As some of you might guess, I get mixed reactions whenever I reveal that I use Wikipedia in my history classes. And not just for reading; I actually assign my students to research and write an article for Wikipedia. And it has consistently been one of my most successful assignments. It shows students the difference between fact-only writing and analytical writing, it provides an introduction to research methods, and it gives them more insight into the working of Wikipedia, so they understand why they should or shouldn’t use it for various situations.
The Assignment
The assignment consists of two phases, each graded separately:
Phase 1: Students choose a topic related to history that either doesn’t have a substantial article already written about it, or a topic that is listed on the history stubs page on Wikipedia. Then, they research the topic and contribute ~500 words to the article. The article must include footnotes, and reference at least two published books, two external websites, and link to at least two other Wikipedia pages. Students must use proper formatting for footnotes, headings, lists, links and other content per Wikipedia formatting guidelines. They must also create a user account, and log in with that user account when editing. If an article’s history doesn’t include the user name they sent to me at the beginning of the semester, they don’t get credit. No exceptions.
Phase 2: After publishing, students must watch the article, see if anyone contributes or changes their article, and if so connect with these users. The goal here is to improve the article, either with others users or individually. If their article is flagged for deletion, students must work to make sure the article isn’t deleted. But, regardless of outcome, students must write a ~500 word reflection on what happened to their article, and how their ideas about Wikipedia had changed as a result of the article.
Notes on Process
Topics
Choosing a topic is fairly straight-forward. I always encourage students to find a topic that interests them, that’s relevant to their major, their job, or even hobbies. Students have written about various historical topics related to psychology, sociology, engineering, sports, art, and theater, to name a few. If students can’t come up with a topic, point them to the stubs page. There are thousands of stub articles to choose from, including United States history, history of science, and military history. All topics have to be approved by me before continuing the assignment. I usually require topics related to U.S. history because that’s my primary field of study, and will approve topics if I think there’s enough secondary and tertiary sources available to allow for an adequate article.
Research
The research process is, more or less, the same kind of research process you’d expect when assigning a short term paper. We discuss how to find resources on particular topics, how to brainstorm, create outlines, et cetera. I introduce students to the librarian on staff who’s relevant to their field of study or topic. (Often, this is the first time students are introduced to these very valuable folks.) Wikipedia also has policies about citation, so I make sure students read the policy on citing sources and verifiability. Additionally, I discuss uses of different kinds of sources, and Wikipedia’s preference for secondary and tertiary sources over primary sources. Students articles must not be original research.
Writing and Formatting
Probably the trickiest part of the assignment is showing students how to write for Wikipedia, particularly the way Wikipedia articles are formatted. We take one class period and review “How to Edit a Wikipedia Article,” particularly the formatting section. There’s a great tutorial and sandbox where students can practice formatting before working on their articles. I demonstrate on-screen how to do different kinds of formatting: footnotes, headings, unordred lists, ordered lists, internal and external links, and inserting an image. There is a useful cheatsheet that details formatting methods for specific content elements.
Publishing and Participating
Like I said earlier, the assignment doesn’t end once the article is published. After they publish the article, they must watch and participate in any change that takes place to their article, for good or ill. I show them specifically two sections of their article to watch:
- History page – I encourage students not to revert things immediately, but to take the time to look at changes, determine if they help or hurt the article, and take the appropriate action.
- Talk page – This is where community members talk about the article in question, offering suggestions for improvement or declaring reasons that the article is irrelevant and show be deleted. Its here that students have to defend their articles, or learn from other Wikipedians about how to improve their articles.
Not infrequently, someone’s article will be recommended for deletion, or their changes reverted. In these cases I show students how to interact with Wikipedia admins, review their deletion policy and the process by which they do deletion review. I’ve had several students’ articles get recommended for deletion, and the students justified their articles well enough to save them.
Why Assign a Wikipedia Article?
I have several reasons why I ask students to write an article for Wikipedia:
- Learn how to do research: A no-brainer here. The assignment involves some basic research and writing skills, a modest but substantial amount for a 100-level survey course.
- Demystify Wikipedia: Most people have preconceptions about Wikipedia, but very little experience actually reading AND writing an Wikipedia article. Fewer people have experience communicating with other Wikipedia users, particularly admins and editors. This, in turn, influences how they interact with others on various social sites and services. Moreover, students learn that not just anything can be published on Wikipedia, there are rules and policies in place for the content that gets to stay on Wikipedia.
- Learn the difference between fact-only writing and analytical writing: Most of my students have a difficult time understanding how to make an argument, how to differentiate between fact-based “reporting” and analysis. By actually being forced to write a “just the facts” report, they have been able to see the difference between the two.
As I said earlier, this assignment is consistently one of my most successful assignments. Students find a topic they’re interested in, research it, learn how to write for different audiences, learn how to use Wikipedia more efficiently, and understand when its good to use Wikipedia and when its not. Furthermore, they get experience with community and collaborative writing, and can take those skills with them and use them long after the course is finished. It does take a bit of work on my part, to make sure students understand the assignment and the technology involved, but in my opinion its completely worth the effort. Its certainly much more meaningful to have students contribute to a larger, more public body of knowledge than to write a term paper for me that will get thrown away at the end of the semester. If this assignment can produce some good articles on Wikipedia, and gets students talking to others and learning outside of class, I consider it a success.
A++++!
Seriously, this is an amazing assignment. I’m working on a similar curriculum for english as a second language students in Afghanistan (where I’m at). Rather than have them translate boring and meaningless text from lesson plans, have them translate wikipedia articles into their own language.
It hasn’t been implemented yet, a lot of other things are higher priority, but sometime in the next couple months.
I knew you did this assignment, and I have wondered how you pull it off, and I really appreciate your deconstructing it for our benefit so we can see “behind the scenes” how and why it works. Recently I had students imagine they were writing a short Wikipedia article on an exam question as a way to define the term. I assumed (wrongly) that since they use Wikipedia so much, they would recognize what makes a good entry and that they would have assimilated its basic form. No, and no. We will be doing some meta-talk in class about what makes a good Wikipedia entry, why they consider it such an indispensable resource but what it does AND DOESN’T do… etc. I am considering adding an assignment like yours to another class I’m putting together and this is really helpful to me.
Can you point to an article that was written by you or one of your students, as an example?
Really glad everyone’s liking this! I’d love to hear from anyone using this or doing something similar in class.
Tona: A great example is Living Newspaper by former student (and now CHNM employee) Lara Harmon. Its changed a bit since then, and I think Lara contributed to it well after class. This was, I believe, a stub article until Lara added significantly to it.
[...] the other hand, we have Jeremy Boggs of George Mason University in America. His tactic is to have students actually contribute a well-researched article to Wikipedia, and then observe how it grows and changes over the remainder of the term. This time, the aim is to [...]
[...] One historian shares his Wikipedia-based writing assignment. The full document is there, from instructions to assessment. Handouts for Wikipedia formatting and style are also included. I actually assign my students to research and write an article for Wikipedia. And it has consistently been one of my most successful assignments. It shows students the difference between fact-only writing and analytical writing, it provides an introduction to research methods, and it gives them more insight into the working of Wikipedia, so they understand why they should or shouldn’t use it for various situations. Posted by balexander on Tuesday, April 7, 2009, at 10:33 am. Filed under Pedagogy, Tools. Tagged Pedagogy, wiki. Follow any responses to this post with its comments RSS feed. You can post a comment or trackback from your blog. [...]
[...] an example of a sequence of writing assignments using Wikipedia for a US History survey course from Jeremy Boggs (Creative Lead at the Center for History and New Media and PhD student in [...]
What a fantastic use of collaborative technologies! As I was reading through the description of your assignment, I wondered why you instruct students to choose to contribute to a page on Wikipedia that is relatively underdeveloped. What would you anticipate would be the impact of asking them to edit an already well developed page?
And when you mention that it has been one of your most popular assignments, how do you measure the popularity?
Another question about timings – how long do students have to work on the assignment? Translation: how long does the online community have to respond to their contributions? Have you found that feedback from other wiki contributors is fast?
Your effort to induct students into the process of writing and formatting for Wikipedia is so vital. Have you found that your colleagues have been as receptive to trying out this type of activity with their own students? Have you found those less comfortable with the technology shying away from trying it out with their students precisely because of this induction component of the teaching?
I think it’s fair to say that you could easily add one more reason to your list of why you assign a Wikipedia article: Learn how to use wikis to collaborate with others. It may sound simplistic, but so many approaches to teaching at the higher education level assume that students are technology-fluent and there is no need to teach them how any of it works (as is evidenced by Tona’s comment). Very often, teachers shy away from trying out an assignment such as this one simply because they don’t want to expose their novice abilities in using technologies to their students (perhaps a Sage on the Stage complex…). These sorts of skills are becoming more and more essential, and the more we can ensure that students learn how to use them with respect and to a high standard, the better off everyone will be.
I do that mainly to get students to write something substantial on their own…around ~500 words, that isn’t covered already. Students could certainly contribute that much to a well-developed article, but I’ve found that to be rare. Plus, a lot of students have trouble coming up with a topic, so using the stubs page is a good way to help them choose.
Certainly one thing about editing a larger article that I would anticipate is, as you conclude in your comment, the opportunity to collaborate with lots of other users. This would really happen with articles that already have a large number of users.
No specific measurements; Just that a lot of my student-reviews at the end of the semester say that this was a great assignment.
Generally they have about 6-8 weeks to find a topic, research it, and write the article, so by mid-semester they have their article published on Wikipedia. The second half of the semester is for community feedback and interaction, so about 6-8 weeks there.
Great stuff! I’ve emailed some Wikipedia mailing lists pointing them to this.
Massive collaboration is *hard*. But once you get the idea, it’s fantastic fun – particularly for the public good, as Wikipedia is.
This is great, and another brilliant example of how an education system can – or rather should – give back to the surrounding supporting community.
If you want another example of use of wikis in education, here’s two – and if you drop me a line I can put you in touch with the professor responsible.
First up, the English Wikipedia’s 2,000th featured article. Yep, this was written as a student project for credit. There is a real potential to push people to share what they learn in an accessible way.
Whether or not this *really* is the 2,000th article could be debated. Several were promoted to that status at the same time. However, it was rather convenient to pick this as the nominal 2,000th. The professor in question actually edited in his answers for the interview.
Wikipedia is not the only way to work on a collaborative model.
Wiritng a new article is less daunting, and much more a “level field” than adding substantially to an existing, comprehensive, article. One can much more readily see their input, and the risk of encountering the occasional existing editor who has already formed views, or may not be so supportive of a newcomer, is virtually non-existant for a new or “stub” article.
By comparison, as virgin territory, new articles are wide open, and contributions are gladly welcomed.
(In other words, for educational purposes and for a student class exercise, there’s specific value in asking them to originate something, rather than improve someone elses existing work.)
I have to say kudos for designing a project that really “gets it”. Getting students to expand existing articles rather than starting their own is very smart. But the “phase 2″ part of the project is the really brilliant part. It’s that follow-up that will help them really understand how Wikipedia works. Well done!!
[...] Bir tarixchi Wikipedia bilan yozish(writing) vazifalarini berishligi to’g’risida fikrlari bilan almashdi. Barcha maqola yozish uchun kerakli ko’rsatmalar beriladi, vazifa topshiriladi va shu bilan birga Wikipedia formati va stillari haqida yordamchi qog’ozlar ham topshiriladi. Uning fikrini esa quyidagicha: Men studentlarimga Wikipedia uchun research olib borish va maqolalar yozish vazifasini topshiraman. Va bu mening eng foydali vazifalarimdan biri bo’lib qolmoqda. Bu studentlarga fakt orqali yondashilgan yozish va analitik yozish farqlarini ko’ra olish qobiliyatini, research usullariga kirish yo’llanmasini va Wikipediada qanday qilib maqola yozishligi to’g’risida axborot beradi. Shuning uchun ular qanday vaziyatlarda uni ishlatish yo ishlatmaslik kerakligini tushunmoqdalar. [...]
[...] initiative wiki digne de mention, celle-là dans le milieu de l’éducation. Alors, voici un projet intéressant imaginé par un certain Jeremy, qui termine actuellement ses études de Doctorat à la Georges [...]
[...] Kurs am Institut für Medienwissenschaften an der Universität Basel angeboten. Über seine eigene Variation dieser Idee berichtet eremy Boggs in seinem Weblog Clioweb. Boggs geht wie folgt vor. Er lässt [...]
[...] to take on the bete noire – Wikipedia. In his undergraduate American History Survey course, he assigns students to not just use, but create, Wikipedia articles, including citating sources, monitoring for follow-up collaboration, and writing a reflective [...]
[...] The latest issue of Perspectives from the American Historical Association focuses on history and new media. One article in particular is relevant to our class this coming Wednesday: Kevin Sheets, “Wiki in the History Classroom.”. If you have time, take a look at it before class. If you’re interested in how I’ve used Wikipedia in my undergraduate courses, check out a post I wrote in April on assigning a Wikipedia article. [...]