Wiki metrics, rubrics and collaboration tools: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (Created page with "{{stub}} == Introduction == The purpose of this article is survey various tools that allow to measure what participants (and students in particular) do in a wiki. In addition w...") |
m (using an external editor) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{stub}} | {{stub}} | ||
<pageby nominor="false" comments="false"/> | |||
== Introduction == | == Introduction == | ||
The purpose of this article is survey various tools that allow to measure what participants (and students in particular) do in a wiki. In addition we will look at tools that will enhance wiki participation and collaboration. Finally, we will try to outline a few | The purpose of this article is survey various tools that allow to measure what participants (and students in particular) do in a wiki. Survey literature will include topics that are only indirectly related but of technical interest, e.g. the literature on trust metrics. In addition we will look at tools that will enhance wiki participation and collaboration. Finally, we will try to outline a few paths for further development. | ||
== Bibliography == | |||
=== Trust metrics === | |||
* Mark Kramer, Andy Gregorowicz, and Bala Iyer. 2008. Wiki trust metrics based on phrasal analysis. In Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Wikis (WikiSym '08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, , Article 24 , 10 pages. [http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1822258.1822291 DOI=10.1145/1822258.1822291], | |||
[http://wikisym.org/ws2008/proceedings/research%20papers/18500017.pdf PDF from wikisym.org] | |||
:{{quotation|Wiki users receive very little guidance on the trustworthiness of the information they find. It is difficult for them to determine how long the text in a page has existed, or who originally authored the text. It is also difficult to assess the reliability of authors contributing to a wiki page. In this paper, we create a set of trust indicators and metrics derived from phrasal analysis of the article revision history. These metrics include author attribution, author reputation, expertise ratings, article evolution, and text trustworthiness. We also propose a new technique for collecting and maintaining explicit article ratings across multiple revisions.}} | |||
Revision as of 10:09, 3 November 2011
<pageby nominor="false" comments="false"/>
Introduction
The purpose of this article is survey various tools that allow to measure what participants (and students in particular) do in a wiki. Survey literature will include topics that are only indirectly related but of technical interest, e.g. the literature on trust metrics. In addition we will look at tools that will enhance wiki participation and collaboration. Finally, we will try to outline a few paths for further development.
Bibliography
Trust metrics
- Mark Kramer, Andy Gregorowicz, and Bala Iyer. 2008. Wiki trust metrics based on phrasal analysis. In Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Wikis (WikiSym '08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, , Article 24 , 10 pages. DOI=10.1145/1822258.1822291,
- “Wiki users receive very little guidance on the trustworthiness of the information they find. It is difficult for them to determine how long the text in a page has existed, or who originally authored the text. It is also difficult to assess the reliability of authors contributing to a wiki page. In this paper, we create a set of trust indicators and metrics derived from phrasal analysis of the article revision history. These metrics include author attribution, author reputation, expertise ratings, article evolution, and text trustworthiness. We also propose a new technique for collecting and maintaining explicit article ratings across multiple revisions.”