Top

Technology, Knowledge and Learning

Published in:

07-12-2022 | Original research

Integrating Different Group Patterns into Collaborative Argumentative Writing in the Shimo Platform

Authors: Fan Su, Di Zou, Haoran Xie

Published in: Technology, Knowledge and Learning | Issue 1/2024

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

As the importance of online collaborative writing is recognized as an effective teaching strategy, studies have investigated how factors such as gender, ability, and group size affect learners’ collaboration. However, few studies have explored the effects of group formation, i.e., student-chosen groups (SCGs) and teacher-assigned groups (TAGs) in online co-writing. Using the framework of the Toulmin model of argumentative writing, the current study investigated whether SCGs and TAGs differ regarding collaborative approaches and characteristics in co-argumentative writing using an online writing platform (i.e., Shimo). Seventeen fourth-year English majors participated in this 2-week study, nine of whom formed into three three-person SCGs, while a teacher assigned the remaining participants into two three-person TAGs and one two-person TAG. The archived discussion notes in Shimo along with semi-structured interviews comprised the data for analysis. The findings revealed that TAGs and SCGs had different collaborative approaches. TAGs were identified as less active, while SCGs tended to collaborate better in the co-writing processes. Implications for online classroom applications and future research are discussed.

previous article Incorporating Collaborative and Active Learning Strategies in the Design and Deployment of a Master Course on Computer-Assisted Scientific Translation

next article Informative Feedback and Explainable AI-Based Recommendations to Support Students’ Self-regulation

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Anderson, T. (2004). Teaching in an online learning context. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.), Theory and practice of online learning (pp. 273–294). Athabasca University.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oaCrossRef

Creswell, J., & Guetterman, T. (2019). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson.

Fan, C. Y., & Chen, G. D. (2021). A scaffolding tool to assist learners in argumentative writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34(1–2), 159–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1660685CrossRef

Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. SAGE.

Hassaskhah, J., & Mozaffari, H. (2015). The impact of group formation method (student-selected vs. teacher-assigned) on group dynamics and group outcome in EFL creative writing. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 6(1), 147.CrossRef

Hilton, S., & Phillips, F. (2010). Instructor-assigned and student-selected groups: A view from inside. Issues in Accounting Education, 25(1), 15–33. https://doi.org/10.2308/iace.2010.25.1.15CrossRef

Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kanselaar, G. (2009). Influence of group member familiarity on online collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(1), 161–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.08.010CrossRef

Jiang, D., & Zhang, L. J. (2020). Collaborating with ‘familiar’ strangers in mobile-assisted environments: The effect of socializing activities on learning EFL writing. Computers & Education, 150, 103841.CrossRef

Lai, C., Lei, C., & Liu, Y. (2016). The nature of collaboration and perceived learning in wiki-based collaborative writing. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2586.

Lam, Y. W., Hew, K. F., & Chiu, K. F. (2018). Improving argumentative writing: Effects of a blended learning approach and gamification. Language Learning & Technology, 22(1), 97–118. https://doi.org/10.125/44583

Latifi, S., Noroozi, O., & Talaee, E. (2020). Worked example or scripting Fostering students’ online argumentative peer feedback, essay writing and learning. Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1799032CrossRef

Li, M., & Zhu, W. (2013). Patterns of computer-mediated interaction in small writing groups using wikis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(1), 61–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.631142CrossRef

Li, M., & Zhu, W. (2017). Explaining dynamic interactions in wiki-based collaborative writing. Language Learning & Technology, 21(2), 1–26.

Li, M., & Zhu, W. (2017). Good or bad collaborative wild writing: Exploring links between group interactions and writing products. Journal of Second Language Writing, 35, 38–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.01.003CrossRef

Li, M. M. (2018). Computer-mediated collaborative writing in L2 contexts: An analysis of empirical research. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(8), 882–904. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1465981CrossRef

Mitchell, S. N., Reilly, R. C., Bramwell, G., Slonosky, A., & Lilly, F. R. (2004). Friendship and choosing groupmates: Preferences for teacher-selected versus student selected groupings. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 31, 20–32.

Mozaffari, S. H. (2017). Comparing student-selected and teacher-assigned pairs on collaborative writing. Language Teaching Research, 21(4), 496–516. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816641703CrossRef

Noroozi, O., Hatami, J., Bayat, A., van Ginkel, S., Biemans, H. J., & Mulder, M. (2020). Students’ online argumentative peer feedback, essay writing, and content learning: Does gender matter? Interactive Learning Environments, 28(6), 698–712. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1543200CrossRef

Odo, C., Masthoff, J., & Beacham, N. (2019). Group formation for collaborative learning. In International conference on artificial intelligence in education, Chichago. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-23207-8_39

Qin, J. (2013). Applying toulmin model in teaching L2 argumentative writing. The Journal of Language Learning and Teaching, 3(2), 21–29.

Qin, J., & Karabacak, E. (2010). The analysis of Toulmin elements in Chinese EFL university argumentative writing. System, 38(3), 444–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.06.012CrossRef

Qiu, X., & Lee, M. K. (2020). Regulated learning and self-efficacy beliefs in peer collaborative writing: An exploratory study of L2 learners’ written products, task discussions, and self-reports. System, 93, 102312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102312CrossRef

Rajaguru, R., Narendran, R., & Rajesh, G. (2020). Social loafing in group-based learning: Student-created and instructor-created group perspectives. Education + Training, 62(4), 483–501. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-01-2019-0018CrossRef

Sadeghi, H., & Kardan, A. A. (2016). Toward effective group formation in computer-supported collaborative learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(3), 382–395. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2013.851090CrossRef

Storch, N. (2002). Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning, 52(1), 119–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00179CrossRef

Su, F., & Zou, D. (2020). Technology-enhanced collaborative language learning: theoretical foundations, technologies, and implications. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(8), 1754–1788. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1831545CrossRef

Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Toulmin, S. E., Rieke, R. D., & Janik, A. (1984). An introduction to reasoning. Macmillan.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Yang, R. (2022). An empirical study of claims and qualifiers in ESL students’ argumentative writing based on toulmin model. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 7(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-022-00133-wMathSciNetCrossRef

Zhang, M. (2019). Towards a quantitative model of understanding the dynamics of collaboration in collaborative writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 45, 16–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.04.001CrossRef

Zioga, C., & Bikos, K. (2020). Collaborative writing using Google Docs in Primary Education: Development of argumentative discourse. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21(1), 133–142. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.690372CrossRef

Title: Integrating Different Group Patterns into Collaborative Argumentative Writing in the Shimo Platform
Authors: Fan Su
Di Zou
Haoran Xie
Publication date: 07-12-2022
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Published in: Technology, Knowledge and Learning / Issue 1/2024
Print ISSN: 2211-1662
Electronic ISSN: 2211-1670
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-022-09632-8

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

Correction: Teaching the Use of Gamification in Elementary School: A Case in Spanish Formal Education

The Learning Design & Course Creation Workshop: Impact of a Professional Development Model for Training Designers and Creators of Online and Distance Learning

Faculty’s Formal and Informal Learning Experiences During the Transition of a New Learning Management System at a Community College: A Case Study

Which is the Digital Competence of Each Member of Educational Community to Use the Computer? Which Predictors Have a Greater Influence?

Perceptions of Digital Learning and Teaching: The Case of a Croatian University Transition to an Emergency Digital Environment

Scaffolding Computational Thinking Through Block Coding: A Learner Experience Design Study

Premium Partners