Below is a sample assignment showing how I would use a wiki in a college-level history course. It’s far from a perfect assignment and I would love feedback about how to improve it, but I think it conveys some of my basic ideas about how wikis could reshape classroom interactions.
The class would build parts of a wiki as weekly assignments. The assignments would be scheduled at the beginning of the semester and the wiki pages would be due the week before the relevant classes. Wiki entries would include: (a) context for the readings/topics witing outside sources, (b) any relevant news stories, (c) discussion questions, (d) and overview of key issues, (e) possibly identification terms and exam questions. After the week covered by each group, the group members would be responsible for posting a summary of the in-class discussions and how they relate to the wiki posts and the rest of the class.
The goal of this assignment would be to have the students create a useful site for themselves (essentially a review sheet of the course) as well as for anyone interested in the topic.
I’m still not completely sure how I would control access to the wiki. I’m inclined to start with a free open-access wiki from pbwiki, but I do want to limit the wiki to class members during the semester. Perhaps the most efficient option would be to use a premium wiki to make some pages private, lock others, and give the class limited access to the rest?
Honestly, I hate admitting I don’t know things. My sister loves to tell me “You don’t know!” — especially when I would respond to anything she told me with “I know.” So, it was interesting for me to be in a class where I had no delusions of knowing and no investment in denying my ignorance. Of course, I still didn’t ask questions every time I didn’t know or didn’t understand something and I certainly didn’t learn everything I need to know to use digital media/technologies as effectively as I know they can be used.
That said, I learned a lot this semester and the final project for this class was possibly one of the most concretely useful assignments I’ve had in my (too, too) many years of school. Building a personal quasi-database from my research was both incredibly challenging and rewarding. Fortunately, someone else did the hard technical part – writing the software that makes a wiki work – and all I had to do was add content.
At least, I thought all I had to do was add content.
(more…)
My website is less an actual “website” and more of a research tool. It’s a personal wiki with organized and cross-references notes from my research for my dissertation.
Eventually, I’d like to make this into a truly public site, so any suggestions for organization, clarification, etc. are very much appreciated.
wiki!
(The password is the name of the town I used to live and where my dissertation advisor currently lives — spelled backwards.)
I started to correct the very flawed Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl entry in Wikipedia, but decided not to since I didn’t want my edits to somehow influence the plagarism investigation into one of my students. But, let it be know that it is a terrible entry! instead, I added a brief overview of Project Renew to the Unexploded U.S. Explosives section of the Wikipedia entry on the Vietnam War.
With some hesitation, I do appreciate Wikipedia for what it is. I agree with Rosenzweig that it is a useful research starting point, but I will probably tell my students not to quote/cite it for research papers. Of course, I am still quite suspicious on online research, so my objections to Wikipedia are not personal, per se. However, it is frustrating to me that so many students see Wikipedia as the final arbiter of history — or maybe they’re just lazy?
Rosenzweig’s article convinced me that my innate distrust of Wikipedia is a bit of an overreaction and misplaced as the online encyclopedia compares quite favorably with professional publications such as Encarta and the American National Biography Online. Additionally, the ability to track changes and respond to errors/vandalism is a clear strength of Wikipedia. (see an earlier post about politics and Wikipedia here)
This week’s readings have given me an idea for a potentially interesting assignment for the class I’m teaching this summer: either in class or an outside paper, I will have students critically evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of a Wikipedia entry. I have to think about this a bit more, but it might be a very useful way to convince students to question all sources, particularly unauthored, internet sources. What do you think about this potential assignment? Would you, if you were a freshman or sophomore at AU, take away something useful from such a project or would you feel insulted and belittled?
I sincerely enjoyed poking around the blogs and carnivals, but had to cut myself off because the midterms refused to grade themselves. I thought Mark Grimsley made a number of excellent points about the potential usefulness of blogging for academics — I particularly like the idea of making my work into a form of procrastination! What did you find most useful/interesting in the readings for this week?