|
View the edtech Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in edtech's September 2005 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] View the Next Message in edtech's September 2005 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] Visit the edtech home page.
I've been surprised at some of the responses to this question, since they suggest a somewhat muddy notion obaut "reliable" sources. Recently, on another list, the topic of Wikipedia cam up and a number of instructors all said they used it for background lecture material. For my undergraduate students, Wikipedia is a good source as a beginning for doing research on a topic. But like any encyclopedia, it is just a starting point, and should NEVER be cited--certainly not by graduate students! Isn't that the type of thing we learned in high school? The advantage to Wikipedia is that it is very current, and has such a broad feedback mechanism. Even online encyclopedias like Encarta can get out of date fast, and only have a limited number of editors to check facts, interpretations, etc. On the minus side, the quality is more uneven than Encarta, etc. Shouldn't the question be, when is Wikipedia (or any source) useful? When is it appropriate? The context should determine the answer to both of those questions. Michael Goldberg University of Washington, Bothell --- Edtech Archives, posting guidelines and other information are at: http://www.h-net.msu.edu/~edweb Please include your name, email address, and school or professional affiliation in each posting. To unsubscribe send the following command to: LISTSERV@H-NET.MSU.EDU SIGNOFF EDTECH
 Humanities & Social Sciences Online 
|