Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/University of Southern California/AMST 140 Borderlands in a Global Context (Spring 2018)
| This Course
|
Wikipedia Resources
|
Connect
Questions? Ask us:
contact |
 | This course page is an automatically-updated version of the main course page at dashboard.wikiedu.org. Please do not edit this page directly; any changes will be overwritten the next time the main course page gets updated. |
- Course name
- AMST 140 Borderlands in a Global Context
- Institution
- University of Southern California
- Instructor
- David-James Gonzales
- Wikipedia Expert
- Ian (Wiki Ed)
- Subject
- American Studies & Ethnicity
- Course dates
- 2018-01-08 00:00:00 UTC – 2018-05-09 23:59:59 UTC
- Approximate number of student editors
- 70
We will critically examine the social and political conflicts that arise and the challenges that migration poses to the ways in which national membership is established, public policy towards migrants is made, and the nation is imagined using the metaphor of border and borderlands to explore these issues. Connecting the past to the present, we will explore current activism on indigenous sovereignty, migrant rights, and transnational labor.
Students will be assigned to work in groups of 2-3 persons to research, draft, edit, and publish a Wikipedia article on a topic, event, or contemporary/historical figure related to the content covered throughout the course. This will be a cumulative full term assignment that will be used in lieu of a final exam. Students will be allocated one 50 min. class period each week (discussion section - 13 in total) to work on assignments in their groups. Based on how well students manage in-class group work, additional group meetings may be necessary outside of class.
The overall goal of this project is to facilitate the application of knowledge and skills developed through course activities beyond the confines of the classroom and university. In short, students will become informed producers of knowledge, not just consumers.
Timeline
Week 2
- Course meetings
-
- Friday, 19 January 2018
- In class - Introduction to the Wikipedia project
Welcome to your Wikipedia project's course timeline. This page will guide you through the Wikipedia project for your course. Be sure to check with your instructor to see if there are other pages you should be following as well.
This page breaks down writing a Wikipedia article into a series of steps, or milestones. These steps include online trainings to help you get started on Wikipedia.
Your course has also been assigned a Wikipedia Expert. Check your Talk page for notes from them. You can also reach them through the "Get Help" button on this page.
To get started, please review the following handouts:
- Editing Wikipedia pages 1–5
- Evaluating Wikipedia
- Assignment - Get started on Wikipedia
- Create an account and join this course page, using the enrollment link your instructor sent you.
- It's time to dive into Wikipedia. Below, you'll find the first set of online trainings you'll need to take. New modules will appear on this timeline as you get to new milestones. Be sure to check back and complete them! Incomplete trainings will be reflected in your grade.
- When you finish the trainings, practice by introducing yourself to a classmate on that classmate’s Talk page.
- Finally, we introduce Intertwine, a video conferencing tool where you can will create your own User page and User Talk Page with peer editors enrolled in other courses. Sign up for a sessionhere or using the Intertwine training module below.
- Milestones
This week, everyone should have a Wikipedia account.
Week 3
- Course meetings
-
- Monday, 22 January 2018 | Wednesday, 24 January 2018 | Friday, 26 January 2018
- Assignment - Evaluate Wikipedia
It's time to think critically about Wikipedia articles. You'll evaluate a Wikipedia article related to the course and leave suggestions for improving it on the article's Talk page.
- Complete the "Evaluating Articles and Sources" training (linked below).
- Create a section in your sandbox titled "Article evaluation" where you'll leave notes about your observations and learnings.
- Choose an article on Wikipedia related to your course to read and evaluate. As you read, consider the following questions (but don't feel limited to these):
- Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
- Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
- Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
- Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
- Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
- Optional: Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback with four tildes — ~~~~.
- In class - Discussion
- What's a content gap?
Now that you're thinking about what makes a "good" Wikipedia article, consider some additional questions.
- Wikipedians often talk about "content gaps." What do you think a content gap is, and what are some possible ways to identify them?
- What are some reasons a content gap might arise? What are some ways to remedy them?
- Does it matter who writes Wikipedia?
- What does it mean to be "unbiased" on Wikipedia? How is that different, or similar, to your own definition of "bias"?
Week 4
- Course meetings
-
- Monday, 29 January 2018 | Wednesday, 31 January 2018 | Friday, 2 February 2018
- Assignment - Add to an article
Familiarize yourself with editing Wikipedia by adding a citation to an article. There are two ways you can do this:
- Add 1-2 sentences to a course-related article, and cite that statement to a reliable source, as you learned in the online training.
- TheCitation Hunt tool shows unreferenced statements from articles. First, evaluate whether the statement in question is true! An uncited statement could just be lacking a reference or it could be inaccurate or misleading. Reliable sources on the subject will help you choose whether to add it or correct the statement.
- Again, we introduce Intertwine, a video conferencing tool where you will do an hour-long edit-a-thon to improve a fun Wikipedia article with peer editors enrolled in other courses. Sign up for a session here using the Intertwine training module below.
- Assignment - Copyedit an article
Choose an article. Read through it, thinking about ways to improve the language, such as fixing grammatical mistakes. Then, make the appropriate changes. You don’t need to contribute new information to the article.
Week 5
- Course meetings
-
- Monday, 5 February 2018 | Wednesday, 7 February 2018 | Friday, 9 February 2018
- In class - Discussion
- Thinking about sources and plagiarism
- Blog posts and press releases are considered poor sources of reliable information. Why?
- What are some reasons you might not want to use a company's website as the main source of information about that company?
- What is the difference between a copyright violation and plagiarism?
- What are some good techniques to avoid close paraphrasing and plagiarism?
- Best practices for working in groups
- Once your group has a Wikipedia article to work on, make sure everyone in the group is assigned to that article on the Students tab of this course page.
- Select one group member whose Sandbox space you'll all share to draft your article. (It will be titled something like User:Diderot/sandbox.) Each person should link to that shared Sandbox from their own Sandbox page. A sandbox is like any other page on Wikipedia, and anyone can edit it.
- Wikipedia doesn't handle multiple people editing from different devices at the same time very well. If you're working together in person, one person should add the work to the Sandbox. If you are all working independently, make small edits and save often to avoid "editing conflicts" with classmates. Make sure that you're logged in under your own Wikipedia account while editing in your classmate's sandbox to ensure your edits are recorded.
- Don't create a group account for your project. Group accounts are prohibited.
- Assignment - Choose possible topics
- Review page 6 of your Editing Wikipedia guidebook.
- Look up 3-5 potential topics related to the course that you might want to update on Wikipedia. Review the content of the article and check the Talk page to see what other Wikipedians are already contributing. Identify one or two areas from each that you could improve.
- Choose 2-3 potential articles from that list that you can tackle, and post links to the articles and your notes about what you might improve in your sandbox.
- Finally, present your choices to your instructor for feedback.
Week 6
- Course meetings
-
- Monday, 12 February 2018 | Wednesday, 14 February 2018 | Friday, 16 February 2018
- Assignment - Finalize your topic / Find your sources
- On the Students tab, assign your chosen topic to yourself.
- In your sandbox, write a few sentences about what you plan to contribute to the selected article.
- Think back to when you did an article critique. What can you add? Post some of your ideas to the article's talk page, too.
- Compile a list of relevant, reliable books, journal articles, or other sources. Post that bibliography to the talk page of the article you'll be working on, and in your sandbox. Make sure to check in on the Talk page to see if anyone has advice on your bibliography.
- Guide(s) for writing articles in your topic area
Week 7
- Course meetings
-
- Monday, 19 February 2018 | Wednesday, 21 February 2018 | Friday, 23 February 2018
- Assignment - Annotated Bibliography
Guidelines for Annotated Bibliography for Wikipedia
Objective: This is an opportunity to begin significant research on your Wikipedia interventions by finding those sources and material that will help you build the citations that will provide the documentation for your article.
Annotated Bibliography: In preparation for their Wikipedia contributions, students will present an annotated bibliography that includes at least 10 verifiable sources (15 for groups of 3) related to their topic. These can include journal articles, book chapters, newspaper accounts, and documentaries. Your annotations should include both broad general texts that provide the historical, geographic, or contextual framing for your Wiki article and more specific articles that focus directly on your topic. Each entry in the Annotated Bibliography should be about 2-3 sentences long and include a description of the source and about how you are going to use it in Wiki articles. In your annotated bibliography you can already begin paraphrasing those points that you want to make using this source. The assignment will be graded based on the range and quality of the sources cited, the strength and clarity of the writing, and the creativity and resourcefulness used to track down pertinent citations. Each topic will be different, but here are some things to consider:
Quality of Sources: The better your sources, the more credible your Wikipedia article. The highest quality sources are those that come from academic books and academic journals—academic books are published by University Presses, and academic articles are peer-reviewed. The next level would be popular books, magazines, and newspapers, and finally, the least reliable are web pages and blogs. Even here there are differences—the Human Rights Watch is a much better source for Human Rights than a random page by an unknown author. Always aim to use the highest quality of sources you can find.
Context: In considering what sort of things to include, think about the larger historical, cultural, or geographic context of your topic, these might not specifically mention your subject but can help provide the background to establish their significance or importance. For general context, academic books and academic journal articles are best to establish the grounding and significance of your topic. Sources will generally come from databases like J-Stor, Project MUSE, LexisNexis (for Law), and google scholar. But you will also need to seek out sources that directly speak about your topic, and for these, you may need to look harder, including in local newspapers, independent films, and other more obscure sources.
Grading Criteria for Annotated Bibliography
Things I will look for in sources:
· A wide range of appropriate sources: a mix of books, articles, newspapers
· The scholarly value of the sources used
· Sources that suggest that you have considered several aspects of the topic
· Extra consideration will be given to sources that are particularly unusual, creative, or difficult to find.
Things I will look for in annotations:
· How focused are they relative to your project?
· How well are you able to describe the relevance of the source to your project?
· How insightful is your understanding of the ideas presented?
· How effectively are the annotations written in terms of style and grammar?
Grading Grid
A (90-100) An excellent range of substantive and high-quality sources that work well together to illuminate a topic in compelling ways. The sources demonstrate advanced research skills, tenacity in seeking out obscure sources, and familiarity with assessing the value of diverse sources. The annotations are well written and illustrate an understanding of the significance of the relevant issues and how they might be applied to the final Wikipedia entry.
B (80-89) A good range of sources that work together to construct a solid research foundation for a topic. Overall the annotations demonstrate a clear understanding of the issues involved. This assignment may have benefited from one or more of the following: greater use of high quality sources; more specific and targeted sources that directly address your topic; more creativity or perseverance seeking out useful sources; greater clarity in presenting the larger relevant issues; greater attention to existing Wikipedia sources to avoid duplication; greater attention to grammar, punctuation and proofreading.
C (70-79) The assignment has an identifiable topic and demonstrates evidence of some independent research. This assignment would have benefited from one or more of the following: more high quality sources; more specific and targeted sources that directly address your topic; clearer focus on the larger context and relevance of your topic; more attention to connecting your annotations to your project; greater analysis or thought in terms of understanding the larger context; more attention to existing Wikipedia sources to avoid duplication; considerably greater attention to writing, grammar and proofreading.
D (60-70) The assignment does not evidence meaningful research or consideration of the issues. This assignment is lacking in several significant areas including quality of research; clarity of annotations; focus; grammar and proofreading.
F (59 or less) The minimum requirements of the assignment were not met.
Week 8
- Course meetings
-
- Monday, 26 February 2018 | Wednesday, 28 February 2018 | Friday, 2 March 2018
- Assignment - Begin Drafting your article
You've picked a topic and found your sources. Now it's time to start writing.
Creating a new article?
- Write an outline of that topic in the form of a standard Wikipedia article's "lead section." Write it in your sandbox.
- A "lead" section is not a traditional introduction. It should summarize, very briefly, what the rest of the article will say in detail. The first paragraph should include important, broad facts about the subject. A good example is Ada Lovelace. See Editing Wikipedia page 9 for more ideas.
Keep reading your sources, too, as you prepare to write the body of the article.
Resources: Editing Wikipedia pages 7–9
- Milestones
Everyone has begun writing their article drafts.
Week 9
- Course meetings
-
- Monday, 5 March 2018 | Wednesday, 7 March 2018 | Friday, 9 March 2018
- In class - Discussion
- Thinking about Wikipedia
- What do you think of Wikipedia's definition of "neutrality"?
- What are the impacts and limits of Wikipedia as a source of information?
- On Wikipedia, all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. What kinds of sources does this exclude? Can you think of any problems that might create?
- If Wikipedia was written 100 years ago, how might its content (and contributors) be different? What about 100 years from now?
- Milestones
Every student has finished reviewing their assigned articles, making sure that every article has been reviewed.
Week 10
- Course meetings
-
- Monday, 19 March 2018 | Wednesday, 21 March 2018 | Friday, 23 March 2018
- Assignment - Expand your draft
- Keep working on transforming your article into a complete first draft. Get draft ready for peer-review.
- If you'd like a Wikipedia Expert to review your draft, now is the time! Click the "Get Help" button in your sandbox to request notes.
- Assignment - Peer review and copy edit
- First, take the "Peer Review" online training.
- Select two classmates’ articles that you will peer review and copyedit. On the Articles tab, find the articles that you want to review, and then assign them to yourself in the Review column.
- Peer review your classmates' drafts. Leave suggestions on on the Talk page of the article, or sandbox, that your fellow student is working on. Other editors may be reviewing your work, so look for their comments! Be sure to acknowledge feedback from other Wikipedians.
- As you review, make spelling, grammar, and other adjustments. Pay attention to the tone of the article. Is it encyclopedic?
- Not only your classmates, but also a broader group of Wikipedia student editors can benefit from peer review! Here, we introduce Intertwine one more time. You will do an hour-long peer review session with peers from other courses. Sign up for a sessionhere using the Intertwine training module below.
Week 11
- Course meetings
-
- Monday, 26 March 2018 | Wednesday, 28 March 2018 | Friday, 30 March 2018
- Assignment - Respond to your peer review
You probably have some feedback from other students and possibly other Wikipedians. It's time to work with that feedback to improve your article!
- Read Editing Wikipedia pages 12 and 14.
- Return to your draft or article and think about the suggestions. Decide which ones to start implementing. Reach out to your instructor or your Wikipedia Expert if you have any questions.
Week 12
- Course meetings
-
- Monday, 2 April 2018 | Wednesday, 4 April 2018 | Friday, 6 April 2018
- Assignment - Begin moving your work to Wikipedia
Once you've made improvements to your article based on peer review feedback, it's time to move your work to Wikipedia proper - the "mainspace."
Editing an existing article?
- NEVER copy and paste your draft of an article over the entire article. Instead, edit small sections at a time.
- Copy your edits into the article. Make many small edits, saving each time, and leaving an edit summary. Never replace more than one to two sentences without saving!
- Be sure to copy text from your sandbox while the sandbox page is in 'Edit' mode. This ensures that the formatting is transferred correctly.
Creating a new article?
- Read Editing Wikipedia page 13, and follow those steps to move your article from your Sandbox to Mainspace.
- You can also review the [[../../../training/students/sandboxes|Sandboxes and Mainspace]] online training.
- Assignment - Continue improving your article
Do additional research and writing to make further improvements to your article, based on suggestions and your own critique.
- Read Editing Wikipedia page 12 to see how to create links from your article to others, and from other articles to your own. Try to link to 3–5 articles, and link to your article from 2–3 other articles.
- Consider adding an image to your article. Wikipedia has strict rules about what media can be added, so make sure to take Contributing Images and Media Files training before you upload an image.
Week 13
- Course meetings
-
- Monday, 9 April 2018 | Wednesday, 11 April 2018 | Friday, 13 April 2018
- Assignment - Polish your work
Continue to expand and improve your work, and format your article to match Wikipedia's tone and standards. Remember to contact your Wikipedia Expert at any time if you need further help!
- Assignment - Prepare for in-class presentation
- Prepare for an in-class presentation about your Wikipedia editing experience.
Week 14
- Course meetings
-
- Monday, 16 April 2018 | Wednesday, 18 April 2018 | Friday, 20 April 2018
- Milestones
Everyone should have finished all of the work they'll do on Wikipedia, and be ready for grading.
- Assignment - Final article
See blackboard for details and upload instructions.
- Assignment - In-class presentation
Our remaining MWF lecture meetings will feature the work you’ve done this semester in regard to the group Wikipedia article project. Presentations will begin this Monday, April 16. Every group must come prepared to present. I will call on groups at random. We will cover approximately 5 groups per day, except Friday April 20 since I’ll be out of town.
Details:
- all group members must be present (individual group members absent will not receive refit if they miss/don’t participate.
- presentations will be 7 min. of you speaking plus 2 extra minutes for Q&A
- presentations must address: 1) why you chose the topic; 2) who did what; 3) how topic relates to our class; and 4) what you learned
- your Wikipedia will be projected on the screen for you to discuss and for the class to view (hence make sure your article is published and accessible on Wikipedi)
Week 15
- Course meetings
-
- Monday, 23 April 2018 | Wednesday, 25 April 2018 | Friday, 27 April 2018
- Assignment - Reflective essay
Wikipedia Reflection Paper
(3-4 double-spaced pages, 12pt. font, 1-inch margins)
Use this prompt as a template for answering each question.
I. Individual Contributions & Learning Goals
Please describe your contribution to Wikipedia in detail. Specifically, explain in detail how your article (new or addition to existing) contributes to the collective knowledge of the public via the Wikipedia community. Also, describe how your article relates to the content, questions, discussions, themes, and debates surrounding the concept of the North American Borderlands.
Also discuss, what obstacles and challenges did this project present, and how did you go about addressing them? This is a place to outline any particular efforts that you made to research your topic, track down material, engage with other Wikipedia editors, etc.
What insights did you gain about Wikipedia, yourself, or the research process?
II. Collaboration, Self-Assessment:
Collaborating with others is an important aspect of this project. Please think about and rate your own contributions to collaboration, using a scale of 1-5 where 5 indicates exceptional contributions, and 1 indicates insufficient contributions.
Attendance and participation in group meetings:
Follow-through on tasks:
Contributing to collective ideas on group presentation (be specific):
Contributing to execution of group presentation, this can include preparing PowerPoint, compiling handouts, writing outline, etc.: Rate yourself and detail your contribution:
Additional contributions to others in or out of your group (editing, proofreading, translation, sharing materials, etc):
Contributing to collective ideas on Wikipedia article(s)(If you were the sole author of a page write N/A but mention any edits you might have made to the pages of other students if applicable):
Contributions to research efforts (be specific about any extra efforts in research):
III. Collaboration, Assessing Others:
Name those you collaborated with and rank their contributions (copy and paste the grading grid for each member of the group). Assign each fellow student a number 1-5 for each area. These are confidential assessments.
Name of Group Member:
Attendance and participation in group meetings:
Follow-through on tasks:
Contributing to collective ideas on group presentation (be specific):
Contributing to collective ideas on Wikipedia article(s) (be specific): (Write N/A if not applicable)
Contributions to research efforts (be specific about any extra efforts in research):
Contributing to execution of group presentation, this can include preparing PowerPoint, compiling handouts, writing outline, etc.: Rate each group member and detail their contribution:
Did you receive any assistance from another class member that you want to recognize?: