia, I will make the use of Wikipedia with middle and high-school students a priority (if I move from my K-5 position). With practice, students can learn to take what is good about Wikipedia and disregard what is flawed. They can learn to think for themselves, a more powerful lesson than learning which sources are teacher approved.


Works Cited

Berinstein, Paula. "Wikipedia and Britannica: The Kid's All Right (And So's the Old Man)." Searcher 14.3(2006): 16-26. Academic Search Premier. Web. June 12, 2011.

Harris, Chris. (2007). "Can we make peace with Wikipedia?" School Library Journal 53.6(2007):26. Professional Development Collection. Web. June 12, 2011.

Miller, Sandy. "Wikipedia vs. Databases." School Library Journal 53.8 (2007): 11. Canadian Reference Centre. Web. June 12, 2011.

Read, Brock. "Can Wikipedia Ever Make the Grade?" Chronicle of Higher Education 53.10 (2006):A31-A36. Canadian Reference Centre. Web. June 12, 2011.

Print Versus Electronic Reference Sources

As I was working on Lesson 4, I found myself in the unusual position of being a teacher-librarian who needs to promote the use of electronic references. From my perspective as a TL in a K-5 school, I certainly do not feel that "those of us who support print and electronic reference sources are fighting a losing battle" (Lesson 4 Reflection). When a class begins a research project at my school, the teacher usually asks me to pull applicable print resources for her students to use when the library is free or for her to take to the classroom for use there. Only if the print resources are inadequate (leading me to select additional resources for an area that will be used each year) does the teacher turn to electronic sources.

As I have mentioned in previous posts, I would like to work more closely with classroom teachers next year and create a schedule that will enable me to be part of the research process. Students need to be able to locate and assess the resources that will answer their research questions. According to Riedling, "the search for information" is the third step of the complete reference process (5). If students are searching within a few books handed to them, their search for information has been severely limited. During library periods, I do teach students how to find different types of reference sources, but their searches are not part of a comprehensive research process.

Rather than having to promote print references, I have worked this year to familiarize teachers with electronic sources such as World Book Kids, World Book Student, and EBSCOhost's Kidsearch and Searchasaurus, as well as to make students aware that these reference sources are available from home.

My situation differs from that of most TLs--especially those in a middle or secondary school library. When I taught Grades 8 to 12, I definitely noticed a preference for electronic resources and a need to teach students how to locate reliable, current information online. As a number of others in this course have noted in their postings, most students are not proficient at evaluating electronic resources.

My purchasing is not, therefore, affected by student preferences for electronic resources, but by a limited budget and by a fixed library schedule. Students access the library once a week for thirty minutes. There is no time for them to explore print reference sources that cannot be checked out of the library. I therefore choose to purchase more non-fiction books that students can take home. They are reference sources in that they are used when students work on research projects and they "serve to answer a question" (Riedling 15), but they usually are not compilations. Riedling defines reference sources as "materials, from book to computer to periodical to photograph, designed to be consulted for definite items of information rather than to be examined consecutively" (15).

In a recent posting, Chris Ellett raised a good question: "Why not sign out some print reference materials on one night loans?" I would consider adjusting my loan policy, although Lori Ingles, in a reply to Chris, did point out the risks of losing materials that some families might not be able to replace. My school library, however, is open only two days a week and does not have a book drop. Students may as well have the materials for a week: unless a class plans to use the books for research in the library, another student would not be able to use the resource until the following week anyway.

Limited access to the library is a problem at our school. When I am at school, I am flexible about allowing students to visit the library at times other than their library period, but students do not have access on the days I am not working.

As I continue through this course, I hope that I will learn more about which print resources I should purchase and house in the designated reference section. I also will consider more ways to expand student access to these resources.


Works Cited

Riedling, Ann. Reference Skills for the School Library Media Specialist: Tools and Tips. 2nd ed. Worthington: Linworth Books, 2005. Print.