Wikiversity talk:Research

Outline of Research Dimensions
I added an outline of research dimensions. Even if only limited kinds of research are to occur in Wikiversity, we may need to discuss many of these dimensions -- if only to make distinctions about what is and is not possible currently in WV. If many kinds of research activity are to be proposed, then there is a lot to talk about.

Topics on the outline easily can be renamed, reframed and regrouped. But, I don't think we should delete topics from this outline just yet. Indeed probably we should add more topics.

Each main topic has various themes of importance, probably requiring a number of subpages. Reswik 04:38, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I used this outline to develop subtopics on this page:


 * Dimensions of research
 * Internal and external research
 * The relationship of Wikimedia sponsored research, internal research by other Wikimedia projects, and Wikiversity based research
 * Program evaluation research, research exercises, and research for publication
 * Original (primary) and derivative (secondary) research
 * (as distinct from) basic and applied research
 * Ethics
 * Guidelines for research on people and other living beings
 * Aggregate and individual research data
 * Research education
 * Theory and methods
 * Writing
 * Legal and institutional questions, such as the need for an Institutional Review Board
 * Research areas, differences in: Physical sciences, natural sciences, social sciences, humanities and professions (to name some general areas)
 * Research meetings and conferences
 * Research sponsorship
 * Hosting research
 * Initiating research
 * Research funding and administration
 * Research support services
 * internal and external
 * Research publication

More topics can be added. Reswik 12:30, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Initiating And Hosting research-- If wikiversity can serve as a convenient meeting place for scholars and researches, it is already doing well. Then new researches may spark spontaneously. As an analogy, an university administrator can do no more than putting the right kinds of people together. She should not try to do things which the experts know better.--Hillgentleman 13:15, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi! In the list of research projects being pursued here, I propose to add mine in the hope that it will spur research, knowledge, and practical utilization the wiki way.

Plant Sciences

 * Bloom clock project
 * Nerd Project

Microsystems and Molecular Systems

 * DNA integrated circuits
 * Capillary electrode array

JPatrickBedell 05:39, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Division of Internal and External Research
I do not think this is a useful distinction. Research performed to create our procedures and systems should be conducted consistent with good practices and reported adequately to the rest of the planet same as "External" research in case someone wishes to create a similar institution or a fork of Wikiversity. Mirwin 07:08, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The main reason for making a distinction between research on "internal" and "external" topics is that the Wikimedia Foundation has a history of supporting some introspective research efforts (see Wikimedia Research Network). Allowing "internal" research at Wikiversity would be a "baby step" towards allowing Wikiversity to be involved in original research.....it could be a "test case" for seeing if Wikiversity participants could be involved with research without getting into any trouble. "Internal" research is one of the few types of research activity that was mentioned explicitly during the process of getting approval for the Wikiversity project. Bottom line: it is a useful distinction only because it is a distinction that has previously been made by the Wikimedia Foundation and people are familiar with the idea of allowing some internal research activities within Wikimedia projects. --JWSchmidt 13:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * There are some other various issues that come to mind for me in the distinction between internal and external research. Internal research can have, for now, fewer administrative-legal requirements than external research. Research on social aspects of Wikimedia projects would involve human subjects. For external research, this would usually require approval by an IRB board. The Wikimedia Foundation currently, last I checked, does not have an IRB board. Internal research can hence be more informal and easy to start -- but it should follow the same ethical standards of research -- obtaining consent, maintaining confidentially, etc.
 * Internal research can also be program evaluation -- such as assessing educational activities or modules -- which can be as simple as a short self-administered survey that users of a learning activity fill out on completing a module. Such evaluation processes may not require IRB approval in educational institutions, but may require a waver from an IRB and IRB issues start to arise when the publishing of more than summary data becomes involved.
 * Another issue is that external researchers are probably often going to be looking to publish their findings. This requires a certain level of professional rigour in analysis and writing. This also requires shaping a discussion in ways and in terms of a contextualizing literature that various academic communities would accept. Internal research can be practical but also creative in reaching beyond the boundaries and interests of academic communities.
 * So, while internal researchers can choose to engage all of the above processes and more, internal research can be more informal, can be more creative, can address academic and/or non-academic questions, and can be less bureaucratically encumbered by approval processes, reporting and extra paperwork. So, internal and external research processes might be (or might not be) quite qualitatively distinct in practice and results. --Reswik 17:07, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Please take a look at the multilingual hub where we have been tasked to address these issues. --JWSchmidt 17:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

regarding assignment in OER course
This is a most important issue! May I work on it in order to satisfy the requirement for the assignment for the second week of the OERcourse? How do I request permission and to who? Will some one please advise. Stewjean, 06:05, 9 March 2008
 * The assignment in that week is: "contribute something in the form of constructive feedback in discussion forums, editing, or new page creation, then write one (1) blog post about the experience"
 * So, you can use this page for your assignment.
 * We are a wiki - there is nothing like asking permission to edit (some pages may be protected, then you also don't have an "edit this page" button). When you make a change, please give good enough comments in the summary, so others can understand more what your intention is in the change you processed. You could also before editing the page for example write on the talk page what you want to change or alike, if you feel like your edit may produce controversy :-) Erkan Yilmaz Wikiversity:Chat  10:09, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

strategy wikimedia - Proposals
Please see:
 * Proposal:Get more serious about promoting research on Wikiversity
 * Proposal:Sponsored research and development, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat (try) 19:13, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikibooks link
The link to Wikibooks (Wiki Science Wikiresearch in wikibooks) is broken. That page does not exist. --Kbarchard (discuss • contribs) 16:15, 4 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Corrected. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 16:20, 4 May 2018 (UTC)