Collaborative Writing Among Second Language Learners Report

This report examines the impact of web-based technologies on collaborative writing, focusing on the experiences of second language learners. The study, conducted with Fulbright scholars, investigated the use of Google Docs for collaborative writing in academic projects. It explores student perceptions, writing processes, and the nature of collaboration. The research highlights how collaborative writing fosters communication, improves accuracy, and provides a sense of ownership. The analysis reveals that students focused more on meaning than form, and that they used the tool for varied purposes. The report also discusses the strengths of the approach, such as opportunities for communication and feedback, while also acknowledging potential concerns like fairness and interpersonal conflicts. Overall, the study offers insights into the evolving landscape of web-based collaborative writing and its pedagogical implications.

Running head: NEW TECHNOLOGIES FOR LANGUAGE LEARNING
NEW TECHNOLOGIES FOR LANGUAGE LEARNING
Name of the University
Name of the student
Author Note

1NEW TECHNOLOGIES FOR LANGUAGE LEARNING
Topic: COLLABORATIVE WRITING AMONG SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNERS
IN ACADEMIC WEB-BASED PROJECTS
Introduction
In the mentioned article, the effects of collaborative writing with the help of various
web based technologies have been evaluated. The perceptions of different students on the
proposed topic has been discussed and the evolution of the web based collaborative writing
has been assessed. The aim of the article is to assess the benefits and concerns that are related
with collaborative writing and what are the implications of the proposed topic with the help
of new web based technologies.
Summary
The purpose of this article is to assess the implications of web based technologies on
collaborative writing and evaluate its changing nature. With the help of web based 2.0 tools,
the adoption of collaborative writing approach has increases substantially. The classroom
context has been reconceptualised to allow students to understand the subject with a deeper
insight rather than completing the assignment just for gaining good marks. The article
conclusively states the theoretical bases of collaborative writing and discusses how it can
help in quality writing, more motivation, increased ownership and pooling of resources to
form a proper feedback loop for quality work (Storch, 2005). The concerns regarding the
topic has been assessed as well. The article describes the materials and methods that were
utilized to conduct the research properly. The particular web based tool that was used as well
as the participants are mentioned. The data collection process for the research has been stated
and an analysis section has been mentioned to discuss the final result. The article explores the

2NEW TECHNOLOGIES FOR LANGUAGE LEARNING
perception of the web based collaborative experience by the students as well as the details of
the writing processes of the students. A number of language related contribution types were
evaluated and the implications on the writing of the students were assessed (Belz, 2007). The
result section of the report discusses the extent by which the team participated in assessing
the implication of collaborative writing. The contributions which were language related as
well as non-language related were categorized as per the team. The effects of Google Docs on
the participants has been assessed and the focus on the product increased substantially more
than the process.
Critique
The strengths of the article are indicated in the usage of the web based tools in
providing opportunities for communicating in unpredictable methods and facilitating
collaborative writing. The technique helps the participants to improve accuracy and fluency.
They are able to share their feedbacks with other participants (Elola & Oskoz, 2010). It helps
the writers to plan how they are going to plan the collaborative work and provide a sense of
ownership and autonomy to the writer. This autonomous belonging of one’s work in
collaborative writing is one of the biggest strength of this research topic.
However, the data collection that was conducted in the research failed to conclusively
define grow much contribution was provided by every student. The quality of the final
product was bot evaluated as well. The pedagogical implications of the new web based tools
are not assessed in this article. Concerns regarding fairness, interpersonal conflicts and
inexperience can disrupt the proposed ideology. Many students may raise concerns about
inaccurate peer edits in their document and refrain from collaborating (Kessler & Bikowski,
2010).

3NEW TECHNOLOGIES FOR LANGUAGE LEARNING
The contribution to the fields are LRC or Language related contributions and NLRC
or Non language related contributions. Analysis of these contributions helped to assess the
activities of the participants properly.
The approach and methodology used for this research were based on the academic
preparation by 38 Fulbright scholars from Midwestern University. Google Docs was chosen
as the web based word processing tool and the activities of the students were assessed based
on their collaborative writing process. Small groups of 3 to 4 members were formed and their
write up and design was assessed for over three weeks. Their frequency of using the web
based tool and feedbacks were assessed in relationship with their collaborative writing
projects to prepare the research article.
Conclusion and recommendations
The article has effectively discussed the engagement of various participants in
determining the implication of collaborative writing with the help of Google Docs. The usage
of web based collaboration tool has been assessed conclusively. The collaborative writing
and the web based tools allowed the participants to make formatting changes throughout the
process instead of making it after completing the document. The grammatical errors occurred
less and the spacing as well as the punctuations were better managed.
The article should have been able to identify why the participants chose to correct the
simple errors like punctuation and spelling rather than the verbal errors which are
complicated.

4NEW TECHNOLOGIES FOR LANGUAGE LEARNING
References
Elola, I., & Oskoz, A. (2010). Collaborative writing: Fostering foreign language and writing
conventions development. Language Learning & Technology, 14(3), 51–71.
Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2010/elolaoskoz.pdf
Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal
of Second Language Writing, 14, 153–173. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2005.05.002Brock, M.
N., & Pennington, Ware, P. D., & O’Dowd, R. (2008). Peer feedback on language
form in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 12(1), 43–63. Retrieved
from http://llt.msu.edu/vol12num1/wareodowd/ default.html
Belz, J. A. (2007). The development of intercultural communicative competence in
telecollaborative partnerships. In R. O’Dowd (Ed.), Online intercultural exchange: An
introduction for foreign language teachers (pp. 127–166). Clevedon, England:
Multilingual Matters.
Kessler, G., & Bikowski, D. (2010). Developing collaborative autonomous language learning
abilities in computer mediated language learning: Attention to meaning among
students in wiki space. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23, 41-58.
doi:10.1080/09588220903467335