“To the extent scholarship in academe is caught up in questions of status, promotion, and tenure,” he says, “then it is slightly misaligned with wiki-style approaches.
“For a wiki-based project to succeed within academic culture, I believe it would need to find a way to highlight individual voices in conversation with one another and to reward those individuals for their work, and that just hasn't happened yet
Fitzpatrick points to blogs as a new-media invention that satisfies the scholarly desire for attribution.
So far, no broadly imagined academic wiki projects have really hit the big time. Citizendium, conceived -- by Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger -- as a more rigorously fact-checked alternative to Wikipedia , has only managed to push 140 articles through the vetting process since it was created in 2006 (there is a logjam of 14,000 articles in various phases of review).
Discipline-specific wikis are moving quickly,” concedes Jodi Schneider, a spokeswoman for AcaWiki, pointing to such examples as nLab, for math and physics, and OpenWetWare, for biology.
While scholars in more settled fields might chafe at a bottom-up model proposed by wikis, a new field such as social informatics might benefit from a space where everything that is known can be collected and discussed, the authors say.
While it's true that there aren’t a ton of formally wiki-based scholarship projects out there, there are lots of resources that are, if you like, wiki-inspired,
CommentPress
Google Docs or Zoho Office
the areas where they have gotten the most play in higher education seems to be in classrooms and various administrative apparatuses.
Democratic governance bodies, it seems, are more open to attributing work to an anonymous collectivity.