Student Wikipedia Contributions in Introductory Composition

By Jeremy Tirrell

Composition instructors are becoming increasingly familiar with Wikipedia, the multilingual, free online encyclopedia that can be edited in real-time by any user. There has been warranted recent debate about the credibility of Wikipedia as an academic resource. I believe an appropriate response to this dialog is for Introductory Composition students to engage it directly. To this end, I have run a project in my 106 classroom that treats Wikipedia not as a resource, but as the primary text that students supplement and revise. Students thereby do not use Wikipedia in the service of a written essay, but rather utilize external research and their own knowledge to shape an evolving, multimedia text.

A one-page assignment sheet that provides an overview of the project is available on the ICaP website here. The project comprises several stages, including reading about and understanding the controversy surrounding Wikipedia's credibility (sample readings are available here under the heading "online readings 1"), differentiating Wikipedia from print encyclopedias and other similar works, analyzing the criteria of a successful Wikipedia entry, and making an effective contribution. Students may contribute in many ways: creating new articles; augmenting existing articles; fitting articles to style guidelines; revising articles to ensure a neutral point of view; copyediting articles; translating material between language versions. In the interest of brevity, the perceived benefits of this project have been condensed into the following annotated list.

• Students compose in a "real-world" format. One of the difficulties of composition instruction is making coursework relevant outside of the classroom. Genres such as research papers may be viewed by students as purely academic exercises with no pragmatic applicability. When contributing to Wikipedia, students are shaping an authentic, widely-used body of knowledge. Students generally view this activity as a more authentic writing situation.

• Student work has a tangible, beneficial effect on the world. Unlike other composition activities that for students do not seem to have a visible effect outside of class, Wikipedia contributions cause real change, however modest, in society. This reveals to students that the core of writing is action in the world.

• Students can focus upon elements of the writing process other than text generation. Activities such as editing—and especially revision—are frequently neglected by students, who tend to concentrate on text generation to satisfy page length requirements. In the context of the Wikipedia project, students can opt to fulfill the assignment by focusing exclusively on grammatical or stylistic revision of existing material, among other tasks.

• Reception is moved beyond the boundary of the classroom. Student contributions to Wikipedia are rapidly viewed, commented upon, and revised by multiple users. This de-centers the authority of the instructor as the source of compositional truth. When other users find weaknesses in student contributions, it reiterates that rhetorical effectiveness is necessary in real conditions, and is not an arbitrary standard imposed by the instructor.

• The project offers broad opportunities for cross-classroom collaboration. Students are able to utilize their own subject knowledge through contributions. This allows students to demonstrate expertise in major fields and personal interests. Two examples from my own experience are a physics student who contributed to articles about machines used for modeling experiments, and another student who translated portions of the English language version of Wikipedia into the German language version using her foreign language professor as a supporting resource.

• Wikipedia inherently encourages students to contribute idiosyncratic knowledge and avoid banal topics. The articles covering common essay subjects, such as abortion or capital punishment, are actively revised in Wikipedia. As a result, it is very difficult to make a substantive contribution to these articles. Conversely, niche topics are frequently underdeveloped. This allows students to showcase particular knowledge, giving them a personal entry point into the project.

• Collaborative knowledge generation underscores the contingent, socially-constructed nature of truth. There are many ways to authenticate knowledge: appeal to authority, sensory experience, visceral belief, etc. Wikipedia's knowledge-making mechanism is popular assent. The way truth is ratified in Wikipedia can be extended into a broader epistemological discussion.

As with any student project, Wikipedia contribution comes with its own set of potential pitfalls. In addition to the common difficulties associated with any composition assignment, the following issues, affecting both students and instructors, are specific to this task.

• Instructors must secure written permission from students to display work in a public forum. Many Introductory Composition instructors have students sign forms allowing the anonymous use of their work as examples during subsequent semester. Instructors that plan to run the Wikipedia project should add a clause to such forms so that students are aware as early as possible that they will be expected to produce work for a public forum.

• Students should select a Wikipedia username other than their real name or Purdue login. This helps students preserve their anonymity. In a digital environment, information is easily archived and searched. No student should be hindered in later life by statements made in an academic context as young adults.

• Because of the anonymity of the internet, Wikipedia users can be harsh critics. Although it is useful for students to be exposed to real-world feedback, it is the duty of the instructor to protect nascent writers. Wikipedia is a vigorous marketplace of ideas, and caustic remarks from users may discourage students who are still honing their abilities.

• Assessment is difficult. By design, Wikipedia is a perpetual work in progress, so mechanical, structural, and cognitive features commonly associated with effective writing do not necessarily apply. Also, student contributions are frequently scattered across multiple articles, and may focus on tasks such as revision or editing. Consequently, holistic assessment is all but impossible. While flawed, quantitative assessment based upon word count is one of the few methods that accounts for the variety of contribution options. Instructors can impose a grading standard closer to that of conventional composition, but such a move endorses the existence of objective good writing and undercuts the rhetorical goal of suiting response to context.

• Wikipedia articles are in continual flux. Other users will likely change student work soon after it is added. Student contributions may change radically before an instructor assess them. Sometimes, unsuitable contributions are rejected outright, and instructors should determine whether such additions should count toward a student's word count. Wikipedia tracks all changes to articles, but instructors must familiarize themselves with how to monitor student contributions and resolve their grading plan.

• Notions of intellectual property are different on the World Wide Web in general and Wikipedia specifically. As this article indicates, some material in Wikipedia is copied directly from other sources. Although this is officially prohibited, and such information is removed when discovered, it is technically impossible to prevent. Students are often genuinely unaware that copying and pasting material between electronic sources constitutes intellectual theft. The concept of plagiarism simply does not operate on the World Wide Web the same way it does in print media. Instructors must be prepared to open this discourse with students.

• The broad scope of Wikipedia can lead to overly-idiosyncratic topic choice. Often because of resistance or inexperience, students attempt to make contributions by creating articles that are too narrowly focused, even for a text as comprehensive as Wikipedia. Some examples from personal experience include articles covering a student's pet and imaginary childhood friends. Most of these issues are self-correcting, as these additions are quickly removed from Wikipedia, but instructors should be prepared for students that knowingly or unwittingly subvert the spirit of the project.

• As with all projects, Wikipedia contribution functions most effectively as part of a larger cycle. Dropping the project into a semester disconnected from other activities frequently confuses students. The project is most effective as part of a semester-long investigation into digital or multimedia genres, epistemology, intellectual property, or some other unifying theme.

Although it requires some cognitive stretching on the part of both instructors and students, the Wikipedia project taps into relevant themes and technologies, and offers a unique and rewarding writing experience. As with any project, results are all but guaranteed to be mixed, but real audiences and real situations are much prized in composition studies, and online production will only become increasingly important for young authors. As instructors, we would do students a disservice not to engage this burgeoning medium—while keeping, of course, an appropriately critical perspective.