Middlebury College: A Stand Against Wikipedia

Parent Cafe
101

<p>Nice, elegant full circle moment. Burke's use of the wiki entry on Malthus as a "navigational beacon" is good use of a valuable resource. It is also germane to this debate because its inclusion on the syllabus signals that this wiki article is a valuable point of reference for either a broad overview of Malthus' life and works as well as the debates generated by his work. It is important to note the wiki article also provides accessible quick links to primary sources available online such as Project Gutenberg's e-book collection. Fine - there really is no argument or debate there. Prof. Burke will, no doubt, expect that the information provided by wiki, or by any reference work, be subject to rigorous intense intellectual scrutiny such as any other source would be in a college level course such as this one. On his blog, Burke puts all this out in terms of "whats the big deal?" Which iterates the Middlebury profs surprise that they even had to take a "stand" on all of this in the first place.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I’d be just as distressed at reading a long research paper in my course that used the Encylopedia Britannica extensively. As a starting place, Wikipedia has an advantage over Brittanica, though: it covers more topics, is easier to access and use, and frankly often has a fairly good set of suggestions about where to look next.

[/quote]
</p>

102

<p>Well, Burke says its a starting point, but college research papers shouldn't rely on encyclopedia articles; and I said that I felt it was fine when my daughter cited it under the "works consulted" section of her paper, which was separate from the part she labeled "works cited", especially as the title of the article she consulted made it clear she was using it to check a collateral matter --- so I think Burke & I are pretty much saying the same thing. It has its place as a general starting point; it is not considered authoritative.</p>

103

<p>
[quote]
Prof. Burke will, no doubt, expect that the information provided by wiki, or by any reference work, be subject to rigorous intense intellectual scrutiny such as any other source would be in a college level course such as this one.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Absolutely. And this is why a blanket ban against the use of wikipedia entries seems to be overkill--as well as rather hypocritical. If profs make use of entries, why not students?</p>

<p>College research papers, as well as academic books include both primary and secondary sources. It would not do to cite an encyclopedia article as a primary source, nor as the source for quotes--as would be the case for secondary sources. Students should always go back to the original to make sure that the author of the secondary work did not distort the meaning of the original through selective quotations.
But for background information, such as key dates in Malthus' life, it should be fine. And it would be fine, as calmom's D did, to use it as a starting point for further reading.
A blanket ban against all encyclopedia articles should be just as silly as a blanket ban against all secondary sources.</p>

104

<p>Encyclopedias are generally categorized as teritiary sources, not secondary.</p>

<p>Calmom--by strict MLA convention, you only list the works you have "cited." Therefore, you wouldn't absolutely need a works consulted page, though I imagine many profs would see that as an interesting addition. Some profs might even modify convention to ask for a list of "works consulted." Otherwise, though, your D could have used Wiki as a jumping off point to find sources, then cited those sources. As long as none of the material in the paper was actually drawn from the Wiki article, there would be no reason to list it.</p>

105

<p>Well, I've seen dictionaries and encyclopedias listed.</p>

106

<p>
[quote]
But for background information, such as key dates in Malthus' life, it should be fine.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>For background information and key dates that are generally accepted to be accurate, verifiable, and as such are known through various sources- including tertiary sources - no citation would be necessary for a college level paper - although perhaps it would be in order for an elementary, middle-school or high school report that would put a premium on fact gathering and learning how to correctly use and cite different types of resources. If a date or some finer point was controversial then other primary or even solid secondary sources ought to be consulted and cited.This is the whole point of learning academic research skills. If a student consults wiki,or any authoritative peer reviewed encyclopedia available, follows through on links and other research avenues, consults primary and solidly researched secondary sources and discovers a significant contextual ambiguity or grounds to contest the information given - well, then they have been extremely well-educated and might even have discovered a valuable contribution to their field. (It costs nothing to dream a little here...) In any case, Middlebury's stand against wiki ought not to be construed to be a ban against using reference matierials - it is a stand to encourage students - and professors- to use them properly and to their best advantage.</p>

107

<p>Actually, for biographical information beyond Thomas Robert Malthus (1766-1834), citations should be provided, whether it comes from an encylopedia or a secondary source. </p>

<p>For Malthus' own ideas, his works (primary sources) should be cited. An encyclopedia entry will give a complete list and thus be used as a starting point for research.</p>

108

<p>For a college level research paper the basic guideline would be any and all material that is contentious, controversial, challenged or likely to be challenged needs a source. Otherwise, no citation is warranted. The works used or consulted should simply be duly noted in the bibliography, if a blbliography is required rather than list of sources cited. Of course, context and critical understanding of the research topic must be taken into consideration - if information is taken from a reference work that could be considered to be a primary source for ex. Voltaire's Philosophical Dictionary on a paper dealing with his influence on 18th century thought, then a citation might indeed be in order and an important addition to the content of the work.</p>

109

<p>I guess I could come up with a long list of what one "should" or "should not" use in a college research paper. But I think it is easy to lose sight of the larger picture. The vast majority of students, even at Swarthmore, are not going on for Ph.Ds. They aren't going to become college professors, or anything close. For the largest number of college students in the U.S., the B.A. (if they get it) is the terminal degree.</p>

<p>We want students to be able to think critically. We want them to have some notion about how to evaluate the sources of information that inform their beliefs. We want them to know how to find information in the world. We want them to be honest about what is their own, and what comes from someone else (although I think we go way overboard in that department, as about 90% of the thoughts we have in our head likely come from somewhere else!) We want them to be open to different points of view.</p>

<p>And we want them to be able to use information in ways that make them more effective in their vocational pursuits, and add to their quality of living. For the rest, eh! What's the big deal?</p>

110

<p>"We want students to be able to think critically. We want them to have some notion about how to evaluate the sources of information that inform their beliefs. We want them to know how to find information in the world. We want them to be honest about what is their own, and what comes from someone else... We want them to be open to different points of view." That is a pretty big deal - and worth taking a stand for if you ask me.</p>

111

<p>
[quote]
I guess I could come up with a long list of what one "should" or "should not" use in a college research paper. But I think it is easy to lose sight of the larger picture. The vast majority of students, even at Swarthmore, are not going on for Ph.Ds. They aren't going to become college professors, or anything close. For the largest number of college students in the U.S., the B.A. (if they get it) is the terminal degree.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Mini, say what? The larger picture is important but in this case the smaller one is crucial: how students learn to write on the college level and that means undergraduate, not Ph. D. Just take a quick look at just about any undergrad history department course website, college library resource center, or academic department writing guide, and you will find that critical thinking, academic writing and research skills that includes finding a scholarly voice - are all part of what professors at Middlebury and other undergrad institutions want students to come away with even if they never pursue a higher degree. In order to do this students and professors do have to be "on the same page" and agree to certain rules of engagement - many of which are pretty standard and include the proper use of encyclopedias as well as how to use footnotes/formal citations. It is fascinating how IT and Wikipedia has created so many new wrinkles in the rules of engagement:</p>

<p>The following is excerpted from the Bowdoin College Writing site:</p>

<p>
[quote]
A citation is the part of your paper that tells your reader where your source information came from. This is one of the most important elements to your paper... </p>

<p>Citations in history papers can take the form of footnotes or endnotes. History papers should not use the parenthetic citation style common to literature and social science papers..</p>

<p>In a research paper for history, you generally need not cite common knowledge. Common knowledge may be considered any information readily available in any encyclopedia. Common knowledge may be comprised of basic historical facts, such as dates of events and place names... </p>

<p>Arcane or debated facts of the past, however, need to be cited. These are not readily accessible facts, agreed upon by all. No one knows when exactly Jesus Christ lived, so if you include set dates for his birth and death, you need to cite the author who claims to know these things.</p>

<p>As this suggests, you must cite all information that constitutes another author's interpretations or arguments. Remember, the point of citation is to acknowledge the sources of ideas that are not your own, and to provide a path back through your research so other scholars can check your work. If you do not include citations, your reader cannot know where your ideas came from, and cannot check controversial statements you might make.</p>

<p>Matters of historical interpretation are particularly important to cite...</p>

<p>Remember to include a source citation every time you use the ideas or words of another author, either directly (through quotation) or indirectly (through paraphrase). The only exception is common factual knowledge of the variety found in encyclopedia.

[/quote]
</p>

<p><a href="http://academic.bowdoin.edu/WritingGuides/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://academic.bowdoin.edu/WritingGuides/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

112

<p>I'd like to propose a different response for colleges and universities teaching their students to do primary source research: have the students do a thorough research paper, revising after critiques, making sure to distinguish primary from secondary sources. Then after the paper is turned in for a course grade by the instructor, have the students use their original research and writing as a basis for posting new Wikipedia articles or updating old ones. That gives back to the broader community, and then the students will be able to observe first-hand, over time, what happens to their own contributions to Wikipedia and decide for themselves how strong its editorial controls are. (Similarly, students learn a lot more from submitting their papers for dead-tree publication than from just turning them in to their instructors.) Let's have more readers and writers who are trained in scholarly research and discourse interact with Wikipedia more--by adding content to it--rather than decrying the convenience of a massive hypertext reference guide.</p>

113

<p>I recently used wikipedia to look up information on the cotton gin. Much to my surprise porn star Ron Jeremy was credited with its invention. Just imagine a young student unfamiliar with his name copying from wiki and handing that in. I went back this morning and Eli Whitney has been restored, but a reference to his associate Peter North (another pornstar) remains. Talk about needing to use critical reading skills.</p>

114

<p>tokenadult, doesn't that sound a lot like citizendium?</p>

<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizendium#Nature_of_the_project%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizendium#Nature_of_the_project&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

115

<p>Ah, well. As a graduate student, I went to Harvard's Widener Library in search of sources for a term paper. I went into the stacks and found one book that seemed to suit my purpose. Next to it, was another book on the same topic (that's why I like going into bookstacks--serendipity). Alas, it turned out that the second book--someone's Ph.D. dissertation, had been plagiarized from beginning to end from the first book. Don't always trust what's written in black and white.</p>

116

<p>Was it Doris Kearns Goodwin? ;)</p>

117

<p>Nope. ;) It was someone from TX.</p>

118

<p>Middlebury College and profs probably got more than they bargained for with their stand on wiki and the fall-out continues - the NYT picks up the story:</p>

<p>
[quote]
When half a dozen students in Neil Waters' ason Mittell, an assistant professor of American studies and film and media culture at Middlebury, said he planned to take the pro-Wikipedia side in the campus debate. “The message that is being sent is that ultimately they see it as a threat to traditional knowledge,” he said. “I see it as an opportunity. What does that mean for traditional scholarship? Does traditional scholarship lose value?”</p>

<p>For his course “Media Technology and Cultural Change,” which began this month, Professor Mittell said he would require his students to create a Wikipedia entry as well as post a video on YouTube, create a podcast and produce a blog for the course.</p>

<p>Another Middlebury professor, Thomas Beyer, of the Russian department, said, “I guess I am not terribly impressed by anyone citing an encyclopedia as a reference point, but I am not against using it as a starting point.”</p>

<p>And yes, back at Wikipedia, the Jesuits are still credited as supporting the Shimabara Rebellion.

[/quote]
</p>

119

<p>here is the link to the NYT article:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/21/ed...=1&oref=slogin%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/21/ed...=1&oref=slogin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

120

<p>
[quote]
Middlebury College and profs probably got more than they bargained for...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This story has been picked up by nearly every domestic and numerous international news organizations, and is inspiring impassioned debate throughout the blogosphere. There's no such thing as bad publicity.</p>