Wikiality meets Academia

I’ll come right out and say it – I’m a Wikipedia skeptic, though I must confess I am a closet-clicker for those quick-hits that help you to win a trivia bet (so Olivia DeHavilland is still alive, but she’s not the oldest living cast member of GWTW – but I found that out on IMDB, the second greatest bet settler on the Internet).

That’s why I was so intrigued to hear about Martha Groom’s new term paper for her students. Instead of writing a term paper , she had them write Wikipedia entries.

The history buff in me nearly choked with flashbacks to Stephen Colbert changing the entries for George Washington. Imagine it – freshman around the world could be polluting cyberspace with their own version of information.

But maybe there are a few lessons in this lesson, for Ms. Groom’s students and for all of us.

Lesson number one is the oldest on the Internet – you can’t treat Wikipedia (and most of the Internet, really) as a reliable source. Ms. Groom’s A+ student probably wrote a stellar entry, but should we assume other students did the same? I don’t doubt that Ms. Groom’s students tried their best, but the fact remains that when it comes to serious research, most college students are amateurs. Sites like Wikipedia may be useful for resolving dead-or-alive conflicts, but should be considered only nominally for serious research.

The second lesson is that if you’re going to post your own user-generated content on the Internet, you’ll be prepared to defend it (I’m already lifting weights to defend myself against the coming onslaught of Wikipedia lovers). There were some comments posted about the students’ entries, some which Groom admits, were less than pleasant. On your traditional term paper, a mistake results in a red-pen swipe by your professor. On the Internet, it may bring on the wrath of angry legions (or worse yet, seen by no one).