Look out for Edutech wiki!!

During this week we had to reorder our wikis in Edutech, trying to follow the correct procedure suggested by M. Schneider.
Then we had to take a look at the pages edited by our course colleagues.

As far as my colleagues are concerned, I have learned a lot from their wikis, especially those concerning subjects I ignored or I have a superficial knowledge of.
I appreciated the way they organize their paragraphs, highlighting certain aspects rather than others or the specific words they use to give unity to their compositions.
In doing so, I found out their own style and their capability of adapting language devices to the purposes of Edutech.

Now, I would like to deal with M. Schneider’s suggestions.
He wrote to Sarah, explaining that we had to follow a certain procedure while editing our wikis.
From his intervention, I learned that, once you decide to edit your works on line, you have to reflect upon your audience. I mean that, when you write a blog, you can even write for yourself. I know that there is a community behind every web page you can find, but a blog is your own product and you can chose your own style and say whatever you want (in observance of a moral etiquette).
However, writing wikis is not so easy. As in written papers, you must avoid plagiarism, trying to say something new and original, even if you base your analysis on a pre-existing topic.
You should not be content with a forced summary full of quotations, you have to create a paper that is well worth a reading.

I also think that what I have learned during this week might be summarize in a few points:

1. Paraphrase, quote and summarize but not copy. Keep closer to the original, but write with your own word
2. Provide examples and be open to several points of view
3. Quote the original only if you really want to stress some passages
4. Paraphrase may help you to understand the real meaning of the original
5. Pay attention to the paragraphs’ division in order to make your text clearer:
   - One paragraph is to coincide with one topic
   - Use cohesive devices such as pronouns, repetitions, synonymous words
   - Respect cohesion with correlative clauses and conjunctions
   - Develop your paragraphs according to the way you want your text to be organised
   
6. Exploit the power of each word, by selecting the ones that let you go straight to the point
7. The Net is full of information: select the most reliable sources
8. When you decide to quote, do it correctly and never forget to put the references at the end of the page. If not, you are plagiarizing the originals.
9. Don’t be content with web pages you find in the Internet. If you want your research to be exhaustive, look for further sources such as books, newspapers and much more.
   

I think that these are examples of basic rules for wikis.
Every wiki has its aim and a problem to solve: the variety of contributors. As a consequence, if a wiki wants to succeed in creating a collection of pages, full of external hyperlinks that everyone might read without losing the thread of a common discourse it needs a common style and a common language. I mean that every wiki must be seen as a whole; so, collaborative writing needs to share rules in order to share information.
It is true that every person has his/her own style, but, in my opinion, contributors should do the effort of linking their documents to the previous ones, by means of contents and linguistic devices.
Only in doing so, people could really benefit from wikis.

Francesca

Edutech, wikis and so on...

Hello everybody!

The task for this week was taking a look at Edutech wiki in order to learn something more about the “wikisphere”.
Afterwards, we had to choose one subject to develop among the wide range offered by this wiki.
As regards me, I decided to select “Programmed instruction” for various reasons:

• there was only one comment on this subject
• the comment was not really expanded
• the fewer lines written on the topic intrigued me and encouraged me to learn more on this kind of education
• I thought that this topic might be useful for our course
  
  

I supposed I knew the topic quite well, since our course is based on it but, going on with my analysis, I realized that Programmed instruction, as we know it, is dated back to 1934.
However, the theory was combined with practice only in 1950, thanks to Burrhus Frederic Skinner (the person in the photo), who invented the “teaching machine”, experimenting a new self-learning method based on computer.
As a consequence, I think we can consider the “teaching machine” as a forerunner of educational softwares and hardwares and computer-based learning (or education) as an evolution of programmed instruction.

I would like to stress that, even if Skinner stated that sometimes teachers fail to shape their students’ behaviour sufficiently, he did not bring into question the importance of teachers in education. He just stated that teachers might be helped with technical devices that enabled students to learn at their own speed. Hence, programmed instruction was considered to be a medium of integrating educational activities.
To conclude, I wish to point out that programmed instruction is now often used also in industry and the armed services to train personnel.

I found this new experience quite stimulating. I think it is wonderful to share knowledge without moving and all this has been possible only thanks to technologies such as wikis.
This analysis made me understand that good ideas are not enough: they need to be combined with the appropriate technology. As a matter of fact, a system based on teaching machines was economically impossible because of higher costs; however, the cheapness and the quickness of wikis enabled us, nowadays, to benefit from free learning material directly at home.

Just a few words on this writing experience.
When I was trying to reorder the large number of information I gathered, I worried about the fact that unknown people could read my analysis and based theirs on it. I was not sure about the cogency of my composition, so, I decided to try to do a good work by citing my sources and complying with them.
As a consequence, I adopted a neutral point of view without giving my personal impressions on topic, even though I also referred to the background I have acquired so far.

I have understood, perhaps, for the first time the importance of wikis.
They are debates in progress! I’m thinking about scholars who have the possibility of implementing their researches by this medium. They do not need to move or follow boring lectures in order to learn about the evolution of a certain topic: they can compare their ideas with their colleagues at home, interacting with them and finding solutions for different problems.
And what about us? In my opinion, we can learn a lot from each other, completing our reflections on various topics.

However, it is important not to minimize the central role the direct (and human) contact plays.

Do you agree with me?

Francesca

Reference to http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Programmed_instruction

Photo taken by http://skeptically.org/skinner/id1.html

The invasion of wikis

Talking about wikis...

During this week we have taken a look on the world of wikis, discussing what a wiki is and trying to prepare the ground for a future activity concerning the creation of a wiki for language learning.
I have got no further information about this new experience, but I hope that the result of the course as a whole will be useful for all the students learning English at university.

I would like to start my analysis with a very simple definition provided by Wikipedia, trying to expand on it:

A wiki is any website based on any kind of Wiki software which enables users to add to, edit and delete from the site's content quickly.

According to this definition, a wiki is a database that allows people to create, edit or search for web pages by means of a browser. Every user can create his/her own documents and change or re-edit the pages of the others. For this reason, a wiki is considered to be a tool for collaborative writing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaborative_writing

This type of writing refers to the projects created by many people together, sharing their abilities and correcting each others. In some wikis their works might be overseen by an editor, but this dipends on the structure and purposes of the wikis. If you want to obtain the maximum result from collaboration, team’s efforts must be turned to the same aim which has to be manifest for everyone.
All the editing operations should be done in an easy way because of the support given by Wiki software and the quickness of the technology itself.

Quickness and collaborative possibilities might be summed up in the word wiki, a shorter form of wiki wiki which means fast in Hawaiian language but also refers to the bacronym “What I Know Is”.

One important feature of wikis is that users do not need to know HTML language in order to write their articles because all their comments will be automatically translated by the software.
Many public wikis allow the users to write without a preliminary registration. I think that this is due do the fact that the first rule of wikis concerns the good faith required for all users.
This is not the case of private wikis in which the registration is compulsory, sometimes even to read pages: the measure has been taken to avoid vandalism related to a wrong use of the system and concerning the large number of misleading information given intentionally or the damages caused to the whole wiki.

Going on with my analysis, I found out that the language used in wikis is informal and plain but quite painstaking. The words are chosen for their specific meaning, without redundancies; the sentences are rather short and clear, avoiding ambiguity in speeches. The layout is very clear and the large presence of hyperlinks enables a non-linear but logical reading.

However, even if wikis follow up the specific philosophy of freedom in writing, the users should comply with an etiquette which is called “Wikiquette”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Wikiquette
This does not contain strict instructions but suggestions in order to facilitate civil collaboration and grant respect for different points of view.

According to Wikipedia definition, the users must treat others as they would have them treat them, that is they have to avoid unuseful discussions, help mediate disputes between other users and choose their words carefully in order not be offensive or tactless.

All the articles presented by users have not to violate the Neutral Point Of View (NPOV) required by Wikipedia and many corrections should be done in order to respect it.
To sum up, the language is relatively free: it has to follow some guidelines defined by Wikipedia.

I must confess that, in reading all these guidelines, I had a good time. Some sentences such as “Turn the other cheek” or “Forgive and Forget”, “If someone disagrees with you, this does not necessarily mean that (1) the person hates you, (2) the person thinks you're stupid, (3) the person is stupid, (4) the person is evil, etc.”, make me reflect upon a better world based on Wikipedia!
Among this naïve suggestions is hidden the real purpose of Wikipedia, that is that of creating a good encyclopedia by benefitting from fundamental people’s contributions.

Those reading or writing a web page in a shared wiki succeed in increasing the community of Wikipedia. Everyone can find his/her position in this community by performing the different tasks put forward by the main team each week, taking part to the forum of Village Pump http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump or posting news to the Community Bulletin Board.

I believe that both private and public wikis pursue the same purpose of Wikipedia.
I focused my attention on a specific wiki concerning education http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Wiki and I found out that it aims to create a complete collection of learning material for teachers and students, using the modern technology of wikis.

I would like to point out that the etiquette of this wiki is, in some ways, very different from Wikipedia’s. http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Help:Editing_rules
As a matter of fact, it avoids neutral points of view, while writing an article. However, the etiquette helps readers to understand whether a statement is based on a speculation or on a reliable source and simply follows three basic rules:

• Think of the wiki as a whole (make sure that people can find articles and quickly refer to them)
• Give credits (and take if you wish)
• Qualify the status of information
  

It also gives directions concerning the written presentation of events, referring to titles, multiple meanings, quotations and much more.

To conclude my analysis, let me suggest you an interesting wiki for our language education: Wikiversity.http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Main_Page

I think that this wiki might sum up our learning experience so far. It provides readers with learning materials and activities, introducing them to a community which enables them to be involved in a dynamic way in their learning process.

See you with the next e-tivity.

Francesca