By Gerard Sasges
For me, the internet is a great way to allow educators in the humanities to build classes around outcome-based projects rather than around exams or other assignments. In this presentation I'm going to discuss a graduate modules I taught at NUS in SEM 1 of AY2012-13, SE5213. The module's subject was revolt and revolution in Southeast Asia. All work except for the final exam was web-based. The first half of the modules saw students write book reviews they then uploaded to Google Books and Goodreads. In the second half of the module, students created Wikipedia entries on topics of their choice. Wikipedia-based projects, I will argue, represent an exciting opportunity to create humanities modules that allow students to engage in the public and genuinely useful production of knowledge. In my presentation, I'll touch on aspects of module design, discuss how the module worked in practice, highlight some of the more exciting outcomes of the classes, and invite discussion of ways to improve the modules and apply the ideas to other contexts.
Philosophy of Education and Educational Philosophy
Wikipedia as a teaching tool in humanities modules
1. Using
Wikipedia
in
the
humanities
Gerard
Sasges,
Department
of
Southeast
Asian
Studies
BuzzEd
2013:
Teaching
with
Technology
NaDonal
University
of
Singapore,
January
10,
2013
2. Who
I
am
• Historian
of
modern
Vietnam
• From
2002-‐2011
I
directed
the
University
of
California’s
Study
Abroad
Program
in
Hanoi
• Joined
NUS
in
2012
• Been
experimenDng
with
technology
in
teaching
since
2006
as
a
way
to
create
project-‐based,
real-‐world
learning
opportuniDes
• Earlier
projects
include
• Project
Kiếm
ăn
• hWp://projectkieman.wordpress.com/
• hWp://projectkiemanvn.wordpress.com/
3. SE5213
Revolt
and
Revolution
in
Southeast
Asia
• Taking
the
commitment
to
“real,”
project-‐oriented
learning
that
had
shaped
my
earlier
courses
and
upping
the
“public”
element
• Inspired
by
a
short
and
very
pracDcally-‐oriented
arDcle
in
Perspec'ves
on
History
by
Jeremy
Brown
and
Benedicte
Melanie
Olsen
enDtled
“Teaching
Tiananmen”
• hWp://www.historians.org/perspecDves/issues/2012/1204/
Teaching-‐Tiananmen.cfm
• Which
led
me
to
another
arDcle
by
Roy
Rozenweig
enDtled
“Can
History
be
Open
Source?”
• hWp://chnm.gmu.edu/essays-‐on-‐history-‐new-‐media/essays/?
essayid=42
• Which
in
turn
led
me
to
the
list
of
essays
and
resources
at
• hWp://chnm.gmu.edu/essays-‐on-‐history-‐new-‐media/essays/
4. A
poll
that
is
also
an
argument
• How
many
of
us
use
Wikipedia?
For
what?
• How
would
we
characterize
the
content
and
coverage?
• How
many
of
us
have
contributed
to
Wikipedia?
• Do
academics
have
a
role
to
play
in
Wikipedia?
5. SE5213
module
design
• Students
free
to
choose
any
topic
related
to
“revolt
and
revoluDon”
broadly
understood.
• The
module
had
two
parts
corresponding
to
the
first
and
second
half
of
the
semester.
• In
part
one,
students
review
two
books
related
to
their
general
topic
and
upload
the
reviews
to
Goodreads/
Google
Books.
• In
part
two,
students
either
modify
an
exisDng
Wikipedia
entry
or
create
a
new
one.
• Each
part
requires
students
to
do
an
outline,
draf,
and
peer
review
before
uploading
final
draf.
• Note:
while
the
module
was
organized
around
individual
projects,
it
could
just
as
easily
be
organized
around
group
work.
6. What
we
learned
from
the
book
reviews
• Useful
preparaDon
for
Wikipedia
entry
(usually)
• Challenging
• Argument
• Context
• length
• Could
be
used
on
its
own
7. What
we
learned
from
the
Wikipedia
entry
• Importance
of
clear
wriDng
• Importance
of
clear
organizaDon
• Importance
of
citaDons/sources
• The
challenges
of
the
“Neutral
Point
Of
View”
(NPOV)
• A
different
way
of
wriDng
• On
one
level
true
• Students
have
to
idenDfy
least
biased
sources,
synthesize
available
informaDon
into
a
meta-‐”story”,
idenDfy
and
explain
important
debates
• On
another
level
completely
false
• Students
learn
in
a
very
concrete
way
that
the
narraDve
is
the
argument
• have
to
make
crucial
choices
about
where
to
start
and
end
their
story,
what
to
put
in
and
what
to
leave
out
8. Challenges
• Wikipedia
is
a
clunky
interface
• Too
much
freedom?
• The
eternal
challenge
of
the
peer
review
• Was
it
too
much
work?
9. Successes
• All
of
our
work
had
a
context
and
a
public
• We
made
a
genuine
contribuDon
to
improving
the
quality
and
coverage
of
popular
resources
like
Google
Books
and
Wikipedia
• We
wrote
and
we
got
creaDve
• We
got
involved
in
controversy
• We
changed
history
(and
people
actually
read
it)!
• We
did
projects
that
were
meaningful
to
us
(and
maybe
meaningful
to
society)