In PAAS 302, assessment related to the Wikipedia project was based on the following:
❖ Online reading log (2% each week for 10 weeks):
➢ Each student must write and post a critical response to discussion questions related to the week’s readings on Brightspace discussion forum and Wikipedia and digital information literacy. Responses should be about 3–4 sentences or one paragraph in length, and are graded on originality, relevance, and organization.
❖ Group presentation (10%):
➢ Beginning in Week 3, each Wikipedia group will choose one week’s readings and give a 10-minute long presentation on 2-3 related Wikipedia articles. The presentation should 1) identify the main questions and themes addressed in the discussion forum; 2) explain the relevance of the 2-3 Wikipedia articles your group selected; 3) evaluate each article according to the criteria provided by Wikipedia; and 4) explain how Wikipedia was a useful or not useful resource in developing your understanding of the week’s readings.
❖ Wikipedia project (35%): The final group assignment consists of one edited Wikipedia entry, following the guidelines as specified by the instructor.
Working in a group of 2-3 students, choose a Wikipedia topic that reflects a recent change or shift in cultural beliefs or practices.
➢ Wikipedia presentation (5% group grade): Explain how the course is related to your Wikipedia topic by preparing it as a presentation for the class in no more than 10 minutes in Weeks 12-13. The presentation should share your group process regarding:
How you selected your article/topic
How the article/topic is related to our course and the study of Asian studies
Major objectives and challenges of the editing project
Did you learn any important lessons regarding Wikipedia or digital literacy in general?
➢ Wikipedia individual reflection (10% individual grade): Each individual group member will submit a 2-3-page double-spaced typed analysis of the topic’s significance and relevance to our class.
-Did you accomplish your main objective(s) in editing the article?
-How did you improve the existing Wikipedia article?
-Why was this important in order to advance understanding about Asian studies?
-How well did you collaborate with your group members?
-What was your individual role?
-How was the peer review process helpful or not?
-How did you address the concerns raised by your peer reviewers?
➢ Wikipedia entry (20%): Provide documentation (e.g. screenshots of your sandbox) to highlight your group’s edits and changes to the existing article. Identify what information (links, images, etc.) you added. Explain your rationale for organization and structure of the edited entry (subsections).
Some students expressed concerns about the assessment criteria for their Wiki editing assignment, including the tension of having the freedom to choose their own topics and the relevance of the topics chosen to course content; whether editing Wikipedia articles in languages other than English is allowed and how to conduct peer review when students have varying levels of fluency or foreign language skills; and the challenges of communicating with other Wikipedia editors and the technical anxiety caused by editing and deleting content. They felt that the time commitment was reasonable.
Some of the concerns were discussed in the Section 4 Challenges in Teaching and Learning Process. To address possible concerns on assessment, the instructor may consider the following in Weeks 6-9, when students decide on their Wikipedia editing topics:
Provide clear criteria and guidelines for grading assignments, including how topics must be related to course content and how relevance must be demonstrated in group presentations, the limitation of choosing English Wikipedia articles, how to save and present students' edits, and how to conduct peer review. Remind students that whether their edits are accepted by other Wikipedians will not affect their grades.
Share the sample Wikipedia Assignment Assessment rubric table from Wiki Education to guide students in conducting peer reviews.
Ask us