Why not do the same work on a userpage/workbench? Then the licence is no problem and the
students will know they are doing it for real.
That's what I an going to do with a wikibook project (Swedish). Then you do not have
to learn how to put up an own wiki on a server.
/Harald
From: schnautzr(a)hotmail.com
To: education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 12:28:07 -0500
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Education] Quantitative Metric and Article Quality
The first and most obvious difference to me is the hardware, software, and
the know-how required to set up another wiki, which most professors unlikely
have. I, too, am interested in learning benefits of this strategy.
Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: domusaurea
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 12:07 PM
To: education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Cc: education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Education] Quantitative Metric and Article Quality
How would you evaluate the difference between a separate wiki and the
sandboxes?
Juliana
Enviado via iPhone
Em 03/10/2012, às 12:57, "Martin Walker" <walkerma(a)potsdam.edu>
escreveu:
A colleague of mine from our geology department
has run article
improvement projects for US undergraduates, and he found it very
beneficial to have the main editing work done on a separate geology wiki
(running Mediawiki) on a college server. Pictures were still uploaded to
Wikimedia Commons (and therefore could be read in the college wiki). He
was easily able to use the history feature to track students'
contributions. Once the work was completed, the professor himself did the
edit, presumably after checking for outside edits done while the project
was ongoing. Students were able to improve Wikipedia, and see their
real-world impact (a very poor article is now good and gets 70,000 hits a
year).
For what you're proposing, I think a separate wiki like this would be
essential. That way the chaos is contained and the Wikipedia biologists
aren't going nuts; also, you can assess the students' contributions more
easily. Once the work is complete, improved articles can be integrated
into the main Wikipedia and everyone benefits.
Martin
Martin A. Walker
Department of Chemistry
State University of New York at Potsdam
+1 (315) 267-2271
walkerma(a)potsdam.edu
On 10/2/2012 10:51 AM, Dimce Grozdanoski wrote:
Hi folks,
I want to open discussion and hear some practical ideas or real stories
about projects with large scale editing participation, or how to
distribute assessment to the editors/students who are geographically
distributed throughout the country.
For example, let's say that we want to recruit 10000 students grouped in
class groups in particular schools to work on biology topics. Each
school must follow the teaching plan / time-line according to the
adopted methodology, i.e. they start with general biological terms then
with kingdoms, ecosystems, interactions of living bing in ecosystem,
evolution, and so on ... And the teachers give one or two assessment per
student of biology in particular class in particular school, to write
new or improve already written article in wikipedia. How to menage this
process? How to measure student work? The goals are to create maximal
number of articles with good quality. How to deal with projects of this
kind in limited time if you have time window of 6 months to start and
finish the project.
Any idea,
Dimce Grozdanoski
Wikimedia Macedonia
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
Education mailing list
Education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education