With that being said, I think wikis are an excellent medium to promote collaborative learning in the adult classroom. Wikis are very open-ended. Essentially, there is no template, yet they are simple enough that even an adult with little technical background can quickly learn to manipulate them. As Stavredes (2011), highlights, "because of the asynchronous nature of wikis, learners can engage in the activities according to their own schedule. An additional benefit is that learners can control the space, which can enhance their sense of responsibility" (p. 177). This sense of responsibility can lead to a stronger feeling of ownership in one's learning, leading to a higher satisfaction with the course.
One dissatisfaction I have with wikis, which is ironically one of the benefits, is the lack of creativity one can implement - especially in the new wiki platform we are using. Yes, one can embed videos and graphics, but the headings are rather limited in nature. By linking to external content, though, they can become a nice cache of resource material. As referenced earlier, King and Cox (2011), indicate "wikis can be very useful in educational setting, but the limitation of this tool is that it can be edited by any individual who may post inappropriate or irrelevant content to the wiki, which in turn may take away from the focus of the wiki" (p.123). If one is able, password protecting the wiki can prevent manipulation of content.
Stavredes, T. (2011). Effective online teaching: Foundations and strategies for student success. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bas
The fact that Wikis can be open to everyone is an interesting point to ponder. I think it is important for instructors to consider learning outcomes and students’ capabilities when choosing a Wiki service (West & West, 2009). The limited amount of users, security, and high degree of control offered by Wikis within a course learning management system offer learners the opportunity to discover this technology in a less threatening environment than a Wiki on an open access network. This might prove to be beneficial for learners who are not tech savvy, or comfortable sharing information on the internet.
ReplyDeleteWest, J. & West, M. (2009). Using Wikis for online collaboration: The power of the read-write Web. San Francisco, CA: Jossey –Bass
Agree about the open access. It's a bit daunting to think that the whole world could see your work- as a student who is learning. We are taking care to put good quality work out here, but a closed environment may give us more freedom to express ourselves.
DeletePatel et al (2012) discuss the security of "social computing" by stating "There are valid reasons for protecting a wiki. One of the most common concerns of wiki users is the security of their pages and how the page could be protected without being purposely manipulated either during development or run time. Given the "open source" nature of wiki, this is regarded as a significant threat. Other major threats relate to information security of wiki sites, information safety and its privacy." (p.4) These concerns could play into someone being reluctant to be as revealing about personal experiences or beliefs as they might be in a closed system.
Patel, A., Taghavi, M., Celestino Jr., J., Laith, R., Zin, A.M. (2012). Safety measures for social computing in wiki learning environment. International Journal of Information Security and Privacy, 6(2), 1-15.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJessica,
ReplyDeleteI completely understand how you feel about Wikipedia from an English teacher's perspective. It's just not a good resource for research. However, if you look at them only from the point of view of allowing students to collaborate, then they begin to look more promising.
I assign a group project in my classroom and my students can all get on their iPads, share a Google Slide, and then they are off creating. They can quickly split up their research and begin creating. There is the occasional hiccup of an "individual who may post inappropriate or irrelevant content to the wiki" (King & Cox, 2011, p. 123). Usually that is easily silenced with the removal of that student's editing privileges if a warning isn't sufficient. I would think it would be even more effective with adults who (hopefully) wouldn't try to sabotage their group's project like my fourth graders sometimes do.
Also, you mentioned the lack of creativity that wikis allow, so I wanted to share that Google has done a lot to add fonts and improve the editing capabilities. Google Docs is becoming more like Microsoft Word. When I was stuck with 6 font choices I also hated Docs, but now that I can make my stuff more attractive I'm much more of a fan. I can't say that I love other wiki programs, but Google has definitely created a great platform that I can rave about.
I think, originally, Wikipedia had the ability to be something really insightful and collaborative. I believe Jana posted this on her blog, but sometimes, if I need a quick reader's digest version of a concept, I will use Wikipedia to get my head around it. As long as things on Wikis are cited, I see it as something very useful and great! Total tangent, but I find it fascinating how quickly celebrity's Wikipedia pages are updated after life events. I guess that goes back to how timely they can be, providing the most up-to-date content (King & Cox, 2011).
ReplyDeleteI do agree with you that lack of customization can be tough, but it can provide a clean, easy-to-read page as well. I think about some of the web pages I designed as a teenager, and I'm very glad I can't bring that terrible design in!