Wisconsin Union Blend

From Wired Magazine:

Wikipedia Scanner — the brainchild of Cal Tech computation and neural-systems graduate student Virgil Griffith — offers users a searchable database that ties millions of anonymous Wikipedia edits to organizations where those edits apparently originated, by cross-referencing the edits with data on who owns the associated block of internet IP addresses.

It’s interesting to see where some of those edits originate, especially where major corporations are involved. There is already  a wall of shame where you can report what you feel are the most flagrant examples of corporate spin.

Wikipedia is the product not of collectivism but of unending argumentation; the corpus grows not from harmonious thought but from constant scrutiny and emendation. (Many to Many)

As hinted in a previous post on differences between wikis and blogs, wikis aren’t always used for collaborative writing. And, as the quote above reminds us, “collaboration” might not be cooperative collaboration in every wiki project.

The various ways in which “collaboration” works (or doesn’t), in different wiki projects is possible because wikis are so inherently flexible, and so initially blank, that creative folks come up with an endless supply of new ideas on how to put them to use. Even with the wide range of potential applications, most academic wiki projects seem to fall somewhere on a spectrum between two approaches to wiki collaboration:

the compilation approach: multiple authors contribute their part to a growing collection of knowledge
the consensus approach: authors work together (or perhaps against each other) to write an evolving document that reflects the perspectives of multiple contributors

The compilation approach (aka the knowledge base)

The majority of academic wiki projects I’ve seen use wikis primarily as an efficient way for a group of people to pool knowledge. Each author adds their 2 cents to the wiki, and, as a reward, benefits from the contributions of the group as a whole. In these projects, the tendency is to not edit the work of others.

An interdisciplinary project at UW-Parkside, created by Wendy Leeds Hurwitz and Shi Hae Kim is a good example:

At UW-Parkside in fall 2006, COMM 310: Communication in Everyday Life linked with TEDU 210: Teaching, Learning and Development. We put the students into groups across courses, and gave them a wiki designed to permit easy sharing of information. The Education students observed K-12 classrooms and posted fieldnotes to the wiki. The Communication students made videotapes of interaction in the same classrooms, and posted the videos, as well as transcriptions, to the wiki. All students were asked to read 10 sources and post their notes to the wiki. We created FAQ, a glossary of specialized vocabulary, and a “water cooler” where anyone could ask a question and anyone else could answer. Each student and group had their own pages, linked to those of others. Then each drew on the information collected in the wiki to write an individual paper (which was not posted to the wiki). - adapted from WiscWiki’s list of UW wiki projects

In this project, the wiki acts as an efficient clearinghouse for the data students are collecting on their classroom visits, rather than as a collaborative writing platform. Students read and draw on each others contributions, and work together to keep the resource organized, but don’t actually edit each others work.

The consensus approach

Less common, in the academic wiki projects I’ve seen, is to use the wiki as a central point for collaboration, argumentation, and consensus building.

One example is the Choose your Own Adventure mystery novel project from an intermediate French class at UW-Madison.

For this project, students worked together in groups to write a “Choose Your Own Adventure” mystery novel in French. Each group collaborated on a chapter of the story and decided on the choices the main character would make at the end of the chapter. Other groups joined in and wrote chapters corresponding to each choice. All in all, each class wrote a story with eight possible endings. - adapted from Wiki Ideas Galore!

Like many wiki projects, this one involves both the compilation and consensus approaches. The story as a whole is a compilation of the chapters submitted by each group. Each chapter is a result of collaboration and consensus among group members. (It is interesting to note however that this project was structured such that much of the consensus building and decision making happened verbally in class rather than on the wiki.)

How does your wiki work?

When I first got started working with wikis, I expected to see many more projects focused on argumentation, debate, and consensus building. I’ve been happy to see the many compilation oriented projects succeed, and it has been fascinating to see how powerful wikis can be for efficient information sharing.

But, I’m beginning to wonder - How well do wikis work for consensus oriented collaborative writing projects in academia? Are there models out there to follow? What makes these wiki projects work? Do wikis need a richer set of collaboration oriented features?

My thanks to Dorothea Salo of the General Library Technology Group for reminding me about the WikiMatrix. This site reviews and compares the many wikis that are out there. It is not a resource to which I would point the average faculty member or other instructional staff, but I think it is really useful for those IT support folks who get inquiries from the campus community on what it would take to install a wiki on a department server.

Want to learn more about blogs? Use a wiki! Wikipedia has a nice bloglossary that can clarify the terminology that surrounds blogs and blogging.

Over the past couple of weeks, at the T&LS, at the TASI, and in consultations and conversations with faculty and staff around campus, people have been thinking and talking a lot about wikis and blogs, and wondering what these tools can do to support effective teaching and learning. In this post, I hope to pull together several discussions addressing the two most common questions people have been asking about wikis and blogs recently: What are they? And what’s the difference?

Quick definitions

A wiki is a website with an edit button on it (Frey). Most of the time, when you visit a website, your only option is to read it. On a wiki, however, you can edit both the content and the organization of the site directly, right from your web browser.

A blog is a website made up of a series of “posts,” organized with the newest information at the top of the page (Hourihan). Blogs often allow your readers to submit comments on each post.

Similarities

Wikis and blogs are often discussed in the same breath, and in some respects, they are similar. Both make web publishing fast and easy. Both are often associated with written text, but also facilitate easy publishing of pictures, movies, and animation as well. And from an educational perspective, both wikis and blogs are often used as platforms for authors to interact, negotiate, and hopefully, form communities that learn and build knowledge together.

Differences

There are many differences between these two tools, but the most salient for educators is that wikis and blogs each place authors in very different relationships with each other and with the text(s) they create.

In a wiki, the document is at the center of the authoring community. Since all of the authors can edit any of the other authors’ work, the text is owned by the community, rather than particular individuals. When used for collaborative writing, the success or failure of a wiki project often hinges on the ability of the authors to negotiate with each other and reach a consensus.

Blogs, by contrast, place authors at the center of their writing community. Authors contribute posts and get commentary and responses from other authors. Individual authors own their contributions. Other authors can make comments, but no one can edit anyone else’s work. In a blogging community, authors formulate opinions in their posts, and then defend and refine their positions as other authors post comments. Blogging projects succeed when students post formative ideas and then interact with other authors through comments and subsequent posts.

Another way to look at this difference is to think about the types of interactions you’re hoping your students will have. If you want your students to collaborate on a document, negotiate and form consensus, or build a shared collection of information, wikis might be the way to go.

On the other hand, if you’re hoping your students will formulate and defend their opinions, read and react to the writing of their peers, write outside the academic register, reflect on their learning, or write with or for an audience, you might look into a blogging project.

Just a start

My hope with this post is to put forth the beginnings of an answer, rather than a comprehensive one. For example, my discussion of wikis looks exclusively at collaborative writing and largely ignores the use of wikis for knowledge or research repositories. Currently, this is my “quick answer” to these questions, formed out of a number of interesting discussions over the past couple weeks. Hopefully, the discussions will continue here in comments and future posts!

So as Doug and I were having coffee, I said “Why is it that people always mention wikis and blogs in the same breath? They’re not the same things.” Doug was having similar conversations with other people and so he set out to write down an explanation of the differences and similarities as he saw them. And that’s the post you see here.

This is the kind of griping that we want to see in this blog. It’s okay to gripe, but try to encourage yourself and others to respond in a positive way!