User:Debnugent

Using Wikis to Promote Collaborative Learning

<font=blue>NOTE: To make edits to this site, simply click on "edit" at the top of your screen and add your thoughts about the pros/cons of Wikis. Also, please add your name to the end of your addition so I know who contributed to our wonderful Wiki site.

One of the strengths of Wiki pages is the ability to collaborate on a single document, without having to keep tabs on how many "versions" of the document exist.

In a learning environment, students can work together to create a project that is available to everyone around the world. Let's consider this option. A Spanish class in America wants to collaborate with an English Class in Spain on the benefits of being bilingual. By creating a Wiki page, the students, despite being an ocean apart, can work together to create a site that everyone has access to. This is a great example of how technology in the classroom can enhance the learning environment.

It's unfortunate that this wealth of knowledge cannot always be used as a credible reference when researching for educational purposes. Anyone can edit the text, therefore the reader cannot tell if it comes from an expert or a novice.

While it is true that wikis should be used with caution, they are remarkably reliable and vandalism free. This is due to the workings of the wiki community. When this community is functioning well, the content of the wiki improves with time. When changes are made, the community reacts. Therefore, false information, typos, vandalism, etc. are quickly removed or rectified. For this reason, wiki pages expand and change all the time. The same tools that make wikis open to vandalism and corruption provide a quick and easy means to eradicate it.

It is important to know that all wikis are not completely open for all to view and edit. Wikis used by many institutions of higher ed, offer students a secure and controlled wiki environment where they can collaborate with fellow classmates on projects. They are not wide open to the entire World Wide Web like Wikipedia is thought to be. Yes, most of Wikipedia content is open for viewing and editing, but not all.

Comedian Steven Colbert once created chaos when he encouraged fans that due to the fact that "anyone can edit Wikipedia", they should all "edit the elephant page." This comedic stunt resulted in the page being vandalized beyond recognition, and henceforth being shut down for a substantial period of time. [Anson Loveday]

Many Wikis are brief, but others are long and thorough. Some topics even have their own independent "Wiki". That is to say, a Wikipedia-like website dedicated just to that topic and anything that falls within its group.[Anson Loveday]

I think that the pros of Wikis are that it fosters collaboration among those who normally would not be able to closely collaborate. Being able to use this site to share information and ideas is beneficial. I think that the only con to this type of page is that it could be reviewed and edited by anyone with internet access. But I agree with the information above, that through time, information posted to these sites can become much stronger with time. No matter how you look at it, as long as the people who read these understand that anyone can edit, the pro's outweigh the cons. Mandie Hibbard

Working in an elementary school computer lab it's amazing how the students think that Wikipedia is gospel! Many times a year we discuss how these pages can be edited and the content may not be reliable or factual enough to use for school research. Wikipedia however is a great resource and often times have links embedded within a page that is very valuable. Karen Crowley

Karen, I have to say, before this class I thought wikipedia was gospel too. I was told once that any site that had org at the end of it was reliable. I guess not. I can see how Wikipedias could be usefull, such as with a collaborative study in which the participants are not together. As long as these participants were the only ones editing I think it could be very beneficial. Bonnie Houghton

This is really great! I had no idea about the avaliable educational technoligies or how easy they are to obtain. I thought things like wikis and blogs were shrouded with mystery and you had to know alot of technical stuff to acces them. This would have been very helpfull in my last class where we had to do a group project. It was really hard to make any real contribution with out the other members getting upset because I wasnt sure what they were working on and what they wanted from me. Shannon Huffman

I find the information that Wikis are reliable interesting as all of the courses I have taken here at GSC prohibit use of Wiki pages as references. I was always so disappointed to hear this considering that all the primary and elementary schools that I am associated with encourage their students to use Wikipedia as a working encyclopedia. I must also say that when searching for academic information about any topic on the web, a Wiki page is always available and one of the first resources that comes up. Sarah Major

First, Wikis are a great place to look up a definition when you are unsure of a term or concept. Despite the fact they are not cit-able for scholarly work, they can start a path of research to valid scholarly works, if the user follows the links that are cited on the page. If you consider that most people that post to a Wiki want to share their knowledge with the public, that is a fairly positive motivation, and there are bound to be good references. As Karen said above, the community will take care of vandalism unless it is a large scale attack. I always find good material when I follow links from Wikis. Use a Wiki with discretion and common sense.

Second, I love the idea of collaborative online work, but also find assigned groups hard to work with through email and course messages. A Wiki page with a few guidlines would go a long way towards helping these groups work towards success instead of frustration. Some of the guidelines might be to not delete content, but enclose it in square brackets, curly braces, or asterisks. Then the gropu could decide towards the end of the project what was most valid, but this method would not invalidate anyone if used with grace.

Third, a group of learners could invite experts to their Wiki where the expert could contribute. This could be without elaborate permissions from institutional educational platforms. If we are to move forward in technology and education we have to start considering non-traditional approaches to learning, like not isolating the classroom with the instructor in complete control. Imagine the learning possibilities! Cathy T.