A Collaborative Writing Approach to Wikis: Design, Implementation, and Evaluation

Hadjerrouit, Said

doi:10.28945/1432

Cited by 31 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding conforms the findings of previous studies (e.g. Berbache, 2007;Choi, 2008;Kessler, 2009;Hadjerrouit 2011;Woo et al, 2011;Razak & Saeed, 2014a) that learners made such additions to incorporate additional information to their writing. It also helped them to correct the errors in grammar and mechanisms (Horne, 2011;Yang, 2010).…”

Section: What Types Of Revision Changes Did the Efl Arab Learners Maksupporting

confidence: 82%

“…For instance, Choi (2008) and Kessler (2009) reported that learners focused on how to make the meaning clearer in their revised texts, thus, attending to fluency rather than accuracy. Other studies reported that learners focused on conclusion and sentences or ideas relative to the text in their final drafts (Arnold et al, 2009;Yang, 2010), content (Hadjerrouit, 2011), organization and cohesion (Alshumaimeri et al, 2011) and more language related contributions (LRCs) than non-language related contributions (NLRCs Kessler et al, 2012). This role that online peer review plays in assisting learners to contribute to their written texts has been also reported in other studies as well.…”

Section: Previous Research On Peer Writing Revisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In investigating online peer revision, many researchers (e.g. Min, 2006;Berbache, 2007;Choi, 2008;Arnold et al, 2009;Kessler, 2009;Hadjerrouit, 2011;Woo et al, 2011;Horne, 2011;Yang & Meng, 2013;Razak & Saeed, 2014a) have found that learners made text revisions: addition, substitution, deletion, permutation (re-ordering or re-arranging), consolidation (combining elements) and distribution (breaking up combined elements). Other revision strategies include scaffolding exchanges such as suggestions and using the first language (L1) (Santoso, 2010;Razak & Saeed, 2014a), meaning negotiation and content discussion (Liang, 2010 …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

EFL Arab Learners’ Peer Revision of Writing in a Facebook Group: Contributions to Written Texts and Sense of Online Community

Razak¹,

Saeed²

2015

ELT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This qualitative study investigated peer writing revision among English as foreign language (EFL) Arab students in a Facebook group. Specifically, it aimed to identify the text revisions made by the learners and to determine their contributions to the learners' written texts and sense of online community outside the college classroom context. Being framed within the situated learning approach (Wenger, 1998), the current study was carried out among 14 EFL Arab university learners from Yemen, Algeria, Tunisia, Syria, Sudan and Egypt. A purposeful sampling was perfomed to achieve a heterogeneous group of EFL learners. A qualitative content analysis of the learners' written paragraphs (original and revised drafts), online interactional exchanges and responses to the post-revision reflection discussions was employed in this study. The findings showed that addition, substitution, deletion, permutation, consolidation, and distribution were identified as the main revision operations made by the EFL learners. These revisions operations and changes contributed to enhancing learners' end-products or texts in terms of content, unity and organization, language and mechanics. The learners' engagement in the online revision activities fostered their sense of online learning community by creating an interactive friendly learning environment, building and nurturing new relationships based on shared interests and developing a sense of belonging.

show abstract

Section: What Types Of Revision Changes Did the Efl Arab Learners Maksupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Previous Research On Peer Writing Revisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

EFL Arab Learners’ Peer Revision of Writing in a Facebook Group: Contributions to Written Texts and Sense of Online Community

Razak¹,

Saeed²

2015

ELT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…have entered language classrooms and have been redefining the dynamics in interactions among members of the class. These tools are designed to be highly interactive and collaborative as they provide multiple writers with the virtual space to contribute to an evolving text (Hadjerrouit, 2011). In other words, "The affordances of social digital networks enable people to work together on projects in ways not necessarily possible in the past due to distance, time, age, or language constraints" (Coiro, Knobel, Lankshear, & Leu, 2008, p. 527).…”

Section: Collaborative Technologies In Writing Classroomsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Google Docs as a Tool for Collaborative Writing in the Middle School Classroom

Woodrich

Fan

2017

JITE:Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim/Purpose: In this study, the authors examine how an online word processing tool can be used to encourage participation among students of different language back-grounds, including English Language Learners. To be exact, the paper discusses whether student participation in anonymous collaborative writing via Google Docs can lead to more successful products in a linguistically diverse eighth-grade English Language Arts classroom. Background: English Language Learners (ELLs) make up a considerable portion of elementary and secondary public school students, as language and ethnic diversity has become the norm in the United States. The research literature finds that ELLs are statistically behind their monolingual peers on such key language and academic development indicators as writing. Educators and researchers then turn to collaborative writing with the assistance of online technology. Although it is shown in literature to be a worthwhile endeavor for students of all ages and ability levels, no studies have investigated the differences it makes, namely, in comparison to traditional face-to-face collaboration in the classroom, and to anonymous online collaboration in the virtual space. Methodology: Through face-to-face, online, and anonymous writing activities, a rubric, and a survey, this quantitative study asks if anonymous collaborative writing, com-pared to other modalities, equalizes participation among students of varying language fluencies, and if anonymous collaborative writing, compared to other modalities, affect student comfort levels. Contribution: This builds on research of online collaborative writing tools and suggests that using such tools (Google Docs in particular) is beneficial, especially for students who are building their language abilities. The study further reveals varied degree of success and student comfort level in participating writing tasks in three modalities. Findings: We ascertain that students of varying language fluencies participated more equally when they were able to remain anonymous. Face-to-face writing exhibited the highest overall scores, and students enjoyed working on Google Docs. Recommendations for Practitioners: Future and current teachers are encouraged to be open to new technologies and be creative in the use of technology to facilitate student learning. They should have the opportunity to participate in the discussion on how, not if, integrating technology impacts the cognitive, social, and cultural dimensions of teaching. Recommendation for Researchers: After this initial quantitative study on students’ reactions to various modalities of technology-supported writing formats, the next questions to ask may be how students were engaging in dialogues during face-to-face sessions or chat features of Google Docs trials, and what types of edits students are making. Researchers should turn their focus on secondary school classrooms where there is an increasing impact of technology-assisted collaborative writing on student learning and teaching pedagogy. Impact on Society: As online technology has become an integral part of daily life, it is beneficial to educators, policy makers, and classroom teachers to understand how technology can be integrated in writing programs and to what extent the integration can help boost student motivation and participation. Future Research: More longitudinal research on online assisted collaborative writing and addi-tional quantitative data are needed to further understand the complexities of the writing process in-group online writing and the nature of collaboration.

show abstract

“…The Internet-based teaching of writing gains its popularity in which webblogs (Blackstone, Spiri, & Naganuma, 2007;Eady & Lockyer, 2013;Wu, 2014) and social media such as Facebook, Twitter, Wikis (Hadjerrouit, 2011;Hiew, 2012;Lundin, 2008;Yunus & Salehi, 2012) are used in teaching writing. This is not surprising since internet-based teaching of writing is believed as the answer of many problems in teaching writing such as time limitation in teaching writing (Aliweh, 2011;Moloudi, 2011), inadequate media supporting writing (Bilal, Tariq, Din, Latif, & Anjum, 2013) and lack of motivation (Erkan & Saban, 2011;Gupta &Wondemariam, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indonesian EFL Teachers’ Familiarity with and Opinion on the Internet-Based Teaching of Writing

Cahyono¹,

Mutiaraningrum²

2015

ELT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) especially the Internet has been a common practice in education. However, research studies show that the Internet has not been frequently used in the teaching of English as a foreign language (EFL) writing, especially in the Indonesian context. This study aimed to find out whether or not Indonesian EFL teachers are familiar with the Internet-based techniques for the teaching of writing. In addition, it investigated their opinions on the Internet-based techniques of teaching of writing. This study involved 17 EFL teachers from various parts of the country who were asked about their experiences and opinions dealing with the Internet-based teaching of writing. The results of the study showed that almost half of the teachers admitted that they have used Internet facilities for the teaching of writing. The other EFL teachers either have indirect involvement with the teaching of writing using Internet application or have never used Internet applications at all. However, these teachers had intention to teach writing by applying Internet-based techniques for their future practices. The study also showed that Indonesian EFL teachers valued the Internet-based teaching of writing as this practice benefits the students in terms of their writing quality and quantity, autonomy, flexibility, as well as confidence. This implies that with the development of advanced ICT, there is a hope that students' learning of writing could be improved well.

show abstract

A Collaborative Writing Approach to Wikis: Design, Implementation, and Evaluation

Cited by 31 publications

References 38 publications

EFL Arab Learners’ Peer Revision of Writing in a Facebook Group: Contributions to Written Texts and Sense of Online Community

EFL Arab Learners’ Peer Revision of Writing in a Facebook Group: Contributions to Written Texts and Sense of Online Community

Google Docs as a Tool for Collaborative Writing in the Middle School Classroom

Indonesian EFL Teachers’ Familiarity with and Opinion on the Internet-Based Teaching of Writing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About