Wikiversity:Disclosures/fr
Wikiversité tente d'offrir une pensée large et ouverte, et sa mission est donc similaire à celle de Wikipédia dans le sens où elle s'efforcera d'atteindre le concept de neutralité, ou "NPOV". Cependant, comme la neutralité n'est pas toujours (certains diraient, jamais) possible, ou même souhaitable, nous devrons développer un système de divulgation des partis pris. En particulier, lorsque liberté académique conduit les participants de Wikiversité au-delà des restrictions de la politique traditionnelle de la Fondation Wikimedia Point de vue neutre (NPOV), les pages de Wikiversité qui sont exemptées de NPOV doivent être marquées comme telles et inclure une divulgation des limitations sur la perspective et les points de vue qui sont explorés. Seuls les participants à Wikiversité qui ont explicitement affirmé leur engagement personnel envers la politique de Wikiversité sur l'éthique scientifique sont autorisés à éditer des pages Wikiversité en dehors des restrictions imposées par la politique de NPOV.
Les partis pris doivent être divulgués. Les concepteurs d'une filière, d'une unité ou d'une ressource didactique doivent indiquer leur parti pris en tête de chaque ressource didactique. Certains flux et unités englobent plusieurs partis pris ; ils doivent mentionner tous les partis pris englobés dans leur divulgation. Les développeurs d'une ressource n'ont pas besoin de divulguer tous leurs préjugés, mais seulement ceux qu'ils présentent dans le travail de cours. Les pages de Wikiversité qui ne révèlent pas explicitement leurs partis pris doivent être éditées conformément aux restrictions imposées par la politique de NPOV (tous les points de vue significatifs doivent être décrits).
Informations par défaut=
Template:Disclosures Les divulgations affichées à droite seront les divulgations par défaut pour Wikiversity :
NPOV a été choisi car c'est ce que les gens attendent des projets Wikimedia.
Progressisme a été sélectionné car c'est celui qui est promu sur la page Wikiversité:Apprentissage et discuté dans la Wikiversité:Proposition de projet Wikiversité.
Voir ci-dessous ces interprétations
POV Biases
POV: Point de vue
Explication générale
Wikiversité a des objectifs différents de ceux de Wikipédia. Les pages de l'espace de noms principal de Wikiversity sont consacrées au soutien de l'enseignement en ligne et aux objectifs d'apprentissage des participants à Wikiversity. Le politique traditionnelle de Wikimedia en matière de point de vue neutre n'est pas toujours important pour certaines pages de Wikiversité - bien qu'il indique le processus "itératif" (et, par conséquent, de type wiki) de développement vers un compromis commun, qui pourrait être pertinent pour un style d'apprentissage sur Wikiversité. De nombreuses pages de l'espace de noms principal de Wikiversité s'efforceront de suivre la politique traditionnelle de Wikimedia en matière de neutralité des points de vue.
La politique de Wikipédia sur le maintien d'un « point de vue neutre » sert l'objectif de produire des articles d'encyclopédie qui ont un degré limité de partialité. Certaines pages de Wikiversité sont fonctionnellement similaires à des articles d'encyclopédie en ce sens qu'elles doivent présenter un compte-rendu impartial d'un sujet. Pour ces pages Wikiversité (par exemple, une page Wikiversité qui décrit les avantages et les limites de certains matériels pédagogiques), la politique de Wikipédia relative au maintien d'un point de vue neutre doit être appliquée. Les pages Wikiversité de l'espace espace de noms wikiversité doivent s'efforcer de présenter un point de vue neutre.
In contrast, other Wikiversity pages might be devoted to the study of a topic from one particular point of view. Such Wikiversity pages need not strive to present to the world a neutral and unbiased presentation of the topic. Sometimes learning is advanced by asking new or unpopular questions that fly in the face of conventional thought. Wikiversity readers should not expect all Wikiversity pages to follow the neutral point of view policy. In order to help Wikiversity users distinguish between NPOV pages and other types of pages, pages that do not follow the traditional Wikimedia NPOV policy should be marked as such. Pages that do not attempt to follow the traditional Wikimedia NPOV policy should clearly indicate what they are trying to accomplish and why that does not involve adherence to the traditional Wikimedia NPOV policy. When members of the Wikiversity community excuse pages from the traditional Wikimedia NPOV policy, those community members take on the responsibility of making sure that they adhere to highest standards of scholarly ethics.
Examples of exceptions from traditional Wikimedia NPOV
example Scholarly study of topics can sometimes be advanced when a scholar adopts a particular point of view with respect to a topic of study. A famous example comes from attempts to understand the cause of acquired immune deficiency syndrome. Starting in 1987, soon after the discovery of HIV, Peter Duesberg systematically questioned the role of HIV as the cause of AIDS. Duesberg adopted a minority view, has published articles describing that point of view and has participated in discussions of the merits of his adopted point of view.
lessons Wikiversity allows scholarly investigations of individual points of view with respect to a topic of study. During the course of such studies, Wikiversity pages can be created and maintained that do not present a balanced (NPOV) discussion of the topic. These pages should contain a prominent section that describes why editors are departing from NPOV. Good scholarly practice is to be aware of and open to other points of view and to engage in scholarly analysis of each point of view. Each and every Wikiversity page need not present an NPOV account of topics that are under study, but each scholar needs to honestly portray the nature of their work within the Wikiversity community. Wikiversity editors can create and edit pages that deal with topics such as AIDS reappraisal, but these pages need to be scholarly analyses of ideas. Such pages can seek to be persuasive because of the merits derived from careful reasoning and intellectual honesty, not from deception or use of irrational arguments.
example Some advocates of Intelligent Design aim to scientifically study creationism or some variant of the idea that there are aspects of the natural world best explained in terms of intelligent design. Intelligent Design is often described by its supporters as a scientific alternative to evolution. However, creationism is considered by most biologists to be religion not science, and the legal status of Intelligent Design as public school educational content has been the topic of legal dispute (see: Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District).
lessons A learning project about Intelligent Design could be included in Topic:Evolutionary Biology and designated as being outside of traditional Wikimedia NPOV policy. This would allow a scholarly scientific exploration of the hypothesis that life on Earth has features best explained by an intelligent design process. Some advocates of Intelligent Design explicitly abandon the scientific method. A learning project that does not use the scientific method should not try to include itself as a topic at a science page such as Topic:Evolutionary Biology. Studies founded on religious convictions should be explored at School:Theology. Further discussion of this example is at Creation science and NPOV.
studying bias itself A project studying e.g. how scientist that happend to come under the political regime of nazi terrorism bent their published views away from what they published before and after that time period, will most naturally have to use, present, and analyse historic scientific resources with zeitgeisty nazi bias. While those documents may, or may not present biases of various kinds, they need to be on the wikiversity web site in part or toto, providing evidence backing the project teachings, or as working materials for learners.
There are many other historical examples of scholarly departures from unbiased study of a topic. (add more...)
Neutral point of view in interactions
The neutral point of view policy is not intended to restrict ideas expressed on Wikiversity to those which are neutral - for example, participants are welcome to express emotions which are representative of their internal state. For example, a participant (a Wikischolar) can express delight in acquiring a new concept.
NPOV addressses primarily that scholarly material written to exemplify competency in a particular topic is neutral. It should come across as a balanced, mature, and moderated.
Case in study
Wikipedia's reference desk is the largest and most popular collaborative page which deals with any topic. It exemplifies how collaborative learning can occur in a "neutral" environment. The ratio of edits to vandalism on that page is the highest on Wikipedia when compared to any other project page.
Current POV Biases
Other possible biases
- Left-wing
- Right-wing
- Christian conservative
- Libertarian
- Atheist
- Naturalist
- Socialist
- Muslim
- &c.
EP Biases
EP: Educational Philosophy
Likewise, different educational philosophies will be selected by those who develop the Learning Materials. These should also be disclosed.
Current EP Biases
Example Bias Disclosures
It doesn't show here, but the "Disclosures" heading links to this page.
Physics course
Some biases that might apply to a traditional Physics course are floating on the right.
Politics course
Some biases that might apply to a left-wing political course are on the right.
Resources
The following could be useful article(s) about the notion of disclosure:
- Newman, Judith M. (1987). Learning to teach by uncovering our assumptions. Language Arts, 64 (7), 727-737. Available online at http://www.lupinworks.com/article/learn.html