So I just read the article for Friday's class on Google and Wikipedia and while it did raise some concerns over their overwhelming I still feel that they can be an invaluable tool for us as teachers. I can't think of any two sights that I use more often to gather information (my personal favorite is when I use google to find something on wikipedia), so it would be a tad hypocritical of me to steer my students away from doing the same.
Just today I used google when a more scholarly search engine (failed to produce results). There was an article I had looked up earlier that I couldn't find after 10 minutes searching on Eric, after 10 seconds with google I was led to the article with no problem. The same goes with wikipedia, even today in class Pat used wikipedia to tell us something more about the subject.
I plan on telling students that wikipedia are great starting off points but because of their inherent weaknesses they can't be used as formal references on any assignments. But who am I to limit somebody's curiosity just because their first source for information isn't peer reviewed. I'll just be glad if they're interested enough in a subject I'm teaching to look into it and investigate outside of the classroom. And as for formal reports and assignments it can still lead them to better sources.
The end.
Hi, Sean -- Have you tried Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com)? We librarian-types call it a federated search because you can search across multiple scholarly databases. Pretty amazing way to search. When you find what you want, you can get it by authenticating with your library/university credentials.
ReplyDeleteYou raise a great point about "peer-reviewed." Some ed tech people would ask, "How do you define peer?" :)
Definitely all food for thought for tomorrow's Resource Marathon!
It is true how google and wikipedia make it so easy to find out random information. I also love how you stated that you search google for random topics and end up at wikipedia. Whenever I do that I always wish I just started with wikipedia.
ReplyDeleteAgreed about smart use of wikipedia! Wikipedia is the dark secret every college student hides: we all use it but so many people deny it. You seem to advocate a fair and responsible use for it. I also like that you take the position that you shouldn't discourage students' desire to increase knowledge, even if it is peer reviewed. I think the challenge for us teachers is to make clear why wikipedia can be used for basic learning/ideas, but not for real research.
ReplyDeleteHey Sean, I really like your point about how Wikipedia is dismiss because it is not peer reviewed. However, several times I researched a topic by reading articles and books,and have found that most of the information is in Wikipedia and is the exact same. Similarly Wikipedia is sometimes dismissed as being to much of an overview of a topic, yet so many textbooks (particularly at the secondary level) are simply overviews of a topic. Just a thought.
ReplyDeleteLove the title of your blog, Sean; Educating Klavers. Just wanted to tell you I had the same experience with Google. Knew the title, author, journal, everything, for an article, but couldn't find it on either ERIC or Ed Abstracts. Found it immediately by means of a Google search, and was actually able to pull it up as a PDF right from the search results. Not some shlock piece either, Harvard. IMHO, there is almost no illegitimate means when it comes to finding and accessing information. Whatever works and saves time.
ReplyDelete