Professors should embrace wikipedia

Bryozoans as taphonomic engineers, with examples from the Upper Ordovician Katian of midwestern North America. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs in press.

Professors should embrace wikipedia

Some areas seem to be quite well covered, with entries quite seriously written that explain well the basics and allow the interested person to go deeper. However, in my field Model TheoryI believe we are still very far away, both in coverage of important subjects, and in the quality of the entries themselves, from the level of other areas.

Mgccl on April 1, at Most of the entries are accurate, though incomplete. Some have grammatical errors, and I usually correct those when I see them.

Occasionally, the entries are not what I think they should be for a broad audience. For example, I am currently working on a presentation for my Algebraic Topology II class on classifying spaces of groups. The definition on Wikipedia is very abstract, and hardly mentions the beautiful, concrete construction due to Milnor?

Wikipedia is improving all the time, and professionals and graduate students certainly have a big role to play.

Professors should allow use of Wikipedia | The Oracle

Lucas on April 2, at 3: In general, I think that the sort of topics undergraduate students math students, that is encounter tend to be pretty good, but the coverage of more advanced topics is mostly islands of good articles surrounded by oceans of marginal ones.

Tracy Poff on April 2, at 7: This is rather unfortunate for mathematics in less populous fields. It might provide them with additional motivation to not only understand the topic, but to understand it well enough to explain it to others.

Tom Franklin on April 3, at 8: They go very rapidly from the briefest of outline to the seriously heavy without the semi-digested that I could understand By: How am I supposed to tell everyone about knot covariants opp.

I suppose I just have to write it up on my weblog also papers and hope someone else makes an article. John Armstrong on April 4, at 4:Carol Smith and Stephen Leberstein have documented investigations of professors' political views at the City College of New York (CCNY) during the s and s.

Professors should embrace wikipedia

Citing the tactics of private hearings, requiring respondents to name others, and denying rights of legal representation, Smith calls the investigations a "dress rehearsal for McCarthyism". Apr 01,  · If we as faculty members truly want to own the assessment of student performance and understanding, then we should work together toward meaningful solutions and processes, writes Will Miller.

Inside Higher Ed - "Professors Should Embrace Wikipedia" - April Fool? I wasn't inspired to do an April Fool's post.

Anti-intellectualism - Wikipedia

The best I could think of was something along the lines that I'd received a big grant from the "Patton Foundation" and the "Open But Not So Open Our Brains Fall Out Minded Institute", to set up a "Center for Internet Skepticism".

Wikipedia Is Wikipedia enemy #1 for professors? Despite its reported accuracy ( errors or omissions per article, on average, compared with for Britannica), the crowd-sourced encyclopedia hasn’t gained traction in higher education, because articles can be biased and the sources don’t have to meet the same high standards that a.

Jul 19,  · When professors want students to use scholarly resources, she said, they tell their students not to use Wikipedia. The website has become a scapegoat for scholars, she said.

But its accessibility makes it alluring to schwenkreis.com: Megan Zahneis. Essay about professors should embrace wikipedia 9/30/14 Response Essay Professors Should Embrace Wikipedia In Mark Wilson’s article “Professors Should Embrace Wikipedia”, Wilson argues that despite the legitimacy of Wikipedia, educators should engage and take part in helping shape the direction of Wikipedia.

Professors Should Embrace Wikipedia | Mathematics under the Microscope