Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Scaffolding collaborative technical writing with procedural facilitation and synchronous discussion

  • Published:
International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

With the advent of computer technology, researchers and instructors are attempting to devise computer support for effective collaborative technical writing. In this study, a computer-supported environment for collaborative technical writing was developed. This system (Process-Writing Wizard) provides process-oriented scaffolds and a synchronous online chat room to facilitate real-time collaborative writing practice. It allows multiple students to work synchronously on collaborative writing tasks via the Internet. It also helps develop collaborative writing strategies, such as creating team agendas, brainstorming, creating team outlines, and generating team articles. An experiment was conducted to examine the effect of the system on EFL (English as a Foreign Language) students’ collaborative writing experiences. First, an attitude questionnaire was used to evaluate learners’ perceptions, acceptance, attitudes, and continuing motivation toward the functionalities and guidance provided by the system. Second, students’ writing products were examined to evaluate the effect of the system on EFL students’ collaborative writing quality, especially on content and organization. Finally, this study analyzed and coded students’ synchronous chats with three categories (article-related interactions, social interactions, and system operation-related interactions) to evaluate the effect of the system on students’ interactions. The results of the experiment showed: (1) the students had positive attitudes toward the system and continuing motivation to use the system in future writing tasks; (2) analysis of writing products suggested that students produced better content and organization with the support of the system; (3) the procedural facilitation provided by the system successfully scaffolded students to converse more in the category of article-related interactions. Limitations and future research directions are also discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Black, A. (2005). The use of asynchronous discussion: Creating a text of talk. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5(1), 5–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulos, M. N. K., Maramba, I., & Wheeler, S. (2006). Wikis, blogs and podcasts: A new generation of Web-based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education. BMC Medical Education, 6(41). Retrieved Oct. 10, 2010 from World Wide Web: http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1472-6920-6-41.pdf

  • Bradney, D. D., & Courbat, M. D. (1998). Technical writing: Higher education’s self-inflicted wound. Tech Directions, 57(6), 33–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, G. C., & Kumar, A. (2005). Explaining consumer acceptance of handheld Internet devices. Journal of Business Research, 58, 553–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, M., Anson, C. M., & Miller, C. (2003). Assessing technical writing in institutional contexts: Using outcomes-based assessment for programmatic thinking. Technical Communication Quarterly, 12(1), 101–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chisholm, R. M. (1990). Coping with the problems of collaborative writing. Writing Across the Curriculum, 2, 90–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooney, D. H. (1998). Sharing aspects within aspects: real-time collaboration within the high school English classroom. In C. J. Bonk, & K. S. King (Eds.), Electronic collaborators: learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse (pp. 263–287). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

  • Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, A. (1993). How collaborative is collaborative writing? An analysis of the production of two technical reports. In M. Sharples (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative writing (pp. 69–85). London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duin, A. H. (1991). Computer-supported collaborative writing: The workplace and the writing classroom. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 5, 123–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ede, L., & Lunsford, A. (1992). Singular texts/plural authors: Perspectives on collaborative writing. U.S.A: Southern Illinois University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Englert, C. S., Zhao, Y., Dunsmore, K., Collings, N. Y., & Wolbers, K. (2007). Scaffolding the writing of students with disabilities through procedural facilitation: Using an Internet-based technology to improve performance. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 9–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elola, I., & Oskoz, A. (2010). Collaborative writing: Fostering foreign language and writing conventions development. Language Learning & Technology, 14(3), 51–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillie, J. W., Ingle, S., & Mumford, H. (2001). Ready to write: An integrated course for nonnative speakers of English. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glendinning, E., & Howard, R. (2003). Lotus ScreenCam as an aid to investigating student writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16(1), 31–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorsky, P., & Caspi, A. (2005). Dialogue: A theoretical framework for distance education instructional systems. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2), 137–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2010). Higher-level knowledge construction in asynchronous online discussions: An analysis of group size, duration of online discussion, and student facilitation techniques. Instructional Science, Online First™, 14 March 2010.

  • Hyland, F. (2003). Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System, 31, 217–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Eilola, J. (1996). Relocating the value of work: Technical communication in a post-industrial age. Technical Communication Quarterly, 5(3), 245–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, J. (2003). “What’s with the musty, old tent?” Using technical writing to promote peer- and self-evaluation. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19(4), 363–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lebie, L., Rhoades, J. A., & McGrath, J. E. (1996). Interaction process in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 4(2–3), 127–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, L. (2010). Exploring wiki-media collaborative writing: A case study in an elementary Spanish course. CALICO Journal, 27(2), 260–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y., Kozar, K. A., & Larsen, K. R. T. (2003). The technology acceptance model: Past, present, and future. Communications of the Association for Information System, 12, 752–780.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lo, J. J., Chang, C. J., Tu, H. H., & Yeh, S. W. (2009). Applying GIS to develop a Web-based spatial-person-temporal history educational system. Computers & Education, 53(1), 155–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, L. L., & Jeng, I. (2006). Knowledge construction in inservice teacher online discourse: Impacts of instructor roles and facilitative strategies. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(2), 183–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lunsford, A., & Ede, L. (1986). Why write together: A research update. Rhetoric Review, 5, 71–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagelhout, E. (1999). Pre-professional practices in the technical writing classroom: Promoting multiple literacies through research. Technical Communication Quarterly, 8(3), 285–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, S. (2000). Teaching collaborative writing and peer review techniques to engineering and technology undergraduates. Proceedings of 30th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, S2B1-S2B5. Kansas City, MO: U.S.A.: October 18–21. Retrieved Oct. 16, 2010 from World Wide Web: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.19.85&rep=rep1&type=pdf

  • Nunan, D. (1993). Collaborative language learning and teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development)(2001). Defining and selecting key competencies. Retrieved Oct. 9, 2010 from World Wide Web: http://www.oecd.org/document/17/0,3343,en_2649_39263238_2669073_1_1_1_1,00.html

  • Orvis, K. L., Wisher, R. A., Bonk, C. J., & Olson, T. M. (2002). Communication patterns during synchronous Web-based military training in problem solving. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 783–795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, K. R., & Chao, J. T. (2007). Wiki as a teaching tool. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 3, 57–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, S., Holt, D., & Bray, S. (2007). Does the discussion help? The impact of a formally assessed online discussion on final student results. British Journal of Educational Technology, 29(5), 847–858.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pata, K., Sarapuu, T., & Archee, R. (2005). Collaborative scaffolding in synchronous environment: Congruity and antagonism of tutor/student facilitation acts. Proceedings of the 2005 Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning: Learning 2005: The Next 10 Years! (CSCL'05), 557–566. Taipei, Taiwan.: May 30-June 4.

  • Porter, C. E., & Donthu, E. (2006). Using the technology acceptance model to explain how attitudes determine Internet usage: The role of perceived access barriers and demographics. Journal of Business Research, 59, 999–1007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reis, R. (1997). Bite-size morsels introduce technical writing the easy way. Tech Directions, 57(2), 43–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, J. A. (2009). Devising collective knowledges for the technical writing classroom: A course-based approach to using Web 2.0 writing technologies in collaborative work tutorial. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 52(3), 303–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rovai, A. P. (2007). Facilitating online discussions effectively. The Internet and Higher Education, 10, 77–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schellens, T., Van Keer, H., Valcke, M., & De Wever, B. (2005). The impact of role assignment as scripting tool on knowledge construction in asynchronous discussion groups. Proceedings of the 2005 Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning: Learning 2005: The Next 10 Years! (CSCL'05), 557–566. Taipei, Taiwan: May 30-June 4.

  • Semones, L. (2001). Collaboration, computer mediation, and the foreign language writer. Clearing House, 74(6), 308–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharples, M., Goodlet, J., Beck, E., Wood, C., Easterbrook, S., & Plowman, L. (1993). Research issues in the study of computer supported collaborative writing. In M. Sharples (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative writing (pp. 9–28). London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spring, M. (1997). Computer support of collaborative authoring. Software to Aid Collaboration: Focus on Collaborative Authoring. Retrieved Oct. 7, 2010 from World Wide Web: http://www.sis.pitt.edu/~spring/cas/cas.html

  • Stratton, C. R. (1989). Collaborative writing in the workplace. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 32(3), 178–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veerman, A. L., Andriessen, J. E. B., & Kanselaar, G. (2000). Learning through synchronous electronic discussion. Computers & Education, 34, 269–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C., & Turner, D. (2004). Extending the wiki paradigm for use in the classroom. Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Technology: Coding and Computing (ITCC’04), 255–259. Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S.A.: April 5–7.

  • Yeh, S.-W., Lo, J.-J., Huang, J.-J., & Fang, Z.-Y. (2007). A Synchronous Scaffolding Environment for Collaborative Technical Writing. Proceedings of the 2 nd International Conference on E-learning and Games (Edutainment 2007), 829–840. Hong Kong: June 11-June 13.

  • Zeng, D. (2005). The process-oriented approach to ESL/EFL writing Instruction and research. CELEA Journal, 28(5), 66–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zoran, A. G. (2006). CALLing all learners: An explanatory integrative research study of EFL learner-learner corrective feedback patterns within online synchronous environments. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of South Florida, U.S.A.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the research support of the National Science Council of Taiwan (NSC 94-2411-H-033-010). We would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers for insightful comments on an earlier version of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan, Republic of China

    Shiou-Wen Yeh

  2. Department of Information Management, Chung Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan, Republic of China

    Jia-Jiunn Lo & Jeng-Jia Huang

Authors
  1. Shiou-Wen Yeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jia-Jiunn Lo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jeng-Jia Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jia-Jiunn Lo.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 5 The experimental questionnaire
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yeh, SW., Lo, JJ. & Huang, JJ. Scaffolding collaborative technical writing with procedural facilitation and synchronous discussion. Computer Supported Learning 6, 397–419 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9117-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9117-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation