Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Temporality revisited: Dynamicity issues in collaborative digital writing research

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper explores the feature of dynamicity (a composite of temporal and local properties) in research on collaborative digital writing (CDW) in academic writing assignments. The paper traces the ways in which current research typically approaches CDW and identifies the underlying elements of current and technological inquiry in this field: components of text (the process and products of writing and learning communication), external variables, such as learning orientations and group composition, and an intermediate layer of time management that is related to organizing the assignment. The paper identifies gaps in the current understanding of the phenomenon of collaborative writing for learning and pinpoints some basic weaknesses with concepts used in this research, in particular assumptions related to the time aspect of the collaborative writing process. The prevalent view of current research, which conceptualizes writing processes as predominantly time-ordered intermediate products (texts) at several designated points within the writing assignment, overlooks the sequential dynamics of textual interaction, linearity, and “local” concept construction as influential factors in CDW assignments. Instead, this paper argues for the ideas of sequential concept construction and locally changing sources for the writer at a certain point in the writing. The insights presented in this paper can help address some of these time-related shortcomings of current research. A few selected key aspects of implementing dynamicity in studies of CDW are exemplified in a CDW assignment with information science students that the author conducted back in 2016.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajjan, H., & Hartshorne, R. (2008). Investigating faculty decisions to adopt web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 71–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alghasab, M., Hardman, J., & Handley, Z. (2019). Teacher-student interaction on wikis: Fostering collaborative learning and writing. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 21, 10–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2018.12.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, N., Atkinson, D., Morgan, M., Moore, T., & Snow, C. (1987). What experienced collaborators say about collaborative writing. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 1(2), 70–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/105065198700100206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, I., Espasa, A., & Guasch, T. (2012). The value of feedback in improving collaborative writing assignments in an online learning environment. Studies in Higher Education, 37(4), 387–400. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.510182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barkley, E. F., Major, C. H., & Cross, K. P. (2014). Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass & Pfeiffer Imprints, Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, E. E. (1993). A survey of experiences of collaborative writing. In M. Sharples (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative writing (pp. 87–112). London, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Berlanga, A., Brouns, F., Van Rosmalen, P., Rajagopal, K., Kalz, M., & Stoyanov, S. (2009). Making use of language technologies to provide formative feedback. In Workshops Proceedings Volume 10. Natural Language Processing in Support of Learning: Metrics, Feedback and Connectivity. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference in Artificial Intelligence in Education, Workshops Proceedings, Brighton, UK. (pp. 1–8). Brighton, UK.

  • Berlanga, A., Van Rosmalen, P., Boshuizen, H. P. A., & Sloep, P. B. (2012). Exploring formative feedback on textual assignments with the help of automatically created visual representations. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(2), 146–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00425.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (1999). Learning communities in classrooms: A reconceptualization of educational practice. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 269–292). Mahwah: Lawrence Earlbaum Ass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonk, C. J., & Cunningham, D. J. (1998). Searching for learner-centered, constructivist, and sociocultural components of collaborative educational learning tools. In C. J. Bonk & K. S. King (Eds.), Electronic collaborators. Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse (pp. 25–50). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Brodahl, C., Hadjerrouit, S., & Hansen, N. K. (2011). Collaborative writing with web 2.0 technologies: Education students’ perceptions. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 10, IIP 73-IIP 103.

  • Bühler, K. (1990). Theory of language: The representational function of language. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M., & Lam, J. (2011). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies in Higher Education, 36(4), 395–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cen, L., Ruta, D., Powell, L., Hirsch, B., & Ng, J. (2016). Quantitative approach to collaborative learning: Performance prediction, individual assessment, and group composition. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(2), 187–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-016-9234-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 328–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1993). Grounding in communication. In R. M. Baecker (Ed.), Readings in groupware and computer-supported cooperative work: Assisting human-human collaboration (pp. 222–233). San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cress, U., & Kimmerle, J. (2007). A theoretical framework of collaborative knowledge building with wikis: A systemic and cognitive perspective. In Proceedings of the 8th iternational conference on Computer supported collaborative learning (pp. 156–164). International Society of the Learning Sciences.

  • Cress, U., & Kimmerle, J. (2008). A systemic and cognitive view on collaborative knowledge building with wikis. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(2), 105–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cress, U., & Kimmerle, J. (2018). Collective knowledge construction. In F. Fischer, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, S. R. Goldman, & P. Reimann (Eds.), International handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 137–146). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315617572.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Csanadi, A., Eagan, B., Kollar, I., Shaffer, D. W., & Fischer, F. (2018). When coding-and-counting is not enough: Using epistemic network analysis (ENA) to analyze verbal data in CSCL research. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(4), 419–438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9292-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhyab, R., & Varol, A. (2018). Distance education features using Facebook. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 12(6), 19–34. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v12i6.9621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erstad, O., & Sefton-Green, J. (Eds.). (2013). Identity, community, and learning lives in the digital age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esguerra, M. A. (2019). Educational applications of web 2.0: Strategies to enrich the teaching and learning in the graduate school. In ACM International Conference Proceeding Series (pp. 217–222). https://doi.org/10.1145/3369199.3369226.

  • Ferrara, K., Brunner, H., & Whittemore, G. (1991). Interactive written discourse as an emergent register. Written Communication, 8(1), 8–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088391008001002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freire, T., & Li, J. (2016). Using Wikipedia to enhance student learning: A case study in economics. Education and Information Technologies, 21(5), 1169–1181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9374-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gadomska, A., & Krakowian, P. (2017). Implementing blogs for developing academic writing skills in a variety of higher educational contexts. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning, 27(4), 358–372. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJCEELL.2017.087139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guasch, T., Espasa, A., Alvarez, I. M., & Kirschner, P. A. (2013). Effects of feedback on collaborative writing in an online learning environment. Distance Education, 34(3), 324–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2013.835772.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadjerrouit, S. (2016). Assessing the level of collaborative writing in a wiki-based environment: A case study in teacher education. Competencies in teaching, learning and educational leadership in the digital age: Papers from CELDA 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30295-9_12.

  • Hadwin, A. F., Bakhtiar, A., & Miller, M. (2018). Challenges in online collaboration: Effects of scripting shared task perceptions. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(3), 301–329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9279-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harney, O. M., Hogan, M. J., & Quinn, S. (2017). Investigating the effects of peer to peer prompts on collaborative argumentation, consensus and perceived efficacy in collaborative learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 12(3), 307–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9263-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heimbuch, S., Ollesch, L., & Bodemer, D. (2018). Comparing effects of two collaboration scripts on learning activities for wiki-based environments. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(3), 331–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9283-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herring, S. C. (2002). Computer-mediated communication on the internet. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36(1), 109–168. https://doi.org/10.1002/aris.1440360104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herring, S. C., Stein, D., & Virtanen, T. (2013). Pragmatics of computer-mediated communication. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ingulfsen, L., Furberg, A., & Strømme, T. A. (2018). Students’ engagement with real-time graphs in CSCL settings: Scrutinizing the role of teacher support. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(4), 365–390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9290-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H., Beissner, K., & Yacci, M. (1993). Structural knowledge: Techniques for representing, conveying, and acquiring structural knowledge. Hillsdale: L. Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonsson, E. (2015). Conversational writing a multidimensional study of synchronous and supersynchronous computer-mediated communication. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorczak, R. L. (2011). An information processing perspective on divergence and convergence in collaborative learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(2), 207–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-010-9104-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kapur, M. (2011). Temporality matters: Advancing a method for analyzing problem-solving processes in a computer-supported collaborative environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9109-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kimmerle, J., Moskaliuk, J., Brendle, D., & Cress, U. (2017). All in good time: Knowledge introduction, restructuring, and development of shared opinions as different stages in collaborative writing. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 12(2), 195–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9258-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, P. D. (2014). Writing as a learning activity. Leiden: Brill.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, I. M., & Kusurkar, R. A. (2017). Science-writing in the blogosphere as a tool to promote autonomous motivation in education. Internet and Higher Education, 35, 48–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.08.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, C.-L., Yu, S.-W., Su, Y.-S., Fu, F.-L., & Lin, Y.-T. (2019). Charismatic learning: Students’ satisfaction with e-learning in higher education. Journal of Internet Technology, 20(5), 1665–1672. https://doi.org/10.3966/160792642019092005030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom-Ylänne, S., & Pihlajamäki, H. (2003). Can a collaborative network environment enhance essay-writing processes? British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(1), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8535.00301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ludvigsen, K., Krumsvik, R., & Furnes, B. (2015). Creating formative feedback spaces in large lectures. Computers & Education, 88, 48–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ludvigsen, S., Law, N., Rose, C. P., & Stahl, G. (2017). Frameworks for mass collaboration, adaptable scripts, complex systems theory, and collaborative writing. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 12(2), 127–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9257-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ludvigsen, S., Cress, U., Rose, C. P., Law, N., & Stahl, G. (2018). Developing understanding beyond the given knowledge and new methodologies for analyses in CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(4), 359–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9291-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lutaaya, J. N., Cronje, J., & Aheto, S.-P. K. (2018). Exploring wiki-based collaborative writing activities among ESL pre-service education students. In Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Learning, ICEL (Vol. 2018-July, pp. 514–524).

  • Mahlambi, S., Civilcharran, S., & Ajayi, N. A. (2019). The perception of students about the use of social media as an alternate learning platform. In 2018 International Conference on Intelligent and Innovative Computing Applications, ICONIC 2018. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICONIC.2018.8601228.

  • Marcarelli, K. (2010). Learning through writing. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452219066.n7.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Markova, T., Glazkova, I., & Zaborova, E. (2017). Quality issues of online distance learning. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 237, 685–691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2017.02.043.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, N. (2001). Writing to learn: One theory, two rationales. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Eds.), Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 23–36). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Onrubia, J., & Engel, A. (2009). Strategies for collaborative writing and phases of knowledge construction in CSCL environments. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1256–1265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.06.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paavola, S., & Hakkarainen, K. (2014). Trialogical approach for knowledge creation. In S. C. Tan, H. J. So, & J. Yeo (Eds.), Knowledge creation in education (pp. 53–73). Singapore: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pachler, N., & Daly, C. (2011). Key issues in e-learning: Research and practice. London: Continuum International Pub. Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Page, K. L., & Reynolds, N. (2015). Learning from a wiki way of learning. Studies in Higher Education, 40(6), 988–1013. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.865158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preece, J. (2000). Online communities: Designing usability, supporting sociability. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prins, F. J., Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Kirschner, P. A., & Strijbos, J.-W. (2005). Formative peer assessment in a CSCL environment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30, 417–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reimann, P. (2009). Time is precious: Variable- and event-centred approaches to process analysis in CSCL research. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 239–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-009-9070-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resendes, M., Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., Chen, B., & Halewood, C. (2015). Group-level formative feedback and metadiscourse. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(3), 309–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-015-9219-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romero, L., Saucedo, C., Caliusco, M. L., & Gutiérrez, M. (2019). Supporting self-regulated learning and personalization using ePortfolios: A semantic approach based on learning paths. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0146-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sáiz-Manzanares, M. C., García Osorio, C. I., Díez-Pastor, J. F., & Martín Antón, L. J. (2019). Will personalized e-learning increase deep learning in higher education? Information Discovery and Delivery, 47(1), 53–63. https://doi.org/10.1108/IDD-08-2018-0039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheuer, O., Loll, F., Pinkwart, N., & McLaren, B. (2010). Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state of the art. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(1), 43–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-009-9080-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwan, S., & Cress, U. (Eds.). (2017). The psychology of digital learning constructing, exchanging, and acquiring knowledge with digital media. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49077-9.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, B. B., Prusak, N., Swidan, O., Livny, A., Gal, K., & Segal, A. (2018). Orchestrating the emergence of conceptual learning: A case study in a geometry class. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(2), 189–211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9276-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J. R. (1985). Speech acts: An essay in philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slack, F., Beer, M., Armitt, G., & Green, S. (2003). Assessment and learning outcomes: The evaluation of deep learning in an on-line course. Journal of Information Technology Education, 2, 305–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2015). Conceptualizing the intersubjective group. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(3), 209–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-015-9220-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2017). Group practices: A new way of viewing CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 12(1), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9251-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Starkey, L. (2020). A review of research exploring teacher preparation for the digital age. Cambridge Journal of Education, 50(1), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2019.1625867.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strijbos, J. W., Narciss, S., & Dünnebier, K. (2010). Peer feedback content and sender’s competence level in academic writing revision tasks: Are they critical for feedback perceptions and efficiency? Learning and Instruction, 20, 291–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suthers, D. D., Dwyer, N., Medina, R., & Vatrapu, R. (2010). A framework for conceptualizing, representing, and analyzing distributed interaction. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(1), 5–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-009-9081-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trocky, N. M., & Buckley, K. M. (2016). Evaluating the impact of wikis on student learning outcomes: An integrative review. Journal of Professional Nursing, 32(5), 364–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2016.01.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, S.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2007). On- line peer assessment and the role of the peer feedback: A study of high school computer course. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1161–1174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.01.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turvey, K., & Pachler, N. (2020). Design principles for fostering pedagogical provenance through research in technology supported learning. Computers and Education, 146, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tynjälä, P., Mason, L., & Lonka, K. (2001). Writing as a learning tool: An introduction. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Eds.), Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 7–22). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • van Aalst, J. (2009). Distinguishing knowledge-sharing, knowledge-construction, and knowledge-creation discourses. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 259–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-009-9069-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verstege, S., Pijeira-Díaz, H. J., Noroozi, O., Biemans, H., & Diederen, J. (2019). Relations between students’ perceived levels of self-regulation and their corresponding learning behavior and outcomes in a virtual experiment environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 100, 325–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.02.020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, P. M. (2001). The psychology of the internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wise, A. F., & Chiu, M. M. (2011). Analyzing temporal patterns of knowledge construction in a role-based online discussion. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(3), 445–470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9120-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeh, H. C. (2014). Exploring how collaborative dialogues facilitate synchronous collaborative writing. Language Learning and Technology, 18(1), 23–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zappavigna, M. (2012). Ambient affiliation: A linguistic perspective on twitter. In J. Hughes (Ed.), SAGE internet research methods (pp. v4-193–v4-215). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Communication, University of Copenhagen, Søndre Campus, build. 4, Karen Blixens Plads 8, DK-2300, Copenhagen S, Denmark

    Volkmar P. Engerer

Authors
  1. Volkmar P. Engerer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Volkmar P. Engerer.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Engerer, V.P. Temporality revisited: Dynamicity issues in collaborative digital writing research. Educ Inf Technol 26, 339–370 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10262-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10262-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation