So you're telling me... I can cite Wikipedia as a reliable source?

In my K12 experience, Wikipedia had a bad rap. I remember the common refrain before every research project: "...and you CANNOT use Wikipedia as one of your sources!" 

Poor Wikipedia. Seemingly the bane of all secondary teachers.  

Perhaps there was a time in Wikipedia's earlier years when it could never be used as a trustworthy source. Today, however, with the rate at which information changes and the number of editors on Wikipedia pages, it might not be as dicey as everyone thought. 

I was particularly astonished to learn in Jeff's class that the half-life of facts today is just a number of months. Having an online encyclopedia that can be updated in real time allows for the possibility of a source that is up-to-date and fact-checked by swaths of people from all over the world. This is not to say that all Wikipedia articles are equivalent to a peer reviewed journal article, but some of them certainly are, and some may be even more reliable than more traditionally accepted sources, such as textbooks and other websites. For example, how often in school did we question a textbook's validity based on how long ago it was published? And the question Jeff posed that really stuck with me was, how often are we asked to research the textbook's editor? In my experience, both of those answers are "never."

In the age of technology, part of our jobs as educators is to teach students how to think critically and learn how to evaluate the legitimacy of all the information that is being thrown at them. Instead of completely swearing off Wikipedia, what if we invited our students to evaluate for themselves whether the page they are on is reliable or not? 

Conveniently built into Wikipedia's website is the ability to check each page's reliability. (I don't know how I never knew about this until last week!). Users can click on the "Talk" tab at the top of their article and immediately see a quality grade for the article as well as feedback regarding its accuracy. Anything above an A is exceptional and comparable to a professional encyclopedia. Here is a link to an explanation of Wikipedia's Quality Scale.

Wikipedia is also an incredible avenue for students to make meaning of their own research. When I was in my senior year of undergrad, I took an art history course entitled "Art and Activism in Latin America." We learned about seminal artists from Latin America in the 20th century that have historically been underrepresented in the global art world. As our final project, the professor let us each choose a Wikipedia page that had not been thoroughly developed and contribute to its contents. 

This was a wonderful opportunity for me to feel like my research was actually meaningful and to positively contribute to the representation of these artists and artistic movements. (Speaking of which, if you are interested in learning about the Nueva Figuración movement, you can check out the page I contributed to here :) )

I would love to do research projects in this way and give students the opportunity to see their work posted on Wikipedia. It helps students see the relevance and importance of the work they do in school and empowers them to see how they can make an impact outside of the classroom.

Thanks, Wikipedia, for surprising me in the best of ways.