I looked at a rough draft of the beginning of a paper my grandson

[Obamanaut]

is preparing for a writing assignment for his English class. One of the sources he is citing is Wikipedia. I asked if the instructor really allows that as a credible source, and the answer was "Uh, everybody uses it. Why?"

Our schools are so screwn.

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

1. turn it onto a teaching moment!

This would be a great opportunity to discuss information bias in the media and the move away from fact to opinion in modern American culture!

[adamuu]

34. hehe figure out what articles he'll likely look at, and edit them :) n/t

[TicketyBoo]

2. I would say that Wikipedia

is a good place to start for research, but nothing should be quoted directly from it as a source.

[JuniperLea]

6. Exactly... it's a decent information aggregate...

But it in itself is too riddled with bogus information. Best to rely on the sources they note... or not:)

[rucky]

3. Wikipedia is okay if you use it right...

Only use cited material, and follow the citations to their source

[DrDan]

4. would you have felt more comfortable had he sourced a hardback release from

ann coulter, sarah palin, bill o'reilly, sean hannity, rush limbaugh, dick morris, karl rove, etc?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

11. The choice isn't "unreliable encyclopedia" or "unreliable book"

Good lord...learning which sources were acceptable and which were not was one of the first things they used to teach in school.

[DrDan]

14. my point exactly

Good Lord.

There are bogus sources everywhere - on-line and in print. Wikipedia has it's place - but it's limitations always need to be kept in mind. I would think it's use depends a good deal on the topic of the paper. For example, if a bio of some celebrity, then more valid than a serious research project. Also, what grade level is the student? Perhaps the paper was on the ills of internet sourcing. We know nothing of the context of the paper.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

16. But the OP is not discouraging use of the internet, but of Wikipedia.

What you are suggesting is that saying Glenn Beck's book is a poor source for historical information is like saying books are a poor source for information.

And no, not even for celebrity bios should Wikipedia be used as a source. It can be a great starting point but it should not be a source.

[DrDan]

19. we know absolutely nothing re the context or level of the paper

This might be a paper for a 6th grade class. (I say this knowing full well you will still find fault. oh well)

and how do you know what the OP is suggesting? Is Wikipdedia any better or any worse than any other Internet source?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

22. Sixth graders should know which sources are acceptable.

And yes, Wikipedia is worse than many internet sources. It can be edited by anyone.

[DrDan]

26. and internet sources can be authored by anyone

[SemiCharmedQuark]

28. Well obviously you shouldn't cite someone's blog.

Internet sources should be government websites, etc.

[DrDan]

29. private businesses and corporations?

Can their web sites be used?

How about all the downloading of literature by colleges and universities? Is that a worthy source?

"etc" just doesn't cut it. It is a complex issue.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

30. Depends on what your topic is. But wikipedia is NEVER valid.

The content is always has the potential to change and is subject to people on the internet.

[DrDan]

36. not unlike everything else on the internet . . .

[DrDan]

27. and I would agree with that . . . and it is up to the teacher to make it clear

I teach at the graduate level. I know what I accept and make it clear. However, I would never be so presumptuous as to dictate the guidelines for others. Perhaps this is an elementary student - I have never taught at this level so am not aware of the expectations relative to sources.

[JackRiddler]

35. Wikipedia is not a source at all.

Think of it as an annotated search engine. You might find everything you're looking for. But you must check sources, follow all statements or facts back to their originators, use multiple sources and apply criticical reasoning to all sources. For wikipedia, remember a) anyone can come along and edit an article, anonymously, and b) on controversial questions, the consensus of busiest editors wins. The latter is no way to find truth.

It's very reliable for subjects like Battlestar Galactica or LOLcats, however.

PS - Prior to Internet, even Encyclopedia Britannica was not considered a source for college-level research, though it's acceptable for a middle school paper.

[DrDan]

37. exactly the point I was making . . . we do not know the grade level of this paper

ANYTHING on the internet should be questioned - not only Wikipedia

[Obamanaut]

40. High School. Tenth grade. nt

[JackRiddler]

45. Anything on the Web should be questioned, true, however, keeping in mind...

that the Web is much like the library. Insofar as it's electronic or scanned you can find academic articles, professional journals, local archives, college course material, census databases, newspapers, magazines, tabloids, many books, oral histories, photo libraries, etc., as well as everyone's personal site or diary ("blog"). It's a matter of knowing how to distinguish between the sources and using the evaluative methodology appropriate to each type of source.

[DrDan]

48. exactly - just another medium - care should be taken

[Obamanaut]

15. Good point. nt

[Posteritatis]

24. Mmmm, excluded middle. (nt)

[Brickbat]

5. Pff. That's nothing. When I was working at the newspaper, I had to beg supervisors to remind the

reporters and copy editors that Wikipedia is not an acceptable, quotable source.

[LiberalFighter]

7. That would be a good inclusion in a LTTE to challenge the reputation of any reporter.

[Recursion]

8. No encyclopedia is supposed to be used as a source

Wiki is an encyclopedia. Like any encyclopedia. you start your research there, and use it to find the works that you do cite.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

9. Someone in my women's studies class last year used Wikipedia.

I wasn't even allowed to use REAL encyclopedias as sources from grade school through high school. It was so ingrained in me that encyclopedias were not acceptable that I never even attempted to use them in college. I was absolutely appalled.

[anigbrowl]

18. I think you need to distinguish between 'used' and 'cited'

It's a fantastic resource and overall an extremely well-curated one. As long as you are aware of the difference between 'resource' and 'source', it's not a problem :-)

[SemiCharmedQuark]

23. You're right. I meant cited. As in, he used it in his presentation. "According to Wikipedia.."

I have no problem with using it as a baseline to start your research. But it should never appear on a Works Cited page.

[AllentownJake]

10. The internet has been both a boost

and a menace for getting good information.

Of course I come from the last of students that had to use Microfiche. I can still remember the smell from the microfiche printing machine.

[fauxnewsSUCKKKS]

12. isnt that where faux news gets their reports from? lol

[Quantess]

13. It's a starting point, but if you're going to cite sources, then no,

Wikipedia shouldn't be acceptable in and of itself as a source.

I assume he's in junior high or older? If he's in grade school, it's not so bad to do that.

[BolivarianHero]

17. Wikipedia isn't horrible...

I never cite it in my university papers, though I do use it as a base for doing more in-depth research. As long as you avoid controversial topics, it can be useful. It's the first place I look for election results, particularly in non-English countries.

If I were a teacher or a professor, I would not accept it in my students' papers, but I would be willing to work with students who used it as part of their preliminary research.

[raccoon]

20. Is this a public school? Maybe the parents bellyached until the teachers backed down.

And the administration probably wouldn't back them up.

Remember that plagiarism business in KS a few years ago?

Teacher flunked a bunch of students for plagiarism, parents bellyached until admin. told teacher to back down. She quit.

[Statistical]

21. Teach him.

1) Use wiki to find a starting point.
2) Show him the cites at the bottom of the page.
3) Explain how she should use wiki to find sources and then reference the original sources.

He will be well ahead of his peers.

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. Wiki is a good place to find OTHER sources to start research

but yes, kids are using it... like they used to use the American Encyclopedia, or any other encyclopedia.

Some articles on WIki are very good... some not so much.

By the way, they must be doing something right... after all it is a liberal website... didn't you know?

Why we have Conservapedia.

[Paul_D]

32. My kids can't use it as a source

Everytime my kids have a report of any type, they always say Wikipedia can't be used as a source. There are so many other places that can be so it isn't much of a loss. Of course, the only place I had to do my research was Encyclopedias. No internet (at least as it is now) when I was in school.

[nadinbrzezinski]

33. Tell your kids to go all the way to the bottom

most wiki articles have books and articles where they got their info. That is why it is a launching point...

I have found that in some subjects those biblographies are pretty good and valuable, as a STARTING POINT

And welcome to DU.

[JVS]

47. I wouldn't allow it from any student, for one simple reason.

Wikipedia experiences editing that makes it entirely possible that the information cited by the student will no longer be there in the future. One of the reason's for documentation is so that the readers of a paper can assemble the information that you've looked at, examine it themselves, and judge for themselves whether you've dealt with the information in an intellectually honest and intelligent manner. If your citations don't make it possible to re-assemble your data (and not just at time of writing, but long into the future), then you're not doing things right. This applies to things like newspapers too. If you can get the paper online, bully for you, but unless you are certain that the newspaper has long term digital archives (a lot of old links die), you should make sure that you can point your reader to the printed version that is gathering dust in a research library.

[Toucano]

31. As long as the Wikipedia article has cited sources, it is valid. n-t

[DrDan]

38. no - it can be verified (or not) via the cited sources - but that does not make it valid

[Posteritatis]

49. Von Daniken's books have citations, too. (nt)

[MadHound]

39. Why are you using one example, of one rough draft

To indict the entire education system. I'm in teaching, and none of the school districts around here allow the use of Wikipedia as a source for anything. These students don't pick up the use of Wiki from their teachers, but rather their parents, siblings and peers.

So again, why are you using this example to blast the whole education system?

[Obamanaut]

41. Because it appears it is acceptable. And this is a public high school

near the bottom of the list (performance, not alphabetically) in counties in the state.

[MadHound]

42. But again, you are using one example, from one school, to blast the entire education system

Faulty logic there, real faulty logic.

[Obamanaut]

43. We talk here about NCLB and it's evil ways. We speak poorly of

teaching how to color bubbles for an assessment test, and how that takes time away from teaching real stuff.

We read about teachers who use their own money for classroom supplies, and how budget constraints have adversely affected entire districts.

We gnash our teeth and pull our hair over school vouchers, charter schools, church schools, etc.

Yes, we talk, read, gnash, and pull right here on DU about those very items.

But you are absolutely correct. One pitiful example of a high school class assignment that allows a source such as wikipedia to be acceptable, and my hands are up in despair. Perish the thought I should think we have a problem, even with the examples mentiones above.

The Patrick Swayze character in "Road House" said, "Opinions vary." Quite true.

[MadHound]

44. First off, have you talked with the teacher?

Have you found out if using Wiki is acceptable to the teacher?

I've found that kids try to slip in lots of sources of questionable veracity. Teachers generally catch them, that's one of the reasons that they have kids do a rough draft.

I'm willing to bet that the teacher will take a look at the Wiki source and call your grandchild on it. But hey, it's much more fun to scream about schools being screwn based on the rough draft of one paper:eyes:

[Obamanaut]

46. You're right again. Screaming about this one little thing and all

this other stuff staring us in the face.

How heretical of me to presume to think there could be something wrong with the system (refer back to the reading, speaking, talking, etc in the earlier post)

At a school board meeting, one of the board members stated that in our district 25% of the adult males over the age of 25 are barely literate.

Our district has a 70% HS graduation rate. The district to the north of us is much better at almost 71%.

But I imagine you are right, and I am wrong. But the statistics here seem to lean in my direction.