What to Trust: Wikipedia Articles or Snapple's Fun Facts

Here is a list of things I've searched on Wikipedia today: Sushi, The Land Before Time, John Dewey, The Rubik's Cube and The Relationship between string theory and quantum field theory (not really). What did all of these topics have in common, well each of them piqued my interest during the day and I was able to find answers to my questions about these subjects rather easily with Wikipedia. By going to Wikipedia I was able to answer the following questions in a matter of minutes: how do I make sushi? Who is this Dewey guy we keep reading about? And how do I solve a Rubik's Cube? ( I lied, I had no questions about The Land Before Time, I already know way to much about it as is, I went through an intense dinosaur phase as a kid.)

I admit I am somewhat of a Wikipedia Junkie. Sometimes I start looking up one thing and the hours go by as a click on link after link. I'll give a prize to the person who can tell me how in one sitting I went from reading about the death of Michael Jackson's to the death of Che Guevara in less than three clicks. For someone who suffers hyperactive curiosity like myself Wikipedia is a godsend. However, I have often thought about why a website that is so useful for me is so widely criticized by academia, in my own personal experience. In several classes Wikipedia was banned as a research tool. In one such class, I had to do a research paper on the relationship of grunge music and the discontent of the 1980s working class. I had difficulty finding sources for my research and went to my professor for help finding sources. The very first thing he did was go on Wikipedia and find a list of Grunge documentaries and books that would be helpful. He joked and said to me "don't tell your classmates I used Wikipedia." I thought to myself if Wikipedia is the tool a highly respected professor used to find more sources, then why is it banned?

In my opinion it is not the content within Wikipedia that professors and teachers find troubling rather it is the fact that by using Wikipedia students do not learn the skills of how to do detailed academic research. While I agree that Wikipedia does not facilitate in-depth research, it is a great resource for finding a general background on a subject and in many cases has reference links so that more sources on a topic can be found. For example why go through the trouble of searching through a database for articles on John Dewey when I only want a broad overview of who he is. Searching through articles can be a grueling process. Some articles I can't access, while others are too in-depth for what I am looking for. With Wikipedia I have the information needed in seconds. I highly advocate using Wikipedia for this purpose. I think even with assignments that require thorough research, Wikipedia is great starting point.

Dewey states in My Pedagogic Creed "I believe that the school must represent present life." Today Wikipedia is very much a part of the present life for American students. Because Wikipedia has become such a massive source of knowledge, I think teachers should embrace it for it is, rather than dismiss its value all together.