1. Learning, Media and Technology
Vol. 34, No. 1, March 2009, 1-10
Using wikis to promote quality learning in teachertraining
Steve Wheelera and Dawn Wheelerb
aFaculty of Education, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK; bSaltash.net Community
School, Cornwall, UK
This paper discusses writing as a social practice and speculates on how wikis
might be used to promote higher quality academic writing and support
collaborative learning. This study of undergraduate teacher trainees' online
learning activities focuses on how shared spaces – wikis – might be used to
communicate ideas and generate course specific content. The study also explored
how students, through such activities, were able to improve their academic writing
skills and engage more critically in learning. Data captured from student
discussion boards and a post-module e-mail questionnaire (n=35) were used
to map student perceptions of the usefulness of wikis in support of their academic
studies. The data indicate that most students raised their skill level in writing
directly to the publicly viewable wiki space, in sharp contrast to the more informal
content they posted on the discussion boards. The scope of collaborative writing
was limited due to students' reluctance to edit each others' work, but students
appreciated the shared environment as a means of discussing their work and the
content of the course. Students reported that their academic writing skills had
improved through their formal participation in the wiki.
Keywords: academic writing, collaborative writing, wikis, Web 2.0
The rise of the Social Web
The emerging social dimensions of the Internet are exemplified in new and dynamic
interactive tools such as blogs and wikis. Social networking is a popular pastime for many
students, and increasingly, such activities are transgressing institutional boundaries such as
the provision of virtual learning environments (Wheeler & Whitton, 2007). The World Wide
Web is increasingly pervading all aspects of modern life, driving users to discover ever more
sophisticated and ingenious uses, particularly for communication and social networking. The
Web's second major incarnation – known by some as ‘Web 2.0’ (O’Reilly, 2004) – has
justifiably been referred to as the 'social web'. Compared to its transmission heavy precursor,
or ‘Web 1.0’, the social web has tools which are quick and easy to set up. Social web sites are
also significantly more interactive, with functionality to support collaborative working, voting
and other forms of group engagement that have pedagogical potential. Within the social web,
content can be generated, edited and published by users, and control of content is subjected to
open, democratic processes (Kamel Boulos & Wheeler, 2007). The growing challenge for
many academics will be to discover how universities can harness the power of such informal
tools within the formalised structures of the institution.
The social web is very much at the vanguard of a significant shift in the ways the World Wide
Web is being used across society, particularly within the entertainment, commerce and

2. S. Wheeler and D. Wheeler
2
education sectors. Clearly, the social web has burgeoned in recent years and Web 2.0 tools
have increased in popularity for two important reasons. They are free and they are interactive.
Social web tools are generally offered free to all, and provide a means for dialogue with
potentially very large audiences, through quick and easy publication and rapid feedback.
Readers become writers, and users can become their own publishers, producers and directors
in what has been dubbed the 'read-write' web (Kamel Boulos, Maramba & Wheeler, 2006).
Teachers are continually searching for ways to create interactive learning environments in
which collaboration can be supported (Jonassen et al, 1999). The social web tools do appear
to provide an architecture that can be used to promote active engagement students find useful
and satisfying (Horizon, 2007).
Many new services and web 2.0 tools are already established, including social spaces such as
MySpace, FaceBook and Bebo, photo sharing sites such as Flickr and Picasa, and video
sharing sites such as YouTube, all of which enable subscribers to broadcast their ideas and
creative aspirations to a potential worldwide audience. Blogging is increasingly popular as a
means of publishing a regular diary online, where ‘star bloggers’ can daily command
audiences numbering tens of thousands (Kamel Boulos et al, 2006). Web services such as
Technorati and RSS feeds help Bloggers to promote their sites, whilst services such as Digg
and del.icio.us offer social tagging and collaborative filtering options that allow users to alert
their friends about new or favourite web sites and to vote for those they consider to be most
useful within their own community of interest. It is imprudent to ignore the social web
because it enables students to participate in new forms of literacy that contribute toward
collective knowledge (Lankshear & Knobel, 2006). Such literacies undoubtedly have a
significant role to play in the re-purposing of education (Kimber & Wyatt-Smith, 2006).
Collaborative online writing
Users of all ages are discovering that a growing range of social software is available at a
globally networked level to support co-operation. Such tools enable them to create their own
personal contact spaces, share ideas, photos, videos and documents with their friends and
family, and at a more formal level, as a serious educational resource that facilitates discussion
and collaboration. This paper was created by its two authors using Google Docs - a free
collaborative authoring tool allowing shared, synchronous writing to be managed over the
web. This is just one of a plethora of collaborative tools that are available freely online. Wikis
are one of the most useful tools available for collaborative online writing and teachers are
discovering that they provide a dynamic new set of tools for students (Richardson, 2006). The
name derives from the Hawaiian phrase 'Wiki wiki' meaning 'to hurry', and wikis are certainly
quick and easy to set up and learn to use. It is perhaps one of the most flexible applications
found on the social web, and can be used in a number of valid educational contexts. Wikis
house a shared web space which all users have equal access to, and include toolbars to import
images, create hyperlinks and modify text (Wheeler, Yeomans & Wheeler, 2008).
Each page is typically accompanied by a discussion group, and all pages within the set have a
'track back' history utility which can be used to revert content to an earlier version if
vandalism or serious error occurs (Richardson, 2006). The wiki has the potential to contribute
significantly toward collaborative learning, but to date little research has been published
regarding its effectiveness. Here we seek to outline some wiki utilities, describe their use in
teacher education, and provide the reader with an initial evaluation of their use from a student

3. S. Wheeler and D. Wheeler
3
perspective. To contextualise these aims, we begin with a discussion on writing as a social
practice.
Writing as a Social Practice
The examination of Social Practice theory and its allied concept of 'New Literacies' has been a
recurrent theme in the study of writing within digital social settings. The ongoing introduction
of new technologies encourages changes in the nature and use of literacies within a social
practice framework. Digital communications technologies have transformed the manner in
which people communicate in what Crystal (2006) has called ‘Netspeak’. Collaborative
writing also has a role to play in the defining of social practices and literacies. Street (1984)
suggests that we identify with domains in which different types of communication take place.
Subsequently, writing for an academic audience might be grounded within a shared electronic
environment such as FaceBook, if the reader also identifies with, and subscribes to the same
medium. The language used within that agreed domain becomes socially acceptable within its
own boundaries, but might not be as appropriate outside of this context. Shortis (2007)
believes that those who write within new technology mediated text environments formulate
their contributions according to the expectations of others within the same social context. The
grammar that is acceptable in say, an e-mail communication, may be socially unacceptable in
a formal letter. Shortis also points out a further distinction - that electronic forms of text are
composed on a computer screen or phone screen rather than on paper (Shortis, 2005) which
make it harder to separate out verbal language from communication.
Thurlow, Lengl and Tomic (2004, p 120) discuss speech communities as shared spaces
where 'people organise themselves into communities around the way they speak'. The same
could be said about writing and 'text communities'. We argue here that as with language,
text does not need to be perfect in order for understanding to be gained. Complex issues are
emerging from the multiple modes of text based communication available within the age of
new media (Kress, 2003). Carrington (2005) argues that contemporary literacy is reflected in
a number of ways by individuals who will become adept at shifting between text genres,
adaptability that might be extended to the use of a range of new technologies and experiences.
Mobile phone texting, e-mail and writing to social networking spaces are different text genres
that each display subtly emerging protocols and rules, some of which can be at odds with
conventional grammatical structure and language use. Yet such text genres can still contribute
toward the development of knowledge and can act as a cohesive force within online learning
communities in the same manner that culture acts as a type of ‘social glue’.
For students, there is also the strong probability that larger audiences exist beyond that of the
conventional essay audience of 'one'. When online pages are 'tagged' – appended with key
words – they become highly visible to search engines, and web visitors will inevitably be
attracted. As social beings we are naturally aware of our audience and take care to present our
'best side'. Goffman (1959) suggests that individuals tend to carefully manage their
impression by presenting a 'front stage' version of themselves in public, which can greatly
contrast with the self that is seen 'back stage'. It is highly likely that evidence of impression
management might be present within the written postings of students on wikis, due to the
potential for large 'hidden audiences' of casual web visitors. Such a phenomenon has already
been observed in studies of students using blogs (Miller, 1995) and social networking sites
(Wheeler et al, 2008). It is therefore possible that some students could be reluctant to

4. S. Wheeler and D. Wheeler
4
participate if they perceive the need to adapt their writing styles, or open their ideas up to
scrutiny from a hidden audience.
Academic writing and Literacy skills for trainee teachers
Academic writing can present a challenge for some students as it is cognitively demanding,
and invokes a deep and powerful kind of learning (Northedge, 1990). All undergraduates are
required to write at a level which meets academic standards, where essays are coherently
argued with acceptable grammatical structure and accurate spelling. Students are also
expected to demonstrate critical awareness of their subject, cohesive argument and a relevant
focus in their writing. They are also required to support their arguments and reference
accurately from the literature. Many students enter into higher education ill-equipped for such
rigours, and some find the task of writing academically frustrating or confusing (Fairbairn &
Winch, 1992). Furthermore, studies show that the majority of students who drop out from
university study do so within their first year (Benn, 1995; Bourner et al, 1991). One study
reported that 37% of student attrition in the first year was attributable to 'academic' problems
(Johnston, 1997). It was deemed important for this study therefore, that an investigation
should be made into the possible disparities between formal and informal writing styles in
web based environments. A study was therefore set up to determine the extent to which wikis
could be used to support students’ writing skills. The research team was particularly interested
in whether the social collaborative context would encourage higher quality writing.
Method
Four cohorts of education students comprising first (n=10), second year (n=10) and third year
(n=9) undergraduates, and a small post graduate cohort (n=6), participated in this study
(N=35). Ages ranged from 18 years to 35, with the majority in their early twenties. All
students used wikis as an integral part of their studies for one complete term of 10 weekly
teaching sessions within their initial teacher training programme and were invited to report on
their experiences periodically through their respective online discussion groups. Data were
gathered through the wiki discussion boards after prompts from the researchers, and
subsequently through a post-module e-mail questionnaire. In any collaborative writing space
the initial contributors often work at a disadvantage, as they have no other contributions to
compare and contrast their own writing with. To ameliorate this problem the course tutors
created a set of headings (writing framework) and accompanying questions within the root
pages of the wiki spaces to prompt and scaffold initial student postings. Students found this
useful as a starting point, and as they gained in confidence, gradually began to create their
own pages, sub-headings and spaces within which to post their own content.
Results and discussion: benefits and limitations
We start our discussion by highlighting the benefits and limitations of wikis as collaborative
online writing tools. One area of focus for the study was to determine how participants used
the wiki to develop their writing skills. Students were asked: What particular kinds of writing
skill do you think you have developed as a result of using this kind of web page? One student
reported a heightened awareness of the importance of developing his critical and analytical
skills:
In terms of hand-writing and basic writing skills, the wiki has played no part in
developing or extending my abilities, however for academic writing e.g. writing

5. S. Wheeler and D. Wheeler
5
essays, it has showed me the importance of using a wide variety of sources and
not basing fact or theory on one opinion that a website offers. I think I am now
developing a healthy critical and analytical writing style thanks to the wiki.
Looking at other people's opinions and findings has helped me to question what's
in front of me and I have found myself researching certain areas further to see if
all opinions are the same. So all of that put into one sentence is basically that the
wiki has helped with academic writing skills. (2nd Year Male)
Others reported that they were keenly aware of a 'hidden audience' of visitors to the wiki that
could be tracked using the onboard hit counter. This was initially a somewhat disconcerting
effect, as the students had no knowledge of who was visiting the site or when they were
visiting, and the visitors left very little feedback in the comments boxes. Significantly,
students considered their own student peer group to be the hidden audience that exerted the
most considerable influence on their writing, and for whose benefit they managed their
impressions the most. Several reported that they had adjusted their writing within the wiki to
present themselves in a favourable light. Some of the discussion board postings resembled
‘streams of consciousness’ rather than considered compositions, and were more reminiscent
of text messaging or ‘squeeze text’ (Carrington, 2005). In contrast, greater care was taken in
the public wiki pages, with some concerned that they were seen to write content that would
represent their thinking in the best possible light. As is evidenced within the following quotes
taken from the discussion board, students’ writing within this domain was less formal, and
riddled with spelling and punctuation errors.
I consentrate more now on my spelling than ever before because anyone can see
what you are writing so you have to take more care. (1st Year Female)
… if anything it probably makes me write better. on the wiki you know that
everyone can read your work so you make yourself as intelligent as possible. (2nd
Year Female)
… I know other people that I don't even know will be reading it. I will only write
something that I'm sure about, and not things that I think might be wrong or
questioned by other people. (1st Year Female)
Several students realised at an early stage that writing to the wiki was a challenging exercise,
for a number of reasons. A great deal of thought was required over sentence construction,
spelling and grammar before students were confident enough to publicly post their writing.
One student wrote:
Writing on the wiki is a challenging activity which involves much thought about the
length and structure of sentences as it is able to be read by anyone. (1st Year Male)
One of the most useful utilities of the wiki was its capability to encourage students to deal
with smaller, more manageable 'chunks' of study. Although one student argued that using the
wiki did not appear to improve her writing, she admitted that it enabled her to reduce her
confusion about the topic as a whole:

6. S. Wheeler and D. Wheeler
6
Using the wiki has made writing much more focused on a part of a topic rather
than gettin confused trying to tackle the topic as a whole- i found it particularly
useful when doin all the learning theories. With regard to actual 'writing skills' i
wouldn’t say it's improved anything to be honest, i find myself writing in the same
way I’d write a text or speak to friends on MSN. I dunno if this makes it look
unprofessional or appear easier to read cos its more informal? (2nd Year Female)
Some students experienced a more acute awareness of the need to provide accurate
referencing to support the thoughts and ideas they posted to the wiki. Others discovered that a
more formal approach to writing would be appropriate for their postings to the space, and
adapted their style accordingly:
my referencing has improved through using the wiki, as it had made me realise
how important it is to state where you got your information from initially. (2nd
Year Female)
I have developed more consideration for others when writing, as you know that
everyone will be reading what you write. you have to consider whether or not it
will be relevant to them before you write it up (2nd Year Female)
I believe the wiki has helped me to improve my formal writing skills and academic
writing. I now realise that their is a great deal of research available to me to
support my academic writing. I feel that my referencing skills have also been
improved. (2nd Year Female)
As with all technologically mediated communication tools, wikis have limitations, but in this
study the constraints appear to be mostly perceptual. Some for example, avoided potential
conflict with peers by steering clear of controversy in their writing, or carefully moderated
their opinions to minimize the potential for conflict. Voicing personal opinion was, for most
students secondary to the perceived need to comply with the unwritten rules of net etiquette
when using the shared web pages. In recent use of wiki spaces, the authors have created
activities which enable students to create their own ground rules or ‘wikiquette’ which define
their subsequent actions on the wiki. Such activities encourage students to gain ownership
over the content, process and ethos of learning online.
Several students were of the opinion that the wiki restricted their writing style or constrained
them from expressing themselves in a natural way:
Using the wiki has restricted me putting a lot of personal opinion into the
findings, so to avoid conflict with others over a differing opinion. (2nd Year Male)
I personally feel that, for me, the wiki stops you from writing your opinions in full.
I feel very wary knowing that anyone else can read them, so tend to keep my
opinions to myself. I know that this will restrict my learning, but i don't feel
confident enough to write my full opinions on the internet. (2nd Year Female)
Two students however, voiced an alternative view, believing that freedom of speech was a

7. S. Wheeler and D. Wheeler
7
key characteristic of wiki writing. They reported that they would take the risk of offending
others as a trade off to expressing their full opinions:
I feel fine putting down opinions! If you feel you may upset someone - try and put
it tactfully! (2nd Year Male and a now a regular Blogger)
When writing in the wiki, i am aware that anyone can look at it and i suppose this
limits to an extent what il write but not greatly. Im still happy to write my own
opinions and stuff its more the language im using that i find myself thinking about
as this will differ for people i know. (2nd Year Female)
Students quickly discovered that the wiki they were using lacked a spellchecker, and this
proved to be both a strength and a weakness. Comments from two students revealed the extent
of their dependency upon spellchecking:
I have noticed how much I do rely on Microsoft word, when I word process. Wiki
has no spelling or grammar functions, so I have to pay more attention to what I
write. However, the problem is when you cross over from using Microsoft word to
wiki. (1st Year Male)
It's hard to get used to not depending on the spell checker to correct spelling
mistakes. (1st Year Female)
Some students reported that they used a wordprocessor to create and then spellcheck their
contributions prior to copying and pasting them onto the public wiki pages. This is an
example of the ad hoc strategies students tend to adopt when they are exposed to new
experiences, or the need to adapt to new and unfamiliar technology.
It was interesting to note that at least one student identified the use of automatic features on
the computer as a potential problem. She considered that her over-reliance on the computer
tended to exert a detrimental influence over her general writing skills:
The wiki and using ICT as a whole has limited my writing skills and spelling, as i
now depend more on the spell and grammar checker and my handwriting has got
worse as i am using the computer more. (1st Year Female)
Some students adopted the strategy of using a word-processor to create and edit their
contributions, before checking for spelling and then finally copying and pasting their work
directly to the wiki. One student also reported that she had revisited the wiki to view content
after the module had ended and this had been instrumental in helping her to write her
assignment. She used it to:
…go back and look up what others had written and use that as a starting point for
my essay (2nd Year Female)
This is a pertinent example of students using the wiki as a reference repository, returning
periodically to access information that has developed over a period through the combined

8. S. Wheeler and D. Wheeler
8
efforts of the learning community. By contrast, another student considered that using the wiki
as an source aid for his essay writing was invalid. This was in spite of the fact that an entire
term’s research in specific topic areas had been posted by all the students, and corrected or
edited to ensure reliability and accuracy by other members of the cohort:
I … think if I quoted from the WIKI it would not be deemed as a valid source. (2nd
Year Male)
Such perceived illegitimacy may of course be a legacy of students’ use of other public
collaborative online spaces such as Wikipedia and Wiktionary, which have received criticism
over their accuracy and validity as research and information sources. One student made her
views clear about all wiki based sources:
At the end of the day this is only someone’s opinion and should be taken with a
grain of salt unless it is backed up. (2nd Year Female)
Such comments serve to indicate that some of the students had developed discernment and
critical awareness over which websites they could trust and which might be questionable.
When applied to academic writing contexts, these skills are patently desirable.
Other skills were more implicit within the wiki based learning process. Some students were
reluctant to edit or add to the content posted by their peers (Wheeler et al, 2008). Others,
however, had less reservations about altering their classmates’ work, and a series of heated
exchanges ensued in the classroom as students justified their actions. This form of negotiation
of meaning through text was also seen in retrospect as a valuable experience by the majority
of the students. Ultimately, students learned that writing to a shared and open online space
meant that individual ideas were subsumed into the collective ideas of the community of
learners, and that the wiki challenged the notion of intellectual property.
Conclusion
This study focused on the use of the wiki as an online tool with the potential to support the
practice of higher quality writing skills for undergraduate and postgraduate students through
collaboration. As with all new technologies, a number of benefits and limitations were
identified, some of which were perceptual in nature. Students welcomed the chance to air
their views and ideas about their course work on a public forum, with very few expressing a
reluctance to contribute. When they were reluctant, this was usually in the scope of their
writing rather than the actual contributions they made. Some were cautious about offending
their peers, and reported that they wrote in a restrained manner, or deliberately avoided
writing content about contentious issues. A couple of the students created their own blogs as a
direct result of their participation on the wiki during class time, and have used these to reflect
regularly on their undergraduate studies and student life. Some 'impression management' was
observed, which suggests that students were aware of an audience greater than that constituted
by their own peers. Initially students were surprised by the number of outside visitors to the
wiki, which they could view via the onboard hit counter. They were, however, less fastidious
over their impression management within the more informal discussion pages, where the
correction of spelling and grammatical errors appeared to assume less importance.

9. S. Wheeler and D. Wheeler
9
Significantly, use of the wiki was observed to aid the development of a healthy critical
awareness for many of the participants in the study, particularly in relation to the citing of
information sources, and the nature of intellectual property. Moreover, students reported that
they took greater care in the referencing of their work, and were more fastidious in checking
the veracity of their sources. It remains to be seen whether such meticulous scrutiny of
sources can be translated across to the writing of academic essays with future student cohorts
and this will be an aim of future, extended research with a larger sample of students. Most
students considered that they had raised their skill level in academic writing through use of
the wiki, but their collaborative writing was limited due to their reluctance to edit each others'
work. Never the less, students unanimously reported that they enjoyed using a shared
environment to discuss their work and the course content. Some also reported that they used
the wiki content to help them to plan and write their essays. Students contributed to the wiki
mostly during classroom sessions, and reported that their academic writing skills had
improved through participation in the formal wiki space. Although it was limited to a small
sample of students, and based solely on self-reports, this study has clear implications for the
use of wikis as tools to encourage quality academic writing skills. We are currently
undertaking further studies with larger student groups and one of the aims will be to test
relationships between the quality of students' academic writing and the quality of
contributions they have made on the wiki.
References
Benn, R. (1995), Higher education: Non-standard students and withdrawals. Journal of
Further and Higher Education, 19(3), 3-12.
Bourner, T. et al (1991) Part-time students and their experience of higher education
(Buckingham, Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press).
Carrington, V. (2005) Txting: the end of civilization (again)? Cambridge Journal of
Education, 35(2), 161-175.
Crystal, D. (2006) Language and the Internet (Second Edition) (Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press).
Fairbairn, G. J. and Winch, C. (1992) Reading, Writing and Reasoning: A Guide for Students
(Buckingham, Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press).
Goffman, E. (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (New York, Doubleday).
Horizon Report (2007) The Horizon Report 2007. Available online at:
http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2007_Horizon_Report.pdf (accessed 20 March 2008).
Johnston, V. (1997) Why do first year students fail to progress to their second year? An
academic staff perspective. Paper presented at the British Educational Research
Association Annual Conference, September 11-14 1997: University of York.
Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L. and Wilson, B. G. (1999) Learning with Technology: A
Constructivist Perspective (Upper Saddle River, NJ, Merrill Prentice Hall).
Kamel Boulos, M. N., Maramba, I. and Wheeler, S. (2006) Wikis, blogs and podcasts: a new
generation of Web-based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education.
BMC Medical Education, 6(41).
Kamel Boulos, M. N. and Wheeler, S. (2007) The emerging Web 2.0 social software: An
enabling suite of sociable technologies in health and healthcare education. Health
Information and Libraries Journal, 24(1), 2-23.
Kimber, K. and Wyatt-Smith, C. (2006) Using and creating knowledge with new

10. S. Wheeler and D. Wheeler
10
technologies: A case for students-as-designers Learning, Media and Technology, 31(1),
19-34.
Kress, G. (2003) Literacy in the New Media Age (London, Routledge).
Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. (2006) New Literacies: Everyday Practices and Classroom
Learning (Maidenhead, Open University Press).
Miller, H. (1995) The Presentation of Self in Electronic Life: Goffman on the Internet. Paper
presented at the Embodied Knowledge and Virtual Space conference, Goldsmiths'
College, University of London, June 1995. Available online at:
http://www.ntu.ac.uk/soc/psych/miller/goffman.htm (accessed 10 September 2007)
Northedge, A. (1990) The Good Study Guide (Milton Keynes, Open University Press).
O’Reilly, T. (2004) Open Source Paradigm Shift. Available online at:
http://tim.oreilly.com/articles/paradigmshift_0504.html (accessed 15 February 2007).
Richardson, W. (2006). Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and other powerful web tools for classrooms
(Thousand Oaks, CA, Corwin Press).
Shortis, T. (2005) The Language of ICT (London, Routledge).
Shortis, T. (2007) Gr8 Txtpectations: The Creativity of Text Spelling. English Drama Media
Journal, June 2007, 21-26.
Street, B. V. (1984) Literacy in Theory and Practice (Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press)
Thurlow, C., Lengel, L. & Tomic, A. (2004) Computer Mediated Communication: Social
interaction and the internet (London, Sage Publications).
Wheeler, S., Yeomans, P. and Wheeler, D. (2008) The Good, the Bad and the Wiki:
Evaluating student generated content for collaborative learning. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 39 (6), 987-995.
Wheeler, S. and Whitton, N. (Eds: 2007) Beyond Control: Social Software for the Network
Generation. Research Proceedings of the Association for Learning Technology
Conference (ALT-C 2007) held at the University of Nottingham, September 4-6.