School talk:History/Archive 2006

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Goals*[edit]

Circle-question-blue.svg This section is a discussion of a policy, guideline, or goal in development for the School of History. Please contribute your thoughts so that a consensus can be reached and action can be taken.

What should be the goals of the School of History? I think we should try to find something to focus on and work toward, here. Any thoughts? Jade Knight 20:13, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

  • I think one think we should work to get out fairly soon is a course on basic Historiographic methods and problems; the Philosophy of History Department will probably be instrumental in this. This could provide as an introduction to anyone who has not completed college-level History coursework dealing in Historiographical issues. Another course should make sure proper formatting/citation methods are followed. The Jade Knight 06:44, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Format style classes are going to be difficult under wiki as it will pretty much be a link to Chicago/Turabian and that's about it. Plus, I think it's going to be difficult to find wiki people that are going to write a paper just for the sake of going over the formatting. Perhaps, by covering a bit of that in each of the topics that come up, a bit of familiarity might be attained, but that's really the realm of a real college class or local writing center/tutor kind of environment. --Kfitton 14:33, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
      • That may be true; people are just going to have to learn Chicago as they go along (though, it might be worth noting that I'm not aware of any place you can find Chicago/Turabian online for free). I think something on Historiography is particularly important, however. The Jade Knight 01:21, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Turabian - http://library.concordia.ca/help/howto/turabian.pdf
    • Chicago - http://library.osu.edu/sites/guides/chicagogd.php

Just use google =P --Kfitton 18:36, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Good sources for the basics, though these are only the bare-bones of even Turabian. I guess they're better than nothing, however. Perhaps we should set up a "Chicago-style Reference Desk" or something for more detailed questions regarding citations in Chicago-style. The Jade Knight 21:15, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Google is not good enough. An academic level of expertise can only be reached when students get books from university libraries, or libraries with enough books of an academic level.--Daanschr 15:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Style*[edit]

Circle-question-blue.svg This section is a discussion of a policy, guideline, or goal in development for the School of History. Please contribute your thoughts so that a consensus can be reached and action can be taken.

Should we keep to Chicago style here? Should we allow any citation style? What are your preferences? The Jade Knight 06:52, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

  • I would suggest Chicago or Turabian, as most history professors will require one of those two. In rare cases I have seen APA, but that tends to be more psych/social work kind of situations. --Kfitton 11:32, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Turabian is simply a condensation of Chicago style. The Jade Knight 01:22, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
      • I'm aware... =P I just stated both because some history professors are quite particular. --Kfitton 18:33, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Course numbering?*[edit]

How do we want to establish course offering numbers? Suggestions? Should we use a 3 digit system or 4? Should we leave that entirely up to individual Departments? The Jade Knight 07:49, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I honestly don't think that course numbers are going to be relevant to a wiki format...in keeping with the idea that http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Portal:Education is establishing, I think that keeping valid topics in a list should be sufficient in order for people to access different projects/classes/topics. --Kfitton 14:33, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
I guess that's fine for now. Eventually, however, we will want to come up with some way of easily distinguishing various levels of content while sorting it categorically. The Jade Knight 02:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Determining "Expertise"*[edit]

Circle-question-blue.svg This section is a discussion of a policy, guideline, or goal in development for the School of History. Please contribute your thoughts so that a consensus can be reached and action can be taken.

I think the School of History, or its individual Departments, should come up with a peer review system that recognizes historiographical understanding, and allows us to separate those who may be considered "experts" in History in some sense and those who are simply interested, but do not have a strong grasp of History, or of historiographical methods and their significance. Ultimately, this distinction should (probably) be based on a review of contributions, rather than external achievements (unverifiable) or some sort of test (too difficult to administer fairly). In addition, I think that only those who have been granted this status (at least once we have a few) should be allowed to vote on its granting, and that it be required that those who have it be subjected to a regular (perhaps annual) review process, whereby the School (or their respective Departments) verify that the individual has kept to a professional standard (and to prevent anyone from resting on their laurels, thinking they've "earned" the right to be called "expert" [or whatever], regardless of what they contribute). What do you think? The Jade Knight 01:53, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Well...I think you're going to run into the same issue as before - being in a wiki environment and the challenges of keeping participants active. This is what a lot of librarians have against wiki, in that there it no verification of information beyond peer review/editing; as the flaw can be seen on current event articles and topics that are controversial. I think that people have to naturally come to wiki with the idea in mind that information here is NOT the end all, be all of discussion on a topic. Beyond obvious merit and participation, I don't think that there is going to be a reasonable way to establish 'academic validity' that doesn't impede the wiki process and drive people away from participating. Personally, anyone could look up my username and find out my background...and I don't think there is anyone disputing that I haven't put quite a bit of time into the Hitler's Germany class, but am I going to jump through hoops to prove my competancy? No, I don't have that kind of time and I've already proven it to two state boards of education for my career alone! I would be suspicious of anyone who doesn't make a username or fill out their profile, but I wouldn't go to excessive lengths to establish credentials - this isn't the right venue for that. --Kfitton 14:25, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

It could be an idea to have a section of the school of history that will try to figure out what is necessary to live up to a certain level of academic expertise. It would probably be a small group willing to work on this, but it could try to cooperate with likewise groups on the internet or try to get some support from universities.--Daanschr 15:20, 7 December 2006 (UTC)