If you allow me, perhaps I should rephrase:
***After all requirements of quality are assessed and evaluated***, what
would you consider a reasonable number for the minimum of bytes in the final
article?
Indeed, maybe this question overlaps with some of the criteria for GA/FA,
but I also suppose they are not the same for all Wikipedias.
Juliana.
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Jon Beasley-Murray
<jon.beasley-murray(a)ubc.ca> wrote:
Well, a little unfair perhaps. The education program was not a single
thing, and I certainly acknowledge your own valuable contributions
throughout, that consistently ensured (and continue to ensure) a more
thoughtful approach to counteract the editcountitis and bytecountitis that
was prevalent in other quarters. Still, there's no denying that the focus
on quantity (seemingly at the expense of quality) has always been, and
continues to be, one of the major sources of tension between the education
program and the Wikipedia community. Hence there is good reason to think
and talk in other ways about how to assess and encourage student work.
Take care
Jon
On Jan 29, 2014, at 1:23 PM, Sage Ross <sross(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 4:04 AM, Jon
Beasley-Murray
<jon.beasley-murray(a)ubc.ca> wrote:
In short, focussing single-mindedly on bytes contributed (as the WMF
has repeatedly done in the past) in counterproductive and goes directly
against Wikipedia's own criteria for what are (rightly) valued as its most
important and valuable contributions.
Jon, I think you're being unfair here. Despite being much harder to
measure, quality has been part of WMF's education programs since the
beginning. During the Public Policy Initiative, we created a system
for quantifying article quality (and how the work of student editors
impacted it) that was directly based on WP:WIAFA [1].
It should be uncontroversial to say that what we -- and by "we" I mean
both WMF and the editing community -- want is large quantities *of*
high quality content. From what I saw, the leaderboards were pretty
effective at motivating a handful of most involved classes during the
Public Policy Initiative -- classes with instructors who were the most
into the goal of improving Wikipedia -- and for those classes, the
quality was also high. For the classes that were doing lower quality
work, from what I remember they were also the ones that did not take
an interest in the leaderboard. (I also suggest that the Pune pilot
would have gone just as badly with or without leaderboards; counting
bytes was not among its critical problems.)
(I agree that, for evaluating an individual student's work, bytes
added is not a great metric, and in general there are some dangers to
incentives based on quantity of text.)
[1] =
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_States_Public_Po…
_______________________________________________
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