The Challenge of Wikis in the Classroom

I learned today, via the Mail and Guardian Online, about a Wiki designed by the Conservative and Religious Right in the US. Called Conservapedia, this wiki gives me a terrific counterpoint to Wikipedia in my classroom struggles to point out that wikis, like any source of information, have biases.

Conservapedia was setup to refute directly the biases of Wikipedia. According to the article:

Although entries on Wikipedia are open for anyone to edit, conservative campaigners say they are unable to make changes to articles on the site because of inherent bias by its global team of volunteer editors. Instead they have chosen to build a clone which they hope will promote Christian values.

“I’ve tried editing Wikipedia, and found that the biased editors who dominate it censor or change facts to suit their views,” Andy Schlafly, the founder of Conservapedia, told the Guardian. “In one case my factual edits were removed within 60 seconds — so editing Wikipedia is no longer a viable approach.”

Among his criticisms listed on Conservapedia, Schlafly explains how many Wikipedia articles often use British spelling instead of American English and says that it “refuses” to give enough credit to Christianity for the Renaissance. “Facts against the theory of evolution are almost immediately censored,” he continues.

And, from the front page of Conservapedia:

Conservapedia is a much-needed alternative to Wikipedia, which is increasingly anti-Christian and anti-American. On Wikipedia, many of the dates are provided in the anti-Christian “C.E.” instead of “A.D.”, which Conservapedia uses. Christianity receives no credit for the great advances and discoveries it inspired, such as those of the Renaissance.

The fact that Conservapedia’s biases are so obvious — stated so overtly — should raise the question for students about the biases inherent in Wikipedia. I do wonder, however, when I will see the first Conservapedia citation in a student essay.

Personal note: I often find it difficult to explain to students why Wikipedia is not a suitable source of information for essays — especially if it is the only source consulted or cited. Students seem to see the rapid retrieval of information as a preferable substitute for library research and rarely question the validity or biases inherent in Wikipedia articles. Frankly, students may not yet have developed the critical research and evaluative skills to know what is worth using from Wikipedia and what should be questioned thoroughly or avoided altogether. I have blogged in the past about the value and challenges of Wikipedia in the classroom. Others blog about the challenges stemming from the democratic editing of wikis in general.

Share This