What are your thoughts about using Wikis
in the Media Center? How can they be used most effectively? Are there drawbacks
to Wikis?
My thoughts
about using Wikis in the Media Center are still on the fence because of the
drawbacks. Meaning, students can make changes to things they find online and I
know they have ways of making the information private for editing by others. In
the past I have had so frightening mishaps with Wikipedia and reminding my
student that the information might or might not be reliable. This has always
been a major research concern for me. I understand the collaboration efforts
and how well we are able to collaborate with our peers but we know how to cross-reference
and check and recheck information. After reading the “Seven Things you should know about Wikis,” article I was still not
moved at all. Sarah’s scenario was a great example; remember when she inadvertently
wiped out someone else’s contribution? Sarah was also impressed with how easy
it was to edit her teams work. It’s an iffy situation I feel needs more data
and research for me to jump on the bandwagon. I like Google for some reason; it’s
like I feel safe and secure even though, I know it’s the internet.
When a community
of users can edit information I don’t feel safe with the website. While reading
Library 2.0 text I was surprised to read again how you don’t have to have any
specialized web authoring software or advance HTML coding skills. I also read the
community has to be strong and continually working to maintain the website.
Unlike the past where individuals could make changes. I know it was created in
2001 and it is 2014 now and things have changed. I see we are using Wikis now
for our classes and I think I am seeing the changes but I could see some of the
past classes assignments this summer when I logged on early. I did not know
what I was reading but I could see others post. I had access to the class so I guess I should have been able to read them, I guess. I might need more experience with the site before I keep running. The library manager who sets up
their page will have access to the site and I feel this is wonderful. I just
think Wiki has received a bad reputation from the past. Page 32 of Library 2.0 text
was still causing me to think twice, according to Boeninger, many wiki administrators
are still hesitant about opening a wiki up to the community. But on the other
hand the reading goes on to say creators should not worry too much about the structure
and content of the wiki. I think there should be a built in filtering system, I
am not afraid of something new but I am afraid of something changing without my
permission.
As you perused
the Wikis in the readings above, did you find uses you thought particularly
strong? Particularly weak? I did not find the uses I read particularly strong
at all I was still searching for some reassurance about Wikis because of the
past experiences me and my students have had.
While Wikis are touted as collaborative tools,
many seem to be passive "storage cabinets." What elements need to be
present to move them toward being active spaces for collaboration?
I really do not seem to be passive
about Wikis being a storage cabinet, but more of a site which needs more
filtering and a sense of security. I would use this to collaborate because I
too, but I need more research on why this website is secure and reliable.
I think Wikipedia gave Wikis a bad rep. I think is a good option for librarians
who are not afraid of inappropriate content being posted or changed.
I also have some of the fear that you mentioned in your blog about content being changed on a Wiki without your consent. This would be especially problematic if the content was inappropriate or incorrect. I did not have much experience with Wiki's before my classes at UWG, so I can really only base my experience in this area with the Pathfinders we created for the Reference and Materials course and then the Wiki for this class. I think that Pathfinders created on a Wiki were a great way to share information and collaborate with other media specialists and educators. The only frustrating part that I ran into while using the Wiki was that I sometimes would save information a certain way, using a certain font, spaced perfectly, and I would come back later to find that it had changed. I am assuming this had to do with multiple people editing the content, but it was still time consuming to have to go back and revise something that I had already considered complete. For this course, the Wiki seems to be a great place to share our work. Since we have been simply posting our work and not editing collaborative work, I have not had any problems with my work changing as of yet. I am open to using Wiki's in the media center, however, I think they may be used more efficiently when students or teachers are posting for themselves and not editing each others' content.
ReplyDeleteTrue, after reading more into Wiki I would agree teachers and students should only post comments for themselves. I think that's why PDF files are so wonderful. Editing and changing any information to me is frightful. I did not have much experience with Wiki's until this I started UWG too. I was like good now I can see the true value of Wiki in a different light and not the negative comments made by professors in the past. I think I was taught wiki was a bad word.
Delete