Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Tuesday, 14th October 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Falling exam passes blamed on Wikipedia 'littered with inaccuracies'



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 21 June 2008
WIKIPEDIA and other online research sources were yesterday blamed for Scotland's falling exam pass rates.
The Scottish Parent Teacher Council (SPTC) said pupils are turning to websites and internet resources that contain inaccurate or deliberately misleading information before passing it off as their own work.

The group singled out online encyclopedi
a Wikipedia, which allows entries to be logged or updated by anyone and is not verified by researchers, as the main source of information.

Standard Grade pass rates were down for the first time in four years last year and the SPTC is now calling for pupils to be given lessons on using the internet appropriately for additional research purposes "before the problem gets out of hand".

Eleanor Coner, the SPTC's information officer, said: "Children are very IT-savvy, but they are rubbish at researching. The sad fact is most children these days use libraries for computers, not the books. We accept that as a sign of the times, but schools must teach pupils not to believe everything they read.

"It's dangerous when the internet is littered with opinion and inaccurate information which could be taken as fact.

"Internet plagiarism is a problem. Pupils think 'I'll nick that and nobody will notice', but the Scottish Qualifications Authority has robust ways of checking for plagiarism and parents are worried their children will fail their exams."

Ronnie Smith, the general secretary of the Educational Institute of Scotland, said there was a higher risk of inaccurate information on the internet than in books. He added: "We need to make sure youngsters don't take what they read online as fact."

Several further education institutions have already banned students from using the interactive encyclopaedia. At one college in Vermont in the US, a history professor found several students repeated the same error in exam papers. On discovering the information came from Wikipedia, the college outlawed its future use.

Ms Coner said overuse of the internet also meant students did not develop interpretative skills.

She said: "Pupils are in danger of believing what they read. It's part of our short-cut culture, where we will do anything to pass a test, without properly engaging with the information or questions that are being asked.

"It's all very well to glance at a website for research, but you have to check what you are reading is correct. Anything can be untrue. I can claim to be a world expert on anything if I set up a website on the internet."

Alan Johnson, the UK Education Secretary, was lambasted earlier this year for suggesting the website could be a positive educational tool for children.

He described the internet as "an incredible force for good in education", singling out Wikipedia for praise.

A disclaimer on Wikipedia states "it is important to note that fledgling, or less well monitored, articles may be susceptible to vandalism and insertion of false information".

Boasting over two million articles, Wikipedia is used by about 6 per cent of internet users, significantly more than the traffic to more authorised sites, such as those of newspapers. Its articles are mainly edited by a team of volunteers.

'There is a great deal of misinformation on the net'

LAST week I heard the writer Colin Bateman describe how, on looking himself up on Wikipedia, he was dismayed to discover that his young son had gone online and added the sentence: "Mr Bateman is currently suffering from penile dysfunction." Fortunately his dad saw the funny side – and was proud his child could spell "dysfunction" correctly.

In common with students everywhere, I use Wikipedia as a research tool, and so does my son. Occasionally, I come across areas where there is academic dissent – for example on whether Homer was an individual poet, and this is usually clearly indicated.

There are subjects on which I wouldn't trust any open-edit web resource, because I've come across too many conspiracy theorists in my time. But generally I think the biggest risk of using any internet source is that it leads to plagiarism, intended or unintended.

It is so easy to cut and paste, meaning only to put together some useful notes, and then to draw on them too heavily without acknowledging the source. At the extreme it is all too easy to buy "off the peg" essays on any subject.

When I was studying public health, we were trained to test the reliability of health-related websites, because there is a great deal of subjective misinformation on the net which may appear reliable.

The great strength of the internet is that it means we can amass information very readily, but it is hard to distinguish between authoritative, scientifically tested information, and something more akin to rumour.

One topic in my son's Higher History course is the civil rights movement in the US. Starting from the simplest of internet queries, it wasn't long before he got into quite contentious issues, which were presented in very partial terms by organisations with vested interests.

It was hugely useful to him to develop the skill of challenging what was presented as "fact", but it is a skill that has to be learnt, and which many internet users won't have. Of course, that skill isn't just useful for assessing the reliability of the internet. Mr Bateman, for example, earns his living by making up stories.

• Miranda Harvey is a parent of a pupil at Boroughmuir High School, Edinburgh.

Politics

POLITICIANS and their parties are among those Wikipedia entries most vulnerable to deliberate misinformation.

During his time in Downing Street, Tony Blair may have been alarmed to find himself slurred as "George Bush's bitch-boy".

The SNP's entry has previously seen the party described as one "influenced by childish Jacobitism", while Scottish Labour has been dubbed a "fascist organisation".

Celebrity

AS WELL as political heavy-hitters, the realm of celebrity is a favourite for Wikipedia's mischief-makers.

At different times, Kylie Minogue has had her genealogical history thrown into doubt after her entry claimed that she was "the more beautiful and talented older sister" of Michael Jackson.

Robbie Williams suffered an even crueller entry – it was at one point alleged on Wikipedia that he made a living from eating hamsters in pubs in and around Stoke.

Fantasists

WIKIPEDIA is seen by some as a blank canvas where self-publicists can promote themselves. In 2006, a call centre worker from Glasgow was exposed after concocting an elaborate alter ego through his Wikipedia page, which gave the impression he was a highly decorated war hero.

Alan Mcilwraith, renaming himself Captain Sir Alan, claimed to have been an officer in the Parachute Regiment, who finished top of his class at Sandhurst before going on to become a terrorism expert.

After two years of conducting this charade, someone who knew Mcilwraith revealed the sham.



The full article contains 1141 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 21 June 2008 12:05 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

The Answer,

Glasgow 21/06/2008 00:28:56
51 million population England
5 million population scotsland
3 million population Wales

Undergraduate students qualifying to enter/study at Oxford university! (Oxford and Cambridge ranked 2 and 3 in the world)

9,141 England
362 Wales

239 scotsland

Well done the welsh education system.

tinyurl.com/5ehwfp

2

Boy Wonder,

21/06/2008 07:43:14
Two days ago my nephew was asking me about reading graphic novelisations of the great novels, such as The Count of Monte Cristo, Black Beauty, Last of the Mohicans and others. I told him that while I commend the creators of such works ... there is nothing better than reading the proper book since graphic novels edit much out for reasons of space. The trouble is ... kids don't want to spend hours reading a book ... and we only have ourselves to blame for that as our society takes life at a much faster pace than 20 years ago.

As an aside, he askled me if I had ever read Aw-thull-oh. When I said no and asked who wrote it, he replied, William Shakespeare. I fell about laughing for a good hour much to his annoyance. I'm still laughing, cos the poor wee kid meant Othello! :D
3

The Answer,

Glasgow 21/06/2008 08:25:43
#38 yukyfingers

Low skill jobs are for scotch like yourself!
read and weep.

51 million population England
5 million population scotsland
3 million population Wales

Undergraduate students qualifying to enter/study at Oxford university! (Oxford and Cambridge ranked 2 and 3 in the world)

9,141 England
362 Wales

239 scotsland

Well done the welsh education system.

tinyurl.com/5ehwfp

4

Isonomia,

Lenzie 21/06/2008 08:29:26
Wikipedia: "There is an overwelming scientific consensus" ... basically that we are all going to a fiery hell because we are burning fossil fuel which can never run out.

Yes there are articles that will completely mislead the public. (The truth is that global temperatures have been dropping this century and huge numbers of scientists, maybe majority, now accept that the theory of global warming has been discredit by the drop in temperature in the 21st century. But a few zealots still hold the fort at Wikipedia and refuse to allow any mention of the truth!

Yes I'm sure there a few articles like global warming which are "zealotised" or vandalised by inserting false information, but on the boring stuff I use on Wikipedia the vast majority is factual and as far as I can tell checking the sources, it is accurate.
5

Isonomia,

Lenzie 21/06/2008 08:34:33
And the great thing about wikipedia is that you can correct your typos!
6

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 21/06/2008 09:10:45
The increased use of Wikipedia as a primary source for knowledge and factual accuracy is the end of scholarship and civilisation and civilised thought as we know it.
7

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 21/06/2008 10:06:34
No doubt the Greeks had similar complaints:
our children no longer read the Odyssey!

We now live in the I.T. Age and all these antediluvian, goose quill elitists will just have to like it, or lump it!

Who really wants to read Shakespeare for the fun of it!

8

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 21/06/2008 10:16:33
As professional disinformators, "The Scotsman" must deplore internet upstarts like Wikipedia..
9

albanman,

Edinburgh 21/06/2008 10:17:46
Recently, a friend of mine showed me a Wikipedia article which had some clearly incorrect information. He changed the details and provided a link to Encyclopedia Brittanica to back up his alteration - another Wikipedia user (the one who had entered the incorrect information) changed it back and wrote to my friend saying that "Brittanica's definition is wrong." Amazing arrogance. Sadly, this is not unusual on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia attempts to be an encyclopedia, but is too often used by people who offer opinion rather than verifiable data. Even a cursory reading of the inumerable changes and 'debates' shows that many of its frequent contributors are arrogant, close-minded and need to get a life outside of Wikipedia. It is too unreliable as a source of information, and is thus not a true encyclopedia. Students in my classes are not permitted to cite Wikipedia when doing essays or projects as there are several reliable encyclopedias available. Wikipedia an enclyclopedia? Hardly.
10

Richardinho,

21/06/2008 10:19:48
Wikipedia articles are all required to be sourced. At the bottom of every page you'll see a list of references to every statement-(in theory).
If something you read in Wikipedia is not referenced, then treat it with caution.

Used properly, Wikipedia is a fantastic tool for learning.
11

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 21/06/2008 10:22:42
#7 Mr. Lachie Todd

I do, I do!

And there are many of us out there who find Shakespeare's prose and characters to be the stuff of REAL entertainment. Think Lady Macbeth, Hamlet, Falstaff, Titania, Puck, Henry V,etc.

You just have to consider the number of adaptations of his plays starting in the 1930s with "A Midsummer Night's Dream" with Jimmy Cagney to know that his appeal is universal and POPULAR.

What is there not to like about "Shakespeare in Love" or the weirdly theatrical "Titus" (the title character, Titus Andronicus is played by the star of "Silence of the Lambs") with it's sick-making violence and blood and plenty of nubile, nude bodies or Roman Polanski's "Macbeth" with its repulsive "three weird sisters" and yet more blood and gore?

Perhaps if our youth saw these movies they would go back to the originals an even branch out into his other plays that are replete with famous lines that are repeated over and over even in these philistine times.
12

Mcsnagpile,

21/06/2008 10:54:48
Unfortunately our history books are also full of inaccuracy's.
You have to learn the right lies to get your degree.
13

Gordon Angus,

Sydney not the Australian one 21/06/2008 11:09:17
In regard to what No 10 wrote, the so called "authoritive referencing" does not work. Earlier this year I was advised by two academics to check information in a text that I had written, with Wikepedia, in all of the 588 entries referenced, there were over 1,200 inaccuracies (many outright lies) identified, with many contradicting other entries. In one particularly slanderous entry, it was referenced to a reputable museum's articles on line. Having checked with the curator, the refence was known to be false, and that the museum was unable to have it removed from Wikepedia!
Yours,
G/.
14

Concerned local,

Edinburgh 21/06/2008 11:30:10
Could it be somethng to do with the quality of teaching? The question that dare not be asked.... easier to blame something or someone else than try to persuade the dinosaurs of the EIS that reform is necessary. Because surely if teaching standards are up to scratch, the existence of Wiki et al is moot?
15

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 21/06/2008 11:30:14
The advice I would give to anyone researching anything is to check factual accuracy by always using more than one source of information. Golden rule!
16

Richardinho,

21/06/2008 12:18:28
#13 All you're saying is that the sources wikipedia makes reference to are subject to inaccuracy. But that's not Wikipedia's fault. In reality everything is prone to inaccuracy. The smart student knows to look at different sources and not accept anything at face value.

I would suggest to use Wikipedia as a 'portal' to other sources of knowledge, rather than as a definitive source in itself.

for the record, I have rarely encountered any inaccurate information (that I knew to be so) in Wikipedia.
17

Richardinho,

21/06/2008 12:20:04
'In one particularly slanderous entry, it was referenced to a reputable museum's articles on line. Having checked with the curator, the refence was known to be false, and that the museum was unable to have it removed from Wikepedia!'

So why didn't the museum simply take their article offline, or correct it, or even log in and edit Wikipedia's entry?
18

Benjamin,

Dresden 21/06/2008 13:53:35
Do people really confuse Wikipedia and an encyclopedia? The one is opinion driven, the other is fact. How hard is that?
19

Fifi la Bonbon,

21/06/2008 14:48:00
My favourite Wikipedia lie was a claim in an article on the Congolese economy that Um Bongo was a major export of theirs. It lasted for years. Gone now, unfortunately. But check out the article on Innellan in Argyll and Bute to see how trustworthy Wikipedia really is.
20

BG the TB,

US 21/06/2008 14:53:25
"Standard Grade pass rates were down for the first time in four years last year...WIKIPEDIA and other online research sources were yesterday blamed for Scotland's falling exam pass rates."

So there was no Internet access in Scotland before last year? Kids couldn't access Wikipedia prior to last year? :-)

The Scottish Parent Teacher Council is using some pretty faulty logic here. Exam scores fall in one year and they blame the Internet? What about the immediately preceding years when the scores didn't fall? Something tells me that kids were using the Internet the as well. :-)
21

Western Gael,

21/06/2008 16:43:28
Long ago, the standard requirement for "research papers" was to have two references for each asserted fact. Having read so many Jeremiads about students mindlessly copying wrom Wikipedia, and so few "mea culpas" from the miscreants, it is clear that our education system and parents are both at fault in teaching neither "honour" nor "due diligence." And, Albanman #9, you could benefit from some due diligence yourself -- the proper spelling is B-r-i-t-a-n-n-i-c-a.
22

Beth Boyle,

NY 21/06/2008 18:23:05
That will teach them. Crack opened a book or go to a library. Wikipedia is not the same as reading the real thing.
23

Calummac,

21/06/2008 19:48:53
I like the line about not believing all you read - quite rich printing that in the Scotsman!
24

Fairfax,

21/06/2008 22:21:17
BGtheTB (20): "Exam scores fall in one year and they blame the Internet?"

But exam scores should sometimes fall. The constant rise is simply grade inflation. There is nothing to worry about here at all.
25

Wee Pal Joe,

22/06/2008 00:20:09
Believe it or not, there are inaccuracies in books too.
26

A.J.,

L.A., CA. 22/06/2008 03:51:37
Easier to blame Wikipedia than the fact that you're poor parents and your children are out partying or playing video games.
Inaccuracies are found in standard encyclopedias (and newspapers) too. And besides, don't your schools provide textbooks?
27

Rick Metzger,

Orlando 22/06/2008 04:15:21
Hmmm...
1. Government schools do not like competition. Anything that is unregulated pretty much defines potential competition.

2. Wikipedia is unregulated.

3. Government schools throughout the English-speaking world have enormous budgets, far more than enough to, alone or in collaboration, establish a credible and thorough online encyclopedia.

4. There is no evidence that government schools, alone or in collaboration, have approached Brittanica with a serious offer to subsidize an online version of the latter's encyclopedia, free to the world - not only as the presumable remedy to British childrens' falling marks, but as a benefit to the underprivileged everywhere who might have access to an inexpensive computer.

Conclusion: Government schools fear Wikipedia precisely because it represents a threat to their control of what goes into the minds of captive students.
28

Tecumseh Sherman,

California 22/06/2008 04:15:48
As a teacher, I regularly see this site used as a primary source for information. Unfortunately, it is extremely ragged in its reliability, and very often rife with very subjective opinion. It is my understanding that the University of California at Berkeley, considered the top public university in the U.S. does not allow Wikipedia to be used by its students as a source reference. Students in general are very adept at technology, but it is important for them to gain an understanding of the fact that technological literacy and the ability to think critically and develop reasoned conclusions are very diffent things. Unfortunately, it still takes work to become a learned person.
29

chromenun,

USA 22/06/2008 05:04:15
From what I have encountered, children today are too smart to believe all that they read, and they tend to dig deeper for truth.
Remember a couple of things about life...one, history is told by the WINNERS...but that is not necessarily the whole truth...
Two, the bible says man/humans should tithe, but why would god need money??? Man created money, and capitalism, so am I to believe that god is a capitalist???
Therefore I put more belief in what I read on Wikipedia than I do in what I have read in the bible and on many news articles, and especially in the comments sections...we all have OPINIONS!!!! But that does not make them valid...
30

Geez Geez,

Edinburgh 22/06/2008 08:32:51
Wikipedia is a great resource but i would nt base my essay around it. You can pick up some great background knowledge, then through further research begin to get more detailed information.

But you cant blame the internet for school marks dropping - its either the teachers fault or the students
31

Fairfax,

22/06/2008 09:03:19
chromenun (29): "one, history is told by the WINNERS."

That's often said, but it's by no means always true. For example, Polybius' history of the rise of the Roman Republic is a major source for the Punic Wars and the Roman absorption of the Greek States, but was written by a Greek, one of the losers. To give a second, almost all of the academic and popular literature on the Vietnam War is produced by the USA, not by Vietnam. To give a third, accounts of the rapid decline and fall of the British Empire following WWII are dominated by British accounts.
32

Umar,

USA 22/06/2008 09:03:37
"POLITICIANS and their parties are among those Wikipedia entries most vulnerable to deliberate misinformation. During his time in Downing Street, Tony Blair may have been alarmed to find himself slurred as 'George Bush's bitch-boy'."

What, you mean he WASN'T?
33

alcides,

united states 22/06/2008 10:17:51
Wikipedia doesnt talk in front of a classroom.

Teachers do.

The world is changing, the old facade of dispassionate instruction in place of the inquisitive desire for knowledge is what makes some internet website the blame for bad teaching.

Im sorry but most teachers suck (especially in the states). They treat it like a darn typical day job than an opportunity to inspire...and so garbage in, garbage out. Cop-out teaching will get cop-out students. I have no doubt their professors spent about as much time gathering material for class as students did from wikipedia.

When was the last time you had a professor who really cared about the subject he/she taught? Passion is contangeous, when instructors get into the material the students respond.

I see the school system as the problem, leave wikipedia alone; classrooms need to revamp the education system with the changing times.
34

nk,

edin 22/06/2008 10:39:06
Just one example............to show how BAD Wikipedia is............
A few years ago I stumbled on ..." .303 RIFLE
in the British Army" Wikipedia said..."withdrawn from service in 1955" Under their "correction" method, I went online to say.......NO , IT WAS STILL IN use in 1959 or later, BECAUSE I was in Germany with the The Seaforth Highlanders then and it was wall to wall No 4 SMLEs .303 rifles and as much ammo as you wanted for field firing. As it happened, SIX 7.62 SLRs had just arrived and my squad were in the first classes to convert to them.

I had a look later and somebody else had erased my corrections. Ditto with the .303 Jungle Carbine and other variants
35

King Ghidora,

Ohio, USA 22/06/2008 12:18:29
I once tried to add information to a person's biography. The person had become famous for harassing a professor and ridiculing his beliefs with politically correct misinformation. I tried 3 times to include the fact about what this person was actually known for and each time Wikipedia deleted the information. What I said was a solid fact yet it was deemed inappropriate by Wikipedia. It's no wonder that information gleaned from that source is highly questionable. The administrators definitely have a political bent there.
36

King Ghidora,

Ohio USA 22/06/2008 12:29:25
The comment about the Bible being less valuable as a source of information than Wikipedia is just so typical of the anti-Christian hysteria that grips much of the world. Whoever said the Bible would be a source of information about anything except what it is about. And the historical accuracy of events in the Bible is well documented. It is probably the most researched book in history and it's claims have been studied and scrutinized for almost 2000 years. Contemporay historians of Biblical events provide proof that the information in the Bible is accurate. And archaeology has shown it to be a very accurate portrayal of historical events. Yet its recorded information is scorned by those who hate religion. It's bias like that which makes Wikipedia a vast reserve of misinformation.
37

Reader11722,

22/06/2008 12:46:18
Schools hate it when students do not swallow their mandated dogma. The internet allows students to see all sides of issues. This is a case of a school losing control of their student's minds. It is also the first step to censorship. Even in the US, censorship is king. The US gov't (and their corporate friends), already detain protesters, ban books like "America Deceived" from Amazon and shut down Ron Paul. Free Speech forever (learn from the internet, break the school's mind control).
Last link (before Google Books caves to pressure and drops the title):
http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0
38

,

22/06/2008 12:50:06
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
39

Stephen A.,

Manchester NH USA 22/06/2008 15:09:38
There are indeed flaws in Wikipedia, both in accuracy and in its execution. Groups of biased, no-life editor/administrators bully their biased opinions into articles (the topic of Global Warming is a great example, and any articles about a conservative, both in the UK or US are loaded up with "controversy" sections that simply don't exist for left-leaning politicians.) Any REAL experts who dare to add a bit of real-life personal experience to articles (like #34 above) face having their changes "reverted" by over-protective people who think they "own" the place, and do pretty much run it.

Libelous content has often appeared on Wikipedia, such as the John Siegenthaller incident, and glaring errors are well documented. Though I do agree with some here who are saying that it's the teachers' responsibility to teach factual information, I also believe the students who are using this resource and other online sites as a crutch are as much to blame for their own failing scores.
40

KYJurisDoctor,

USA 22/06/2008 15:20:42
That's FUNNY. The CHEATERS get CHEATED! OsiSpeaks[dot]com

41

Tom Burdine,

Sugar Hill 22/06/2008 15:34:35
I agree with the Education Secretary that Wikipedia is a great tool. The Internet has, in one flash, uplifted mankind into a new age of information, and the problems it creates pale in comparison to the benefits that it brings to the evolution of all life and forces in the cosmos.........

Tom Burdine
Sugar Hill, GA
42

Viper21,

USA 22/06/2008 16:13:29
Well, DUH! When you put up so-called a factual information site, with the ability of every idiot on the planet to access and make changes to, then you essentially have nothing more than chat room for morons. Learn to read a book, learn to research proper sites and resources if you want the correct information. Stop looking for shortcuts and easy ways out. Life is not easy, and was not supposed to be, deal with it, or stay stupid.
43

uniqorn51,

tucson, Az 22/06/2008 16:34:33
It is relieving to see that other western nations have also lost their way in education. In the USA, our constitution prohibits the use of federal funding for education (by not providing for it). However, our constitution has been ignored by our governments. I believe that state and local jurisdiction in education would make educators more accountable since people would be closer to the receiver of their tax monies. The Feds have made a shambles of education through political control. Another disaster in American education is the dearth of males. When I went to elementary school (1950's), there were few male teachers, but they were the principals and other administrators. When the graduates of the feminist revolution moved into our schools, men were removed from all positions. Children now have no fathers at home and so few men in the school systems. Men make great educators and disciplinarians. Most women in our educational system are also incurable male bashers, and teach man-hate feminist politics (as they learned in college and on TV). They are an absolute danger to boys (read "The War Against Boys", by Christina Hoff Sommers) Get the Feds out!
44

davidbmac,

Pennsylvania, USA 22/06/2008 16:47:34
Publik Socialist Inducitrination Edgeumacation sistem cuming home to roast.

Seriously, here in the States, the education system in some areas has graduating high school students that can't read their diplomas.

Get back to real teaching and end the indoctrination and things will improve.
45

opa,

usa 22/06/2008 17:18:59
wiki editors perpetuate innaccurcy via their kingdom of darkness... contrary opinions are not allowed on any topic without editoral approval. A single editor will dump added comments for any of several filvous reasons to perpetuate "that editors" brand of darkness & refuses other opinions or corrections. Furthermore there is no viable option to re-dress an editor's exclusion. The WIKI is a sham run by self agrandizing editors, many of whom have little or no expertise in their proported area of pontification.
46

radge dug,

22/06/2008 17:53:05
Theres a lot of misinformation in the Scotsman. Take the "drinking is like child porn" story for example.
47

radge dug,

22/06/2008 17:53:05
Theres a lot of misinformation in the Scotsman. Take the "drinking is like child porn" story for example.
48

Robin Starveling,

Outskirts Athens 22/06/2008 17:58:01
The fallability of Wikipedia provides an opportunity to teach our children not to accept just because it is written.
49

JZ,

USA 22/06/2008 18:00:17
what a terrible headline...did the idiot who wrote the headline even READ this story
50

ma77,

22/06/2008 19:13:51
Perhaps parents should look to themselves, their government and their society for the source of the problem. Wikipedia has its shortcomings, including outright bias of some vested interests. However, blaming the falling test scores of some country long in decline on several years of Wikipedia's effective presence seems a stretch, to say the least.

The Talk pages can be useful to identify the range of bias, facts and controversy around some subjects.
51

Nonconfomist,

USA 22/06/2008 19:21:40
So is the real problem WIKIpedia or the fact that Education today just hasn't grasp how irrelevant their curriculum is to the lives of students??? Why hasn't education embraced the internet to create Edu-Pedias??? Books are great... for leisurely reading but kids today want and need "instant" information... and a book doesn't do that.

If education does not figure out how to embrace IT they are going to miss the boat when it comes to these student... they are truly digital natives.
52

Iben Hadd,

VA USA 22/06/2008 20:04:37
In a speech shortly after Google had become a publicly traded company for many billions of dollars Michael Crichton said "we now know what information is worth, what is still in question is how much GOOD INFORMATION is worth".
The internet adds more information in a year than all information known to the world the year before. My bet is that bad info out-numbers good by at least 60 to 40.
In the preceeding paragraph I made a statement I don't know for a fact but it is similar to statements I have previously seen on the internet. I just contributed to the bad information, before the day is over it will be "fact" somewhere on the net.
53

Hanz,

logtastica 22/06/2008 20:24:33
This article doesn't say how much test scores have dropped, or how they determined that Wikipedia is the cause. All it has is one example of an unspecified history error, and some general gripes about celebrities and politicians.

It sounds like just another aging crank bawling about "kids these days" and "the internet". Does the author have no education about how a thesis is to be supported?
54

AbleGoodman,

Grand Junction, USA 22/06/2008 20:31:49
I prefer to ignore Wikipedia's errata and assinine policies (which allow repulsive children-unfriendly explicit sodomy pictures) in favor of focusing on the fact Wikipedia and the many links contained in its articles remain THE outstanding starting point for Internet research. In that regard, despite some of the self-absorbed imbeciles who post articles and pictures, Wikipedia is still THE gateway to Internet research. I find it enormously useful.
As cause-and-effect retribution for Wikipedia's deceptive (done in the name of "tolerance", "open mindedness", and "intellectual freedom") lack of concern for the REAL education of children, I removed the "donate to Wikipedia" button from my "mashup" website.
I fail to see the logic in believing that smearing feces on one's urethra has some legitimate connection to intellectual freedom and education for children.
Accordingly, I dissent.
55

Michael Scott1111,

London 22/06/2008 21:38:29
"Wikipedia is the best thing ever. Anyone in the world can write anything they want about any subject. So you know you are getting the best possible information."

--Michael Scott
56

Larry Daley,

Corvallis, Oregon 22/06/2008 21:45:09
For an well documented example of Wikipedia capture by ideologues read:

Daley, Larry 2006 Descriptions of pernicious attempts to gain control of the World Wide Web: the Cuba Case. Cuba in Transition ASCE 16: 236-248
lanic.utexas.edu/project/asce/pdfs/volume16/pdfs/daley.pdf
57

Christopher D. Mader,

Weirton, WV 22/06/2008 22:09:32
Wikipedia in an article about the Supreme Court: Josh is on the Supreme Court cuz Josh knows what's up

Wikipedia on George Washington Carver: George Washington Carver created the first computer out a peanut in 1906

Wikipedia on my hometown page: For a good time, call (304) xxx-xxxx

Its a good place to start a research paper or get a general feel on a topic but dont take everything you read seriously
58

Davi3d,

Tennessee, USA 22/06/2008 23:00:47
That this article would imply that what newspapers print is more credible than Wikipedia is laughable.

There are few print outlets that are not thinly veiled propagandists for the left (most numerous) or the right.

The state of the educational system in the USA is such that few current college graduates could pass the final test given to 8th grade students in the 1890s.
59

Potus_lies,

USA 23/06/2008 00:17:48
So, Wikipedia is unreliable, and yet I'm supposed to take all of your unsubstantiated assertions as more reliable? I don't think so. If you know of a wikipedia page that is inaccurate why don't you give the URL in your comment? Better yet, why don't you log in to wikipedia and correct the mistake.

Britannica has more errors than Wikipedia, and you cannot correct them.

Try vandalizing a wikipedia page, and just watch how quickly it will be corrected. Less than 10 minutes.


60

Potus_lies,

USA 23/06/2008 00:19:32
Here is the URL for the wikipedia article on George Washington Carver:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington_Carver

Mr. Christopher Mader, there is nothing in this article remotely close to what you asserted.
61

Jon Awbrey,

http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey 23/06/2008 01:45:23
Could you please check your facts on the following statement:

"Mr Bateman is currently suffering from p-e-n-i-l-e dysfunction." Fortunately his dad saw the funny side — and was proud his child could spell "dysfunction" correctly."

Though I'm not discounting the possibility of a second opinion, or even multiple insertions of similar diagnoses, the edit of 11 days duration found by "Iamlost" at The Wikipedia Review spelled it "erectal disfunction" [sic] — which I gather is a radically different affliction.

Vide: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Colin_Bateman&diff=213939438&oldid=211511217

NB. Your comment-bot won't allow me to quote your use of the word p-e-n-i-l-e!
62

bring them on,

23/06/2008 04:56:18
What an excuse.

All kids should be made to memorise the New Testament.
63

Nous,

Waterloo, ON 23/06/2008 07:29:11
Adding to Comment 31: History is not always written by the winners. The Bible was written by the Jews, who have not always been winners! Thucydides was an Athenian who wrote the History of the Peloponesian Wars, i.e. the war between the Athenian League and the Spartan League - Athens lost. It is mainly the French who write about French history, including the defeats of France. (Victor Hugo's novel Les Miserables is in large part about the Battle of Waterloo, which Napoleon lost.) Likewise, it is mainly Germans who write German history, etc.
64

Porry,

Nowgorod 23/06/2008 09:17:35
Nous (#63), unfortunately it is mainly Brits and Americans who come closer to the truth when they write about German history than the generation of young German historians who seem to believe they have an obligation to change factsor at least misinterpret them in order to please certain people. The book by Andreas Kossert, "Masuria: The forgotten South of East Prussia" might serve as an example here.
65

Les insolences du Frère Untel,

23/06/2008 09:55:04
Agree with Richardinho. Use wikipedia as a base, not as a sole resource. look at the talk pages as a starting point.

Wikipedia is a wonderful resource, just use your own judgement and like everything else in this world , dont always believe what you read.

At least it doesnt have one single overwhelming political bias.
66

Les insolences du Frère Untel,

23/06/2008 10:00:17
My favourite has to be the Albion Rovers entry.

3rd or 4th best in the world ?!

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Albion_Rovers_F.C.&diff=200793977&oldid=199839509
67

suzuky7502000,

Belgium 23/06/2008 15:13:25
I noticed that many french articles are the exact replica of the english articles...The translation mistakes can be detected after reading a few lines only!!!
68

Al Mackay,

London 23/06/2008 15:29:45
Go back to your sheep Mr Welsh Education system..
Why apply for Oxbridge, when you have fees paid to go to Edinburgh, St Andrews & Strathclyde? What's your alumnus...Swansea poly? Dumbf.k.....
69

radge dug,

23/06/2008 21:52:05
#68 - Maybe the Welsh do better as so many of them have bilingual education? Even in Scotland, the Gaelic medium kids are streets ahead of their English-only counterparts. Check out the stats or go and see for yourself.
70

Vincent-W,

25/06/2008 16:47:07
Radge - Your reasoning is rubbish, while I totally agree that bilingual education has many advantages (and it can be any two languages, Gaelic offers no special advantages).

The reason there are so few is because Scots teachers and parents actively dissaude kids from having wider horizons.
71

Vincent-W,

25/06/2008 16:48:07
Wikipedia is a more reliable source of information than the Scotsman.
72

Fishface,

Borders 25/06/2008 22:12:04
"Nothing exists except atoms and empty space; everything else is opinion."
(attributed to Democritus of Abdera)

"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." Albert Einstein

"We are here and it is now. Further than that, all human knowledge is moonshine."
H L Mencken

"Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited, whereas imagination embraces the entire world, stimulating progress, giving birth to evolution." Albert Einstein

"The problem with our education system is not the quality of sources of information students consult, but the stultifying lack of inspiration and imagination in what (and how) they're taught." Fishface
73

nuet,

Tucson, Arizona, USA 28/06/2008 23:28:44
"It's dangerous when the internet is littered with opinion and inaccurate information which could be taken as fact."
As if books, magazines and newspapers - and radio and tv aren't littered with opinion and inaccurate information!

"Anything can be untrue. I can claim to be a world expert on anything if I set up a website on the internet."
People with power and money can buy whole media systems, set up ThinkTanks which also claim privileged access to the TRUTH.

Falling exam pass rates in Scotland may, however, be significant. But I would not blame it on inaccuracies on the Internet.
Actually, Wikipedia has an excellent self correcting process and eventually highlights alternative positions. Hackers attempt to bias Wikipedia entries, but that is also monitored. This is much better feedback and correction that in most other media.

Most passive media have high selection bias. Those who consistently access the same media limit their sources. This holds true for having fixed internet sources, and sources with automatic updates. The internet enables a learner to quickly examine sources of different perspectives and even find comparisons and evaluations. This is very difficult in the passive media.

However, there are competencies in using all media, and there is almost no instruction or education in using media, passive or active, for serious research among conflicting sources. This lack of research skills, not the lack of information or resources, contributes heavily to our contemporary messes.
74

Joe BtotheE,

South Korea. 24/07/2008 11:20:26
This is hilarious. if not for the ridiculous headline, which ironically enough constitutes faulty information. So wikipedia = bad, newspaper articles are good?
Let's take the information from this article for instance. According to this article, wikipedia is blamed, and hence a causal factor in failing exam grades. What evidence do we have for this? Because Wikipedia's existence is CORRELATED with failing exam grades, hence it must be CAUSING failing exam grades. that's it. No mention of a regression analysis ruling out omitted variable bias, links to the study, or how carefully controlled the factors were. In effect, this article is as guilty as wikipedia is for bad information, with the exception that I can't change the article to correct the mistake... Until you give me the peer reviewed article that shows a CAUSAL relation I will treat this article like I do with any article in wikipedia, with a grain of salt.
75

Christopher D. Mader,

Weirton, WV 03/08/2008 04:30:22
Well, if you learned anything from this news story, you would realize that information can be put on or taken off at any time on wikipedia. I believe I was the one who took it off so yeah, it definitely isnt on there now. Read the story and know what you're talking about before you decide to post something and call me a liar, sir/madame

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In