Wikiversity talk:Research guidelines/Zh
此頁待譯; 此頁需修改
此等是維基學院之內的研究指引,通用於各維基學院計劃. 請繼續編輯和增補此等指引，基於一般編輯者的共識。 請用討論頁建議討論這些準則的編輯.
維基學院容許 :
- 產生(未正式發表的)新知識的文獻回顧(屬次生研究);
- 維基學院內, 使用文獻回顧外之研究方法 之研究計劃(屬原創研究);
- 有維基學院之外的研究員參與的合作研究計劃.
原創研究 包括提出假說, 會集原始資料, 分析資料, 評估做法. 次生研究是關於一結果的新解釋, 或關於分析的新討論, 引入新理論但不引入新原始資料。
客觀
editWikiversity內所張貼的研究應該以科學方法來進行，文章應包括未刪改的原始數據。
Original research should be conducted with a neutral point of view, and with a view to accept the outcome of your analysis, whatever that may be. You should propose a hypothesis, and obtain the results to prove or disprove your hypothesis. However, there is a difference between proving a hypothesis and manipulating results. You should conduct research to find out what the results are, not to prove yourself right (or someone else wrong).
維基學院作為一維基, 任何人都能編輯您在此之任何發表. You must be prepared for others to edit or add to your work, otherwise Wikiversity is the wrong platform for it. However, if other people do contribute, be aware that those details may not be accurate or even true. Wikiversity is open to the general public, not just degree students or qualified teachers. In the same manner, do not entirely disregard any opinions because they contradict yours, but discuss and build upon them.
研究過程
editThe research process as a whole does move towards objectivity, but objectivity is a construct that is generated by special social processes. Not all of the individual components of the research process are objective. Research starts with the thoughts and actions of individuals which are by definition highly subjective. The entire research process typically involves cycles of subjective claims and peer review in what could be called the "research cycle". Subjective observations, claims, and ideas that repeatedly survive challenge, tests and peer review can result in increasingly high levels of objectivity about a topic of study.
The neutral point of view (NPOV) policy that has been adopted by previous Wikimedia Foundation projects arose from the need to prevent original research activities and unpublished results from disrupting wiki projects. If Wikiversity is going to allow participants to include original research activities and results in Wikiversity then we need to modify the traditional NPOV policy. The research process often starts by a single person or a small group of like-minded individuals adopting a minority Point Of View and audaciously pushing that POV, even in the face of disbelief and active opposition from the those who hold a more conventional POV, often one held to be true by the majority of investigators in a field of study.
Wiki software is a tool that promotes collaborative authoring of webpages. Each wiki community decides what the rules are that best support the mission of the wiki. Most wikis restrict the editing of at least some pages. The early stages of the "research cycle" often involve the production of idiosyncratic and personalized texts that introduce new ideas to the community. The novel ideas expressed in the initial stages of the "research cycle" are then subjected to review. The typical wiki method of peer review often involves erasing the work of earlier contributors, in particularly, contributions that do not conform to conventional thinking about a topic are likely to be removed from wiki pages during the collaborative editing process. Such conventional wiki editing would be a problem for a wiki that is trying to support original research and the creation of new knowledge.
In the "research cycle", a standard alternative to "wiki peer review" is a system for "formal peer review". Formal peer review is usually a highly structured and formal "dialog" between reviewers and the authors of documents reporting original research. In this "dialog", nothing is erased. In fact, even if a new idea is wrong, the identification of incorrect ideas is still important, and keeping a record of wrong ideas is useful for preventing others from repeating errors. This kind of "dialog" and a system for not ever erasing text is what usually happens on MediaWiki discussion pages. It would be possible to construct a formal peer review system in wiki format (see).
If Wikiversity is going to be a place for, "conducting research and publishing results (within a policy framework developed by the community)" then we need to develop new policies that truly support research, not just adopt a set of rules that were developed for another wiki project and that would cripple research. --JWSchmidt 01:34, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
操守
editAll research must be ethical. If you are deceiving, harming or using data without consent, that research project should not be posted on Wikiversity. Ethics also includes the preservation of raw data, and not covering inappropriate topics (discuss.)
If you use other people's work, research or data as a basis or starting point for your own research, be sure to verify your sources, as well as adhering to Wikiversity's copyright policies.
參見,
edit- Scope of research - English language discussions
外連
edit- Scholarly ethics - at the English language Wikiversity
- Research Ethics - at the English language Wikiversity
- Original reporting - guidelines at Wikinews