I was most interested in the article posted by the MIT Technology Review which stated:
"Surveys conducted by the Harris polling organization for Wetpaint show that only 5 percent of adults who go online can define the word "wiki," according to Elowitz. And it's not clear that Wetpaint or any other wiki-focused company has made the technology simple -- or useful -- enough to attract large numbers of users."This article also claims that although many people read Wikipedia,
"only about 500 users are responsible for editing it."
(I've edited, have you?)
A wiki that isn't called a wiki used in college
I had an interesting conversation with my cousin who is in college when I asked her if she's used wikis. She stated that she had never heard of them, but when I described them, she has in fact collaboratively edited documents. The college is using them extensively but not calling them wikis.
Confusing wikis with wicca
My biggest obstacle to the introduction of wikis is that each time I introduce or speak of it, the newcomer to the term thinks I am referring to something that has to do with wicca, a witchcraft organization. I now immediately state the definition of a wiki and explicitly point out there is no relation to wicca and I am fine. It seems to be the question that everyone is afraid to ask, although it is just a semantic misconception.
Wikis remain my best classroom tool
I see so much misunderstanding of how to teach corrrectly with wikis. They are the best classroom tool that I use! I am excited because GAETC has asked that I teach a workshop covering how to teach using wikis at their conference this November. I look forward to sharing the best practices I've learned and how to set up a basic wiki. I plan on using a class wiki to teach the class so the students will see me model the behavior I am teaching.
Whether it is called a wiki or some other name, it is still a very useful technology and one that is vastly undestimated in my opinion.