ON the other hand, Britannica's citations are limited for students to learn
about the reliability of the source. World Book gives you the author of the
article, along with the author's profession. Wikipeda has footnotes for
some of of the facts that lead to an author you can further track. In
teaching 6-7-8 graders, I allow the use of sentences in Wikipedia that have
a trackable footnote,
I use nutrition for a diabetic cats as my example (our essential questions
being" How do I take care of a diabetic cat?")
"They may also avoid sugary foods and milk; since they are lactose
intolerant <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactose_intolerant>, these sugars
are not easily digested and may cause soft stools or
Footnote 144: Kienzle, E. (1994). "Blood Sugar Levels and Renal Sugar
Excretion after the Intake of High Carbohydrate Diets in
*Journal of Nutrition* *124* (12 Supplement): 2563S–2567S.
We Google the Journal to find out more about it as a "magazine" of research
for medical people, and Kienzie, E. as probably a medial doctor. This is
enough depth of reliability for that age level.
So Wikipedia offers much more than Britannica when teaching depth of
information and searching for reliability of sources.
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Ann W. Rea <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> One more reason to use MARVEL's Britannica instead of Wikipedia ...
> Ann Rea
> Beal College Library
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Maine Libraries Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> On Behalf Of Mary Anne Libby
> Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2013 4:48 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [MELIBS-L] Wikipedia
> I just saw this article. I actually like Wikipedia, have found it handy
> to use to introduce some subjects to some people. But now...
> Wikipedia being hacked by PR firms:
> Mary Anne Libby, Lib Asst.
> Dr. Shaw Memorial Library
> Mt. Vernon, ME
Nancy B. Grant
Penquis Valley Schools
Milo, ME 04463