Wikipedia E-Portfolio Assignment

I have had a few questions from students so let me clarify this assignment a bit more.

The assignment to write on Wikipedia is really to show you how easy it is for anyone to create information there and hence, how unreliable it might be. Remember, in academia we're interested in peer-reviewed scholarly sources (usually!). It also helps you as students to become producers and communicators rather than simply consumers of information. This is something too that you can add to your CV to show how you engage with content (in your field).

BUT the way we will mark the assignment is really focused on the e-portfolio entry. If you look at the wikipedia assignment google doc you will see that the rubric is really geared to the analysis/critical interpretation of your ACT of writing the wikipedia article rather than the article itself. We're more about marking the reflective content rather than the entry. Of course part of the content mark (how focused etc it is) comes from the Wikipedia article you have written too.

This Wikipedia article forms part of the e-portfolio which means when you write your blog post ABOUT the writing of your article:

1. Include at least one image
2. Include at least one external link (somewhere out in the WWW – probably to your article)
3. Include at least one reference to a fellow student’s blog post (you must link to the post, i.e. internal link)
4. Be on topic (i.e. related to our class work).
5. Each blog post should be at least two paragraphs but no more than four.

Note on Quality of E-Portfolio and Wikipedia Article Content:

Rating	Characteristics
4	Exceptional. The blog entry is focused and coherently integrates examples with explanations or analysis. The entry demonstrates awareness of its own limitations or implications, and it considers multiple perspectives when appropriate. The entry reflects in-depth engagement with the topic and demonstrates interaction and engagement with lecture content. Appropriate references are included to support arguments. Submitted on time. Wiki: Length: For the purposes of this assignment, a reasonable article will contain 300-600 words, which correspond to 1.5-3 pages of standard double-space text. Content: Neutral and verifiable Uses quotations Uses twitter alias or real name for revision history/marking purposes
3	Satisfactory. The blog entry is reasonably focused, and explanations or analysis are mostly based on examples or other evidence. Fewer connections are made between ideas, and though new insights are offered, they are not fully developed. The entry reflects moderate engagement with the topic and lecture content. Some references are included. Wiki: Length: follows the recommended standard Content: Neutral and verifiable Uses quotations or paraphrases where appropriate Uses twitter alias or real name for revision history/marking purposes
2	Underdeveloped. The blog entry is mostly description or summary, without consideration of alternative perspectives, and few connections are made between ideas. The entry reflects passing engagement with the topic and lectures. Few references are included. Wiki article most copies with a few paraphrases little to no referencing/citations length is insufficient Not a recognisable name/twitter alias
1	Limited. The blog entry is unfocused, or simply rehashes previous comments, and displays no evidence of student engagement with the topic or lectures. Insufficient references to support content. Wiki simply copies text from elsewhere, no references, incorrect length
0	No Credit. The blog entry is missing or consists of one or two disconnected sentences. No referencing. Submitted after the deadline. Wiki - does not follow any of the recommendations for content or length