Exploring and Supporting Today's Collaborative Writing

Wang, Dakuo

doi:10.1145/2851581.2859013

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In-depth qualitative analyses were supported by quantification and collaboration using text mining techniques called DocuViz and AuthorViz. Two open-source text mining tool were used to measure the length of the document, illustrate the layout of the amount of contribution each person made, and understand the patterns of interaction occurring in each group and their collaboration-related behaviors in the cloud-based writing system (e.g., Yim Wang, 2016). DocuViz (Figure 1) is an interactive visualization system that provides usage statistics (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, the second open-source text mining tool used in the study, AuthorViz (Figure 2), is another useful visualization tool for analyzing collaboratively written paragraphs and identifying writers' linguistic contributions. Different colors denote each contributor's writing, indicating their roles, contribution, language use, and editing support in Google Docs (Wang, 2016). These two advanced visualization tools help the researcher measure and depict a group's collaboration behaviors to elucidate the quality of each author's linguistic contribution and language use.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Collaborative Writing on Google Docs: Taiwanese Students’ Participation, Behaviors, and Writing Trajectories with Real-work Online Tasks

Yeh

2021

ALLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the past two decades, the growing rage of computer mediated environments (CMC) affords new literacies and new opportunities for language learners to experience, construct, communicate, and access knowledge (Ware, Kern & Warschauer, 2016). Also, it suggests that writing in multimodal in the digital ear contributes to its production and interpretation (Canagarajah, 2013) and can be particularly beneficial for L2 learners’ writing practices (Elola & Oskoz, 2010) such as writing quality (Stroch, 2005), writing fluency (Bloch, 2007), academic voices (Sperling & Appleman, 2011) and a sense of audience (Sun & Chang, 2012). Google Docs and online text-chat systems are prominent collaborative tools for group writing, and the result shows that the focus group displayed a mixed-interaction pattern, a collaborative pattern in two online text-chat systems, and a more dominant-passive pattern while co-constructing the text. They study also explored that changing the mode of communication from Line to Google Docs chat-room appears to have led to an increase in the participants’ interaction and communication and seems to have facilitated collaboration. Participants make a significant contribution of two types of writing changing functions, adding and correcting in the text and make revisions to their text.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaborative Writing on Google Docs: Taiwanese Students’ Participation, Behaviors, and Writing Trajectories with Real-work Online Tasks

Yeh

2021

ALLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The third tool, AuthorViz is a Google Chrome extension that color-codes sections of text contributed by each author within a Google Doc (Wang, 2016).…”

Section: Data-mining and Visualization Tools For Analyzing Collaborat...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Analyzing collaborative note-taking behaviors and their relationship with student learning through the collaborative encoding-storage paradigm

Fanguy

Costley

Courtney

et al. 2023

Interactive Learning Environments

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Note-taking is a ubiquitous learning strategy that learners employ when attempting to comprehend and remember information shared during lectures.However, the process of note-taking can be cognitively burdensome for learners. Research has shown a number of benefits to collaborative notetaking, including a reduction in the cognitive burden required to take notes, the creation of more comprehensive notes than those typically produced by an individual, and exposure to the varying perspectives from peers. However, research is needed into the effects of various types of collaborative note-taking behaviors on the quality of the notes and on subsequent learning outcomes.Therefore, the present research investigates the effects of collaborative note-taking behaviors of 357 students. To better conceptualize note-taking behaviors and their effects, the present dissertation introduces a theoretical framework called the collaborative encoding-storage paradigm, which extends the existing encoding-storage paradigm commonly used to explain individual note-taking behaviors. In the proposed framework, collaborative note-taking behaviors are viewed as forms of collaborative encoding and the completeness of the notes is viewed as a measure of storage quality. The following collaborative note-taking data were mined from the notes and analyzed: volume of words written, edits of others, writing sessions, and turn-taking. The storage produced by each group was assessed using a rubric to measure the completeness of the notes. Analysis at the level of the individual learner indicated that volume of words, edits of others, and turn-taking behaviors were all positively correlated with learning performance. Analysis at the level of the group indicated that turn-taking was positively correlated with learning ii performance, while edits of others was negatively correlated with learning performance. Further analysis at the group level revealed that volume of words and frequency of writing sessions were positively correlated with the completeness of group notes and that completeness of notes was positively correlated with learning performance.Overall, the results demonstrate meaningful relationships between the frequency of collaborative encoding behaviors and learning outcomes. These results suggest that collaborative encoding and storage have different effects on learning performance and that the effectiveness of collaboration differs according to the variables investigated and the level of analysis. The dissertation concludes with two recommendations for practitioners: 1) to increase recall of information, encouraging students to write more notes is beneficial, but encouraging them to write more frequently is not, and 2) for groups to take higher quality notes, they should be encouraged sustain their contributions to the document but need not interact much with the contributions of their group mates.

show abstract

“…Kim and Severinson Eklundh [36] note that even though the tools used by co-writers had features for collaboration, such as comments, these were not used. In recent work, Birnholtz and Ibara [4] and Wang [65] provide an updated view of co-writers' writing practices. Wang's findings show a more diverse use of tools including designated collaboration tools and features.…”

Section: Collaborative Writingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaborative Writing Across Multiple Artifact Ecologies

Larsen-Ledet

Korsgaard

Bødker

2020

Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research focusing on how collaborative writing takes place across multiple applications and devices and over longer projects is sparse. We respond to this gap by presenting the results of a qualitative study of longer-term academic writing projects, showing how co-writers employ multiple tools when working on a common text. We identify three patterns of multi-application collaboration as well as four common types of motivations for transitions between applications. We also extend existing taxonomies of collaborative writing by proposing a categorization of the functions served by the text as object and backbone of the collaboration. Together, these contributions offer a framing for understanding transitions within and across artifact ecologies in work around a common object. Our findings highlight ways in which features like concurrent editing may in fact challenge the collaborative writing process, and we point to opportunities for alternative application models.

show abstract

Exploring and Supporting Today's Collaborative Writing

Cited by 6 publications

References 36 publications

Collaborative Writing on Google Docs: Taiwanese Students’ Participation, Behaviors, and Writing Trajectories with Real-work Online Tasks

Collaborative Writing on Google Docs: Taiwanese Students’ Participation, Behaviors, and Writing Trajectories with Real-work Online Tasks

Analyzing collaborative note-taking behaviors and their relationship with student learning through the collaborative encoding-storage paradigm

Collaborative Writing Across Multiple Artifact Ecologies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About