The reference tool students use most
March 21, 2010 by Jacob HawleyPosted in: Academics, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views
Find out how many students consider this database a go-to site for academic research.
Over half of college students say they frequently or always consult peer-edited Wikipedia for course-related research, while only 22% say they rarely or never use the site.
The findings, based on 2,318 student responses, were published in First Monday, an online, peer-reviewed journal.
The top reason: More than 82% reported using Wikipedia to obtain background information or a summary about a subject. Or, as one student in the study put it, “Wikipedia tells me what’s what.”
Students also reported using the site because it:
- helped them get started (76%)
- was an easy to use interface (69%), and
- explained meanings of terms or language used about certain topics (67%).
Those majoring in architecture, engineering or science were the most likely users, while students who consulted with librarians were less likely to use the site.
However, most students can tell the difference between easy access and credibility – only 17% said they thought Wikipedia was more credible than other Web sites.
How do students use Wikipedia on your campus? Let us know in the comments section.
HigherEdMorning delivers the latest HigherEd news once a week to the inboxes of over 200,000 HigherEd professionals.
Click here to sign up and start your FREE subscription to HigherEdMorning!
Tags: student research, Wikipedia use
Loading ...
March 25th, 2010 at 2:41 pm
To see what kinds of things are in the bibliography and for any esoteric keywords that they might not have thought of when doing searches in the commerical databases
March 25th, 2010 at 2:56 pm
Our students are no different and definitely go to Wikipedia for information. We try to get them to see it as a general overview of their subject and use the bibliography as a means of finding more credible resources, not as THE source for their query. I’d have to say that Google seems to have edged out Wikipedia for information gathering, in my experience.
March 25th, 2010 at 6:52 pm
Earlham students are sometimes asked to update wikipedia entries as a class assignment. For instance, in Prof. Lori Watson’s Inorganic Chemistry class, students are required to enlarge a stub entry for an inorganic compound, using primary chemical literature are their sources of information. These journal articles are identified by searches using SciFinder Scholar.
March 25th, 2010 at 7:15 pm
At least in our department it is NOT allowed as an approved reference source. I take points off for any reference. I also require students to submit a “source validation page” in which they have to list the credentials of any author referenced in their papers. I do tell students how I use Wikipedia to get a general overview of the topic and to follow links to more credible information on the web or elsewhere. I say that it is good for general knowledge, but it is not credible enough for the rigors of academic writing. I point out that, even though most errors in Wikipedia are corrected in a few days, if the student accesses the article between the time that the error is posted and the time it is corrected, then they have included false information in their papers. One fact error is enough in academic work to call all their conclusions and reasoning into question. But I am teaching students how to evaluate evidence, reason from that evidence and write or speak from that reasoning in a rational manner.
March 25th, 2010 at 7:23 pm
What I would like to see are faculty more involved in the peer review and cleaning up of some articles. This would not only enhance the quality of the site but also help ensure students get accurate information.
March 26th, 2010 at 9:19 am
My best example of how useful Wikipedia can be happened a few years ago after a conference on Victorian Literature. Authors and scholars were discussing the life of Natalie Clifford Barney, an interesting Victorian firebrand. One academic challenged a speaker on one of her facts regarding a marriage contract between Barney and her female lover. I was interested in seeing how common this fact was on the Internet so after the conference I searched Barney’s name and the word contract. The first item on my list of results was a link to an extensive article in Wikipedia on Natalie Clifford Barney with a footnoted citation to the academic article on this marriage contract. The browser plug-in I have installed allows me to link directly to this article provided by my academic library, University of Michigan and I could verify this in a few minutes. In this case, college freshman might be better informed about Natalie Barney than some academic scholars who don’t use it.