In terms of 21st century learning, Wikipedia symbolizes our society's access to ever changing information in an ever changing culture. I think a website such as Wikipedia will be huge in terms of promoting Web 2.0 and allowing everyone to have an opportunity to disperse and edit the information that others will receive. As Henry Jenkins puts in, "Wikipedia empowers students to take seriously what they have learned in other classes, to see their own research as having potential value in a larger enterprise, and to take greater responsibility over the accuracy of what they have produced" (Jenkins, 2007).
Wikipedia Analysis: Global Warming Article
Step One: Bias
This Wikipedia article does a fairly good job of remaining neutral through its entirety. The first six sections of the article focus on what global warming is and provides a better understanding for the reader. After, the article defines two separate proposed responses to the situation, and follows with sections on political, scientific, and public opinion discussions on global warming. The article also tends to not show any bias as the two sides mentioned (political and scientific) are not necessarily opposing each other, "In the scientific literature, there is a strong consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused mainly by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases. No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view." At the same time the article states, "In ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, most developed countries accepted legally binding commitments to limit their emissions," showing that the countries are at least not arguing the claims of the scientific community. Overall, the article maintains neutrality as it does not try to convince the reader to take one side or the other, but merely states the facts.
Step Two: Triangulation
Claim: Earth's mean surface temperature has increased by about 0.8 °C (1.4 °F), with about two-thirds of the increase occurring since 1980
The Center for Climate and Energy Solutions agrees with Wikipedia's standpoint. The C2ES states,"The Earth’s average surface temperature has increased by 1.4°F (0.8°C) since the early years of the 20th century. The 10 warmest years on record (since 1850) have all occurred since 1998. The 10 warmest years to date are 2010, 2005, 1998, 2003, 2002, 2009, 2006, 2007, 2004, 2001" (About Science and Impacts, 2013). The C2ES appears to have strong validity as the organization is non-profit and independent of any political parties.
However, Monte Morin of the Los Angeles Times reports that this is not quite the case recently, "Since just before the start of the 21st century, the Earth's average global surface temperature has failed to rise despite soaring levels of heat-trapping greenhouse gases and years of dire warnings from environmental advocates" (Morin, 2013) The Los Angeles Times is typically a reliable source, yet this article could be a little skewed for the newspaper wanting to generate reader interest that may not contain all the facts or may spin the material to be more interesting.
Step Three: Talk Link
The General Sanctions that the article and its editors are subject to are a means of maintaining the integrity of the article. The general sanctions outline what type of behavior is acceptable when it comes to editing and what kinds of proof and supporting research one needs to edit the article. Without going about the process in the proper way, an editor may be subject to removal from the site for a determined amount of time to clear the way for those who want to edit the article (and others) in good faith.
Step Four:
Q14:Doesn't water vapor cause 98% of the greenhouse effect?
A14: Water vapour is indeed a major greenhouse gas, contributing about 36% to 70% (not 98%) of the total greenhouse effect.
Slate Magazine confirms the Wikipedia answer by stating, "According to both the International Panel on Climate Change and many global climate models, water vapor accounts for somewhere between 60 percent and 70 percent of the greenhouse effect. (The 98-percent figure, much beloved by global-warming skeptics, seems to have been first used in a 1991 article by Richard Lindzen. He cites a 1990 IPCC report as his source, but the report doesn't appear to contain that number" (Koerner, 2008).
After researching, Slate appears to be a reliable source. It is a daily online magazine that reports numerous current events and interesting news pieces. It has also been awarded the National Magazine Award for General Excellence Online. A magazine prone to reporting false information would not be eligible for such an award.
Step Five:
I read the section on the projections of future global warming. I learned that there are not many concrete examples of future warming projections. I also learned that Wikipedia goes through exhaustive efforts to produce the highest quality. In this section, one of the editors admits that the article lacks much information on future projections but goes through the criteria substantial for posting new information to the article. After reading this article, I would support Wikipedia as a reference for school material because of the detail and depth that goes into producing an article like this one.
Step Six:
After reviewing NewsAndEventsGuy's profile, my impressions of Wikipedia have been confirmed even more. This particular editor has even achieved the Civility Award on Wikipedia for his efforts in articles such as the global warming one. If this are the kinds of people that are helping Wikipedia prosper, I feel that the website is in good hands.
After completing the Wikipedia Validation process, I feel that Wikipedia would be a reliable source to students. Wikipedia could possibly replace textbooks as has the capability of adapting as new information is discovered. As Geoff Ruth points out, "While some textbooks are excellent, most bore my students and frustrate me" ( Ruth, 2013). Tamim Ansary reflects this viewpoint in saying, "In fact, most of these books fall far short of their important role in the educational scheme of things. They are processed into existence using the pulp of what already exists, rising like swamp things from the compost of the past" (Ansary, 2004). And to answer the common assumption by teachers that Wikipedia is inaccurate, Henry Jenkins proclaims, "Educators ask the wrong question when they wonder whether Wikipedia is accurate, because this implies a conception of Wikipedia as a finished product rather than a work in progress" (Jenkins, 2007). In conclusion, there is a vast amount of support for Wikipedia as not only an academic tool, but as a possible replacement to textbooks...one that you may want to consider in your classroom to not only save some funds, but to save yourself some headaches.
Reference List
(2013). About science and impacts. Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, Retrieved from http://www.c2es.org/science-impacts/about
Ansary, T. (2004). A textbook example of what's wrong with education. Edutopia, Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/textbook-publishing-controversy
Jenkins, H. (2007, June 26). [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://henryjenkins.org/2007/06/what_wikipedia_can_teach_us_ab.html
Koerner, B. (2008). Is global warming caused by water vapor?. Slate, Retrieved from http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/the_green_lantern/2008/01/is_global_warming_caused_by_water_vapor.html
Morin, M. (2013, September 22). Global warming 'hiatus' puts climate change scientists on the spot. The Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes.com/2013/sep/22/science/la-sci-climate-change-uncertainty-20130923
Ruth, G. (2013). No books, no problem: Teaching without a text. Edutopia, Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/teaching-without-text
No comments:
Post a Comment