nach oben

Education and Information Technologies

Erschienen in:

06.07.2020

Temporality revisited: Dynamicity issues in collaborative digital writing research

verfasst von: Volkmar P. Engerer

Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies | Ausgabe 1/2021

Einloggen

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

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This paper explores the feature of dynamicity (a composite of temporal and local properties) in research on collaborative digital writing (CDW) in academic writing assignments. The paper traces the ways in which current research typically approaches CDW and identifies the underlying elements of current and technological inquiry in this field: components of text (the process and products of writing and learning communication), external variables, such as learning orientations and group composition, and an intermediate layer of time management that is related to organizing the assignment. The paper identifies gaps in the current understanding of the phenomenon of collaborative writing for learning and pinpoints some basic weaknesses with concepts used in this research, in particular assumptions related to the time aspect of the collaborative writing process. The prevalent view of current research, which conceptualizes writing processes as predominantly time-ordered intermediate products (texts) at several designated points within the writing assignment, overlooks the sequential dynamics of textual interaction, linearity, and “local” concept construction as influential factors in CDW assignments. Instead, this paper argues for the ideas of sequential concept construction and locally changing sources for the writer at a certain point in the writing. The insights presented in this paper can help address some of these time-related shortcomings of current research. A few selected key aspects of implementing dynamicity in studies of CDW are exemplified in a CDW assignment with information science students that the author conducted back in 2016.

Vorheriger Artikel Uncovering educational outcomes deriving from students’ acceptance and involvement with 3D virtual worlds

Nächster Artikel Predictive learning analytics using deep learning model in MOOCs’ courses videos

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 "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

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

Ajjan, H., & Hartshorne, R. (2008). Investigating faculty decisions to adopt web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 71–80.CrossRef

Alghasab, M., Hardman, J., & Handley, Z. (2019). Teacher-student interaction on wikis: Fostering collaborative learning and writing. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 21, 10–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2018.12.002.CrossRef

Allen, N., Atkinson, D., Morgan, M., Moore, T., & Snow, C. (1987). What experienced collaborators say about collaborative writing. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 1(2), 70–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/105065198700100206.CrossRef

Alvarez, I., Espasa, A., & Guasch, T. (2012). The value of feedback in improving collaborative writing assignments in an online learning environment. Studies in Higher Education, 37(4), 387–400. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.510182.CrossRef

Barkley, E. F., Major, C. H., & Cross, K. P. (2014). Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass & Pfeiffer Imprints, Wiley.

Beck, E. E. (1993). A survey of experiences of collaborative writing. In M. Sharples (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative writing (pp. 87–112). London, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRef

Berlanga, A., Brouns, F., Van Rosmalen, P., Rajagopal, K., Kalz, M., & Stoyanov, S. (2009). Making use of language technologies to provide formative feedback. In Workshops Proceedings Volume 10. Natural Language Processing in Support of Learning: Metrics, Feedback and Connectivity. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference in Artificial Intelligence in Education, Workshops Proceedings, Brighton, UK. (pp. 1–8). Brighton, UK.

Berlanga, A., Van Rosmalen, P., Boshuizen, H. P. A., & Sloep, P. B. (2012). Exploring formative feedback on textual assignments with the help of automatically created visual representations. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(2), 146–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00425.x.CrossRef

Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (1999). Learning communities in classrooms: A reconceptualization of educational practice. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 269–292). Mahwah: Lawrence Earlbaum Ass.

Bonk, C. J., & Cunningham, D. J. (1998). Searching for learner-centered, constructivist, and sociocultural components of collaborative educational learning tools. In C. J. Bonk & K. S. King (Eds.), Electronic collaborators. Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse (pp. 25–50). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc..

Brodahl, C., Hadjerrouit, S., & Hansen, N. K. (2011). Collaborative writing with web 2.0 technologies: Education students’ perceptions. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 10, IIP 73-IIP 103.

Bühler, K. (1990). Theory of language: The representational function of language. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.CrossRef

Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M., & Lam, J. (2011). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies in Higher Education, 36(4), 395–407.CrossRef

Cen, L., Ruta, D., Powell, L., Hirsch, B., & Ng, J. (2016). Quantitative approach to collaborative learning: Performance prediction, individual assessment, and group composition. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(2), 187–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-016-9234-6.CrossRef

Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 328–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006.CrossRef

Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1993). Grounding in communication. In R. M. Baecker (Ed.), Readings in groupware and computer-supported cooperative work: Assisting human-human collaboration (pp. 222–233). San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

Cress, U., & Kimmerle, J. (2007). A theoretical framework of collaborative knowledge building with wikis: A systemic and cognitive perspective. In Proceedings of the 8th iternational conference on Computer supported collaborative learning (pp. 156–164). International Society of the Learning Sciences.

Cress, U., & Kimmerle, J. (2008). A systemic and cognitive view on collaborative knowledge building with wikis. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(2), 105–122.CrossRef

Cress, U., & Kimmerle, J. (2018). Collective knowledge construction. In F. Fischer, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, S. R. Goldman, & P. Reimann (Eds.), International handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 137–146). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315617572.CrossRef

Csanadi, A., Eagan, B., Kollar, I., Shaffer, D. W., & Fischer, F. (2018). When coding-and-counting is not enough: Using epistemic network analysis (ENA) to analyze verbal data in CSCL research. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(4), 419–438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9292-z.CrossRef

Dhyab, R., & Varol, A. (2018). Distance education features using Facebook. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 12(6), 19–34. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v12i6.9621.CrossRef

Erstad, O., & Sefton-Green, J. (Eds.). (2013). Identity, community, and learning lives in the digital age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Esguerra, M. A. (2019). Educational applications of web 2.0: Strategies to enrich the teaching and learning in the graduate school. In ACM International Conference Proceeding Series (pp. 217–222). https://doi.org/10.1145/3369199.3369226.

Ferrara, K., Brunner, H., & Whittemore, G. (1991). Interactive written discourse as an emergent register. Written Communication, 8(1), 8–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088391008001002.CrossRef

Freire, T., & Li, J. (2016). Using Wikipedia to enhance student learning: A case study in economics. Education and Information Technologies, 21(5), 1169–1181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9374-0.CrossRef

Gadomska, A., & Krakowian, P. (2017). Implementing blogs for developing academic writing skills in a variety of higher educational contexts. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning, 27(4), 358–372. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJCEELL.2017.087139.CrossRef

Guasch, T., Espasa, A., Alvarez, I. M., & Kirschner, P. A. (2013). Effects of feedback on collaborative writing in an online learning environment. Distance Education, 34(3), 324–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2013.835772.CrossRef

Hadjerrouit, S. (2016). Assessing the level of collaborative writing in a wiki-based environment: A case study in teacher education. Competencies in teaching, learning and educational leadership in the digital age: Papers from CELDA 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30295-9_12.

Hadwin, A. F., Bakhtiar, A., & Miller, M. (2018). Challenges in online collaboration: Effects of scripting shared task perceptions. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(3), 301–329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9279-9.CrossRef

Harney, O. M., Hogan, M. J., & Quinn, S. (2017). Investigating the effects of peer to peer prompts on collaborative argumentation, consensus and perceived efficacy in collaborative learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 12(3), 307–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9263-9.CrossRef

Heimbuch, S., Ollesch, L., & Bodemer, D. (2018). Comparing effects of two collaboration scripts on learning activities for wiki-based environments. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(3), 331–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9283-0.CrossRef

Herring, S. C. (2002). Computer-mediated communication on the internet. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36(1), 109–168. https://doi.org/10.1002/aris.1440360104.CrossRef

Herring, S. C., Stein, D., & Virtanen, T. (2013). Pragmatics of computer-mediated communication. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.CrossRef

Ingulfsen, L., Furberg, A., & Strømme, T. A. (2018). Students’ engagement with real-time graphs in CSCL settings: Scrutinizing the role of teacher support. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(4), 365–390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9290-1.CrossRef

Jonassen, D. H., Beissner, K., & Yacci, M. (1993). Structural knowledge: Techniques for representing, conveying, and acquiring structural knowledge. Hillsdale: L. Erlbaum Associates.

Jonsson, E. (2015). Conversational writing a multidimensional study of synchronous and supersynchronous computer-mediated communication. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Jorczak, R. L. (2011). An information processing perspective on divergence and convergence in collaborative learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(2), 207–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-010-9104-6.CrossRef

Kapur, M. (2011). Temporality matters: Advancing a method for analyzing problem-solving processes in a computer-supported collaborative environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9109-9.CrossRef

Kimmerle, J., Moskaliuk, J., Brendle, D., & Cress, U. (2017). All in good time: Knowledge introduction, restructuring, and development of shared opinions as different stages in collaborative writing. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 12(2), 195–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9258-6.CrossRef

Klein, P. D. (2014). Writing as a learning activity. Leiden: Brill.CrossRef

Kramer, I. M., & Kusurkar, R. A. (2017). Science-writing in the blogosphere as a tool to promote autonomous motivation in education. Internet and Higher Education, 35, 48–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.08.001.CrossRef

Lin, C.-L., Yu, S.-W., Su, Y.-S., Fu, F.-L., & Lin, Y.-T. (2019). Charismatic learning: Students’ satisfaction with e-learning in higher education. Journal of Internet Technology, 20(5), 1665–1672. https://doi.org/10.3966/160792642019092005030.CrossRef

Lindblom-Ylänne, S., & Pihlajamäki, H. (2003). Can a collaborative network environment enhance essay-writing processes? British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(1), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8535.00301.CrossRef

Ludvigsen, K., Krumsvik, R., & Furnes, B. (2015). Creating formative feedback spaces in large lectures. Computers & Education, 88, 48–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.002.CrossRef

Ludvigsen, S., Law, N., Rose, C. P., & Stahl, G. (2017). Frameworks for mass collaboration, adaptable scripts, complex systems theory, and collaborative writing. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 12(2), 127–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9257-7.CrossRef

Ludvigsen, S., Cress, U., Rose, C. P., Law, N., & Stahl, G. (2018). Developing understanding beyond the given knowledge and new methodologies for analyses in CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(4), 359–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9291-0.CrossRef

Lutaaya, J. N., Cronje, J., & Aheto, S.-P. K. (2018). Exploring wiki-based collaborative writing activities among ESL pre-service education students. In Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Learning, ICEL (Vol. 2018-July, pp. 514–524).

Mahlambi, S., Civilcharran, S., & Ajayi, N. A. (2019). The perception of students about the use of social media as an alternate learning platform. In 2018 International Conference on Intelligent and Innovative Computing Applications, ICONIC 2018. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICONIC.2018.8601228.

Marcarelli, K. (2010). Learning through writing. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452219066.n7.CrossRef

Markova, T., Glazkova, I., & Zaborova, E. (2017). Quality issues of online distance learning. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 237, 685–691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2017.02.043.CrossRef

Nelson, N. (2001). Writing to learn: One theory, two rationales. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Eds.), Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 23–36). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.CrossRef

Onrubia, J., & Engel, A. (2009). Strategies for collaborative writing and phases of knowledge construction in CSCL environments. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1256–1265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.06.008.CrossRef

Paavola, S., & Hakkarainen, K. (2014). Trialogical approach for knowledge creation. In S. C. Tan, H. J. So, & J. Yeo (Eds.), Knowledge creation in education (pp. 53–73). Singapore: Springer.

Pachler, N., & Daly, C. (2011). Key issues in e-learning: Research and practice. London: Continuum International Pub. Group.

Page, K. L., & Reynolds, N. (2015). Learning from a wiki way of learning. Studies in Higher Education, 40(6), 988–1013. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.865158.CrossRef

Preece, J. (2000). Online communities: Designing usability, supporting sociability. Chichester: Wiley.

Prins, F. J., Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Kirschner, P. A., & Strijbos, J.-W. (2005). Formative peer assessment in a CSCL environment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30, 417–444.CrossRef

Reimann, P. (2009). Time is precious: Variable- and event-centred approaches to process analysis in CSCL research. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 239–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-009-9070-z.CrossRef

Resendes, M., Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., Chen, B., & Halewood, C. (2015). Group-level formative feedback and metadiscourse. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(3), 309–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-015-9219-x.CrossRef

Romero, L., Saucedo, C., Caliusco, M. L., & Gutiérrez, M. (2019). Supporting self-regulated learning and personalization using ePortfolios: A semantic approach based on learning paths. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0146-1.CrossRef

Sáiz-Manzanares, M. C., García Osorio, C. I., Díez-Pastor, J. F., & Martín Antón, L. J. (2019). Will personalized e-learning increase deep learning in higher education? Information Discovery and Delivery, 47(1), 53–63. https://doi.org/10.1108/IDD-08-2018-0039.CrossRef

Scheuer, O., Loll, F., Pinkwart, N., & McLaren, B. (2010). Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state of the art. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(1), 43–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-009-9080-x.CrossRef

Schwan, S., & Cress, U. (Eds.). (2017). The psychology of digital learning constructing, exchanging, and acquiring knowledge with digital media. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49077-9.CrossRef

Schwarz, B. B., Prusak, N., Swidan, O., Livny, A., Gal, K., & Segal, A. (2018). Orchestrating the emergence of conceptual learning: A case study in a geometry class. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(2), 189–211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9276-z.CrossRef

Searle, J. R. (1985). Speech acts: An essay in philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795.CrossRef

Slack, F., Beer, M., Armitt, G., & Green, S. (2003). Assessment and learning outcomes: The evaluation of deep learning in an on-line course. Journal of Information Technology Education, 2, 305–317.CrossRef

Stahl, G. (2015). Conceptualizing the intersubjective group. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(3), 209–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-015-9220-4.CrossRef

Stahl, G. (2017). Group practices: A new way of viewing CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 12(1), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9251-0.CrossRef

Starkey, L. (2020). A review of research exploring teacher preparation for the digital age. Cambridge Journal of Education, 50(1), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2019.1625867.CrossRef

Strijbos, J. W., Narciss, S., & Dünnebier, K. (2010). Peer feedback content and sender’s competence level in academic writing revision tasks: Are they critical for feedback perceptions and efficiency? Learning and Instruction, 20, 291–303.CrossRef

Suthers, D. D., Dwyer, N., Medina, R., & Vatrapu, R. (2010). A framework for conceptualizing, representing, and analyzing distributed interaction. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(1), 5–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-009-9081-9.CrossRef

Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249–276.CrossRef

Trocky, N. M., & Buckley, K. M. (2016). Evaluating the impact of wikis on student learning outcomes: An integrative review. Journal of Professional Nursing, 32(5), 364–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2016.01.007.CrossRef

Tseng, S.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2007). On- line peer assessment and the role of the peer feedback: A study of high school computer course. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1161–1174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.01.007.CrossRef

Turvey, K., & Pachler, N. (2020). Design principles for fostering pedagogical provenance through research in technology supported learning. Computers and Education, 146, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103736.CrossRef

Tynjälä, P., Mason, L., & Lonka, K. (2001). Writing as a learning tool: An introduction. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Eds.), Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 7–22). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.CrossRef

van Aalst, J. (2009). Distinguishing knowledge-sharing, knowledge-construction, and knowledge-creation discourses. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 259–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-009-9069-5.CrossRef

Verstege, S., Pijeira-Díaz, H. J., Noroozi, O., Biemans, H., & Diederen, J. (2019). Relations between students’ perceived levels of self-regulation and their corresponding learning behavior and outcomes in a virtual experiment environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 100, 325–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.02.020.CrossRef

Wallace, P. M. (2001). The psychology of the internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wise, A. F., & Chiu, M. M. (2011). Analyzing temporal patterns of knowledge construction in a role-based online discussion. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(3), 445–470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9120-1.CrossRef

Yeh, H. C. (2014). Exploring how collaborative dialogues facilitate synchronous collaborative writing. Language Learning and Technology, 18(1), 23–37.

Zappavigna, M. (2012). Ambient affiliation: A linguistic perspective on twitter. In J. Hughes (Ed.), SAGE internet research methods (pp. v4-193–v4-215). London: Sage.

Titel: Temporality revisited: Dynamicity issues in collaborative digital writing research
verfasst von: Volkmar P. Engerer
Publikationsdatum: 06.07.2020
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies / Ausgabe 1/2021
Print ISSN: 1360-2357
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7608
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10262-9

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

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

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2021

M-learning adoption of management students’: A case of India

eLearning technology and the advancement of practical constructivist pedagogies: Illustrations from classroom observations

Case study: Developing long-term knowledge with Sprego

Correction to: Time to engage: Implementing math and literacy blended learning routines in an Indian elementary classroom

Correction to: A scoping review of Critical Predictive Factors (CPFs) of satisfaction and perceived learning outcomes in E-learning environments

Time to engage: Implementing math and literacy blended learning routines in an Indian elementary classroom