Wikipedia:CARL Medical Editing Initiative/Fall 2021/Course Overview/Assignment 3

  Assignment 3: Individual Page Improvement Plan

Assignment 3: Wikipedia Page Improvement Plan (Group Assignment)
Assignment 3: Wikipedia Page Improvement Plan (Small Group 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 November 29th, 2021. ''Note: This is a group assignment done in your small groups of 2-3 students. If you haven’t already, please email the Year 1 Curricular Coordinator ugmeyr1@queensu.ca with a list of your group members.''


 * Your completed assignment must be emailed to tutors (1 per small group) and an anonymous version posted in your individual sandboxes (due) by 11:30pm November 19th 2021. Your article talk page also has to be updated by this same due date (see # 5 below). Please post the assignment in each of your sandboxes (not just one team member) and please be sure to make your sandbox version anonymous (no name or student number).


 * Faculty tutors will return marked assignments via email by November 26th at noon so you will have their feedback to adjust your talk page proposed changes (if required) and prior to editing the Wikipedia article live on Monday November 29th 2021.

Instructions:
1.      Outline your specific planned changes to your section of the article, labelled “Proposed Changes”. Each student in your small group should 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 sources (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 Sources.”

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

 * Due date: This small group (2-3 students) assignment must be emailed to tutors and an anonymous version posted in your sandboxes (due) by 11:30pm November 19th, 2021. Your article talk page also has to be updated by this same due date.


 * Student Names: (please do not include your name in the sandbox, only include your names in the version you email to your tutor)


 * Wikipedia Article Title:

Marking notes (this is shared with students and tutors)


 * 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 (3 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 proposed for the article has been justified by the students. 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 students have 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 students have identified any validity issues or potential bias within the secondary source they have chosen to support their proposed change. The students written content demonstrates an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence they have identified. The students can speculate on the potential bias of their source and whether (and how) that might have affected their extracted information.

5.      Article improvement (1 marks): The students have shared their proposed improvement on their article talk page. This entry is formatted according to the supplied template and the students have included the reference and exact improvement that they propose to make on Wikipedia.

Grade:            /10