Wikipedia distresses History Department
Brian Fung
Issue date: 1/24/07 Section: News
- Page 1 of 2 next >
Faculty members of the College's Department of History recently passed a resolution forbidding students from using online interactive encyclopedia Wikipedia for academic assignments. The motion was passed unanimously on Tuesday, Jan. 9 after brief debate and is expected to take effect in February.
Kawashima Professor of Japanese Studies Neil Waters, who grew increasingly concerned with the reliability of the online encyclopedia after students began to cite it on essays and final exams, developed the new policy.
"Students are responsible for the accuracy of the information they give," said Waters. "They can't say, 'I saw it on Wikipedia and therefore that shields me.'"
The departmental statement, which was initially drafted by Waters, also forbids students from including Wikipedia in lists of bibliographic sources.
"Wikipedia is not an acceptable citation," the motion reads, "even though it may lead one to a citable source."
The popularity of online research tools has grown rapidly in recent years. Like most successful Internet ventures, Wikipedia relies on the greater online community for its existence and support.
The Web site employs software that allows multiple individuals to edit the same text, much like the strategy used to develop open-source programming code. A typical encyclopedia entry begins with a brief skeletal outline of a topic, provided by Wikipedia itself. Users then contribute additional information to the entry, which is subject to further updates by other so-called "Wikipedians."
"Wikipedia is constantly being adapted and shaped and cut by people who are weighing in on what they know about a topic," said Assistant Professor of History Amy Morsman. "It's very democratic, and it's very dangerous in that way."
Because of the communal and largely anonymous nature of the Internet, however, scholars have brought into question the strength of Wikipedia's authority from its beginning in 2001.
Kawashima Professor of Japanese Studies Neil Waters, who grew increasingly concerned with the reliability of the online encyclopedia after students began to cite it on essays and final exams, developed the new policy.
"Students are responsible for the accuracy of the information they give," said Waters. "They can't say, 'I saw it on Wikipedia and therefore that shields me.'"
The departmental statement, which was initially drafted by Waters, also forbids students from including Wikipedia in lists of bibliographic sources.
"Wikipedia is not an acceptable citation," the motion reads, "even though it may lead one to a citable source."
The popularity of online research tools has grown rapidly in recent years. Like most successful Internet ventures, Wikipedia relies on the greater online community for its existence and support.
The Web site employs software that allows multiple individuals to edit the same text, much like the strategy used to develop open-source programming code. A typical encyclopedia entry begins with a brief skeletal outline of a topic, provided by Wikipedia itself. Users then contribute additional information to the entry, which is subject to further updates by other so-called "Wikipedians."
"Wikipedia is constantly being adapted and shaped and cut by people who are weighing in on what they know about a topic," said Assistant Professor of History Amy Morsman. "It's very democratic, and it's very dangerous in that way."
Because of the communal and largely anonymous nature of the Internet, however, scholars have brought into question the strength of Wikipedia's authority from its beginning in 2001.
Viewing Comments 1 - 7 of 7
a
posted 1/25/07 @ 3:17 PM EST
"A typical encyclopedia entry begins with a brief skeletal outline of a topic, provided by Wikipedia itself." No, it's written by people just like the rest of the article is. (Continued…)
Brenda Ellis
posted 1/26/07 @ 9:01 AM EST
Students, you can find background information from online library reference sources by typing go/eref in your browser address bar or go directly to http://www. (Continued…)
ConcernedStudent
posted 1/26/07 @ 11:16 AM EST
While I strongly agree that Wikipedia has not been accepted by the academic community due to its free and open nature and any student who pays attention should know this, I take issue with this article and the resolution. (Continued…)
AnAlum
posted 1/27/07 @ 12:09 PM EST
Concerned Student, that was awesome. You should resubmit that as an opinion to the Campus. I agree wholeheartedly with you. A lot of the time, Wikipedia is the most accurate online research tool available. (Continued…)
David Haglund
posted 1/28/07 @ 10:11 PM EST
This is interesting. I am a big fan of wikipedia and like to work on the site myself when I can. As such I can attest that there is a lot of excellent information on it, as well as a good deal of crap. (Continued…)
Larry Welkowitz
posted 1/30/07 @ 1:56 PM EST
I think the History Department protests too much! As a Professor of Psychology (at Keene State College in New Hampshire) I have taken the opposite position of the Middlebury History Department: I require my students to make contributions to the Wikipedia in Psychology. (Continued…)
Peter Galamaga
posted 2/16/07 @ 12:16 PM EST
Are you telling me that Middlebury is only NOW realizing that Internet citations are often problematic?????
Post a Comment