When a Japanese history professor looked at his exams, he noticed that several of his Middlebury College students provided the same mistaken answer.
He wondered about the cause of the misinformation but found an answer when his students shared their common source: Wikipedia.
In February 2007, the history department banned students from citing or supporting their points with Wikipedia.
The instance at Middlebury College shows how Wikipedia is forcing students and universities to reconsider digital sources. The online encyclopedia-and its inaccuracies-are created and edited by individual users, placing the website at the center of an academic debate over user-created content.
Dr. Richard Piper, Dana Professor of political science, sees Wikipedia as a two-pronged problem. It is an encyclopedia, providing only summary information, but the site also contains errors since almost anyone can update an entry.
“I have found factual errors concerning topics that I’ve assigned in class. For the most part, I’ve found it pretty accurate. I discourage its use even though students use it without citing it as a source.”
UT history professors see Wikipedia errors as less of a concern but still worry that Wikipedia provides only summary information.
Dr. Bob Kerstein, chair of the Government, History and Sociology department, says students’ Wikipedia use is not a significant problem.
“Students use it to some degree, but I have never had a student rely on it heavily. They may cite it once or twice, but I say it shouldn’t be relied upon.”
“I tell [students] not to rely upon [Wikipedia] when they do cite it,” Kerstein says. While he does not forbid the use of Wikipedia, he says he needs to do more research about the online encyclopedia.
Students agree that Wikipedia is not an appropriate source.
Raymond Braaf, a junior history major, uses Wikipedia to confirm a date or a name but does not use it as a primary source because unlike a scholarly journal, there are no editors to check facts and make changes other than users.
Jorge Acosta, junior History major, says that he uses Wikipedia for everyday information but as far as citing on a paper, he understands that professors don’t allow it because there are too many articles to have to check over just to make sure every piece of information is accurate.
The Government, History and Sociology department does not plan a ban but acknowledges that any ban would be made with an understanding that students will still use Wikipedia as a convenient and fast source.
Dr. Mike Donnelly, director of first-year writing, says, “Students are too quick to go it. They are often looking for the quick and easy answer. For them it answers questions that for [professors] require more substantial research.”
Donnelly says that only two or three times a semester does he encounter Wikipedia and usually in definitions, which students should analyze in research not just repeat.
Teresa Grettano, a visiting instructor of Composition and Rhetoric, sees Wikipedia as a more complex problem than students using it or not.
“Wikipedia gets really complicated because in composition and rhetoric courses students are taught to write for an audience outside the classroom while also being prepared to write in the academic discourse communities. The academic discourse communities won’t respect Wikipedia, but the outside audiences will.”
She suggests students use Wikipedia as a guide to see respected names and links to other sources in the field but then insists students must check the other sources.
A central issue in first-year writing is teaching students to evaluate sources, Donnelly says. Wikipedia might be acceptable in casual writing, such as a letter to the editor, but not in academic writing, he says.
Grettano, who researches media literacy, says, “If you’re lucky, universities and academic systems are only 10 years behind technology and theories of technology.”
Wikipedia has the potential to offer more than the typical encyclopedia.
“As Wikipedia becomes more used the way it was meant to be used, it will become as accepted as any other encyclopedias but with the option to go more in depth than an encyclopedia because of links and other research,” Grettano says.
The popularity of Wikipedia also reflects a trend in American culture about the democratization of information by comping it in short forms such as bulleted lists and subheads which make information more quickly readable. The result is that critical thinking skills are declining, Grettano says.
“Part of a university education is supposed to teach different perspectives through multiple voices and mediums. If students use just Wikipedia, there are limitations.”
Wikipedia’s popularity among students represent a different response to the media than the previous generation of students, Grettano says.
“For students, Wikipedia is an established brand like Google. These students know that the media is unreliable and things are corrupt, pushing an agenda, but they don’t see anything wrong with that.”
She cites the popularity of Fox News’ focus on conservative politics and entertainment as an example of the media in a consumer culture where if a person does not like the agenda being pushed then that person can change the television channel or read a different magazine.
Wikipedia may not be discouraged in academia for much longer. Grettano compares academia’s disapproval of Wikipedia to when newspapers were considered unreliable and not allowed in scholarly research.
Newspapers are accepted now, and Grettano says Wikipedia will be accepted once the site is used more as it was intended-to be edited and refereed by the informed, including graduate students and professionals-and provides links to connect for further research.
______________
Top Wikipedia Errors
David Beckham played goalkeeper for China in the 18th Century.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair was accused of having Hitler pictures in his room when he was a teenager and starting a fake war against Saddam Hussein.
Comedian Sinbad reportedly died of a heart attack. He is still alive today.
___________________________
Questions to analyze content
Is the writer politically biased or pushing an agenda?
Does the writer have a degree or significant research in the field?
If the information seems unbelievable, then you probably shouldn’t believe it without confirming from another reliable source.