Improving Wikipedia: educational opportunity and professional responsibility

From WikiLit
Jump to: navigation, search
Publication (help)
Improving Wikipedia: educational opportunity and professional responsibility
Authors: Kristine L. Callis, Lindsey R. Christ, Julian Resasco, David W. Armitage, Jeremy D. Ash, Timothy T. Caughlin, Sharon F. Clemmensen, Stella M. Copeland, Timothy J. Fullman, Ryan L. Lynch, Charley Olson, Raya A. Pruner, Ernane H.M. Vieira-Neto, Raneve West-Singh, Emilio M. Bruna [edit item]
Citation: Trends in ecology & evolution 24 (4): 177-179. 2009 April.
Publication type: Journal article
Peer-reviewed: Yes
Database(s):
DOI: Define doi.
Google Scholar cites: Citations
Link(s): Paper link
Added by Wikilit team: Added on initial load
Search
Article: Google Scholar BASE PubMed
Other scholarly wikis: AcaWiki Brede Wiki WikiPapers
Web search: Bing Google Yahoo!Google PDF
Other:
Services
Format: BibTeX
Improving Wikipedia: educational opportunity and professional responsibility is a publication by Kristine L. Callis, Lindsey R. Christ, Julian Resasco, David W. Armitage, Jeremy D. Ash, Timothy T. Caughlin, Sharon F. Clemmensen, Stella M. Copeland, Timothy J. Fullman, Ryan L. Lynch, Charley Olson, Raya A. Pruner, Ernane H.M. Vieira-Neto, Raneve West-Singh, Emilio M. Bruna.


[edit] Abstract

The rise of user-generated Internet content (i.e. ‘Web 2.0’) has resulted in dramatic changes in the way that scientific information is collected and disseminated. One notable example is Wikipedia (http://www.wikipedia.org), the user-written online encyclopedia with millions of users worldwide. In the 7 years since its inception it has become a staple of the academic community, increasingly used by faculty and students to develop lectures and study aids, research topics for papers and as a source of background information while studying or conducting research.

[edit] Research questions

"As part of a graduate seminar on plant–animal interactions, we set out to assess the quality and content of Wikipedia entries with an ecological focus. To do so, we critiqued entries on five major categories of plant–animal interactions: frugivory, herbivory, pollination, granivory and seed dispersal."

Research details

Topics: Student contribution [edit item]
Domains: Biology [edit item]
Theory type: Analysis [edit item]
Wikipedia coverage: Main topic [edit item]
Theories: [edit item]
Research design: Content analysis [edit item]
Data source: Wikipedia pages [edit item]
Collected data time dimension: Cross-sectional [edit item]
Unit of analysis: Article [edit item]
Wikipedia data extraction: Live Wikipedia [edit item]
Wikipedia page type: Article, Article:talk [edit item]
Wikipedia language: Not specified [edit item]

[edit] Conclusion

"We believe users of Wikipedia seeking information on ecological topics should continue to approach these entries critically, and strongly encourage readers to refer to the ‘Article Rating’ and other tools available on the ‘Discussion’ tab for assessing and discussing entry quality. With Wikipedia and other online sources of information increasingly at the nexus of science and society, we also argue researchers in ecology and evolutionary biology can and should play an active role in improving the quality of these entries [6]. Although we recognize that the time, professional incentives and public recognition for doing so are limited, we believe that improvements to this now ubiquitous reference source are particularly important given the increasingly public debates on ecological and evolutionary topics. The revision of Wikipedia entries can easily be incorporated into undergraduate and graduate courses, the service activities of student organizations, laboratory meetings, extension programs and the annual meetings of professional societies. It could even become part of publishing articles in peer-reviewed journals. For example, RNA News now requires that authors submitting manuscripts to one section of the journal include a Wikipedia entry for peer review that is uploaded upon the manuscript's acceptance [7]. Activities such as these could greatly enhance the quality of scientific information available to a global audience, increase the diversity of participants in the process of disseminating this information, create mechanisms by which to gain formal recognition for doing so and provide opportunities to develop the public outreach and education skills encouraged by funding agencies, professional organizations and universities [8]."

[edit] Comments


Further notes[edit]

PR: http://www.cell.com/trends/ecology-evolution/authors

Facts about "Improving Wikipedia: educational opportunity and professional responsibility"RDF feed
AbstractThe rise of user-generated Internet contenThe rise of user-generated Internet content (i.e. ‘Web 2.0’) has resulted in dramatic changes in the way that scientific information is collected and disseminated. One notable example is Wikipedia (http://www.wikipedia.org), the user-written online encyclopedia with millions of users worldwide. In the 7 years since its inception it has become a staple of the academic community, increasingly used by faculty and students to develop lectures and study aids, research topics for papers and as a source of background information while studying or conducting research.ion while studying or conducting research.
Added by wikilit teamAdded on initial load +
Collected data time dimensionCross-sectional +
ConclusionWe believe users of Wikipedia seeking infoWe believe users of Wikipedia seeking information on ecological topics should continue to approach these entries critically, and strongly encourage readers to refer to the ‘Article Rating’ and other tools available on the ‘Discussion’ tab for assessing and discussing entry quality. With Wikipedia and other online sources of information increasingly at the nexus of science and society, we also argue researchers in ecology and evolutionary biology can and should play an active role in improving the quality of these entries [6]. Although we recognize that the time, professional incentives and public recognition for doing so are limited, we believe that improvements to this now ubiquitous reference source are particularly important given the increasingly public debates on ecological and evolutionary topics. The revision of Wikipedia entries can easily be incorporated into undergraduate and graduate courses, the service activities of student organizations, laboratory meetings, extension programs and the annual meetings of professional societies. It could even become part of publishing articles in peer-reviewed journals. For example, RNA News now requires that authors submitting manuscripts to one section of the journal include a Wikipedia entry for peer review that is uploaded upon the manuscript's acceptance [7]. Activities such as these could greatly enhance the quality of scientific information available to a global audience, increase the diversity of participants in the process of disseminating this information, create mechanisms by which to gain formal recognition for doing so and provide opportunities to develop the public outreach and education skills encouraged by funding agencies, professional organizations and universities [8].sional organizations and universities [8].
Data sourceWikipedia pages +
Google scholar urlhttp://scholar.google.com/scholar?ie=UTF-8&q=%22Improving%2BWikipedia%3A%2Beducational%2Bopportunity%2Band%2Bprofessional%2Bresponsibility%22 +
Has authorKristine L. Callis +, Lindsey R. Christ +, Julian Resasco +, David W. Armitage +, Jeremy D. Ash +, Timothy T. Caughlin +, Sharon F. Clemmensen +, Stella M. Copeland +, Timothy J. Fullman +, Ryan L. Lynch +, Charley Olson +, Raya A. Pruner +, Ernane H.M. Vieira-Neto +, Raneve West-Singh + and Emilio M. Bruna +
Has domainBiology +
Has topicStudent contribution +
Issue4 +
MonthApril +
Pages177-179 +
Peer reviewedYes +
Publication typeJournal article +
Published inTrends in ecology & evolution +
Research designContent analysis +
Research questionsAs part of a graduate seminar on plant–aniAs part of a graduate seminar on plant–animal interactions, we set out to assess the quality and content of Wikipedia entries with an ecological focus. To do so, we critiqued entries on five major categories of plant–animal interactions: frugivory, herbivory, pollination, granivory and seed dispersal.pollination, granivory and seed dispersal.
Revid10,816 +
Theory typeAnalysis +
TitleImproving Wikipedia: educational opportunity and professional responsibility
Unit of analysisArticle +
Urlhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169534709000548 +
Volume24 +
Wikipedia coverageMain topic +
Wikipedia data extractionLive Wikipedia +
Wikipedia languageNot specified +
Wikipedia page typeArticle + and Article:talk +
Year2009 +