Wikipedia:WSPA/IndianaStatehouse/Assignments/Final paper

Final Paper: Due December 14, 2010

The final project for the class is to write an evaluative review of the WSPA project that spans both the 2009 and 2010 classes but focuses on your personal experiences. While this paper is meant to be narrative, please include the sub headings below in your paper so that I can clearly delineate which part you are discussing.

All of the research that you need to do for this project is contained within the project and articles of Wikipedia or from class readings: you don’t have to find outside resources, but you can if you’d like.

While I have posed questions here, these are not the only ones that can be raised; feel free to bring your own ideas into it, but make sure you’ve answered what I’ve put forth here (notice that I’ve bolded this for emphasis). It goes without saying that not only am I interested in your responses I’m interested in seeing your capacity to articulate a well-rounded discussion.

Undergraduates = 4-5 pages
Graduates = 8-10 ages

Part I

Graduate students

• Describe and discuss all of the work you completed as part of your leadership role. Evaluate your work and discuss how many points out of the 100 you should get for your leadership work.
• Discuss how the class leaders helped you work collaboratively (or not). Discuss how you used the resources that were created by the other leaders for the class. Discuss ways in which the leadership component could be improved.

Undergraduate students

• Discuss how the class leaders helped you work collaboratively (or not). Discuss how you used the resources that were created by the other leaders for the class. Discuss ways in which the leadership component could be improved.

Part II

• Discuss and evaluate how you used each of the three WSPA resources (WSPA Template, WSPA Style Guide, WSPA Image Guide). Did you use these resources? Evaluate their effectiveness.

Part III

• Compare your class’ final products to that of the fall 2009 class. Each class surveyed more than 40 artworks, but clearly there were different challenges for each class. Note: all of the students last year had all of their artworks “live” in Wikipedia by the due date, while many of this year’s students did not despite the fact there was considerably more training and instruction for this project.

• If this project were to completed again next fall, suggest possible collections that should be surveyed.

Part IV

• Looking back to the first readings in this class in which we read the HHI, HHA, and SGS reports, evaluate the over all effectiveness of the WSPA project to be a tool for cultural institutions to care for cultural property. Discuss whether or not certain cultural institutions might benefit more than others with this project.

• Discuss and evaluate the potential for others not affiliated with a university or cultural institution to research and publish articles in Wikipedia about public artworks.

Part V

• Discuss and evaluate the 6 assignments that were given for this project. Was this too many, not enough? Were they too hard, too easy? I’m not interested in hearing why you did not complete the assignments.

• Evaluate your work on the Indiana Statehouse project generally on its three main components:
  • Object Selection and Research
  • Drafting and Refining
  • Publishing Article
• Out of the 6 assignments that were given, each counted the same as reading response assignment (10 points each). Evaluate your work and discuss how many points you should be given for each assignment.

Part VI

• Discuss how this information might be used by the Indiana Statehouse tour office immediately and how it can be used by other online visitors to the Statehouse.