Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Erschienen in:
Designing for Authorship: Students as Content Creators Using Mobile Devices in Educational Settings Kapitel lesen Erstes Kapitel lesen

2018 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Evaluating the Use of Groupware Technologies in Support of Collaborative Learning in an ESP Tertiary Education Course

verfasst von : Aekaterini Mavri, Stavroula Hadjiconstantinou

Erschienen in: Learning and Collaboration Technologies. Design, Development and Technological Innovation

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

ESP (English for specific purposes) refers to English teaching and learning with a strong emphasis on discipline-specific competencies and skills. Collaboration provides key benefits in ESP education, in terms of stronger linguistic gains and better written artefacts. Dedicated learning platforms as well as knowledge management and social networking tools, have become central in supporting collaboration in educational settings, yet sufficient evidence of their in-depth contribution and usability, with regards to ESP, is limited.
This study seeks to evaluate the perceived usability of two web-based collaborative learning and productivity platforms: (a) Moodle Elgg and (b) Google Drive, Docs & Hangouts, as well as investigate their distinct pedagogical impact on the students’ perceived learning.
Results indicate that the affordances of each tool are accountable for the type and extend of activities performed within them, and - consequently – the respective learning outcomes achieved. Significant differences were recorded between the tools and the outcomes render Google Drive as a more appropriate option than Moodle Elgg for the ESP requirements in this study.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

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!

Jetzt informieren

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!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Vorheriges Kapitel Social Learning and Social Design Using iPads and Groupware Technologies
Nächstes Kapitel Measuring Teamwork Competence Development in a Multidisciplinary Project Based Learning Environment
Literatur
1.
Byram, M.: Routledge Encyclopedia of Language Teaching and Learning. Psychology Press, London (2017)
2.
Chu, S.K.W., Kennedy, D., Mak, Y.K.: MediaWiki and Google Docs as online collaboration tools for group project co-construction. In: Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Knowledge Management (2009)
3.
Zhou, W., Simpson, E., Domizi, D.P.: Google Docs in an out-of-class collaborative writing activity. Int. J. Teach. Learn. High. Educ. 24(3), 359–375 (2012)
4.
Liu, S.H.-J., Lan, Y.-J.: Social constructivist approach to web-based EFL learning: collaboration, motivation, and perception on the use of Google Docs. Educ. Technol. Soc. 19(1), 171–186 (2016)MathSciNet
5.
Blau, I., Caspi, A.: What type of collaboration helps? Psychological ownership, perceived learning and outcome quality of collaboration using Google Docs. In: Proceedings of the Chais Conference on Instructional Technologies Research, vol. 12 (2009)
6.
Bold, M.: Use of wikis in graduate course work. J. Interact. Learn. Res. 17(1), 5 (2006)
7.
Harasim, L.M.: Learning Networks: A Field Guide to Teaching and Learning Online. MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)
8.
Forment, M.A., Guerrero, M.J.C., Mayol, E., Piguillem, J., Galanis, N., García-Peñalvo, F.J., González, M.Á.C.: Docs4Learning: getting Google Docs to work within the LMS with IMS BLTI. J. UCS 18(11), 1483–1500 (2012)
9.
Huchinson, T., Waters, A.: English for Specific Purposes: A Learning-Centered Approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1987)CrossRef
10.
Csizér, K., Kontra, E.H.: ELF, ESP, ENL and their effect on students’ aims and beliefs: a structural equation model. System 40(1), 1–10 (2012)CrossRef
11.
Hafner, C.A., Chik, A., Jones, R.H.: Engaging with digital literacies in TESOL. TESOL Q. 47(4), 812–815 (2013)CrossRef
12.
Lee, C.D., Smagorinsky, P.: Vygotskian Perspectives on Literacy Research: Constructing Meaning Through Collaborative Inquiry. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000)
13.
Vygotsky, L.S.: Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Mental Process. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1978)
14.
Wenger, E.: Communities of practice: learning as a social system. Syst. Thinker 9(5), 2–3 (1998)
15.
Swan, K., Shea, P.: The development of virtual learning communities. In: Learning Together Online: Research on Asynchronous Learning Networks, pp. 239–260 (2005)
16.
Abraham, R.G., Liou, H.-C.: Interaction generated by three computer programs: analysis of functions of spoken language. In: Computer-Assisted Language Learning: Research and Practice. Newbury House/Harper Row, New York (1991)
17.
Dudley, A.: Communicative CALL: student interaction using non-EFL software. CÆLL J. 6(3), 25–33 (1995)
18.
Dziombak, C.E.: Searching for collaboration in the ESL computer lab and the ESL classroom. Diss. Abstr. Int. A Humanit. Soc. Sci. 51(2296–A) (1991)
19.
Levy, M., Hinckfuss, J.: Program design and student talk at computers. Comput. Assist. English Lang. Learn. J. 1(4), 21–26 (1990)
20.
Meskill, C.: ESL and multimedia: a study of the dynamics of paired student discourse. System 21(3), 323–341 (1993)CrossRef
21.
Murillo, D.: Maximizing CALL effectiveness in the classroom. CÆLL J. 2(2), 20–25 (1991)
22.
Pujol, M.: ESL interactions around the computer. CÆLL J. 6(4), 2–11 (1995)
23.
Warschauer, M., Healey, D.: Computers and language learning: an overview. Lang. Teach. 31(2), 57–71 (1998)CrossRef
24.
Barkley, E.F., Cross, K.P., Major, C.H.: Collaborative learning techniques: a handbook for college faculty. Wiley, Hoboken (2014)
25.
Schellens, T., Valcke, M.: Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Comput. Educ. 46(4), 349–370 (2006)CrossRef
26.
Bean, J.C.: Engaging Ideas: the Professor’s Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom. Wiley, Chichester (2011)
27.
Klemm, W.R.: Benefits of Collaboration Software for On-Site Classes (1997)
28.
Dekeyser, S., Watson, R.: Extending Google Docs to collaborate on research papers, vol. 23, p. 2008. University of Southern Queensland, Australia (2006)
29.
Werdmuller, B., Tosh, D., Files, F., Free, P.: Elgg–A personal learning landscape. TESL-EJ 9(2), 1–11 (2005)
30.
Tee, S.S., Wook, T., Zainudin, S.: User testing for moodle application. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Its Appl. 7(5), 243–252 (2013)
31.
Baker, K., Greenberg, S., Gutwin, C.: Empirical development of a heuristic evaluation methodology for shared workspace groupware. In: Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 96–105 (2002)
32.
Johnson-Lenz, P., Johnson-Lenz, T.: Post-mechanistic groupware primitives: rhythms, boundaries and containers. Int. J. Man Mach. Stud. 34(3), 395–417 (1991)CrossRef
33.
34.
Nielsen, J., Molich, R.: Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 249–256 (1990)
35.
Patel, H., Pettitt, M., Wilson, J.R.: Factors of collaborative working: a framework for a collaboration model. Appl. Ergon. 43(1), 1–26 (2012)CrossRef
36.
Crumlish, C., Malone, E.: Designing Social Interfaces: Principles, Patterns, and Practices for Improving the User Experience. O’Reilly Media Inc., Sebastopol (2009)
37.
Luna-García, H., Mendoza-González, R., Vargas Martin, M., Muñoz-Arteaga, J., Álvarez-Rodríguez, F.J., Rodríguez-Martínez, L.C.: Validating design patterns for mobile groupware applications by expert users: a USAER case. Comput. Sist. 20(2), 239–250 (2016)
38.
Pinelle, D., Gutwin, C., Greenberg, S.: Task analysis for groupware usability evaluation: modeling shared-workspace tasks with the mechanics of collaboration. ACM Trans. Comput. Interact. 10(4), 281–311 (2003)CrossRef
39.
Herrick, D.R.: Google this!: using Google apps for collaboration and productivity. In: Proceedings of the 37th Annual ACM SIGUCCS Fall Conference: Communication and Collaboration, pp. 55–64 (2009)
40.
Chu, S.K.-W.: TWiki for knowledge building and management. Online Inf. Rev. 32(6), 745–758 (2008)CrossRef
41.
Patton, M.Q.: Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. SAGE Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks (1990)
42.
Viera, A.J., Garrett, J.M.: Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam. Med. 37(5), 360–363 (2005)
43.
Shneiderman, B.: Reflections on authoring, editing and managing hypertex (1998)
44.
Farmer, R.: Instant messaging–collaborative tool or educator’s nightmare. In: The North American Web-based Learning Conference (NAWeb 2003) (2003)
45.
Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T., Archer, W.: Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: computer conferencing in higher education. Internet High. Educ. 2(2), 87–105 (1999)CrossRef
46.
Nicholson, S.: Socialization in the ‘virtual hallway’: instant messaging in the asynchronous web-based distance education classroom. Internet High. Educ. 5(4), 363–372 (2002)CrossRef
47.
Raman, M., Ryan, T., Olfman, L.: Designing knowledge management systems for teaching and learning with wiki technology. J. Inf. Syst. Educ. 16(3), 311 (2005)
48.
Bubaš, G., Orehovački, T., Kovačić, A.: E-learning with Web 2.0 tools: what can (’t) go wrong. In: 18th European University Information Systems (EUNIS) Congress-A 360° Perspective on IT/IS in Higher Education (2012)
49.
Farmer, R.: Instant messaging: IM Online! RU? Educ. Rev. 40(6), 49 (2005)
50.
Preece, J.: Sociability and usability in online communities: determining and measuring success. Behav. Inf. Technol. 20(5), 347–356 (2001)CrossRef
51.
Ardito, C., Costabile, M.F., De Marsico, M., Lanzilotti, R., Levialdi, S., Roselli, T., Rossano, V.: An approach to usability evaluation of e-learning applications. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 4(3), 270–283 (2006)CrossRef
52.
Nicol, D., Littlejohn, A., Grierson, H.: The importance of structuring information and resources within shared workspaces during collaborative design learning. Open Learn. J. Open Distance e-Learn. 20(1), 31–49 (2005)CrossRef
53.
Apple, K.J., Reis-Bergan, M., Adams, A.H., Saunders, G.: Online tools to promote student collaboration. In: Getting connected: Best Practices for Technology Enhanced Teaching and Learning in High Education, pp. 239–252 (2011)CrossRef
54.
Wang, Q.: Using online shared workspaces to support group collaborative learning. Com put. Educ. 55(3), 1270–1276 (2010)
55.
Liaw, S.-S.: Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: a case study of the Blackboard system. Comput. Educ. 51(2), 864–873 (2008)CrossRef
56.
Emmer, E.T., Liu, M., Reimer, T.C.: Student perceptions of a collaborative online learning environment (2005)
57.
Bower, M., Richards, D.: Collaborative learning: some possibilities and limitations for students and teachers. In: 23rd Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education: Whos Learning, pp. 79–89 (2006)
58.
Lahtinen, E., Ala-Mutka, K., Järvinen, H.-M.: A study of the difficulties of novice programmers. In: Proceedings of the 10th Annual SIGCSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education - ITiCSE 2005, p. 14 (2005)
59.
Mavri, A., Loizides, F., Souleles, N.: A case study on using iPads to encourage collaborative learning in an undergraduate web development class. In: 1st International Conference on the use of iPads in Higher Education 2014, pp. 267–290 (2014)
Metadaten
Titel
Evaluating the Use of Groupware Technologies in Support of Collaborative Learning in an ESP Tertiary Education Course
verfasst von
Aekaterini Mavri
Stavroula Hadjiconstantinou
Copyright-Jahr
2018
Buch
Learning and Collaboration Technologies. Design, Development and Technological Innovation

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-91742-9

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-91743-6

Copyright-Jahr: 2018

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91743-6_33

Neuer Inhalt

    Bildnachweise