Wikipedia's Worth

Today, when someone has a question or needs some more information, their first stop is probably the internet.  After a quick search, their second stop is likely to involve a visit to Wikipedia.  As a collaborative encyclopedia with thousands of editors (both amateur and professional), Wikipedia has information on virtually every topic one could imagine.  Still, many academic institutions limit or prohibit the use of Wikipedia due to misconceptions about the veracity of its content.

Since anyone can seemingly write anything they want on a Wikipedia entry, it is understandable why some educators would discourage the use of this site.  However, there is a lot to be gained by using Wikipedia and its vast knowledge bank.  For one, Wikipedia information is often more current than textbooks or journals.  Since updates can be published anytime from anywhere, information on current issues is often very relevant.  For example, during the 2004 tsunami, information was posted every minute, some coming in even before it was reported by news networks. 

As for the claim that information on Wikipedia is inherently inaccurate, there is no way to ensure every article is correct 100% of the time.  However, the site has increasingly added safeguards to help users identify false information.  For one, Wikipedia flags articles that are out of date, lack citations, or are incomplete.  Additionally, Wikipedia has protected certain articles from being edited by anyone other than an administrator.  Such protected articles are generally those that face “information vandalism” either for humor or propaganda. 

Another great Wikipedia feature that many people may not know about is the discussion section attached to each article.  This is a space where article editors can share the motives behind their updates, ask questions, and clarify information with other knowledgeable users.  Reviewing this discussion can help any reader identify bias and determine the credibility of an article’s editors. 

Beyond conducting research, Wikipedia also offers a space for anyone to share their knowledge on any topic of interest.  This is a great exercise for students, who may not have had much experience with concise, expository writing.  Additionally, the discussion feature allows for an author’s work to be critiqued (for better or for worse) in a genuine public forum.  This is something that many students may not otherwise experience. 

Even if someone still refuses to cite Wikipedia as a trustworthy source, it can still be a helpful starting point.  Wikipedia articles can provide context and background information.  They are also full of references to web pages, books, journal articles, and other sources that are generally considered reliable.  Thus, if nothing else, Wikipedia offers a jumping-off point.  This, combined with its global community, makes it a great place to begin research, gather information, and share ideas. 

References:

Educase. (2007, June). 7 things you should know about wikipedia. Retrieved from www.educase.edu/eli

Student Response Systems: Thoughts and Experiences

As teachers, we want all of our students to engage in the lessons we create and the discussions we prompt.  However, there are many barriers to full class participation.  For example, some students are shy or nervous when sharing with peers.  Other students may be so forthcoming with ideas that they hardly give their peers a chance to join in.  Furthermore, restrictions on time make it difficult to let every student answer every question.

Student response systems help mitigate these difficulties.  Such systems include remotes where students can input their answers to a class question. These answers are submitted to a computer and subsequently displayed, usually in a graphic format, for the entire class to view and discuss.  This is an excellent tool for checking understanding and allows teachers to assess every student's knowledge.  If each student has to answer via a remote, there is little chance for them to skate through a lesson which confuses them simply by staying quiet.

In addition to checking understanding, I have found a number of useful ways to integrate student response systems into my lessons.  Thanks to a grant received two years ago, I have a TurningPoint Response Card system in my classroom.  One great feature of this product is that students are not limited to multiple choice questions.  They can type in numbers / letters to give more free-thinking responses when appropriate.  Additionally, the Response Card remotes are easy to use and provide students with a smiley face to let them know their answer has been received.

One of my favorite ways to use our student response system is through trivia games.  These are highly engaging and help students review content.   By evaluating responses during the game, I am provided with immediate feedback on what topics need additional coverage  before moving on to a formal assessment.  Additionally, I enjoy using the system for surveys.  They help me learn more about my students' interests at the beginning of a new course.  They can also be used to prompt discussion of current issues as students can anonymously and safely share their ideas and get a feel for their peers' opinions, which can lead us to a more open discussion. 


Over the last year, I have incorporated our student response system into all of my classes, and in each one I have seen students light up with excitement at the promise of using these new tools.  This leads me to an important question, if I were to use my TurningPoint remotes more frequently, would the excitement be the same?  In the same way my students are no longer enthralled by the use of our classroom computer, could their enthusiasm (and subsequently the effectiveness of the tool) wane?  I suppose only time will tell...

Defining the Digital Native

In a world full of technology, there are people who were practically born texting and tweeting, and others who had to acquire such sills in adulthood.  Naturally, this leads to a divide between those who are fully fluent in the language of technology use and those who live with a permanent accent.  What does this mean for education?  Well, as most students today are so-called "digital natives", teachers must learn the characteristics of this tech-saavy generation and adapt teaching methods to satisfy their needs. 

So, who are these digital natives?  They are young people who have grown up with technology.  This includes most Americans under the age of 30.  In fact, 80% of America's infant to 5-year-old population  uses the internet on a weekly basis.These are kids who can surf the web before they can read!   As such, they are adept at using it and integrate it seemlessly into their daily lives.  For example, more than 80% of digital natives use social networking sites. In terms of the youngest digital natives, 77% of teens have a cellular phone.  Despite this, their reliance on phone conversations is decreasing, with almost a third of teens reporting they never talk on the phone.  Instead, teens aremore likely to communicate via text message, with 68% saying they text daily. 

Digital natives spend more time in front of a screen, be it television, computer, or cell phone, than reading.  To the traditional educator, this might seem counterproductive and signal a lack of academic skill.  However, students are actually spending time using the tools and skills they will need to navigate through both their social and profeccional lives in the future.  We need to embrace this new population and their tech-saavy ways and invite them to bring their natural skillset into the classroom on a daily basis.

Resources:
Pew, R. (2012, July 11). [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/PewInternet/teens-2012-truth-trends-and-myths-about-teen-online-behavior

Suarez, R. (2011, July ). The real digital natives: 80% of children under age 5 use the internet http://ramonsuarez.com/the-real-digital-natives-80-of-children-under