No description available.

The overarching aim of this thesis is to probe more deeply into how col­laborative writing can help to socialise students in a writing practice. More specifically, the thesis deals with lab report writing and the relationship of three students with different backgrounds to the educational practices of a university department. The three students differ in language background, previous higher education and vocational experience. The material comprises recordings of student discussions while writing lab reports in a group. The students and their lab report writing in different group con­stellations has been followed longitudi­nally for between two to four semesters. In addition the development of the lab reports over time has been studied, as well as teachers’ comments on them. Student acquisition of the genre is linked to internal textual criteria (textual aspects) and to extratextual criteria in the educational context. In view of the study’s focus on group collaboration a socio-cultural per­spective has been adopted as a frame. A model developed by Storch (2002) based on Vygotsky’s role relationships between expert and novice is used to shed light on how the students resolve problems related to the writing task through group discussions. The results show that the students’ backgrounds play a role in the creation of their profiles in the collaborative writing groups. The student with a second-language background often seeks support, not least where linguistic correctness is concerned, and cites what teachers say as arguments. The student with prior experience of academic writing appears to be a seasoned writer, for instance by daring to deviate from instructions and teachers’ directives. The third student uses his professional experience of writing lab reports in discussions to gain acceptance for his ideas.

A autoria coletiva mediada por computador, ou a escrita de um texto por mais de uma pessoa em ambiente informatizado, pode trazer benefícios significativos para o Ensino de Química, principalmente no que se refere à flexibilização das formas de interação entre os envolvidos e à construção colaborativa do conhecimento. No entanto, estudos mostram que o engajamento mútuo nem sempre é recorrente em iniciativas dessa natureza, com estudantes preferindo a divisão de tarefas, e mesmo o trabalho individual. Este trabalho investiga atividades de autoria coletiva baseadas na construção em grupo de textos argumentativos com a participação de estudantes do curso de Bacharelado em Química do Instituto de Química de São Carlos (IQSC), da Universidade de São Paulo (USP). Na atividade, os envolvidos, divididos em grupos, foram submetidos ao processo de produção textual com o objetivo de apresentar uma solução conjunta para estudos de caso. O objetivo geral da pesquisa é entender aspectos do trabalho coletivo no processo de autoria em questão no que se refere à colaboração e à cooperação a partir de duas perspectivas consideradas cruciais para a autoria coletiva: condições oferecidas pela plataforma eletrônica, denominada eduqui.info, e em quais contextos essas possibilidades se fizeram presente no processo de autoria; e os aspectos organizacionais da atividade. Para a discussão dos resultados, os processos de autoriaforam divididos em peculiares - aqueles que apresentaram aspectos únicos de autoria coletiva entre os analisados - e representativos, os que exibiram a tendência para os demais processos. A investigação dos chats peculiares (quatro) revelou que estes se distanciaram da perspectiva dialógica no que se refere aos movimentos procedurais-simbólicos, com estratégias e funções de autoria coletiva de caráter cooperativo e individual. Por outro lado, a análise das produções consideradas representativas (onze) mostrou uma distribuição dialógica dos movimentos procedurais-simbólicos e estratégias e funções para autoria coletiva em consonância com a perspectiva colaborativa da autoria colaborativa. Em virtude desse panorama, que coloca dialogicidade e colaboração com uma tendência majoritária da atividade, contrariando alguns estudos e ao mesmo tempo se alinhado a outros, alguns elementos são apresentados e discutidos, como roteiro das atividades realizadas, atuação do professor, forma de organização dos grupos e recursos da plataforma, em uma tentativa de justificar as tendências observadas. / Collaborative writing with computer support or a text written by more than one person in a computerized environment can bring significant benefits to Chemistry teaching, mainly concerning flexibilizing forms of interaction among those involved and collaborative construction of knowledge. However, studies show that mutual engagement is not always recurrent in initiatives of this nature as students prefer task division and even individual work. This work investigates collective authorship activities based on constructing argumentative texts in groups with the participation of undergraduate students from the BEd in Chemistry at the São Carlos Institute of Chemistry (IQSC), University of São Paulo (USP). In the activity, those involved, divided into groups, followed the textual production process aiming to present a joint solution for case studies. The main aim of the research is to understand aspects of collective work in the authorship process in question regarding collaboration and cooperation based on two perspectives considered crucial for collaborative writing: conditions offered by the electronic platform called eduqui.info, and in which contexts these possibilities were present in the writing process; and the organisational aspects of the activity. Considering the discussion of the results, the collaborative writing processes were divided into peculiar ones - those that presented unique aspects of collective authorship between those analysed - and representative ones, which showed a tendency for the other processes. The investigation of the peculiar processes (four) revealed that they distanced themselves from the dialogical perspective with regard to procedural-symbolic movements, with strategies and functions of collective authorship of a cooperative and individual character. On the other hand, the analysis of productions, considered representative (eleven), showed a dialogical distribution of procedural-symbolic movements and strategies and functions for collective authorship in consonance with the collaborative perspective of collaborative writing. Considering this panorama, which places dialogue and collaboration with a majority tendency of the activity, contrary to some studies and at the same time aligned with others, some elements are presented and discussed, such as the script of the activities carried out, the teacher\'s performance, the way of organising groups and platform resources in an attempt to justify the observed trends.

A autoria coletiva mediada por computador, ou a escrita de um texto por mais de uma pessoa em ambiente informatizado, pode trazer benefícios significativos para o Ensino de Química, principalmente no que se refere à flexibilização das formas de interação entre os envolvidos e à construção colaborativa do conhecimento. No entanto, estudos mostram que o engajamento mútuo nem sempre é recorrente em iniciativas dessa natureza, com estudantes preferindo a divisão de tarefas, e mesmo o trabalho individual. Este trabalho investiga atividades de autoria coletiva baseadas na construção em grupo de textos argumentativos com a participação de estudantes do curso de Bacharelado em Química do Instituto de Química de São Carlos (IQSC), da Universidade de São Paulo (USP). Na atividade, os envolvidos, divididos em grupos, foram submetidos ao processo de produção textual com o objetivo de apresentar uma solução conjunta para estudos de caso. O objetivo geral da pesquisa é entender aspectos do trabalho coletivo no processo de autoria em questão no que se refere à colaboração e à cooperação a partir de duas perspectivas consideradas cruciais para a autoria coletiva: condições oferecidas pela plataforma eletrônica, denominada eduqui.info, e em quais contextos essas possibilidades se fizeram presente no processo de autoria; e os aspectos organizacionais da atividade. Para a discussão dos resultados, os processos de autoriaforam divididos em peculiares - aqueles que apresentaram aspectos únicos de autoria coletiva entre os analisados - e representativos, os que exibiram a tendência para os demais processos. A investigação dos chats peculiares (quatro) revelou que estes se distanciaram da perspectiva dialógica no que se refere aos movimentos procedurais-simbólicos, com estratégias e funções de autoria coletiva de caráter cooperativo e individual. Por outro lado, a análise das produções consideradas representativas (onze) mostrou uma distribuição dialógica dos movimentos procedurais-simbólicos e estratégias e funções para autoria coletiva em consonância com a perspectiva colaborativa da autoria colaborativa. Em virtude desse panorama, que coloca dialogicidade e colaboração com uma tendência majoritária da atividade, contrariando alguns estudos e ao mesmo tempo se alinhado a outros, alguns elementos são apresentados e discutidos, como roteiro das atividades realizadas, atuação do professor, forma de organização dos grupos e recursos da plataforma, em uma tentativa de justificar as tendências observadas. / Collaborative writing with computer support or a text written by more than one person in a computerized environment can bring significant benefits to Chemistry teaching, mainly concerning flexibilizing forms of interaction among those involved and collaborative construction of knowledge. However, studies show that mutual engagement is not always recurrent in initiatives of this nature as students prefer task division and even individual work. This work investigates collective authorship activities based on constructing argumentative texts in groups with the participation of undergraduate students from the BEd in Chemistry at the São Carlos Institute of Chemistry (IQSC), University of São Paulo (USP). In the activity, those involved, divided into groups, followed the textual production process aiming to present a joint solution for case studies. The main aim of the research is to understand aspects of collective work in the authorship process in question regarding collaboration and cooperation based on two perspectives considered crucial for collaborative writing: conditions offered by the electronic platform called eduqui.info, and in which contexts these possibilities were present in the writing process; and the organisational aspects of the activity. Considering the discussion of the results, the collaborative writing processes were divided into peculiar ones - those that presented unique aspects of collective authorship between those analysed - and representative ones, which showed a tendency for the other processes. The investigation of the peculiar processes (four) revealed that they distanced themselves from the dialogical perspective with regard to procedural-symbolic movements, with strategies and functions of collective authorship of a cooperative and individual character. On the other hand, the analysis of productions, considered representative (eleven), showed a dialogical distribution of procedural-symbolic movements and strategies and functions for collective authorship in consonance with the collaborative perspective of collaborative writing. Considering this panorama, which places dialogue and collaboration with a majority tendency of the activity, contrary to some studies and at the same time aligned with others, some elements are presented and discussed, such as the script of the activities carried out, the teacher\'s performance, the way of organising groups and platform resources in an attempt to justify the observed trends.

Compared with first language (L1) writing, writing in a second or foreign language (L2) is considered to be more challenging and difficult. The challenges and difficulties may result from both the cognitive and the affective aspects of writing. To mitigate the difficulties of L2 writing and help students master L2 writing, teachers could consider using the pedagogical strategies which can help enhance students' cognition in writing or students' writing performance, and also can help reduce students' fear of L2 writing. One of the pedagogical strategies is online collaborative writing supported by CMC. Collaborative learning helps enhance students' cognitive outcomes, such as academic achievement and cognitive development, as well as produce less anxiety in learning. CMC facilitates collaboration, and also provides more chances for interaction which could result in more thoughts. The more thoughts would facilitate to compose. Therefore, it is assumed that online collaborative writing is more effective than traditional collaborative writing in terms of writing performance and writing anxiety. The present study is a quasi-experimental study. Participants were 101 first-year college students from two intact classes of a private university in Taiwan. One class was randomly assigned as the control class. Participants were engaged in traditional collaborative writing. The other was the experimental class. Students wrote collaboratively via blogs. Before the treatment, both classes were asked to completed a background survey, a pre-test L2 writing anxiety questionnaire, and a pre-test individual writing task. The treatment lasted for ten weeks during which each collaborative group in both classes completed five collaborative writing tasks. After the treatment, a collaborative writing questionnaire, a post-test L2 writing anxiety questionnaire, and a post-test individual writing task were administered to all participants. Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted to the students who made the largest, medium, and lowest gains in both classes. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were conducted to analyze the data. In terms of the quantitative results, there were no significant difference in collaborative writing performance and the quantity of individual writing between classes. The experimental class only significantly performed better than the control class in the quality of individual writing. Concerning the writing anxiety measured, the control class was significantly lower than the experimental class. Regarding students' perceptions, the results of the questionnaire showed that the control class made much more positive responses than the experimental class. As for the qualitative results, students' interviews revealed (1) the function of collaborative writing, (2) the features of the media, (3) the difficulty they encounter during collaborative writing, (4) the positive and negative factors influencing their motivation to write, and (5) their suggestions for teachers. The qualitative results support the quantitative results. Overall, this dissertation study found that, based on statistic results, traditional collaborative writing seems to be more effective than blog-supported collaborative writing in decreasing the writing anxiety of the EFL college students with weaker English ability and little writing experience. In addition, according to students' perceptions and interview results, traditional collaborative writing also appears to be more acceptable in this context. Although the statistic results suggest that the effect of blog-supported collaborative writing on writing performance and writing anxiety seems to be limited and little probably due to the use of blogs as individual and synchronous tools, its effectiveness can not be completely denied because students' perceptions and interviews suggest its positive influence and outcome. L2 teachers are suggested to provide more training sessions, employ the collaborative writing activity as an out-of-class assignment, and carefully monitor the process of collaborative writing if they do use blogs in L2 writing instruction.

<p>The method of peer response has become an important part in process oriented writing classes and is often used at universities, but not in upper secondary school. The aim of this paper is to investigate how students in upper secondary school react when introduced to peer response, and whether or not they find it a beneficial way of working when trying to improve their writing. The aim is also to find out if the students’ texts improve as a result of a peer response session.</p><p>The results of my investigation show that the majority of the students who participated had positive reactions when introduced to peer response. All students agreed that the method was beneficial to improving their texts. Furthermore, according to the teacher, who read both the first and final versions of the texts, many of the students improved their texts enough after peer response to raise their grades. This confirms that peer response is, in fact, a good method to use when trying to improve students’ writing. However, even though the majority of the participants were positive to the idea of using peer response again, there were some students who prefer that only the teacher reads their assignments. This could be due to a lack of confidence concerning their own abilities or the fact that some texts are perceived as too personal and private. There will often be students who do not like to share their writing but the method could be modified and adapted to the situation of each class. Peer response can be combined with teacher response, or the groups can be reduced to pairs of two persons.</p>

The purpose of this study was to investigate how Scardamalia’s (2002) socio-cognitive determinants of knowledge building emerge in a computer-supported collaborative writing task, and to understand students’ perceptions of knowledge building experience and the use of tools, including wikis, to support the collaborative writing process. The setting of this study was a graduate level online course on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL), in which all course activities were conducted collaboratively in an online environment. Data sources included: transcripts of online inputs in the wiki areas; interviews with 15 participants; participants’ reflective journals; transcripts of asynchronous online discussions and synchronous chats. Data were analyzed using content analysis for the transcripts of wiki areas and grounded theory approach (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) was used in the analysis of data from the interviews. Results of the data analysis indicated that the three groups in this study participated in the collaborative knowledge building activity in different ways. The three factors that influenced their participation in the activity included: group dynamics, collaborative writing task, and collaborative writing tools. These factors interacted with each another and impacted their knowledge building discourse in the following ways: improvable ideas, constructive use of authoritative sources, epistemic agency, and embedded and transformative assessment. As a result of their engagement in knowledge building discourse, participants successfully completed the collaborative writing project and shared a strong sense of community and co-ownership of the knowledge product. The findings of this study may shed light on the strategies and environmental factors that encourage knowledge building discourse as well as the synergetic combination of technology tools and knowledge building task. In addition, understanding the process of knowledge building in a computer-supported collaborative writing task and the participants perception of knowledge building and the use of tools may help instructor better prepare learners to become collaborative learners and effective knowledge workers. / text

I detta kandidatarbete har jag gått igenom hur man skriver ett manus med kunden, låta kunden komma på idéen och vara med i skrivandeprocessen. Med hjälp av en kombination av Deltagande Design och Kollaborativt Skrivande som metoder har jag byggt ihop en ny modell som hjälpte både mig och kunden för att få det bästa filmmanuset vi kunde göra med dom begränsningarna vi fick på vägen. Under skrivandets gång fick vi lite hinder om vad som kunde vara med och inte kunde vara med. Flera begränsningar dök upp men löstes på det bästa möjliga sätt. Åskådarnas feedback var nyttigt för oss alla för att kunna göra bättre framtida filmer och filmmanusar. / In this Bachelor Thesis I’ve gone through how to write a script with a customer, letting the customer to generate an idea and participate in the writing process. With the help of a combination of Participatory Design and Collaborative Writing as methods I have built a new model that helped me and the customer to get the best script we could make with the restrictions we got along the way. During the writing we got some hindrance on what could be in the script and on what couldn’t. More hindrance got up but got solved on the best possible way. The viewers feedback was necessary to hear for us to evolve and to do better movies and scripts in the future.

Com o surgimento da WEB 2.0 surge um novo conceito de criação de conteúdo digital. A edição colaborativa de textos é uma prática consolidada que está se tornando cada vez mais comum em toda a internet. Com páginas totalmente dinâmicas e ferramentas específicas, surgem recursos capazes de facilitar o desenvolvimento de textos e conteúdos dos mais diversos assuntos. Apesar desta evolução na forma da criação de textos diversos na internet, o conteúdo de artigos científicos ainda é produzido da forma tradicional na maior parte dos eventos e periódicos. Com revisões ocorrendo no processo blind review o autor muitas vezes não conhece o revisor de seu trabalho. Além disso, o artigo muitas vezes é limitado a uma única versão submetida ao evento, pois não ocorre um processo de evolução, como verificado em enciclopédias online, por exemplo. Um sistema web, aberto à comunidade, que permita criar, editar, indexar e buscar artigos pode contribuir positivamente no contexto das revisões, tornando o processo mais transparente e democrático. Se este sistema permitisse também que os artigos fossem discutidos e revisados, utilizando uma abordagem aberta, seria criado um novo canal para contribuições científicas, ajudando a aumentar a qualidade das publicações. Assim, o objetivo principal deste trabalho é avaliar a utilização da técnica de edição colaborativa de textos, aplicada em contextos científicos, verificando se esta abordagem auxilia na produção de artigos de qualidade. Para isto, foi desenvolvido um protótipo que estende as características do MediaWiki, o software utilizado pela Wikipedia. Com o auxílio desta ferramenta foi realizado dois experimentos onde foram obtidos resultados satisfatórios. Baseado no resultado dos experimentos é apresentado uma seção de análise do processo que demonstra as etapas necessárias para que o processo ocorra com o propósito de que, ao final, obtenham-se artigos científicos com conteúdo qualificado. / The consolidation of Web 2.0 brings more attention to a new concept of digital content edition. The Collaborative Writing is a practice that is becoming increasingly common on the internet. With dynamic pages and specific tools, there are resources that can facilitate text writing. Despite such evolution in the conception of texts on the Internet the scientific articles’ content is still produced in the traditional individual and sequential way in most conferences and journals. The author often does not know the reviewer of his work due to a blind review process. Moreover, the article is often limited to a single version submitted to a conference, because there is not a process of text evolution, as seen in online encyclopedias, for example. A web system that allows creating, editing, indexing and searching articles can contribute to the quality of the reviewing process, making it more transparent and with better quality. If such a system could also allow items to be discussed and reviewed, in a transparent fashion, it will create a new model for scientific contributions, increasing the quality of publications. Hence, the main objective of this work is to evaluate the use of collaborative writing applied to scientific contexts, and to analyze whether such an approach would help in the production of quality articles. This research was developed in an environment that extends features of MediaWiki software employed by Wikipedia. With this tool, it was conducted two experiments. Based on the results of these experiments, it is presented a process analysis that demonstrates the steps necessary to ensure the quality of papers produced.

Com o surgimento da WEB 2.0 surge um novo conceito de criação de conteúdo digital. A edição colaborativa de textos é uma prática consolidada que está se tornando cada vez mais comum em toda a internet. Com páginas totalmente dinâmicas e ferramentas específicas, surgem recursos capazes de facilitar o desenvolvimento de textos e conteúdos dos mais diversos assuntos. Apesar desta evolução na forma da criação de textos diversos na internet, o conteúdo de artigos científicos ainda é produzido da forma tradicional na maior parte dos eventos e periódicos. Com revisões ocorrendo no processo blind review o autor muitas vezes não conhece o revisor de seu trabalho. Além disso, o artigo muitas vezes é limitado a uma única versão submetida ao evento, pois não ocorre um processo de evolução, como verificado em enciclopédias online, por exemplo. Um sistema web, aberto à comunidade, que permita criar, editar, indexar e buscar artigos pode contribuir positivamente no contexto das revisões, tornando o processo mais transparente e democrático. Se este sistema permitisse também que os artigos fossem discutidos e revisados, utilizando uma abordagem aberta, seria criado um novo canal para contribuições científicas, ajudando a aumentar a qualidade das publicações. Assim, o objetivo principal deste trabalho é avaliar a utilização da técnica de edição colaborativa de textos, aplicada em contextos científicos, verificando se esta abordagem auxilia na produção de artigos de qualidade. Para isto, foi desenvolvido um protótipo que estende as características do MediaWiki, o software utilizado pela Wikipedia. Com o auxílio desta ferramenta foi realizado dois experimentos onde foram obtidos resultados satisfatórios. Baseado no resultado dos experimentos é apresentado uma seção de análise do processo que demonstra as etapas necessárias para que o processo ocorra com o propósito de que, ao final, obtenham-se artigos científicos com conteúdo qualificado. / The consolidation of Web 2.0 brings more attention to a new concept of digital content edition. The Collaborative Writing is a practice that is becoming increasingly common on the internet. With dynamic pages and specific tools, there are resources that can facilitate text writing. Despite such evolution in the conception of texts on the Internet the scientific articles’ content is still produced in the traditional individual and sequential way in most conferences and journals. The author often does not know the reviewer of his work due to a blind review process. Moreover, the article is often limited to a single version submitted to a conference, because there is not a process of text evolution, as seen in online encyclopedias, for example. A web system that allows creating, editing, indexing and searching articles can contribute to the quality of the reviewing process, making it more transparent and with better quality. If such a system could also allow items to be discussed and reviewed, in a transparent fashion, it will create a new model for scientific contributions, increasing the quality of publications. Hence, the main objective of this work is to evaluate the use of collaborative writing applied to scientific contexts, and to analyze whether such an approach would help in the production of quality articles. This research was developed in an environment that extends features of MediaWiki software employed by Wikipedia. With this tool, it was conducted two experiments. Based on the results of these experiments, it is presented a process analysis that demonstrates the steps necessary to ensure the quality of papers produced.