Wikipedia:CARL Medical Editing Initiative/Fall 2020/Course Overview/Assignment 3

Getting Started Click here to return to
Course Overview Practice Editing How to Edit
Resources and Videos Reliable Sources Community Consensus
(How to Use the Talk Pages) Track our Progress Academic Articles:
Medicine and Wikipedia

Assignment 3: Individual Page Improvement Plan

Assignment 3: Wikipedia Page Improvement Plan (Individual Assignment)

• Goal: Prepare planned edits for Wikipedia and post them to the article talk page on Wikipedia. This is meant to be an iterative process, with the feedback from your *tutors incorporated before editing Wikipedia live (making actual edits to the article) in class on December 7th, 2020.
• Your completed assignment must be emailed to tutors and an anonymous version posted in your sandboxes (due) by 11:30pm December 4th 2020. Your article talk page also has to be updated by this same due date (see # 5 below).
• Faculty tutors will return marked assignments via email by Monday December 7th at noon so you will have their feedback prior to editing the Wikipedia article live.

Instructions:

1. Outline your specific planned changes to your section of the article, labelled “Proposed Changes”. Target 1-2 sentences for your improvements. Use the exact language you plan to post to the Wikipedia community and ensure that it is written in a way that is easily understood by non-medical people.
2. After each proposed change, briefly explain the rationale for the change and the reference(s) you have used to support your content. Label this section “Rationale for proposed change.”
3. Identify any controversy or varied opinions about planned changes in your section and explain how you decided to move forward with the position you have taken. Add this piece to the rationale section.
4. Please identify any issues or concerns with the source (including any possibility of bias) and how (or whether) this has impacted your plans for the information you are choosing to share. Label this section “Critique of Source.”
5. On your Wikipedia article talk page, you are required to share a summary of your proposed article improvements. An explanation such as you have done for the rest of this assignment is not required or appropriate for the talk page. Please use the following template for your group on the talk page of your article. Although your group will only have one entry on the article talk page, each person is expected to log into Wikipedia and share their specific sentence (and reference), proposed deletion (if you have one), and any other proposed improvements in the talk page entry for your group. Please be sure to include your proposed reference with textbook page numbers if you used a textbook and the reference should be inserted using the “cite” tool in Wikipedia.

Marking Rubric Assignment # 3

Marking notes (this is shared with students and tutors)

• Due date: The assignment must be emailed to tutors and an anonymous version posted in your sandboxes (due) by 11:30pm December 4th, 2020. Your article talk page also has to be updated by this same due date.
• Student Name: (please do not include your name in the sandbox, only include your name in the version you email to your tutor)
• Wikipedia Article Title:
• This assignment is worth 10% of the course grade. Ideal student work shows the changes they are planning to make and provides a clear rationale, gives a short appraisal of the validity of the resource that they used as a reference, and identifies areas of nuance or controversy with the content and how they resolved this in their proposed changes. Please record your marks and any specific feedback to the below five questions:

1. Proposed Changes (2 marks): The planned 1-2 sentences are clear, written in simple language, free of jargon, and understandable to a 12-year-old (grade 8). Technical and medical terms are wiki-linked if they have not yet appeared in the article. “People-first” language is used and the word “patient” is avoided (i.e., “People with diabetes” rather than “diabetics”).
2. Rationale for proposed change (3 marks): Each of the new sentences (1-2) proposed for the article has been justified by the student. This justification includes why the change is necessary, where the information came from, and why the content they are adding or replacing is inadequate in its current form.
3. Area of controversy (if applicable) (1 mark): The student has shown areas of ambiguity or controversy for the proposed change and the position taken has been clearly justified.(note if there is no possible controversy or ambiguity, skip this section and add 1 mark to question 2 for a total grade of 10)
4. Critique of source (2 marks): The student has identified any validity issues or potential bias within the secondary source they have chosen to support their proposed change. The student’s written content demonstrates an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence they have identified. The student can speculate on the potential bias of their source and whether (and how) that might have affected their extracted information.
5. Article improvement (2 marks): The student has shared their proposed improvement on their article talk page. This entry is formatted according to the supplied template and the student has included the reference and exact improvement that they propose to make on Wikipedia.

Grade: /10