Abstract
Despite questions about academic rigor, undergraduates use Wikipedia for opportunistic learning: self-regulated study to learn, relearn, or be introduced to concepts. STEM topics are potentially immune from some of Wikipedia’s criticism, as many are based on well-established facts. This article evaluates 28 articles from seven STEM disciplines on four criteria important for undergraduate opportunistic learners. Some articles contained inaccuracies, while common criticisms included poor conceptual development, poor procedural explanations, poor diagrams and failing to utilize internet technologies. Often, the best advice is to read the first paragraph: the rest of the article generally did not enhance opportunistic learning.
Keywords:
Acknowledgment
We thank Dr Jen McDougall and an anonymous referee for constructive suggestions that improved the article.
Disclosure statement
No authors have a financial interest or benefit arising from the direct applications of this research.
Funding
This research did not receive any specific funding from agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. General University research funds were used to support the literature review and collection of metadata.
Data availability statement
The data associated with this article is embedded in the text.