To be honest, I rarely frequent wikipedia as a site, even for research topics. I have nothing against the information that is available on those pages; it’s just that I have had instructors in the past not allow it as a reference. My normal start for researching a topic is simple and consistent. I’m not sure if it is the most effective way, but it seems to get me started. I google the topic and start reading the top posts. It is here where I start to dive deeper into the web and go on tangents to help me cover the main aspects that I’m looking for.
As a teacher I think I will probably allow wikipedia to be used as a reputable, quotable source, as I will encourage students to go see what is there. In the article they bring up many key points that support my approach with future students by maintaining the sites’ validity/credibility a number of different ways. One states that wikipedia may be someone’s only source in researching a new type of technology, or rather recent event. Also, a wider scope of topics is represented compared to an actual book version of an encyclopedia.
The policy that I would feel most comfortable setting for students surrounding web-based research would have to be requiring “A” papers to contain all URL’s ending in .edu or .gov. When we talked about this in class on Friday it made sense not to weigh a ton of reliability on others for the simple reason that anyone could buy an address with .com, .net, or .org. This wouldn’t mean that I would just allow a “B” level paper to be full of those less reputable sites, but there would be a maximum allowed. On top of limiting the amount of certain types of websites, there would be a standard APA citing requirement and a strict policy on plagiarism.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment