Wikipedia y construcción del conocimiento colectivo

Hoy retomaremos el tema de la wikipedia, y la construcción del conocimiento colectivo, para eso traemos los siguientes enlaces:

1) Un artículo en inside higher ed A Stand Against Wikipedia

As Wikipedia has become more and more popular with students, some professors have become increasingly concerned about the online, reader-produced encyclopedia.

While plenty of professors have complained about the lack of accuracy or completeness of entries, and some have discouraged or tried to bar students from using it, the history department at Middlebury College is trying to take a stronger, collective stand. It voted this month to bar students from citing the Web site as a source in papers or other academic work. All faculty members will be telling students about the policy and explaining why material on Wikipedia — while convenient — may not be trustworthy.

2) Un post de Mario Tout de Go titulado Citer Wikipédia ou ne pas citer… telle serait la question
Coach scolaire et catalyseur de communautés d’apprentissage

L’annonce de la décision du Middlebury College d’interdire à ses étudiants de citer Wikipedia (source) a fait jaser sur la blogosphère cette semaine. Je me suis exprimé sur le blogue du Canal numérique des savoirs en qualifiant l’approche «d’intéressante» malgré l’apparente incongruité de la décision (voir le billet de Patrick):

“Le Middlebury College offre une approche intéressante en ce qu’il reconnaît une certaine valeur à Wikipédia. Tout n’est pas noir ou blanc et ce Collège américain innove en accordant de l’importance au processus menant à l’acquisition de connaissances. Même si Sandra Ordonez [Responsable de la Communication de WP] «avoue» que WP n’est pas une «authoritative source», elle place les autres encyclopédies sur le même pied que WP: «It’s usually not advisable, particularly at the university level, to cite an encyclopedia».”

Mon avis est que l’oeuvre de Wikipédia est plus formatrice que crédible et c’est ce qu’il faut retenir. Nicolas Chazaud nomme les enjeux de la bonne façon:

3) Un reportaje de la CBS, titulado Welcome To Wikipedia
The web-based encyclopedia, written entirely by volunteers, has revolutionized information sharing. But critics point to Wikipedia’s open nature as the source of its problems. Serena Altschul reports.

4) Un artículo Assessing the value of cooperation in Wikipedia de Dennis M. Wilkinson and Bernardo A. Huberman (pdf, 154 Kb)
HP Labs, Palo Alto, CA 94304
February 22, 2007

Abstract
Since its inception six years ago, the online encyclopediaWikipedia has accumulated
6.40 million articles and 250 million edits, contributed in a predominantly
undirected and haphazard fashion by 5.77 million unvetted volunteers. Despite
the apparent lack of order, the 50 million edits by 4.8 million contributors to
the 1.5 million articles in the English-language Wikipedia follow strong certain
overall regularities. We show that the accretion of edits to an article is described
by a simple stochastic mechanism, resulting in a heavy tail of highly
visible articles with a large number of edits. We also demonstrate a crucial correlation
between article quality and number of edits, which validates Wikipedia
as a successful collaborative effort.

5) De Academ Hack :The Future of Wikipedia

Fuente: [ varias]

tags: e-learning, aprendizaje, web2.0, social software, web 2.0, wikipedia, wiki