As someone who has done Wikipedia assignments for classes, I'll vouch
for the fact that it is notoriously hard to grade. Who did what, and
how do you measure it against what others have done? If it's a
pass/fail assignment that's one thing, but otherwise, it's very
complicated.
Also, putting in tags into the general article for the use of a single
class is not only nonscalable, but pretty disruptive. :)
-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)
On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 04:45:17 +0200, Jens Ropers <ropers(a)ropersonline.com> wrote:
On 25 Aug 2004, at 02:50,
wikien-l-request(a)Wikipedia.org wrote:
The instructor
commented that he didn't know how you could give an objective grade to
"improving an article."
He doesn't know the history tool then.
What's wrong with using something like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?
title=Gray%27s_Anatomy&diff=5327961&oldid=5248468
That's making it pretty obvious what to grade, IMHO.
Yes, admittedly, if there are many edits by other's in between, then it
might become difficult. -- But how about this:
Instruct students to stick the {{inuse}} tagon the article they've
chosen to improve (see [[Template:Inuse]]).
IMPORTANT: Also instruct them not to leave that on there longer than a
day!
(Other then that, they could use the preview function and commit all in
one go. Might be difficult though if they are using a certain thing
called "MSIE", where with certain versions, if you press ESC within a
text box it blanks the entire thing irrevocably). It might be better to
have them use an external editor then, but that doesn't protect them
from edit conflicts.
So clearly the previous option is MUCH better.)
- Jens [[User:Ropers]]
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
--
Andrew Lih
andrew.lih(a)gmail.com