On March 27, Wikipedia released a new survey revealing that most teachers endorse Wikipedia as the most reliable source. The survey asked teachers to choose both the most and least reliable sources from a list of informative websites. Out of the 10,000 teachers surveyed worldwide, 87 percent chose Wikipedia to be the most reliable. With 11 percent approval, Buzzfeed came in second in reliability. Unsurprisingly, researchers also announced that the majority of teachers collectively chose JSTOR as the least reliable source. 

“Of course I recommend students use the largest database of information since the Library of Alexandria,” Steven Nave, a history teacher, said. “The superior organization of information makes research so much more efficient. It is much easier to copy and paste pertinent information from Wikipedia than JSTOR. During class discussions a student can literally sleep through the preparation and research phase and simply read from Wikipedia and act as though they are really smart. This strategy is much more effective than reading those extremely boring and rambling JSTOR articles for hours that have nothing to do with the actual topic.”

Many claim that Wikipedia was very reliable because editing access is open to all, meaning that people could help each other fix their errors and encounter different perspectives and opinions. This also means that anyone who revises the page can add information they think is accurate, as well as their own perceptions and beliefs on the topic. Another trait of Wikipedia that many teachers love is that it always appears as the first search result when a topic is googled. They claim that efficiency is of utmost importance when it comes to research and Wikipedia was perfect for that. On the other hand, this was not the first time that JSTOR was criticized for being unreliable. JSTOR has a long history of being a problematic source since it only provides journal articles, which make it harder for people to find information quickly. Furthermore, individuals have to struggle through ten or more pages just to find out if the respective source is what they need. 

“The results really did not surprise me,” Timmy Whale, an avid fan and employee of Wikipedia, said. “In fact, I am surprised that this survey had to be taken in the first place. I still remember the first day I visited Wikipedia. For the first time, I was actually able to understand what people were saying. DBQ was a breeze and I aced all my APUSH summatives. Not only did I start receiving all As in my research papers, but I was also able to publish my research on the world’s most renowned research paper collections. My life changed entirely just by clicking on the first result that came out on Google.”

Today, many schools are considering making the use of Wikipedia mandatory in all classes. As the website grows bigger, so does its recognition by people all around the world. In fact, many experts are publishing research papers on why Wikipedia is the perfect source for teachers and students of all grades when searching for a reliable source with precise information. With this issue being brought to light, teachers are happy that their claims are finally being recognized and are bringing reforms. The future looks bright for Wikipedia.

“For me Wikipedia is the height of reliability,” Patrick Young, an English teacher, said. “It is like the Ford Pinto or the Hindenburg. Just because someone is an “expert” on something does not mean they know what they are talking about. I want crowd participation in my academic resources so that I feel included. I want to see information that I already agree with so that I can relate to it. Isn’t that what research is all about? In my class, I will definitely have Wikipedia replace JSTOR, which is not even a real store, by the way. Fake news. ”