Cultural Experience

This semester about 10 of us from FYS took a fieldtrip to downtown Chicago. The point was to see all the different towns and to see their culture. We went to Greektown, Chinatown, the Pilsen area, and we also drove through the Ukrainian area. We arrived at Greektown first, and we went to eat at a place called Mr. Gyros. (Notice "entrance" is not spelled right on the sign.) It was really good, I think I was there once a long time ago. Since I am Greek, I already knew most of the things that went on in Greektown. I explained the music, the dancing and the religion.
(Picture taken by the "Interesting Ideas Staff" at http://www.interestingideas.com/roadside/names/MrGreek72.jpg)

We talked about the Greek Orthodox Faith and what it means to be Orthodox, as compared to being Catholic. I think everyone enjoyed the food and shopping we did. Next we drove through the Ukrainian town. Although we didn’t get off the bus, we all enjoyed the really beautiful churches that we saw. A lot of people in the class had never seen all the great architecture in the Ukrainian village before. Then we went to Chinatown. That was the best for me, because I had never gone there before. I actually felt like I was in China. The shops were really nice and everything was in Chinese. Last, we went to the Pilsen area and stopped in a Mexican museum. We learned about Day of the Dead and the other rituals performed at Halloween time. That was great too. We all had a good time on the fieldtrip, and I really enjoyed the sights and sounds of the other cultures in Chicago.

Encyclopedia Britannica vs. Wikipedia

I went to the Encyclopedia Britannica web site and typed in "Ireland." Immediately I got a nice organized page with options to choose about the country’s attributes, population or other information. I typed the same thing in on Wikipedia and right away I got a lot of information thrown at me. First it talks about the name Ireland and where it came from. This is good information, but it just was not as organized as the Encyclopedia was. The information of Wikipedia was actually edited recently on October 25, 2007. In fact, there have been around 100 edits already this month. I found that to be incredible. I didn’t think that many people actually took the time to put their information on a site like this. The article on Britannica was last edited 2 months ago and that was the only edit I could see for a while. The Britannica one also had very good citations. There were also footnotes at the bottom of the page, along with sources. Wikipedia had some good citations also, but there were more than a couple instances where it said, "citation needed." If I saw that, I definitely would not use that information for a paper. Some one could have just made that up for all I know, and that is just another reason why people should not use Wikipedia for research. Even though Colbert’s video was kind of silly, it made a good point. So what if a lot of people just suddenly all put the same information on Wikipedia? Well, someone is going to use it! Or even worse, they may go ahead believing that the fact they just read is true when in fact someone just added it there for fun. Both web sites had good working links. None of then were dead links and they all were pretty useful. However, some of the links on the Wikipedia page pointed to people’s own personal web sites. This was another reason why I never used Wikipedia for research. How do I know that "Joe’s Geocitities Website" has good valid information? It seems like some people just copied information off someone else’s personal page and posted it on Wikipedia. The bad part is if nobody edits it, the information stays there. In another reference to Colbert’s clip, if a lot of people just go on Wikipedia and post the same false statements, it will stay. That is why Wikipedia is not a "real" encyclopedia and should not be used for serious research. However, overall both web sites contain the same information. The numbers are a little different but other than that, both are very similar. Although Ireland is somewhat of an easier topic to compare, I typed in Kuwait and got very different information from both sites. In the "discussions" section of Wikipedia, there was actually some controversy over the information, particularly the colors of the flag. Some people claimed that the color was not the right hue, and that the flag does not represent what it should. These people don’t seem to realize that someone just made that flag on their computer using a paint program. Britannica has a picture of an actual flag made of material, so there was no controversy over this topic on their site. I will agree that both sites provide a good overview of the topic, but I have to say with all honesty that the Encyclopedia Britannica is a much better choice for research. I have never used Wikipedia or anyone’s personal web page for information. It is just too unreliable. Both "pedia" sites can be very useful, though. If you want to get a general idea of what something is, then Wikipedia is great. However, if you have a big research paper to do, don’t use the information from Wikipedia. Use a service like Encyclopedia Britannica instead. This way at least you know the information is legitimate, or at least more so than information from another site.

Article Reflection

The article I read dealt with plagiarism. I had already read an article similar to this one in high school, although this was more informative. I actually didn’t think that plagiarism was such a big deal in today’s schools, but apparently it is. Although today, there are many more places that a student can go to find fake essays or even the answers to their math homework. It surprised me that the author had to kind of trick the students into thinking she knew exactly how to look up fake papers on the Internet. Some people think that doing something like making up lab results in science is not plagiarism. This is true, but is definitely academic dishonesty. You are not actually doing the work that was assigned. Instead, you are just making up numbers that look good.

I think that plagiarism and academic dishonestly aren’t exactly the same thing, although they are kind of tied to one another. I believe plagiarism is strictly copying someone else’s work and not citing the information. I also believe that getting help when your not supposed to, cheating on a test and trading answers is academic dishonesty. They are both bad in the sense that you’re not doing your own work. Either your copying someone else’s or just getting aid from others when your not supposed to. Some people believe that some forms of academic dishonesty are okay, but I would have to disagree. In high school I have seen many people that have a class first period do the work and then give it to all the other kids that have the class later. This is definitely dishonesty. You’re simply copying someone else’s work.
Even though the teacher probably won’t find out if it’s a math or science class, so still know yourself what you did.

The other students today just backed up my view on plagiarism. We all kind of had the same ideas about it. We all think that no matter what kind of copying your doing, it is wrong. I don’t think anyone actually had any other type of view on the subject. One boy in my group said that in high school, his teacher said he was plagiarizing and he didn’t even know it! This is definitely something that could happen to all of us. If we use different words than our teachers are normally used to us writing, that might send a message to them that we are plagiarizing.

Integrity is definitely something that we all need to maintain and work on. Someone suggested that integrity is the key to putting an end to academic dishonesty and cheating. This is true to some degree, but some people will just continue to cheat and lie until they get what they want. There is nothing we can do about them. However, for the rest of us, our integrity and conscience is what should prevent us from cheating. We know inside if we cheat on a test, and then get an A that we didn’t do any work. There is also a thing called "Honor Code." This is a something that each student should read. It talks about cheating, plagiarism and academic dishonesty. I think we should have each student sign something that shows they know what plagiarism is, and what the consequences will be if they get caught. Actually seeing the consequences will scare many people into not even trying to cheat on tests or anything else. I believe this theory has worked in many other schools, and we should try it here at Elmhurst.

It does not matter what kind of cheating or academic dishonesty is done. The point is still the same. You are just hurting yourself and your own integrity. Especially in college, it is time to actually do the work that you are assigned. Even if you got away with this sort of stuff in high school, it probably will not work in college. Professors know about all the fake essays and everything else that is available to students on the internet. They will search those sights to find out if your essay is real. They’re probably not doing it because they’re mean, they’re doing it because they actually want you to do the work and work hard in college. You will also probably strict consequences you for these actions though. I totally agree with that. The teachers are just trying to help you by not letting you plagiarize or cheat. This article we read was actually very good because it relates to us and a current event that is in all of our lives at the moment. I hope it rubbed off some information on all the other people, because I thought it was very interesting myself.