Skip to main content

Why Teachers Should Require Students to Use Wikipedia

I've always been a fan of Wikipedia, and often I'm happy to see a Wikipedia entry as my top search result. As a math teacher, I never had many opportunities to direct students in the ways of research, including how to choose appropriate sources. Several of my colleagues who do teach research, however, not only discouraged Wikipedia use, but banned it outright. Why? The most common answer: "Because anybody can edit Wikipedia, students won't know if the information is true." It wasn't until tonight that I saw how shortsighted this reasoning really is, and how it gives students wrong ideas about research.

Let's assume we not only encourage, but require students to use Wikipedia. If a student only finds factual information, then we've preserved the status quo, and nothing really changes. But what if the student finds a mistake? (Or, more likely, you find it for them.) This isn't a crisis, this is an opportunity! First, students see this as a powerful example of why we cite our sources, an idea with which many students struggle. Without the citation the student looks like they're wrong; with the citation to Wikipedia, we can see the student is not really at fault. Second, if a student finds an error in Wikipedia, don't ignore it, FIX IT! The same reason you cite as Wikipedia's weakness is also its greatest strength. Everyone can be an editor. Even if you just find a Wikipedia claim to be in question, and aren't sure if it's false, teach your students how to use the discussion page so they can truly take part in the Wikipedia experience.

If having your students participate as Wikipedia contributors sounds too scary, too involved, or not worth your time and effort, think of this absurdity you have created for yourself - You are a teacher, someone who dedicates themselves to helping students learn and share information, but you don't want your students to use your instruction in a way that contributes to the world's body of knowledge in one of the internet's biggest projects.

Like it or not, this is the world we live in, so put down your guard and teach your students (and yourself, if necessary) what digital citizenry can and should be about. In fact, you should hope all your students find mistakes in Wikipedia. Teach them how to fix those mistakes, and you can be sure "research" will mean more to them than churning out double-spaced papers.


  1. Students should be taught to be critical consumers of all information, web based or not. Wikipedia is no exception. The volume of misleading and erroneous information on the web means greater demands should be placed on the information consumer. Wikipedia is not only a valid source of much knowledge; it is a valid method to teach critical thinking as an information consumer in the digital age.

  2. I could have made a more concise post using my best sarcasm in an imaginary conversation:

    ME: Do you use Wikipedia?
    THEM: Yes.
    ME: Have you ever found a mistake in Wikipedia?
    THEM: Not really, but they must be there so I don't let my students use it.
    ME: If you or one of your students found a mistake on Wikipedia, would you fix it?
    THEM: Probably not.
    ME: That's understandable. After all, who are you to impart your knowledge on the world? You're just a teacher, after all.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The 15-Year Blogoversary

15 years and 1,213 posts! My first experience with the World Wide Web came in 1995, and by 1997 I had my own web page. The first web authoring tool I remember using was Composer, an HTML editor built into the Netscape Communicator suite. That helped me learn some HTML, and later I used Microsoft Word 97 and then FrontPage 98 and later Macromedia Dreamweaver to design more elaborate pages. Some of my FrontPage-built sites are still on the web. As I learned more about HTML standards and validation I wrote more HTML by hand, but I still wanted a way to make publishing to the web easier.

By 2001 I understood that (a) sites should be updated regularly and (b) FTP'ing sites and pages from my desktop to a server was a bit of a pain. I had heard about some early blogging platforms and chose one, Blogger, to try out. As you can see, I'm still here.
My first post using Blogger came on December 8, 2001. A few months later I paid for Blogger Pro, which offered additional authoring tools, l… and Ten Years of Web 2.0

Ten years ago yesterday I scrobbled my first tracks to What's scrobbling? On, scrobbling refers to automatic music track logging to the internet. For me, uploading a record of my music listening habits was my first real experience with "Web 2.0." Remember Web 2.0? It referred to websites of user-generated content that enabled virtual communities and interoperability. Now such sites are too ubiquitous on the web to warrant a special designation — they're just the web. But that wasn't true in 2006, and even though I'd been putting content on the internet since 1996, at the time it was enough to make me a little nervous. What did these strangers want with my data, and what was in it for me?

Ten years and 24,941 scrobbles later, I have my answer: I have a really cool record of all the music I've listened to the past 10 years! Well, not "all," technically: I've certainly listened to music in places and on devices that didn't …

Why Eleanor Roosevelt Would Have Liked Google+

And why Google+ won't be replacing Twitter or Facebook for most of us anytime soon
"Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people."
-- Eleanor Roosevelt

I know too much already has been written about Google+ and its place in the world of social networking, but I've recently developed a new perspective which might help some of you who are trying to decide how and when to use Google+ versus Twitter or Facebook.

Eleanor might have said "small minds discuss people," but there's more than one way to discuss people and none of us are consistently small-minded. People are important, and the people who are most important to us are those with which we have mutual friendships or family relationships. This is why Facebook is best at people: it enforces (if we ignore fan pages) a symmetric follower model, ensuring that we are connected to people who want to also be connected to us. Those connections, often with people who we don&…