QUOTE
I would not say that Hambouz and Epstein-Ojalvo have done a terrible job with this lesson plan. It is especially admirable that they refer students and teachers to alternative resources for learning about and actually building wiki environments.
But there is much to be criticized in their way of inviting students and teachers to engage in critical thinking about the stories that we read in the media, including Wikipedia and The New York Times.
First off, thinking critically is better described as “questioning assumptions†than it is as “questioning authorityâ€. After all, “authority†is a very ambiguous word. It can mean that the person speaking “knows what he or she is talking aboutâ€, that is, has a lot of experience with the subject at hand. Or it can mean that a person has the power to compel specific actions on our parts. Either way, there is a lot to think about in the heat of the moment before we question that authority, especially if “questioning†is interpreted as ignoring or failing to give due cognizance, as opposed to simply inquiring into.
So what are some of the assumptions — in the way of assumptions, not always stated outright — that we need to question as we read the several stories and lesson plans at hand?
— Jon Awbrey • February 4, 2011 (9:48 am)
Link
Questioning Authority • Evaluating Wikipedia Articles, NYT • The Learning Network
Newsfeed Questioning Authority • Evaluating Wikipedia Articles 
