Advertisement

Understanding Revisions in Student Writing Through Revision Graphs

  • Antonette Shibani
  • Simon Knight
  • Simon Buckingham Shum
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10948)

Abstract

Text revision is regarded as an important process in improving written products. To study the process of revision activity from authentic classroom contexts, this paper introduces a novel visualization method called Revision Graph to aid detailed analysis of the writing process. This opens up the possibility of exploring the stages in students’ revision of drafts, which can lead to further automation of revision analysis for researchers, and formative feedback to students on their writing. The Revision Graph could also be applied to study the direct impact of automated feedback on students’ revisions and written outputs in stages of their revision, thus evaluating its effectiveness in pedagogic contexts.

Keywords

Learning Analytics Writing Analytics Revision analysis Writing Revision process Visualizations Revision Graph 

References

  1. 1.
    Fitzgerald, J.: Research on revision in writing. Rev. Educ. Res. 57(4), 481–506 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Flower, L., Hayes, J.R.: A cognitive process theory of writing. Coll. Compos. Commun. 32(4), 365–387 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Buckingham Shum, S., Knight, S., McNamara, D., Allen, L., Bektik, D., Crossley, S: Critical perspectives on writing analytics. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, pp. 481–483. ACM, NewYork (2016)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shibani, A., Knight, S., Buckingham Shum, S.: Understanding Students’ Revisions in Writing: From Word Counts to the Revision Graph. Technical report CIC-TR-2018-01, Connected Intelligence Centre, University of Technology Sydney, Australia (2018). https://utscic.edu.au/research/publications/
  5. 5.
    Caporossi, G., Leblay, C.: Online writing data representation: a graph theory approach. In: Gama, J., Bradley, E., Hollmén, J. (eds.) IDA 2011. LNCS, vol. 7014, pp. 80–89. Springer, Heidelberg (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24800-9_10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wininger, M.: Measuring the evolution of a revised document. J. Writ. Res. 6(1), 1–28 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shibani, A., Knight, S., Buckingham Shum, S., Ryan, P.: Design and implementation of a pedagogic intervention using writing analytics. In: 25th International Conference on Computers in Education. Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education, New Zealand (2017)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rijlaarsdam, G., Couzijn, M., Van Den Bergh, H.: The study of revision as a writing process and as a learning-to-write process. In: Allal, L., Chanquoy, L., Largy, P. (eds.) Revision Cognitive and Instructional Processes. Studies in Writing, vol. 13. Springer, Dordrecht (2004).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1048-1_12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shibani, A.: AWA-Tutor: a platform to ground automated writing feedback in robust learning design. In: 8th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK 2018), Sydney (2018)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antonette Shibani
    • 1
  • Simon Knight
    • 1
  • Simon Buckingham Shum
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Technology SydneyUltimoAustralia

Personalised recommendations