Would a leaderboard which breaks down bytes by those advancing any good
article criteria, bytes toward references added to un-sourced crucial
statements, negative bytes reverted, and neutrally (e.g. no "points" for)
other bytes added?
I have a feeling that if we tell students that is how they will be scored
up front, it will work out better than otherwise, whether the subsequent
scoring criteria are good or poor. If it were up to me I would ask students
to search for inaccuracies, bias, contradictions, and missing topics, and
most of those things fit into a few of the good article criteria, but not
very explicitly.
Best regards,
James Salsman
On Jan 29, 2014 9:11 AM, "Pepe Flores" <pepe.fls(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I’m working in an Educational Program in Mexico with the Universidad de
las Americas Puebla. I agree that adding a lot of bytes doesn’t necessarily
contribute to the quality of an article. We have been working on the
development of the nanotechnology entries in Spanish, since this topic is
kinda new in developing countries but there’s a lot of research in the last
20 - 30 years. One of our goals was to improve the quantity and quality of
references, in order to provide little but accurate information rather than
a lot of unreferenced data. This standpoint was well perceived by the
Spanish Wikipedia community as the entries has not been deleted but
improved by other Wikipedia users.
You may know a little bit more about this program in
https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proyectos:Programa_Educativo_UDLAP#Introducci…
Spanish). The report isn’t finished yet but it’s illustrative about the
importance of working toward reference quality instead of volume (bytes).
--
Personal
Sent with Airmail
En 28 de enero de 2014 at 18:42:23, Juliana Bastos Marques (
domusaurea(a)gmail.com <//domusaurea(a)gmail.com>) escrito:
I forgot to mention a couple of important things I'm expecting to happen.
First of all, I thought about measuring bytes *only after* the qualitative
part is assessed (kinda like publishing guidelines, which I'm trying to
make them acquainted with). But I think the reason this could work is
because at least half of the enrolled students have already worked with me
in other previous classes with Wikipedia editing. My idea is to make them
help the other students learn how to edit during the course, together with
the ambassador.
In the last course I offered, some students later got Good Article status,
and they were very excited and proud (
https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genotdel,
https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filipa_de_Lencastre). This wasn't the main
goal, but kept them engaged even months after the course. A Facebook group
helped with continuous lively discussions - the students are always there,
anyway. I'm also relying on word of mouth, which has actually been proven
quite effective. ;)
Juliana.
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Jon Beasley-Murray <
jon.beasley-murray(a)ubc.ca> wrote:
Indeed. The WMF repeatedly bandied around the
number of bytes produced
by education projects, and it was (understandably) hugely controversial,
not least given the problems that the program has had with plagiarism (most
notoriously with the Pune project).
I would strongly suggest that bytes are a very poor indication of success.
Take care
Jon
On Jan 28, 2014, at 4:31 AM, Craig Franklin <cfranklin(a)wikimedia.org.au>
wrote:
The obvious problem I see is that adding a lot of
bytes to an article
doesn't necessarily equate to adding a lot of *value* to an
article. On
enwiki at least, it's probably very easy to inflate the bytecount by
inserting superfluous templates and the like into an article, without
actually adding any content. At most I'd recommend using it as a rough
guide for students as to when an article may be ready, and then assess the
articles qualitatively after that.
Cheers,
Craig
On 28 January 2014 11:12, Juliana Bastos Marques <domusaurea(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
*NOT a CFP!* ;)
Hello all!
I have been thinking about using the criterion of a minimum number of
bytes to
evaluate the students' edits for my next course - together with
content, of course. This came up because I noticed some students were
editing as little as possible, and this time I want the whole group to
start new articles from scratch.
Has anyone used this approach? Pros/cons? What would you consider a
reasonable
number for the minimum of bytes in the final article?
Juliana.
--
www.domusaurea.org
_______________________________________________
Education mailing list
Education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
_______________________________________________
Education mailing list
Education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
_______________________________________________
Education mailing list
Education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
--
www.domusaurea.org
_______________________________________________
Education mailing list
Education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
_______________________________________________
Education mailing list
Education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education