American School Librarian Starts 'Say No to Wikipedia' Campaign

[zekrahminator]

Any member of techPowerUp! that currently attends or has attended a public school, and done a research paper at said public school, knows that using Wikipedia as a source is a huge no-no. New Jersey librarian Linda O'Connor decided to take the verbal no-nos and grading penalties on papers citing Wikipedia a step further. She designed, purchased, and distributed "just say no to Wikipedia" posters all around the local high school that she works in. O'Connor of course has the backing of several teachers that do not like to see students too lazy to find and cite the sources themselves.

There are, of course, legitimate reasons behind banning a well-meaning website from research papers. One student nearly wrote a Martin Luther King Jr. report based on information found on a white-supremacist version of the Wikipedia article on the black man. Another student found a drastically lowered casualty count when researching the Vietnam war. Wikipedia of course does not tolerate these instances when found, and deals with them by locking the articles to editing by new/untrustworthy users. Teachers argue that such methods are too little, too late.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[ktr]

Does it have to do with that wikipedia is threating teachers jobs?

 

[WhiteLotus]

wiki is great for things that are known, science and maths for instance. but any historical or something that can have more than one viewpoint it is a huge no. still you can put it in your blibliography when doing an assignment

 

[ghost101]

Wikipedia.is a great resource. I'd like to see these teachers write books for free on different subjects. Its probably better than 99% of other sources found on the internet.

Also, why would you visit a white supremacist version of wikipedia?

 

[theonetruewill]

Wikipedia.is a great resource. I'd like to see these teachers write books for free on different subjects. Its probably better than 99% of other sources found on the internet.

Also, why would you visit a white supremacist version of wikipedia?

I guess someone with those views edited it- morons.

 

[a111087]

yeah, wiki is no no for academic paper, whether its a high school or college, at least that is what they say.
but I still rely on it.

 

[Mandown]

Well that teacher should be shot in the face, wikipedia is very great source to look in, i've used it on most of my research papers without a problem. but for historical facts its always good to use more than 1 source. I think the teacher just needs to get laid, and stop making it harder for the students, since they have to put up with BS everyday.

I don't know if anyone else had this problem, but in my school they blocked just about every website even a bunch of sites that were specifically meant for research. they blocked wiki in my school and even the teachers were pissed. They are supposed to get us ready for college right? they barely block websites in college. so much for getting us ready.

 

[lemonadesoda]

Email, Wikipaedia, Google, and Googlemaps are the REVELATIONS of the last 30 years.

I know many people resisted email... and still do... and go on and on about how it lowers standards of writing etc. And these people want to live in the dark ages, before electricity.

But I will defend the wiki. There is nothing MORE VALUABLE in education than total immersion. And wiki lets you do just that: go to a new topic or subject, and in minutes, you get an angle.

It's up to the reader to then VERIFY what has been read... just in the same way that you need to also challenge, investigate, research, think for yourself, about nearly any "fact" that we get through modern media... be it chat, gossip, news channels, newspapers, advertising, films, or wiki.

IT IS THE TEACHERS JOB to educate the pupils HOW to use the wiki effectively. (Indeed how to think critically about politics and spin too). The teachers are only MOANING because they are TOO LAZY to write new assignments and are just regurgitating the same old same old which IS AVAILABLE for instant access at wiki, and in 99.9% of the cases, HAS MORE KNOWLEDGE than the teacher themselves.

My moto "JUST SAY NO TO LAZY TEACHERS"

 

[Ketxxx]

My god... anything american related like this I read actually numbs my brain and I can feel my IQ dropping where its so retarded and stupid, all ppl like this deserve to die.

 

[SK-1]

^^He should get laid FIRST then get shot in the face,..it will make the getting laid part much more easy for him.
But seriously,.my drunk Uncle just LOVES to edit Wiki, when he gets on a roll and puts his spin on things in the definitions it is a hoot!!
This is only one reasons I use Wikipedia for "entertainment purposes only"

 

[imperialreign]

Honestly, I kinda, somewhat agree with the teacher's stand point . . .


But, only because the kids are too lazy and/or stupid to notice at the bottom of 90% or Wikipedia articles, there is a nice little scetion titled "REFERENCES", where you could easily click those reference links and verify the information you would like to use, and just cite that friggin reference instead of Wikipedia!!!!!

That's the problem with most kids nowadays (no offense to y'all teenagers here), but the majority of them just don't think . . .

 

[Cold Storm]

I've never seen a problem with Wikipedia. Its a great website that helps you in all ways. You can look up a voice actors name and get the history of the person better than you can googling their name. Then if you ever want to know the history of any comic book spinoff (Crisis or House of M) they have the up-to-date revisions of that story arch.
I don't like the fact that lazy kids get everything off of it, but you have to draw a line on it. Teachers are just made for the fact that new tech. is whats making their students smarter then them. My Economics teacher in 12 grade gave a group an F on their 6 week project because he couldn't make more then 2 questions out of their story... WTF?? they did a great job and I didn't have a question to ask...

 

[TUngsten]

The problem with using Wikipedia in academia is only scratching the surface. High school students need to learn that research does not mean looking something up on wikipedia and turning it in.

As a university prof, I know this all too well - students come to college nowadays with as much sense as a turd when it comes to doing actual research.

 

[F-22]

It's not wikipedia's fault that nobody goes to the library except 90 year old grandmas... Libraries are just obsolete... period.

 

[jurrasstoil]

It's not wikipedia's fault that nobody goes to the library except 90 year old grandmas... Libraries are just obsolete... period.

I had to look up "Library" at wikipedia, cause i didn't know what it is.
Wiki told me it's a place to meet hot/smart chicks - so how does going to these "libraries" help students to do their homework? This seems more like counterproductive to me. Maybe Ms. O'Connor got things mixed up a little.

 

[kwchang007]

This is funny my ap euro teacher endorses wiki. He just says make sure its not feeding us stupid info...like if I'm looking up the Renaissance and it talks about George Bush...don't use that part DUH. And that's why private school can be better than public....sometimes.

 

[imperialreign]

considering that Wiki is a public updated tool - any information found on Wikipedia should be taken with a grain of salt as it's more prone to someone's opinions than actual fact . . . granted Wiki keeps up on posts and relies heavily on people tagging inappropriate or innacurate material, it's still possible to end up with bad info . . .

. . . not saying that there isn't good information there at all, I mean, it's a quick site to check if you've got a good idea about something, but just want a little info to doublecheck your thoughts.

Again, I was taught back in high school, when researching for reports and essays and the like, that something known as common or agreed upon fact doesn't really need as many sources of references - but if your topic is controversial, you want to make sure that your references have good references too (I had quite a few teachers that would randomly spot check students papers), and anything amiss can discredit your paper and hurt your final score.

 

[OnBoard]

In ~1993 I returned my first English paper with a printout (first that did it) and the teacher looked at it like it was contagious. She said it should be hand written, but finally took it. Next paper I returned with Script font (the "hand written one") and asked if this was any better . Again she didn't like it, but not as big of a shock.

There was a reason for that, my hand writing was so poor looking that I had hear it from couple of teachers that it was hard to make out what it said. I wrote like we were told as kids (don't know what it is in English, but http://www.fontbros.com/images/1150/TYPA-SWSC-SP.gif) and many others wrote like the text here (don't know what this writing style is called either) that is more clear.

In University they'd fail my paper if it was hand written. Strict rules of margins, font sizes and other stuff. So the times change, I doubt there is no wikipedia campaigns in 2020.

 

[Thermopylae_480]

Anyone who relies on wikipedia as an academic resource deserves an F. Wikipedia can be trusted as much as a guy in an unmarked van offering a free fuzzy puppy.

 

[ex_reven]

It's not wikipedia's fault that nobody goes to the library except 90 year old grandmas... Libraries are just obsolete... period.

Libraries are a long way off going obsolete.
If you submit an internet based source when doing assessments/assignments in many subjects (especially history) you will be looked upon as a moron.

 

[Xaser04]

As long as the article on Wikipedia is backed up my credible sources (Which alot are now) I see no issue with using it as a source of reference.

Of course as with anything its always best to use more than one point of reference as otherwise you can be drawn in by the writers personal stance on the subject. (This can also apply to books as well).

 

[tkpenalty]

Well, no racism here but you guys "over there" sometimes have people which make you look really bad. By far, this is one of the most useless and nonsensical propositions!

Yes I agree that wikipedia should not be your only source, however most of it IS reliable, IF you can grab hold of many other sources which justify the information. Its certainly not completely comprehensive, but it is indeed a composition of facts. See, most people use wikipedia in this sense, that it summarises what they research. Basically, introducing them to the subject matter. I've used wikipedia a LOT, and frankly its very useful, as I use it as a building block then with external sources to justify what wikipedia says.

This is another ludicrous example of the popular things being bombarded by criticisms, example Windows, the iPod, etcetra... I've seen shitloads of websites with totally inaccurate/byast information, that has NO regulation. I've even used one of them.... now, those teachers, what do you say about that?

You can see how pointless banning wiki is in my previous statments. Teachers are supposed to teach and not have immature rivalries, they are supposed to try to make their students learn as much as possible, not hinder them!

 

[v-zero]

Wikipedia is endlessly useful for whatever science I need to know...

 

[imperialreign]

As long as the article on Wikipedia is backed up my credible sources (Which alot are now) I see no issue with using it as a source of reference

It really depends on the site. Through my college courses, the teachers I had for literature and composition classes would only accpet online references from certain sites, or sites that bear a certain appendix to them (.org, .net, etc - .com was out of the question). The reference site itself had to be from a respected source like Encarta or CNN or whatever, but we were typically limited to only two online references - one if it was a major end of session paper or mid-term paper.

That didn't stop me from using online libraries, though - there is no difference there, IMO. A book is a book whether it appears on the screen or on paper.

 

[zekrahminator]

Anyone who relies on wikipedia as an academic resource deserves an F. Wikipedia can be trusted as much as a guy in an unmarked van offering a free fuzzy puppy.

My cat picture collection has been updated to include de-motivational posters

.