June 26, 2010
AATK 15th Annual Conference, St. Louis, MO
Eunkyung Lee, Rutgers University
Jinsun Lee, Old Dominion University
Young-mee Yu Cho, Rutgers University
1







Introduction: Pedagogy for Digital Natives
Wikipedia
Project Overview
Project Outcomes: Benefits & Barriers
Suggestions
Things to Consider
References
2


-
Young generation and new technology
Today’s students (K-college) represent the first generation
that has grown up immersed in digital devices.
Digital Natives
“native speakers of the digital language of computers, video
games and the Internet” (Prensky, 2001)
Digital Natives think and process information fundamentally
differently from their predecessors (Digital Immigrants).
They enjoy and prefer multi-tasking, random access (like
hyperlinking), networking, and entertaining content.
3
Dilemmas in education
“…our Digital Immigrant instructors, who speak an outdated
language (that of the pre-digital age), are struggling to teach a
population that speaks an entirely new language” (Prensky, 2001)
 New pedagogy making good use of digital tools is required to
encourage Digital Natives to actively participate in learning
processes.
 Five Cs in new pedagogy for Digital Natives (Bruns, 2008)

Creative

Collaborative

Critical

Combinatory

Communicative

4
Wikipedia projects facilitate students’ active
involvement in class and promote their
collaborative skills, imbuing them with a democratic
process of knowledge production (Bruns, 2008; Kidd
et al., 2009; Richardson, 2008).
 Wikipedia-based projects in language courses
effectively engage students in critical thinking and
active reframing of their knowledge (Montgomery,
2008).

5

How much do you
know about
Wikipedia?
6
If anyone can edit
anything on the site
any time they want,
how in the world
can we trust what
we read there?
What kind of
knowledge and
information is more
reliable, particularly
in humanities and
social science?
7
Prof. Alex Halavais (2004) at University of
Buffalo has tested Wikipedia by creating thirteen
errors on various posts on Wikipedia. Then, he
observed whether and how quickly the errors
would be fixed.
→100% were fixed within a few hours.

The Denver Post (2007) graded Wikipedia by asking
experts to review entries in their field of study.
→Four out of five agreed their relevant Wikipedia
entries are “accurate, informative, comprehensive
and a great resource for students.”

8

-
History
Launched by Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger in 2001
Adopted wiki software (developed in 1995) that let any readers add, alter
or delete web content

-
Popularity
14 million volunteer-authored articles in 262 languages
(English 52%, Spanish 19%, French 5%, Polish, German, Japanese 3%)
More than 330 million visitors every month
One of the top five most visited website in the world.
The English-language Wikipedia is the only noncommercial site in the top
twenty sites for the US.
-

-
Main Features
Nonprofit-making site
Open participation (member/non-member can edit)
Creative Commons: Copyright Free
“Publish-then-Filter” model
9



Edit tag
History tag
Discussion tag
10
Goals
To promote students’ learning by having them publish Korea-related articles on
Wikipedia English
- To foster interactive communication and mutual understanding of American
students and Korean native students
- To enrich the quality and the quantity of Korea-related articles on Wikipedia ,
whose articles seem to provide first-access sources regarding Korea worldwide
 Period: late March~early May, 2010
 Participants:
- 26 US students enrolled in “Korean Language in Culture & Society” course at
Rutgers + 15 Korean students recruited from Ewha Woman’s University
- Each group, composed of Rutgers and Ewha students, was required to collect
data, write and edit a draft, and contribute an article to Wikipedia
 Instructors:
- Young-mee Yu Cho, main instructor
- Eunkyung Lee, wikiproject web management
- Jinsun Lee, project design & wikipedia manual

-
11
Opening a working site on Wikispaces (www.wikispaces.com)
• Recruiting Ewha volunteers
•
Wikispaces
Groupmaking
Publication
• Group formation: Rutgers + Ewha students
• Online discussion and collaborative creation of a draft
• Wikipedia tutorial
• Uploading articles to Wikipedia
• Reviewing posted articles
Review • Evaluation of the project
Evaluation
• Survey & Interview
12

Group page
-
Everyone can
post/ edit
Brainstorming
Draft writing
Discussions
(Discussion tab)
-
13

-
Rutgers Wikipedia Tutorial (45 minutes)
Creating of Wikipedia ID
How to determine the subject on which to
contribute
Wikipedia policies & Witiquette
Wikipedia mark-up languages
How to insert images
How to edit & post articles
14

-


Two possible ways
Creating new subjects
Editing and enriching existing subjects
Which will be more beneficial for non-Korean
Wikipedia visitors?
This project focused more on editing and
updating content under broadly defined
subject categories dealing with Korea.
15

Revise the page
of “Korean
Name” by
inserting a
section
16
Comparison with using “history tag”
The Student’s Revision ↓
Current Page (as of 12 June ) ↓
17

Best parts of the project
1. Interest in and satisfaction with Wikipedia publications
“learning how to create and edit pages was most interesting”
“it is fun to contribute something that many people will read”
“the best part was finishing and seeing your edits on the actual Wikipedia
page. It gives you satisfaction that you contributed and published
something that everyone could see.”
2. Critical thinking and learning
“it is an effective and more interpretive way of learning new information”
“it certainly improved my research skills, especially in Korean language and
culture”
3. Communication and collaboration with new people
“working with students in Korea was new and interesting. “
“ I met new people and learned in depth about my culture”
“collaboration with students in Korea was very interesting; made you search
harder to prove your point”
18

Worst parts of the project
1. Lack of integration and schedule conflicts
“If this group wiki page was connected to a (class) presentation, there would
be more motivation”
“I would recommend this project only if it did not coincide with final week”
“If we were doing this project over a longer period of time with clearer
directions”
“[if] the teacher could guide us step by step.”
2. Difficulties in cross-national communication
“communication was a major issue in this project”
“because of time difference…I think that was the large obstacle”
3. insufficient technical support
“the direction at the computer lab was very quick and hard to follow…there
was nowhere to get help when we needed the help”
19





-
More organized plan of the project
The project should be Integrated with the syllabus.
Technical support
A technical session needs to be held at the beginning of the semester.
Technical assistants are required through out.
Group formation
One-on-one joint groups may be more effective than group-to-group
collaborations to meet individuals’ needs
Posting-then-editing
Pre-production on Wikispaces seems unnecessary. Students should be
able to directly post their content to Wikipedia and revise/edit it
Advanced ways of cooperation with partner institutions in Korea
Korean director/coordinator is needed to recruit Korean members and
provide them with detailed guidelines of the Wikipedia project.
20
Consider the different academic calendars of
American & Korean colleges
 Devise a long-term plan to develop cooperation
with partner Institutions in Korea
cf. international, long-distance, (cross-credit)
courses
 Make use of a variety of communication channels
(to include both asynchronous and synchronous):
Skype, Google talk, Facebook, Twitter
 Develop online and personnel resources to offer
sufficient technical support to students

21
Case study: Uses of wikispaces at Columbia University
http://www.wikispaces.com/site/privatelabel/case-study-columbia
including the youtube conference video clips

New Media in Education 2008 Conference hosted by the Columbia
Center for New Media Teaching & Learning (CCNMTL) on Youtube (49:13)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ul9YM7QZZis

Combined classes between English and Canadian students using
wikispaces
http://flatplanet.wikispaces.com/About

Academic references regarding educational uses of wikis
http://educationalwikis.wikispaces.com/Articles+and+Resources

Guideline for K-12 teachers
http://www.teachersfirst.com/content/wiki/wikiideas1.cfm

22





Bruns, A. (2008). Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and beyond: from
production to produsage. Peter Lang Publishing.
Kidd, J., O’Shea P., Kaufman, J., Baker, P., Xiao Y., & Allen D. (2009).
Traditional textbook vs. student-authored Wikibook: a quosiexperimental study of student attitudes and behaviors. Presented at the
conference of American Educational Research Association.
Montgomery, C. (2008). Wikis in the World Language Classroom:
transforming teaching, learning, & teacher preparation with technology.
Retrieved on Jan. 22, 2010 from http://cmwikipaper.wikispaces.com.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon,
9(5), Retrieved on Feb. 10, 2010 from
http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf
Richardson, W. (2008). Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web
Tools for Classrooms, 2nd ed. Corwin Press.
23