1. APS Wikipedia Initiative: Using Wikipedia Writing in Psychology Classes Rosta Farzan & Robert Kraut Human Computer Interaction Institute Carnegie Mellon University

2. Robert Kraut – Professor, Social psychologist & human-computer interaction, Carnegie Mellon – Used Wikipedia writing in two courses Rosta Farzan – Assistant professor, Information sciences, University of Pittsburgh – Primary developer for Association for Psychological Science/Wikipedia Initiative tools Paula Marentette – Professor of Psychology, University of Alberta – User Wikipedia writing in one class Jami Mathewson – Higher education initiative, WikiMedia Foundation Who we are

3. Introduction to Wikipedia The APS Wikipedia Initiative Why use Wikipedia writing assignments in class Tips for creating an assignment Challenges Resources – WMF Educational Initiative – APS Wikipedia Initiative Portal Outline

4. Why use Wikipedia writing assignments in your class? Improves what the general public knows about psychological science Provides high quality learning experiences for students

5. Wikipedia is one of the top five visited web sites Wikipedia has over 400 million unique visitors per month comprising 11.7 billion page request a month, which represents 5% of the world population Highly popular

6. Major source of information on most psychological concepts

7. Yet many Wikipedia articles on psychology were impoverished or out of date A Stub Virtually no content 350 words No references

8. Wikipedia: Anyone can edit almost any page (in real-time) http://www.lkozma.net/wpv/

9. Wikipedia: Behind the article covers

10. APS is calling on its Members to support the Association’s mission to deploy the power of Wikipedia to represent scientific psychology as fully and as accurately as possible and thereby to promote the free teaching of psychology worldwide.

11. Initiative is producing gratifying amounts of high quality work 126 PhD psychologists 36 psychology classes with 752 students Collectively improved more than 1,250 Wikipedia articles (~18%) and wrote over 3,000 pages of text Students do more work than PhD psychologists at comparable quality Users# editing articlesArticles editedWords added All6031079826,636 PhDs67256107,267 Students535749720,021

13. Original 1 article combing bio and theory Sections: 7 Words: 831 Images: 0 References: 5 External links: 7 New 2 pages with bio separated from theory Sections: 27 Words: 5,669 Images: 1 References: 35 External links: 18

14. The assignment is valuable for students Strongly motivating – An authentic writing assignment – Their work is seen by thousands Learning opportunities – Mastering a topic in psychology – Reading the research literature – Writing for the general public – Learning how Internet knowledge is produced

15. Recognition – Did You Know?

16. Topic of the article they edited Norms and culture of Wikipedia community Technical aspects of Wikipedia Students found Wikipedia assignments effective in learning

17. Students are highly motivated and proud that their work will be a public document that they can share with parents and friends and it is really beneficial for them to write it. Quotes from faculty

18. Majority of students take the assignment very seriously and they are very excited about the broad audience and they work really hard on the article….The assignment helped them become more informed about how Wikipedia works and even though they were junior students their contribution improved the articles substantially (an important contribution to the field) Quotes from faculty

19. Class size & level – Typical is upper-level undergrad lecture or seminar, with ~20 students – Graduate seminars – 1,700-student introductory class Small or substantial contributions Write solo or in small team. – Some evidence that team writing is most effective Wikipedia assignments came in a variety of formats

20. Edit an article related to class – Improve a poor quality psychology article to “good article” status – Write a new article – Add a new section – Add references Review classmate’s work (in a minority of classes) Write a reflective essay – The rationale for article edits – What you learned about psychology – What you learned about Wikipedia community Typical Wikipedia assignments

21. Intro to Wikipedia & the assignment Students get familiar with Wikipedia & editing – Create user page, write on a talk page – Read tutorials & policy pages Select article – From list precompiled by instructor – Identified by student, with instructor’s permission Evaluate the selected article – Analyze areas for improvement in the article – Identify the relevant, current literature – Propose plan for improvement – Describe plans on article’s talk page Typical time-line

22. Revise out of public view – Wikipedia sandbox – Word or Google document Get feedback from peers & instructor – In class – On-line – Explicit peer review Typical time-line (cont)

23. Post updates to the public article If appropriate, nominate for ‘Did You Know” review. – New article – Existing article expanded 5x If appropriate, nominate for ‘Good Article’ status Respond to community comments & revise Write self-reflection essay Grade Typical time-line (cont.)

24. Letter grades for quality of contribution – Final Article – Reflective essay Relaxed grading: pass/fail for effort Detailed grading for different pieces of the assignment – E.g., Points for creating account, creating user page, picking article, critiquing article, planning edits, reviewing peers, final article, reflective essay Typical grading rubrics

25. Students need to learn: – A psychology topic in depth – Wikipedia technology for editing – Wikipedia norms & culture Faculty spend more effort than on a typical term-paper assignment – Students receive the most feedback from their professor and less from other students or Wikipedia community – Since article is a public document, faculty feel some responsible Wikipedia editing can be hard

26. Neutral point of view & no original content – Terms papers and literature reviews should make an argument – Wikipedia articles should only include information from authorities sources – Editors shouldn’t draw conclusions or argue a position Clash between academic and Wikipedia values over writing goal

27. Scientists value peer reviewed journal articles Wikipedians prefer secondary sources – “Articles should rely on secondary sources whenever possible. For example, a review article, monograph, or textbook is better than a primary research paper” – “Articles should be based mainly on reliable secondary sources, published sources with a reputation for fact- checking and accuracy. This means that we only publish the opinions of reliable authors, and not the opinions of Wikipedians who have read and interpreted primary source material for themselves.”secondary sources If your students get this response, push back on an article’s talk page Clash between academic and Wikipedia values over reliable sources

28. Typical student sentence – “In a study done by Brown and Munger (2010), they manipulated whether the camera was rotating or translating through the scene and found larger representational momentum for rotations.” APA rewrite – “Brown and Munger (2010) found larger representational momentum for camera rotations compared to translations.” Wikipedia rewrite – “More representational momentum occurs for camera rotations compared to translations through a scene. [1] ” [1] 1. ^ Brown, Travis A.; Munger, Margaret P. (2010). "Representational momentum, spatial layout, and viewpoint dependency". Visual Cognition 18: 780–800. doi:10.1080/13506280903336535.^ doi10.1080/13506280903336535 Writing concisely

29. Follow the Bold-Revert-Discuss cycle If feedback is reasonable, accept the criticisms & fix problems If feedback is not reasonable, – Revert unwarranted changes – Argue your position on the article talk page Responding to feedback

30. 30 DEMO

31. Signup

33. Your profile

34. Finding articles

35. Register a course

36. Tracking students’ activity

38. Constructing course timeline

39. Following editors/articles/classes

40. Help pages

41. Step by step tutorials

42. NSF funded project We built tools to support classes in selecting articles, editing & interacting with the Wikipedia community Our research evaluates their effectiveness – Surveys for you and your students – Random assignment experiments with tools Some features might be available to a random set of students Opt-out if you do not want your class to participate Support for research

43. Robert Kraut, robert.kraut@cmu.edu Rosta Farzan, rfarzan@pitt.edu Questions?