chronicleofbias.com

An instructor for a school of writing, I can attest that there are certain issues that arise time and again during the course of each kind of writing. Questions include:

When do I use "then" and when you use "that"?
How can I write a good thesis statement?
Where I put the page numbers?

Then there are broader questions such as:

You always have to start class on time and end class on time?
Is there anyone else who teaches this course?
You're married. Really? You? (Often followed by a woman "the poor" he muttered.)

But perhaps the most common question I get is whether Wikipedia, the free online everywhere, can be used as a source viable for research. In response to this question, I try to explain how the academic discourse – talk about the accuracy, reliability, objectivity, peer review, and the like. Most times, students just stare at me blankly and say, "So … ah … is that a no?"

As such, I have been looking for a better answer, I hope that finally put an end to this issue, which lurks in the halls of academia and feeding in the brain unprepared of my students like a zombie from one of the old Simpsons Halloween Specials. In short, I think I finally found the answer, which was provided by, of all people, the founder of Wikipedia.com, Jimmy Wales. In the words of the Chronicle of Higher Education:

Speaking at a conference at the University of Pennsylvania Monday called "The Society of hyperlinks, "Wales said he receives about 10 emails a week from students who complain that Wikipedia has got into hot water academic. "They say, 'Please help me. I have an F in my work because I cited Wikipedia' and the information turned out to be erroneous, says. But he said he has no sympathy for his situation, noting that he thinks to himself: "For heaven's sake, you're in college, did not cite the encyclopedia."

Wales goes on to say that Wikipedia is good for getting an overview of a topic, but noted that academic papers should draw from real sources – you know, like those found in the library.

There it is – straight from the horse's mouth – Wikipedia is not a viable source for the documents University. So I think now is the time for students and educators to accept the fact that serious academic discussions should take place in academic forums serious. Websites like Wikipedia can not function as a means to convey crucial information on academic topics.

About the Author:

Benjamin Welch has been a college instructor in writing and composition for nearly six years. When he’s not teaching or playing golf, he offers advice for students seeking information about online education and online degrees. Read more of Ben’s work in our career and education blog. Also find career and education articles.

Article Source: ArticlesBase.com – Is Wikipedia a Viable Source for College Papers?

Apocalypse was compiled in 1486 AD by cabbalist Reuclin!