Comments on: Why I Won’t Get Hired at Middlebury

By: The Dangers of Wikipedia « spectre08

The Dangers of Wikipedia « spectre08 — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 20:01:19 +0000

[...] academic use. Not in the sense of using it for citations, rather it was used as the platform for a class. In it the professor instructed his students to create a fictitious student who was to research the [...]

By: edwired » Blog Archive » Edwired Goes Analog

edwired » Blog Archive » Edwired Goes Analog — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 10:46:48 +0000

[...] pages 452-454 you’ll find my post on Middlebury College’s Wikipedia policy reprinted as part of an assignment on thinking about Wikipedia as a [...]

By: Mark Stoneman

Mark Stoneman — Fri, 05 Oct 2007 17:12:32 +0000

Mills, I myself also accept that students use Wikipedia, so I try to help them understand how to do it. But I’ve never actually asked them to write entries. I would like to hear more about your experiences now that the semester is over. I would also like to hear if anyone else has tried an assignment along these lines.

By: sarah

sarah — Sun, 08 Jul 2007 23:44:48 +0000

I am very happy to see that someone ... has actually done research about the reliability of wiki- and encyclopedias. They are both very reliable and, after doing endless research about art history (that was my major), I firmly believe they are just as accurate as any print source. I am thoroughly pissed off at educators who say wikipedia and encyclopedias are 'bad sources.' I guess they are "old school" and are afraid of change. Scholarly journal articles are never perfect and history books are MOST DEFINITELY not perfect.

I am angry about this because my boyfriend just started college and was marked down 10% for citing an encyclopedia. Meanwhile, his instructor told him the Bible is a great source!! The Bible is no more credible than Roman mythology.

By: weblog.histnet.ch » Blog Archive » edwired: Geschichtsblog des Monats April 2007

Fri, 11 May 2007 16:27:38 +0000

[...] Zunft, sondern auch Mitglieder der Wikipedia-Community. Kelly ist auch der Historiker, der mit dem Ansatz, Wikipedia als Studienliteratur für seine historische Lehrveranstaltung zu nutzen (und dabei die Studierenden verpflichtet, selber [...]

By: weblog.histnet.ch » Blog Archive » Middlebury College “verbietet” Wikipedia-Zitate

Wed, 25 Apr 2007 21:01:17 +0000

[...] Kelly von der George Mason University an. Er gesteht in einem Blog-Eintrag unter dem Titel “Why I Won’t Get Hired at Middlebury“, dass er Wikipedia sogar als Lehrmittel in seinen Kursen einsetzt: Even the folks at [...]

By: Leslie Harris

Leslie Harris — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 20:07:05 +0000

I think it’s great that – instead of being afraid of Wikipedia – you are *using* it as an assignment for students. That’s a much wiser and more practical approach, consistent with some of the “best practices” teaching I’ve encountered in my career. Basically, you are starting from where the students already are, and then teaching them to think at a higher level – to use Wikipedia in a self-conscious, reflective way. I think your assignment of having students write (or revise) an entry in Wikipedia and then analyze what happened to that entry is outstanding. Students are so rarely put in the position of being authors in a public forum. When they are, they tend to find it *very* empowering. They own the work that they are creating and have a greater sense of authority, as well.

By: Keith Patrick Sied

Keith Patrick Sied — Wed, 14 Feb 2007 21:36:51 +0000

I have to say that it is obvious that you don’t agree with the stand that Middlebury is taking against Wikipedia. In a way, I do agree with you. Encyclopedias do hold important information and they can be very helpful when it comes to research papers, or any other types of assignments. To be honest, I am actually a fan of Wikipedia, and I tend to use Wikipedia a lot; whether it comes to school assignments or just plain curiousity about any type of person, place, or thing while “surfing” the internet. Wikipedia, to me, is a very valuable teaching tool, and I agree with you 100% that you use it as your textbook. In my assignments in the test, I used Wikipedia and it seemed as if every bit of information I used I got from Wikipedia because there was so much information. This information I got from Wikipedia just happened to check out with other information I got from other websites. I believe that Wikipedia is an excellent tool for higher learning. It other people who have used Wikipedia in the past have found out that Wikipedia is not a loyal teaching tool, then I’m sure they have their reasons. But for me, there is no reason why I should disagree with Wikipedia as a teaching tool, or as a textbook for your class.

By: Ken

Ken — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 16:14:41 +0000

It seems to me there are apples and oranges here. I think your idea to use Wikipedia as a text book replacement is an excellent approach. It is a reference work, the same as a text book. It might even possibly carry less weight than a text book in a student's mind, which would be even better, opening the door to teaching them about the contested nature of knowledge, meta-narratives, etc. However, as Roy has written and others have repeated, encyclopedias in general should not be used for research papers. While Middlebury certainly has set Wikipedia apart from other encyclopedias in its ban, I would hazard they have practically prevented students from citing encyclopedias more broadly. Wikipedia's prominence in student work is almost certainly closely tied to both its easy access and its general reliability. Perhaps Middlebury would do better to clarify their motivation, but I have a feeling the effect will be the same whether or not they choose to ban all encyclopedias as references.

By: Steven L. Berg, Ph.D.

Steven L. Berg, Ph.D. — Sun, 04 Feb 2007 20:14:44 +0000

When you took a stand for Wikipedia, you gave me an idea about how I could use Wikipedia as a teaching tool in my own history classes. I have expanded on this in my own blog. See http://www.stevenlberg.info/blog/02-04-2007.html