• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Wiki-based Collaborative Writing: a Comparative Study on First and Second Language Writings Among Chinese Secondary Students
 

Wiki-based Collaborative Writing: a Comparative Study on First and Second Language Writings Among Chinese Secondary Students

on

  • 602 views

CHAN, Vanice Siu Yin (Student in MSc(LIM), Faculty of Education, HKU) ...

CHAN, Vanice Siu Yin (Student in MSc(LIM), Faculty of Education, HKU)
CHU, Samuel Kai Wah (Faculty of Education, HKU)

http://citers2013.cite.hku.hk/en/paper_612.htm

---------------------------
Author(s) bear(s) the responsibility in case of any infringement of the Intellectual Property Rights of third parties.
---------------------------
CITE was notified by the author(s) that if the presentation slides contain any personal particulars, records and personal data (as defined in the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance) such as names, email addresses, photos of students, etc, the author(s) have/has obtained the corresponding person's consent.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
602
Views on SlideShare
562
Embed Views
40

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

2 Embeds 40

http://citers2013.cite.hku.hk 39
http://www-dev.cite.hku.hk 1

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Wiki-based Collaborative Writing: a Comparative Study on First and Second Language Writings Among Chinese Secondary Students Wiki-based Collaborative Writing: a Comparative Study on First and Second Language Writings Among Chinese Secondary Students Presentation Transcript

    • Wiki-based collaborative writing: acomparative study on first and secondlanguage writings among ChineseSecondary StudentsPresented by:Chan, Vanice S. Y.Dr. Chu, Samuel K. W.
    • Background
    • Collaborative writing• Common practice in the academicenvironments• Benefits of collaborative writing• Shorten task completion time (Weiss, Urso, &Molli, 2009)• Reduce errors (Arnold, Ducate, & Kost, 2009;Weiss, Urso, & Molli, 2009)• Allow students to generate and shareideas together (Shehadeh, 2011;Weiss, Urso, & Molli, 2009)• Enhance communication skills(Shehadeh, 2011)
    • Wiki as a collaborative writing tool• Definition: a web based tool that allows users tocreate, edit and read the webpage (Geraci, 2007;Wichadee, 2010)• Application of wiki on collaborative writing has a lotsof advantages• Wiki is the most popular collaborative editing systems(Fong, 2012)
    • Research Significance• Insufficient researches on investigating the similarities anddifferences between the L1 and L2 collaborative writing onwiki• Aims to identify and compare the writingpatterns, participation level, collaboration level andinteraction patterns between L1 and L2 wiki collaborativewriting among Chinese secondary students.
    • • What are the similarities and differences on the wikicollaborative writing activities between the L1 and L2 groups?• What are the similarities and differences on the wiki writingparticipation level between L1 and L2 groups?• What are similarities and differences on the wiki writingcollaboration level between L1 and L2 groups?• What are the similarities and differences on the wiki interactionpatterns between L1 and L2 groups?Research Questions
    • RESEARCHMETHODOLOGY
    • Research Methodology• Participants:• Group of form one students from a local secondary schoolProcedure:• Complete their group liberal study projects on Google Sitein Chinese (L1) or English (L2)
    • Research MethodologyFigure 1: Refined Meishar-Tal and Gorsky (2010) wiki actions taxonomy• Data collection of writing activity
    • Research MethodologyCategory ExamplesAdding SentenceWord EditTable 1: Examples of writing activity
    • Research MethodologyInteraction categories Description ExamplesPlanning • Organizing work• Initiating activities“We should interview [Name]before 15th March.”Contributing • Help giving• Feedback giving• Exchanging resources andinformation• Sharing knowledge• Challenging others• Explaining or elaborating“I agree with you, I think theparents should let them tryto face everything aroundthose children.”Seeking Input • Help seeking• Feedback seeking• Advocating effort“Is these the main five topicthat we are going to study?”Monitoring • Monitoring group effort “i think we should make theword more active in order tomake attractions to theteacher”Data collection of commentsTable 2: Refined Curtis and Lawson (2001) wiki interaction classification
    • Research Findings
    • Figure 2: Total percentage of type of wiki writing activities by L1 and L2groups• Similar writing activitypatterns were identified• Tend to adding contentinstead of deleting contentand moving content• Few grammar edits andwebsite appearance editsPossible reasons:• Nature of the project• Performance evaluationbased on the contentrather than the websiteappearanceResearch FindingsWiki writing activity patterns
    • • Both L1 and L2 groupsshowed low participation• Mean of number of daysspent on wiki writingactivities by L1 and L2groups are 24.5 days and28 days• Noticeable increase on wikiwriting activities fromFebruary to MarchResearch FindingsWiki writing activity participation levelFigure 3: Total percentage of monthly wiki writing activities by L1 and L2groups
    • • Uneven work distributionamong group member inL1 and L2 groups• Over 50% of group wikiactivities were completedby one student in two L1groups and three L2groupsPossible reason:• Lack of time for planningand writing• Completed some of theirwork outside the wikiplatform• Share of wiki accountsResearch FindingsWiki writing activity participation levelFigure 4: Total percentage of wiki writing activities by individual group member inL1 and L2 groups
    • • Over 40% of L1 and L2group’s comments were“Contributing” comments• Differences in thepercentage of “planning”and “seeking input”comments were identifiedPossible reason:• Uneven work distribution• Differences on how thestudents utilized thecomment sessionResearch FindingsWiki interaction patternsFigure 5: Total percentage of type of wiki writing comments by L1 and L2groups
    • • Both L1 and L2 groups showedlow collaboration• Only 23% and 22% of the totalrevisions were reviewed by thepeers• Possible reason:• Students tended the avoid editgroup member’s wiki writing(Mak and Coniam, 2008)• Students prefer revise theirown writing instead ofreviewing other student’swriting (Liou and Lee, 2011)Research FindingsWiki writing activity collaboration levelFigure 6: Total percentage of peer and author revision byL1 and L2 groups
    • Conclusion and Recommendation
    • Conclusion and Recommendation• Similarities in writing patterns, participation level andcollaboration level and differences in interaction patterns wereidentified in the study – provide insights on the implementationof wiki in collaborative writing• Recommendation• Encourage students to review other group member’s work• Requiring the students to report their working progressperiodically and taking personal contributions in marking• Set rules or guidelines for students to avoid sharing accountswhen writing collaboratively on wiki
    • References
    • References• Arnold, N., Ducate, L., & Kost, C. (2009). Collaborative writing in wikis: Insights from culture projects inGerman classes. In L. Lornicka & G. Lord (Eds.), The next generation: Social networking ancl onlinecollaboration in foreign language learning (pp. 115-144). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.• Curtis, D. D., & Lawson, M.J. (2001). Exploring collaborative online learning. The Journal ofAsynchronous Learning Networks, 5(1), 21-34.• Fong, L. S. (2012). Benefits of Collaborative Writing for ESL Advanced Diploma Students in theProduction of Reports. Online Submission.• Geraci, Michael. (2007). Implementing a Wiki as a collaboration tool for group projects. Paperpresented at the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications2007, Vancouver, Canada. http://www.editlib.org/p/25852• Liou, Hsien-Chin, & Lee, Shiu-Lin. (2011). How Wiki-Based Writing Influences College Students’Collaborative and Individual Composing Products, Processes, and Learners’ Perceptions (pp. 45-61): IGIGlobal.
    • References• Mak, Barley, & Coniam, David. (2008). Using wikis to enhance and develop writing skills amongsecondary school students in Hong Kong. System, 36(3), 437-455. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.02.004• Meishar-Tal, Hagit, & Gorsky, Paul. (2010). Wikis: what students do and do not do when writingcollaboratively. Open Learning, 25(1), 25-35. doi: 10.1080/02680510903482074• Shehadeh, Ali. (2011). Effects and student perceptions of collaborative writing in L2. Journal of SecondLanguage Writing, 20(4), 286-305. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.05.010• Weiss, Stéphane, Urso, Pascal, & Molli, Pascal. (2009). An Undo Framework for P2P CollaborativeEditing. In E. Bertino & J. D. Joshi (Eds.), Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications andWorksharing (Vol. 10, pp. 529-544): Springer Berlin Heidelberg.• Wichadee, S. (2010). Using wikis to develop summary writing abilities of students in an EFL class.Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 7(12), 5-10.
    • Questions and Comments