While in High School teachers preached over and over how unreliable Wikipedia was and in many cases it was forbidden as a potential source in research-based writing assignments. Although I understood completely that the basis of their argument was because of the changeability of Wikipedia, it always bothered me that we were completely forbidden to use the site as a tool.
I think Purdy makes some really good points. As I read his article I began to realize that all of the arguments he is making about Wikipedia, are the exact reasons I've always felt compelled to use it against instruction from teachers in the past. I believe that my peers and I have grown up in a cyber-age different from that of the generation before us and the use of online articles and Wikipedia in the research-writing process are valuable tools that need to be utilized. Yes, I understand that using Wikipedia as a main source without comparing and contrasting it to other articles wouldn't be good source of information, however, the same can be said for any other encyclopedia. I agree with Purdy's argument in this area.
We can learn a great deal about research-based writing through Wikipedia processes. For example, Purdy suggests that during the reviewing process of writing looking over the discussion section about your topic on WIkipedia can help you to see different view points individuals have about the topic and it can also help you to decide what your argument willbe for your writing. The discussion board is also helpful because it allows you to converse about the topic and to force you to think outside ofyour usual comfort zone about an issue or topic. The idea is to see yourself as a participant with a voice in the conversation. Purdy then goes on to suggest that one way to use Wikipedia to help with revising a course assignment is to post a change to a Wikipedia article based on a draft you are writing, see how others respond and analyze those responses.
No comments:
Post a Comment