PDA

View Full Version : College Classes


Zanguini
07-08-2009, 03:27 PM
Twitter is a social networking and micro-blogging service that enables users to send and read other users updates or “tweets” in real time. This class will teach you how to set up your Twitter home page, add “followers”, post messages and many other useful tools. This class is intended for beginners and everyone is invited to attend regardless of your computer background. Twitter is a fast, simple, and easy way to communicate with friends or family.

Date: July 21 & 28, 2009
Day: Tuesday
Time: 6:00 – 7:15 p.m.
Cost: $35 Early Bird: $30 With Tech ID: $25
Early Bird Deadline: July15, 2009
Location: Lake Point Conference Center

Business Services Training Room A

This is a class offered by my university, its a professional development course... but some majors allow you to take these for credit. I just found it odd is all.

*note: no link cause you cant link to the course outside of the university.

Terez
07-08-2009, 03:32 PM
That is just sad.

I've thought about trying to get my school to do a Wikipedia class, to teach kids how to edit Wikipedia pages and source them properly, etc. (would be a great thing to get kids who are working on research to do - since you're going on at length about it for the prof, you might as well tidy up the Wikipedia page).

But Twitter? WTF...

Brita
07-08-2009, 04:04 PM
I've thought about trying to get my school to do a Wikipedia class, to teach kids how to edit Wikipedia pages and source them properly, etc. (would be a great thing to get kids who are working on research to do - since you're going on at length about it for the prof, you might as well tidy up the Wikipedia page).


That's a great idea T! Far more acedemic than a Twitter course.

Twitter- pfff!

Davian93
07-08-2009, 04:24 PM
~is angerly tweeting about this right now!~

Mort
07-08-2009, 06:16 PM
That is just sad.

I've thought about trying to get my school to do a Wikipedia class, to teach kids how to edit Wikipedia pages and source them properly, etc. (would be a great thing to get kids who are working on research to do - since you're going on at length about it for the prof, you might as well tidy up the Wikipedia page).

But Twitter? WTF...

I think the schools are afraid that such a class would only strengthen the idea that it's okay to cite wikipedia, which it isn't.

AbbeyRoad
07-08-2009, 07:22 PM
Pathetic excuse for an educational curriculum. This has to be a joke. What is academia coming to?

JSUCamel
07-08-2009, 08:11 PM
This is a class offered by my university, its a professional development course... but some majors allow you to take these for credit. I just found it odd is all.

*note: no link cause you cant link to the course outside of the university.

If this is a marketing/business class, I could totally understand it. Twitter has the phenomenal power to reach an incredible number of people very quickly. Unfortunately, I seriously doubt that the class it teaching them how to use it as a marketing/social-networking tool, but rather more as a social tool (if you get the difference).

Ozymandias
07-08-2009, 08:15 PM
I think the schools are afraid that such a class would only strengthen the idea that it's okay to cite wikipedia, which it isn't.

I've been told by reliable sources* that Wikipedia is as accurate as the Encyclopaedia Britannica about 95% of the time.

*Wikipedia


The truth is, most mainstream pages that get more than 1 or 2 views a week are probably pretty accurate. I've gone to the page for Enmerkar, a 27th century BC Sumerian ruler, and changed a bunch of info, and it hasn't even stood for a day... thats quick response time for a very, very esoteric page.

DeiwosTheSkyGod
07-08-2009, 09:06 PM
Is Twitter hard enough to use that it warrants a whole class?

Zanguini
07-08-2009, 10:10 PM
uh.... its over two classes each an hour and a half

Neilbert
07-08-2009, 10:30 PM
That's not sad at all, especially for business and marketing majors. Social networking is hugely important, perhaps even the most important thing for those types, and it's still very useful for say... anyone looking for a job.

It's not like it's a full class or anything, a university offering a 3 hour class on using Twitter (or other social networking sites) is not a bad thing.

Terez
07-08-2009, 11:08 PM
I think the schools are afraid that such a class would only strengthen the idea that it's okay to cite wikipedia, which it isn't.
Well, I don't see how that's a problem since profs can still disallow it as a source, just based on the fact that it can be changed at any time by anyone.

For my music research, my prof recommends that we use Grove's Dictionary of Music (which is more like an encyclopaedia) as a starting point, because it gives a good summary and we can use the sources in the bibliography of each article to kick off our research. I imagine that Wikipedia could be used much in the same way, and if all the researching students on the planet were to take an interest in it, then the quality of the articles, and the source lists, would improve dramatically.

cottillion
07-09-2009, 01:25 AM
Twitter is taking over. It's even taking over sports. Any other NFL fans here see today that Bengals diva Chad Johnson now plans on twittering between plays during games?

GonzoTheGreat
07-09-2009, 05:17 AM
Twitter is taking over. It's even taking over sports. Any other NFL fans here see today that Bengals diva Chad Johnson now plans on twittering between plays during games?Can't he walk and tweet at the same time?

Mort
07-09-2009, 08:00 AM
Well, I don't see how that's a problem since profs can still disallow it as a source, just based on the fact that it can be changed at any time by anyone.

For my music research, my prof recommends that we use Grove's Dictionary of Music (which is more like an encyclopaedia) as a starting point, because it gives a good summary and we can use the sources in the bibliography of each article to kick off our research. I imagine that Wikipedia could be used much in the same way, and if all the researching students on the planet were to take an interest in it, then the quality of the articles, and the source lists, would improve dramatically.

Yeah I don't mind using Wikipedia, or any other encyclopaedia for that matter, as a starting point in your research. Actually it's a great way to use it like that. The problem lies of course in citing wikipedia itself and not having read the texts that wikipedia cites and cite those instead.

One rule that you often have to follow in writing research papers or whatnot, is to cite the original text that mentions whatever you are talking about. That means I can't even use another more recent research article that discusses the same thing. I have to cite the original at first. After that I can start to cite newer materials from authors that may strengthen or weaken the first author's position on the subject, give new meaning to or in other ways talking about the subject you are writing about.

You can't cite only wikipedia then, because users of wikipedia itself doesn't usually cite properly what information has been taken from what source, which makes it hard for anyone to proof read a text that has been cited with wikipedia to know where to fact check everything.

Zanguini
07-09-2009, 08:43 AM
Twitter is taking over. It's even taking over sports. Any other NFL fans here see today that Bengals diva Chad Johnson now plans on twittering between plays during games?


I heard that but the NFL has a rule against cell phones being on a field during a game he could do pregame and halftime tweets from the locker room though.

Terez
07-09-2009, 01:50 PM
Yeah I don't mind using Wikipedia, or any other encyclopaedia for that matter, as a starting point in your research. Actually it's a great way to use it like that. The problem lies of course in citing wikipedia itself and not having read the texts that wikipedia cites and cite those instead.

One rule that you often have to follow in writing research papers or whatnot, is to cite the original text that mentions whatever you are talking about. That means I can't even use another more recent research article that discusses the same thing. I have to cite the original at first. After that I can start to cite newer materials from authors that may strengthen or weaken the first author's position on the subject, give new meaning to or in other ways talking about the subject you are writing about.

You can't cite only wikipedia then, because users of wikipedia itself doesn't usually cite properly what information has been taken from what source, which makes it hard for anyone to proof read a text that has been cited with wikipedia to know where to fact check everything.
Yeah, well...pretty much all students at my school know that they can't use Wikipedia as a source. I doubt that will change if we have a class on editing it, because lots of teachers already recommend it for after-lecture reading, so it's not like it would be going from a scorned source to a respected one all of a sudden. But Wikipedia is mostly a source for laymen rather than experts, and I doubt that will ever change (citing encyclopedias has never been allowed in research, and the idea itself is pretty stupid - who would cite an encyclopedia and try to pass it off as research??)

Ishara
07-10-2009, 08:41 AM
Exactly! It's a jumping off point. Why not scrool down to the bottom of the page and check out the listed sources? Honestly!!