Dumb kids in Scotland are failing tests not because they’re dumb, or because they haven’t properly prepared, but because Wikipedia is evil and mean and “littered with inaccuracies.” Shucks, and I thought Wikipedia was to be trusted 100 percent of the time.
Right, so the Scottish Parent Teacher Council, which just sounds like a fun group, hated on Wikipedia the other day because Scottish test scores are going down and they’ve seemingly pegged Wikipedia as the culprit. Too much opinion presented as fact, too much out-and-out wrong information for the SPTC’s liking.
One comment on The Scotsman makes a fair, if tired, point:
Easier to blame Wikipedia than the fact that you’re poor parents and your children are out partying or playing video games.
Inaccuracies are found in standard encyclopedias (and newspapers) too. And besides, don’t your schools provide textbooks?
I’m both torn and not torn as it relates to this. On one hand, I couldn’t give a toss that a bunch of Scottish parents are upset because they think Wikipedia is making their kids dumb; I have Euro 2008 to watch. That said, Wikipedia was definitely an invaluable resource in school. As I said in my endorsement of the site some time ago, in an astronomy class I had to take, the textbook was written horrendously. Like, you simply could not understand what was going on. Hop on Wikipedia and look up the same topics, and it’s all explained in human-readable English.
via Drudge Report
My university docks marks if you quote or reference Wikipedia. The nice thing about it is that it usually presents the “facts” in a general and easy to read manner, but provides references for more in depth study. Wikipedia should be an aid to study, but not used as a study resource exclusively. That’s what peer reviewed journals and books are for. In my high school days there was a similar problem with Encarta.
If anything, this is another wonderful opportunity for schools to teach their students about the need to read and think critically. Speaking as an active Wikipedian, myself, I’m more or less horrified by people who aim to use us for serious scholarly referencing. We’re far more useful as an introductory read, to get basically grounded on a subject before looking into more serious, in-depth research.
Appreciate the post. Thanks.
Blaming a website, that should only be used to gain general knowledge of a subject, for the downfall of students’ education is completely absurd.
Universities are a bastion of free though and thinking…as long as it is approved by the Central Commitee
apparently parents need to blame on something other than themselves or the child so why not Wikipedia
So, it’s not because kids aren’t properly edumacated… It’s teh Internetz fault!
Between the two viewpoints lies the need for some thinking on both sides – Wikipedia and the parents.
Wikipedia does caution about the articles by caution notes such as this:
“This article does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed.”
If these caveats are redesigned to be more prominent (say use a different color) it could perhaps help in sifting the articles into error free and otherwise.
Also those who contribute content, a laudable effort, may show more responsibility and quote verifiable sources.
Parents should take this opportunity to teach the children discrimination in choosing sources while using content from various internet resources.
“Parents should take this opportunity to teach the children discrimination in choosing sources while using content from various internet resources.”
Do you think the parents complaining about this teach their kids anything? They can’t even get them to pass their classes what chance do they have of taking “this opportunity to teach the children discrimination in choosing sources while using content from various internet resources”?
You’re right though, there are two viewpoints to be considered: The viewpoints of the ignorant parents who are in denial and the viewpoints of people who aren’t stupid enough to blame a valuable source of information for their kids’ stupidity.
Obviously Wikipedia needs to be taken as any other reference material; you need to be aware of the credibility and therefore realise that Wikipedia is not meant for an academic resource beyond a starting point. It’s hard to blame Wikipedia when the people using it should be aware of the reliability of opinion over fact.
i think its not anyones problem people need to realize kids do try to please their parents but they cant please them if their parents wont give them their space for awhile to catch on on what they want to do i dont understand why parents say their kids stress them out and really its not its because of their job or money issues but still they just wanna blame kids for their problems