Usually most of my research is done for school purposes. So my primary source of information comes from the EBSCO Host because it is reliable, peer reviewed information. I have never used Wikipedia for reliable information. The only time I use Wikipedia is for a definition or brief overview of a topic. I do this to narrow my search so I can make my research more accurate. Wikipedia is never a site that I reference in my papers because I feel that most people would doubt the content of my paper if Wikipedia was a primary source for my research.
One of the strengths that the article “Wikipedia – Ban it or Boost it” claims is that Wikipedia is a great resource for current or ongoing events. I would have to agree with this statement, because books are easily outdated. However, since Wikipedia can be edited by anyone it is easy to slip in biases that might be difficult for students to see. As a teacher I would allow my students to use Wikipedia as a starting point. It would be a motivational tool to get them started on the research. However, I would not accept it as a final reference in a formal research paper.
As teachers we must teacher our students to do what we want them to do. Research is no different. As a future health and science teacher I will spend time teaching my students how to search the web for reliable facts. Since both health and science can be overwhelming to students, I will provide them with websites that will expand their knowledge. This will also help to prevent plagerism. It is my opinion that students often plageris because they do not understand the content that they are researching and they don’t have the tools to put the information in their own words.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Really? You wouldn't allow any sources from Wikipedia? I understand that you must regulate your students' research to make sure they are getting accurate information to write their papers, but I believe that there is valuable information on Wikipedia and to not allow any information from that source is too strict for me. I think we should use it in moderation, and in conjunction with other peer reviewed sources from more established sources.
ReplyDelete