Peer-feedback and revision process in a wiki mediated collaborative writing

Woo, Matsuko; Chu, Skw; Li, Xuanxi

doi:10.1007/s11423-012-9285-y

Cited by 64 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, course results cannot fully reflect learner outcomes (Garfield & Ben-Zvi, 2007). Woo, Chu, and Li (2013) suggested that online feedback could elicit revisions using the wiki platform and that this would lead to a better assessment result. Future studies may structure the wiki technology properly in the statistics course curriculum (Hazari et al, 2009) and provide timely and more frequent feedback (Garfield & Ben-Zvi, 2007) to improve students' overall course performance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incorporating Wiki Technology in a Traditional Biostatistics Course: Effects on University Students’ Collaborative Learning, Approaches to Learning and Course Performance

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim/PurposeTo investigate the effectiveness of incorporating wiki technology in an undergraduate biostatistics course for improving university students' collaborative learning, approaches to learning, and course performance. MethodologyDuring a three year longitudinal study, twenty-one and twenty-four undergraduate students were recruited by convenience sampling and assigned to a wiki group (2014)(2015) and a control group (2013-2014 and 2015-2016), respectively. The students in the wiki group attended face-to-face lectures and used a wiki (PBworks) weekly for online-group discussion, and the students in the control group had no access to the wiki and interacted face-to-face only. The students' collaborative learning, approaches to learning, and course performance were evaluated using the Group Process Questionnaire (GPQ), Revised Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) and course results, respectively, after testing.Incorporating wiki technology in a traditional biostatistics course 286Findings Multivariate analysis of variance results revealed that the R-SPQ-2F surface approach score, surface motive and strategy subscores were lower in the wiki group than in the control group (p < 0.05). The GPQ individual accountability and equal opportunity scores (components of collaboration) were higher in the wiki group than in the control group (p < 0.001). No significant betweengroups differences were found in any of the other outcome variables (i.e., overall course result, R-SPQ-2F deep approach score and subscores, GPQ positive interdependence score, social skills score, and composite score). Looking at the Wiki Questionnaire results, the subscale and composite scores we obtained were 31.5% to 37.7% lower than the norm. The wiki was used at a frequency of about 0.7 times per week per student. Recommendations for PractitionersUsing wiki technology in conjunction with the traditional face-to-face teaching method in a biostatistics course can enhance some aspects of undergraduate students' collaborative learning (individual accountability and equal participation opportunity) and approaches to learning (with less surface learning). However, use of a wiki does not improve course performance.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incorporating Wiki Technology in a Traditional Biostatistics Course: Effects on University Students’ Collaborative Learning, Approaches to Learning and Course Performance

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The program boosted students' confidence and developed their creative skills by providing them a real-life audience to impress. While extensive studies in and outside the Chinese context have shown that wikis can be an effective learning platform for students at both tertiary and secondary levels in different subject disciplines, the potential usage and effectiveness of wikis at primary school level is still in question considering the unique developmental and psychological dimensions of young students (Woo, Chu, & Li, 2013). Some of our selected studies explored this issue and found that primary students' writing attitudes were significantly improved after the implementation of a wiki-based collaborative process writing pedagogy (Li, Chu, & Ki, 2014).…”

Section: Technology-enabled Instruction Can Help Students In Their Wrmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some of our selected studies explored this issue and found that primary students' writing attitudes were significantly improved after the implementation of a wiki-based collaborative process writing pedagogy (Li, Chu, & Ki, 2014). Woo et al (2013) observed three key affordances of wiki in the primary context, namely educational, social (collaborative), and technological affordance, which helped in scaffolding students and fostering their critical thinking and creative problem-solving skills. The participants in the study perceived the use of wiki to be enjoyable, beneficial to their collaboration, and helpful in better revising their writing.…”

Section: Technology-enabled Instruction Can Help Students In Their Wrmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Their revisions covered the content, rather than language, because some features of the wiki tool such as 'spell check' could ease their cognitive load and allow them to pay more attention on content. The role of wikis in the revision process of primary school students was more closely investigated in a later study on peer feedback (Woo et al, 2013). The results of the study showed that peer comments posted via the wiki tool predominantly concerned the content and meaning level.…”

Section: Technology-enabled Instruction Can Help Students In Their Wrmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Researching Innovations in English Language Writing Instruction: A State-of-the-art Review

Zhang

Cheung

2018

JLTR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-With academic writing viewed as an important aspect of language instruction, there is an increasing interest on how writing education could be improved to better accommodate the needs of multilingual learners. To evaluate the empirical evidence from published research studies, we conducted a systematic synthesis of the published research that has examined innovations in English-as-a-foreign language writing instruction in China, in contexts including tertiary, secondary, and elementary schools. General claims emerged across our analyses of 56 empirical studies published in the SSCI journals in English from 2005-2015. Each claim is supported by empirical evidence: (1) corpus-based approaches are useful in analyzing students' writing; (2) students' affective and cognitive factors may influence the outcome of writing instruction; (3) training may help teachers improve confidence in teaching writing; (4) differences may appear between assessment-oriented teacher feedback and non-assessment-oriented teacher feedback; (5) assessment for learning influences student learning of writing; (6) instruction may help writers acquire skills and knowledge of writing for publication; (7) technology-enabled instruction can help students in their writing process; and (8) novel and authentic writing tasks can promote students' critical thinking ability.

show abstract

“…Harris, 1996; K. Harris et al, 2013;Miller, 1993;Woo, Chu, & Li, 2013;Yuknis, 2014) for more than three decades. While Ken Macrorie (1985) outlined the practices of process-based writing pedagogy 30 years ago, Lannon's book on the writing process approach has reached the 11th edition in 2012 (Lannon, 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Rising to the Challenge

Xiao-ping

Zhang

2015

Sage Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Writing is recognized as a vital skill in education and the workplace; students in the United States finishing K-12 schooling are expected to be competent writers. Yet, the Nation’s Report Card found that U.S. high school graduates coming into the workforce are particularly deficient in writing skills. Teachers serve as a crucial link in the move to improve literacy skills of K-12 students; however, teachers themselves are underprepared to be writers and writing teachers. Therefore, there is an urgent need to improve teachers’ writing skills and skills of teaching writing to improve K-12 students’ writing skills in the United States. This qualitative study examined the process-based writing project experienced by 22 practicing teachers through their reflective practices in a graduate capstone class. In particular, this study explored the challenges the teachers faced and the lessons they learned through the recursive phases of writing: planning, drafting, revising, editing, conferring, and publishing. The triangulation of the researchers’ field notes, teachers’ daily reflections, and informal interviews between the instructor and the teachers indicated that the challenges the teachers faced and the lesson they learned through the process-based writing project were phase specific. On the completion of the writing project, the participating teachers (a) developed a deep understanding of process-based writing; (b) learned new skills of planning, drafting, revising, editing, and sharing; and (c) were more confident as writers themselves and as writing teachers for their students.

show abstract

Peer-feedback and revision process in a wiki mediated collaborative writing

Cited by 64 publications

References 27 publications

Incorporating Wiki Technology in a Traditional Biostatistics Course: Effects on University Students’ Collaborative Learning, Approaches to Learning and Course Performance

Incorporating Wiki Technology in a Traditional Biostatistics Course: Effects on University Students’ Collaborative Learning, Approaches to Learning and Course Performance

Researching Innovations in English Language Writing Instruction: A State-of-the-art Review

Rising to the Challenge

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About