Wiki+Assignment+Description


 * What is the Socials/History Wiki?**

The socials/history wiki is a writing space where all socials/history students will engage actively, over the duration of one semester, with the twin goals of learning and communication in a publication medium that affords editing, linking, and dialogue as persistent and critical elements in the production of useful knowledge. The Socials/History wiki will take the form of an online set of entries that follow the standard Wikipedia encyclopedia entry genre. Our primary model for wiki entries will be Wikipedia. Wikipedia represents an important contemporary example of how a specific medium (Internet) and a particular environment (collaborative editing) intersect in such a way as to enable the most prolific and significant example to-date of public knowledge production that blurs the boundaries between producers and consumers.

**What is My Responsibility?**

In Socials/History, you are an author or an editor, of the wiki. This is the first iteration of the wiki, and as such, you are responsible for authoring, collaboratively with another student or solo, three major entries on a major topic from the course. OR for making three major revisions to an existing entry that has been authored by previous students in the course.

Choose from one of the two options below for this assignment:

**Option A: Create a New Wiki Entry - 600-900 words**

You may collaborate with one other student on this assignment.

**Evaluation Criteria**

The following criteria will be used to assess new Socials/History Wiki Entries:

Meaningful Contribution to the Wiki ||  || Limited Contribution ||
 * **Wiki Entry Focus**
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Educationally Significant ||  || Not clearly educational ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Well elaborated ||  || Unclear ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Specific Focus ||  || Too general ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Unique Critical Perspective ||  || Neutral Point of View ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * **Resources** ||
 * Diverse Knowledge Sources ||  || Limited Knowledge Sources ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Useful resources linked to the entry ||  || linked resources of limited value ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Active links to resources ||  || Broken links ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Connections to topic made through resources ||  || More connections needed ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * **Quality of Writing** ||
 * Wikipeadia Format Used ||  || Wikipeadia Format is not used ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Clear and concise ||  || Unclear and Verbose ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Few spelling or grammatical errors ||  || Multiple spelling and grammatical errors ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Clear and concise ||  || Unclear and Verbose ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Few spelling or grammatical errors ||  || Multiple spelling and grammatical errors ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||

**Option B: Substantially revise an existing entry/Improve overall coherence/structure of the Wiki**

You may collaborate with one other student on this assignment.

In addition to the revisions you make to the socials/history Wiki, you will also need to provide a description of the changes you have made along with some assessment of how your changes have improved the quality of the wiki. This description can be made on the discussion page for the entry that you are revising.
 * Can you tighten the critical focus or add to the list of resources for the entry?
 * Are you able to clarify points or offer examples that help to substantiate the key points in the entry?
 * Is there a need to update the information based upon all of the things that have happened in the field in the last 12 months?
 * Is there a need to disambiguate particular words or concepts or to combine entries that are currently in multiple areas?
 * Is there a need for a general top-level page to help to add cohorence to the sub-topic links.

**Evaluation Criteria**

The following criteria will be used to assess revisions to the wiki:

Meaningful Contribution t ||  || Limited Contribution ||
 * **Wiki Entry Focus**
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Educationally Significant ||  || Not clearly educational ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Well elaborated ||  || Unclear ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Specific Focus ||  || Too general ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Unique Critical Perspective ||  || Neutral Point of View ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * **Resources** ||
 * Diverse Knowledge Sources ||  || Limited Knowledge Sources ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Useful resources linked to the entry ||  || linked resources of limited value ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Active links to resources ||  || Broken links ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Connections to topic made through resources ||  || More connections needed ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * **Rational for Revision** ||
 * Clear and Concise Rationale Offered for Revision ||  || Vague Rationale ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||
 * Clear and Concise Rationale Offered for Revision ||  || Vague Rationale ||
 * Excellent--Avg--More Work Needed ||