wiki project 2012

Antonella Dagostino THE OPEN UNIVERSITY

1

Exploring the effects of collaborative learning in a

L2 Business English environment in Italy

Index

1. Focus of the project p. 2

2. The rationale for the redesign p. 3

3. A description of the settings p. 4

4. A description of the redesign p. 7

5. Evaluation of the redesign p. 12

6. The ethical issues p. 20

7. Critical reflection on the redesign p. 21

8. Appendices p. 25

E852

EMA RESEARCH PROJECT by Antonella Dagostino

OU X8512925


2

1. Focus of the Project

The focus of this project is to explore the effects of collaborative learning in an Italian company class of L2 Business English learners. The project has been organised and carried out entirely online through the use of modern digital tools; namely a WIKI, e-mails and a final questionnaire.

The nature of this project should not only be considered exploratory but tentative as well. As a matter of fact, neither the practitioner nor the students had contributed to a wiki prior to this experience. In particular, it should be noted that during the execution of this project, not only the students but the researcher as well, have often be required to experiment firsthand the principles highlighted in Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory (1978) with particular reference to the Zone of Proximal Development. Although the initial focus presented in TMA 04 aimed at using a wiki to enhance students’ text cohesion and participation beyond regular class time, in light of what has emerged during the implementation of the project, the focus had to be re-adjusted to explore students’ own perception of collaborative learning in a virtual environment. It should be noted that even if the scope has been changed, the tools of analysis remain unaltered apart from the adding of an on-line questionnaire which has been used to analyse data from a quantitative perspective. Needless to say, due to the exploratory nature and the limited time available to carry out the project, the data collected are not intended to be exhaustive but merely indicative of a trend in a particular socio-cultural setting involving company employees undergoing business English training in Italy. The final focus has been established in accordance with socio-cultural linguistic criteria by taking into consideration that the participants involved in this project belong to a specific socio-cultural linguistic group and consequently, have a lot in common. This aspect should be considered rather relevant because the participants often refer to either facts or even linguistic items that are only intelligible to those who share a similar cultural and linguistic background; such peculiar pattern had been identified by Lantolf and Thorne who coined it as ‘private speech’ (2006, p. 201). Finally, the focus of the present project implies that the concept of intertextuality, as well as the Bakhtinian notion of dialogicality (1981) are indiscernible from a web 2.0 learning environment and should be considered integral parts of it.


3

2. The rationale for the redesign My decision to focus on a Web 2.0 learning environment for the redesign has been made by considering the contextualization of the learning process from a socio-cultural linguistic perspective. As a matter of fact, the learning process has been strongly influenced by two major societal factors: digital innovation and multiculturalism. As a result, exploring new teaching methodologies to suit the needs of a growing number of digitally-literate multicultural learners is not only necessary to bridge the gap between learners who have access to unlimited resources in terms of knowledge and communication from anywhere in the world and teachers, but it should also be considered a priority to be attuned to a quickly evolving globalised world. Even if there are different Web 2.0 tools available for the purpose of computer assisted language learning (CALL), I was strongly impressed by the use of wikis introduced by university lecturer Richard Buckland in a video linked to Unit 9 (E852, Study Guide). In particular, a wiki appears to represent a perfectly democratic space where knowledge is collectively constructed and meanings constantly negotiated among its participants. This vision is in line with Lund’s view regarding the concept of sociogenesis which transcends individual aspects of learning switching from the theory that learning is a process which occurs within the mind to the theory that learning is a process which happens between minds. Lund refers to this process as a collective and dynamic view of Vygotsky’s ZPD (2008, p. 40). A mere analysis of text cohesion would not have rendered justice to a tool which enables students not only to interact with each other, but also to propose, change, modify and create text collaboratively. While observing the participants’ contribution to the wiki, I realized that, just as Deleuse and Guattari mentioned in their theory of the rhizome (1980), a thought is unpredictable and could grow in different directions with unlimited potential so what would happen if a group of people had the possibility to contribute their own thoughts at the same time? Such tool may unleash unlimited potential especially if we consider the notion of intertextuality originated from Bakhtin’s concept of dialogicality which seems to perfectly fit a Web 2.0 learning environment. Whether in text or spoken language, the principles of dialogical talk can be summarised as follow:

For Bakhtin, all language - indeed, all thought - appeared dialogic. This means that

everything anybody ever says always exists in response to things that have been

said before and in anticipation of things that will be said in response.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogism


4

According to Hall (2012, p. 71), traditional approaches to teaching hardly ever took into consideration learners’ linguistic and cultural backgrounds outside the classroom, to the extent that they were often considered as empty vessels to be filled with information. As previously mentioned, a growing population of digitally-literate multicultural learners will definitely possess their own cultural background which may even be more consistent or perhaps, varied than the teacher’s. This aspect is particularly pertinent in a class of L2 business English adult learners whose vessels have already been filled with standard cultural-linguistic notions typical of their own heritage. For this reason, it is important that learners are provided with the necessary tools to express themselves freely and our role as teachers should be limited to provide such tools with the aim of helping our students to become independent learners. Thus, a wiki seems to be a suitable tool to encourage learners to express their own ideas dialogically and collaboratively increasing knowledge as a result.

3. A description of the settings

Participants: Three groups of 5 Italian adult learners (females and males) for a total of 15 participants, aged 25-50 whose L1 and socio-cultural linguistic background is Italian. Participants are highly educated holding a university degree or a high school diploma; however detailed information about their educational background has not been collected. Prior to this course, the participants have been attending other Business English courses organised by their company or while attending school or university. Most of them lack confidence in their communicative skills in English and would like to become more confident in both spoken and written skills. Their main objective is to improve their current level of proficiency for their job but they are also interested in acquiring a high standard of proficiency for social and personal interests such as travelling, reading and watching films. The participants work for a multinational commercial company based in Italy where they have access to computers, internet connection, projectors and other common types of digital media and tools used for business. In-company training for a three month Business English course requires a weekly attendance of 2 hours per lesson for a total of 30 hours.


5

Participants’ level of proficiency has been identified as level B1 of the Common European Framework. The purpose of their regular Business English course is to acquire the necessary skills to be able to deal with a globalised multicultural business environment in English. All students have an excellent knowledge of jargon related to their field of expertise thus the course mainly aims at assisting them in arranging their knowledge coherently with the objective of becoming more confident communicators in both written and spoken skills. The methodology used is a Communicative Language Approach (student-centred) and the lesson is held entirely in the target language. The environment is very informal and students often propose their own material according to their needs at work. For example, real presentations, meetings and conference calls are often rehearsed in class to increase confidence in their communicative skills. In this particular turbulent financial period in Italy, students often feel the need to express their sense of frustration and anger and the teacher assists them by, for instance, providing a list of vocabulary related to the topic of discussion (e.g.: GDP, downturn, austerity, etc.). Interestingly, students seem to memorise vocabulary much more easily when they are emotionally involved. For the purpose of this project, students have agreed to participate on a volunteer basis as their regular English course ended in June and the scheduling of the project included a period between June and August. Thus, contributions to the wiki have been made outside regular working time, with particular preference for the weekend. Location:

The company is situated in a small industrial town near Milan, Italy. There are two training rooms on the ground floor of the three-storey building. One can accommodate up to 10 people and the other about 20. Each class has a laptop computer with internet connection, a projector, a white screen, a white board as well as tables and chairs. The tables are arranged in a horseshoe manner to allow students to interact with each other more easily and to create a warmer, less formal atmosphere. Virtual Location:

The on-line virtual setting includes: 1. A wiki (http://ethicalenglish4all.wikispaces.com) 2. E-mail communication 3. A final on-line questionnaire (http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/HK7TWRS)


6

A typical in-class lesson:

An example of a typical lesson can be structured as follow:

a. Listening to/watching on-line material from BBC learning (http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish), The Economist (http://www.economist.com/) or other sources twice

b. Asking comprehension questions at random

c. Revise and introduce new lexis and grammar items

d. Group or pair discussion based on the topic introduced

e. Written task related to the topic (eventually assigned as homework)

It should be noted that, even if the above structure looks quite simple and easy to follow, it is necessary to have a great degree of flexibility as some unpredictable factors may arise during the lesson. A very common one is that a topic can be so thought provoking for the students that they may wish to continue talking about it endlessly, especially if there are discordant opinions in class. In such a situation, participants are encouraged to express their feelings in English ONLY and to respect common “rules” such as avoiding overlapping talk, politically incorrect or plain offensive language. Another common, still, unpredictable event, could be generated by the fact that some students may make new connections related to the topic introduced and decide to change the direction of the lesson. For example, while introducing some elements of social English whose focus was to entertain customers at a restaurant, the students - who according to their cultural heritage consider cooking and food as fundamental components of their lifestyle - ask me to introduce lexical items related to food and we ended up having a lesson about recipes! As it can easily be assumed, the relationship with the students is very informal and friendly thus the content of each lesson is always negotiated with them. A very similar approach has been used with the wiki however, probably due to the fact that the participants were not familiar with this new instrument, no particular problem has been detected during the duration of the project. Apart from the fact that of the initial 15 students who agreed to participate to the project, only 5 diligently followed it through! Reasons for this will be discussed more in depth in section 7.


7

4. A description of the redesign

The present project has been carried out entirely on-line with the aim of reflecting the existing learning environment students are familiar with in lessons held at the company. The layout of the wiki has been created with the intention of making it as easily accessible as possible. Due to my inexperience with such a tool, a few extra changes had to be made during the carrying out of the project. The following is a chronological account of the steps that were taken before actually inviting students to join the wiki.

WIKI DESIGN

1. Creation of an account with wikispaces.com (http://ethicalenglish4all.wikispaces.com)

2. Creation of the “home” page with instructions for participants (http://ethicalenglish4all.wikispaces.com/). See screenshot A.

Screenshot A

3. Creation of a navigation bar on the left to allow participants to join their own group, namely: Group B1-a, Group B1-b and Group B1-c. Each group consisted of 5 learners.

4. Creation of Activity 1 (all the activities were exactly the same for each group). To access the activity, students had to click on the link correspondent to their group (e.g.: Group B1-a). See screenshot B.


8

Screenshot B

Below there is an enlargement of the description of the activity. Participants were supposed to watch a short BBC learning video before carrying out the activity.

5. Setting up of accounts for participants which included:

• a username • a password • an email address

6. Creation of a SCAFFOLDING section divided in the three activities used for the project. Each activity contains a link to a personal page dedicated to each participant as well as a general, traditional EFL style, grammar revision based on participants’ common “problems” (See screenshot C, p.9). In the personal page there are links to general explanations as well as personal feedback (screenshot D, p.10).


9

Screenshot C

The following is an example taken from the collective Grammar Revision (https://ethicalenglish4all.wikispaces.com/Activity+1)

It should be noted that the personal space was my part of the deal to thank students for participating to the project despite their busy working schedule.


10

Example of a personal space (https://ethicalenglish4all.wikispaces.com/Erika) SCREENSHOT D

7. Provide students with their login data to access the wiki. Prior to this step, students had been furnished with a written explanation of the project via e-mail which required their written consent.

The main aim of the redesign has been to explore the effects of collaborative learning in a L2 Business English environment, thus the virtual redesign has been based on the analysis of some common dynamics of learning happening in class.

Dynamics of learning In a face to face class, even if the number of students is limited to a small group of five people, it becomes rather difficult to ensure that each participant has enough time to express her views during a group discussion. There are also other limitations which may belong to the nature of the individuals. Some participants are shyer than others and may not feel as confident when talking in front of an audience. However, it is important to notice that learners do tend to naturally collaborate with each other. For example, when a shy member of the group cannot remember a particular term, all the other members automatically start suggesting words which they think may suit the case. However, one of the major risks of group discussion in class is that the most confident and talkative learners may tend to monopolise the conversation with the result of causing less confident learners to feel inadequate and even drop out of the course. Thus, participants are asked to work in pairs or in small groups of three people (see fig.1). By contrast, even if in this way it is more likely that everybody gets a chance to speak, every pair or small group will not be aware about what the other people are doing unless


11

a representative of each group summarises their conversation at the end of the talking session. However, this process may take up time and even bore some of the participants. fig.1

• Each colour represents an individual expression.

• Collaborative learning happens when the colours are superimposed.

• Unlike a wiki, each group is a separate galaxy unaware about what the others are doing

GROUP LEARNING IN CLASS

On the contrary, when using a wiki, the space dedicated to collaborative activities allows the participants to be aware, as well as intervene, to their peers’ contributions. All galaxies are thus connected to form a single universe which can be defined as a knowledge-building community (Kimmerle et al, 2010) where collective and individual cognition merge into one (see fig.2). fig.2

WEB 2.0 C0LLABORATIVE LEARNING

individual

contribution

individual

contribution

individual

contribution

individual

contribution

individual

contribution

WIKI

Universal

Knowledge


12

The redesign of the present project has been structured to evaluate and explore the effects of collaborative learning through the use of a wiki. Of course the mode to communicate in this case is restricted to written language only; however, there are some peculiarities about the use of a wiki which cannot be reproduced in class and vice-versa. The most relevant is that every single participant gets the opportunity to express herself no matter their level of fluency or confidence. On the other hand, written contributions are published on the wiki for everyone to see and, as a result, some learners may not “speak” their mind as spontaneously as they would in the comfort zone of their class. In such case, working in the outer limits of their ZPD area includes holistic metacognitive processes which are not restricted to mere language acquisition but comprehend behavioural patterns as well as other skills such as digital ability and creativity. Finally, there are also some practical reasons for which I selected a wiki to redesign this particular area of learning. The most obvious is that a wiki is very easy to use and its features can be learned in less than five minutes as illustrated in a video on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dnL00TdmLY) called Wikis in

Plain English whose link also appears on the wiki created for the purpose of this project. Another fundamental reason, as pointed out by Sykes et al. (2008, p.531) is that wikis are low or no cost for non-commercial use such as the one I used for the purpose of this project provided by: www.wikispaces.com.

5. Evaluation of the redesign

In any given historical moment of verbal-ideological life, each generation at

each social level has its own language; moreover, every age group has as a

matter of fact its own language, its own vocabulary, its own particular accentual

system that, in their turn, vary depending on social level, academic institution

(the language of the cadet, the high school student, the trade school student are

all different languages) and other stratifying factors.

Bakthin (1981, p. 290)

EVALUATING WIKI CONTRIBUTIONS In contrast with traditional monological written text, the overall perception about written contributions in a wiki is that it presents some characteristics which are more commonly identified in speech rather than written language. Such features may be summarised as follow:


13

a. INFORMAL There is a great degree of informality in the participants’ written contribution. It may be assumed that a web 2.0 environment encourages learners to “loosen up” and express themselves as spontaneously as they would in a “familiar” environment (see Extract 1). Extract 1

(http://ethicalenglish4all.wikispaces.com/Group+B1+-+a) Wow, a very interesting article! Now I'd like to know where is Italy in this list! I think it could be in the middle... what do you think? The fact some other countries such as Pakistan have not been assessed is important to me, because they are really critical for women. Giulia

b. INCLUSIVE Participants often ask questions to involve other students as in Extract 1 above “...what do you think?” This element may be taken as an example of collective knowledge-building where learners can immediately confront their reality with that of their peers. This interactive aspect is a fundamental peculiarity of a web 2.0 learning environment which strongly relies on peers’ knowledge and not just the teacher’s. There is a strong degree of negotiation involved which motivates students to intervene more often as they become aware that their opinions matter to form common knowledge. Following Giulia’s invitation, the forum reached its climax with long and articulated contributions such as that from Eleonora (see Extract 2). Extract 2

(http://ethicalenglish4all.wikispaces.com/Group+B1+-+a) Hello, the past week have not been good and today I just wanted to get here. I have seen since the discussion is on, well, I'm happy. I think we're very lucky, our history has made great strides in Italy over the last forty years. Here there is not yet complete equality of the sexes, but you must think that such family law has been modified only in the middle seventies. Since then she has been living for herself, I'll explain: first, the woman was a kind of eternal child that passed from father's custody to her husband, although women had already been granted the right to vote. also we can not hide the fact that women are still subject to violence, and for the most cases they occur in the home. I agree with Giuglia, there is no real policy to support women and families ... and the fact that you say that there should be quotas for women speaks volumes about the path that we still do. Eleonora


14

c. DIALOGICAL TEACHING & LEARNING The level of negotiation in a wiki is not restricted to learners only but includes the teacher as well. Participants and teacher in fact, tend to blend together in a virtual neutral space where no individual is recognised as the solely depositary of knowledge. Suggestions from the teacher are taken more as part of a knowledge sharing process rather than a hierarchical imposition. As a result, the content of a lesson does not have to be necessarily dictated authoritatively by the teacher but can be negotiated with the participants to stimulate learning. A clear example is an exchange I had with a student who informed me about the reasons why fewer people were participating to the third activity (see Extract 3). Extract 3

(http://ethicalenglish4all.wikispaces.com/Group+B1+-+a) TEACHER: Hello Davide & Eleonora Fewer people commented on this topic. Is it because it is a difficult one or are you too busy at work at the moment? Please always feel free to write whatever you think! Thank you!

STUDENT:

hello Antonella, In my opinion, the question has two answers: the first is that WIKI are easy to use but they need time off to connect to, then usually you do on weekends, but now it's summer and we are all distracted by other things; the second reason is that we will be more encouraged to comment on things you are close, perhaps the topic was not common...thanks anyway! Eleonora

QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS The final part of the project involved the filling of a closed questions questionnaire (10 items) to explore participants’ feelings and habits about their first wiki experience. The questionnaire was accessible through the wiki by clicking on “STUDENTS’ FEEDBACK” on the left side of the navigation bar (http://ethicalenglish4all.wikispaces.com/Students%27+Feedback). In addition, individual e-mails with the questionnaire URL address were also sent to encourage students to complete it (http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/HK7TWRS).


15

Analysis of the responses

The overall analysis of the responses is rather interesting as most students replied in a very similar manner. It should be noted that the participants could not access their peers’ responses thus they were not influenced by other people’s choices. Item 1

The most indicative result is referred to item 1 where 100% (5/5) of the participants claimed that their overall experience with the wiki had been very good (see fig.3) Fig.3

Item 2

The second question was strictly related to collaboration and in this case it is interesting to notice that the majority of the students (80%) found that the experience greatly increased collaboration, while only one student claimed that the difference was slight (20%).


16

Item 3

This item was strictly related to easiness of access and usability. In the overall, all the participants found using the wiki simple (80% very simple and 20% quite simple).

Item 4 – multiple-choice Participants placed the user-friendly factor and the collaborative aspect as features they liked most by placing them on the same level (60% respectively). Flexibility of time and having a dedicated space followed with 20% each.


17

Item 5

Interestingly, the majority of the students believe that using a wiki has encouraged them to write more often (in English) 60% while the rest of them claimed that the difference was not as relevant (40%).

Item 6 – multiple-choice This item is strictly related to preferences students have about improving their writing; they placed using a notebook, writing e-mails and using a wiki exactly at the same level (40% each). Surpisingly, more common social networks were totally ignored.


18

Item 7 The purpose of this item is to identify the percentage of digital immigrants participating to the project. Such information is particular relevant to determine whether or not a wiki can actually be defined as easily accessible by all potential users. The percentage appears quite fairly distributed with 2 contributors who are definitely digital immigrants (40%), 2 very likely to be digital immigrants (40%) and 1 digital native (20%).

Item 8 The average amount of time students spent using web tools outside working hours resulted in an overwhelming twice a week (80%).


19

Item 9

Interestingly, most students claimed to use written English less than 1 hour a week (80%); such trend largely depends on the participants’ position at the company. Only one participant spends from 4 to 7 hours a week for this task and the next item will reveal the reason.

Item 10 multiple-choice

As previously assumed, most written tasks are related to business activities. Writing e-mails resulted as the most frequent task (100%), followed by, with equal percentages (40%); writing documents related to work and interestingly, a social network popular for work called LinkedIn (www.linkedin.com).


20

6. The ethical issues

The most evident ethical issue arising when operating in a web 2.0 learning environment is privacy. In order to make the participants aware of what the project involved and to protect them from unwanted release of personal data, prior to the actual carrying out of the project, they had been provided with the following items via e-mail:

• Explanation of the project, its purpose, what a wiki is and

how to use it

• Log-in data: pseudonymous username & password

• Informed consent for the release of data published on the wiki for research purposes as well as anonymous background information about their background

To ensure that each participant completely understood the aforementioned points, the documents were provided in their L1: Italian (See Appendix 1, 2 and 3). In addition, similar information has also been published in English on the wiki home page (http://ethicalenglish4all.wikispaces.com/). The page also contains a list of rules which are commonly applied in class and negotiated with the participants. Particular emphasis on political correctness was given as students often tend to literally translate directly from Italian to English and the result is likely to appear prejudicial and misogynistic. Humanity and human kind for instance, in Italy are still translated as man and men (l’uomo, gli uomini) and generalisation about an individual or a child always require the masculine form (!). Thus, my point is that in a Web 2.0 learning environment it is not only necessary to protect the identities of the participants but it is also fundamental to ensure that the content does not, in any case, contain any offensive or discriminating words or phrases. Such aspect should be considered particularly relevant in an open source Web 2.0 setting where global viewing is something to be expected as illustrated in the wiki usage statistics (see fig.3) Fig. 3

Legend

IT = Italy

US = USA

A1= unknown proxies

DE= Germany


21

Finally, the entire research project has been conducted by considering the guidelines outlined by the British Association for Applied Linguistics (BAAL). As this project was set on a volunteer basis and the students involved accomplished their tasks in their free time, no extraneous personnel at the company were made aware of the project. 7. Critical reflection on your redesign

There are some important aspects related to the carrying out of this project which need to be highlithed to improve further evaluation in this sense. First, as the participants agreed to collaborate to the project on a volunteer basis, all activities had to be accomplished in their free time. For this reason, the great majority of learners, even if they initially showed an interest in the project, decided not to follow it through. Moreover, the execution of the project coincided with their holiday time so the original schedule had to be re-adjusted to suit their needs. As a result, each activity remained open to contributions much longer than previously planned. In the overall, I was really impressed by the level of collaboration shown by the participants; not only to help each other but also in giving me continuous feedback via e-mail to let me know what they thought was appropriate to do to improve the quality of the wiki (see Appendix 4). It is interesting to notice that participants used the wiki for the activities but preferred to use e-mails to let me know about their personal feelings. My reflection on implementing the wiki for future application is mainly based on my students’ feedback as well as my own perception as their “coordinator”. To render the wiki even more appealing for the students, they should be encouraged to submit their own topic of choice by, for instance, adding external links, uploading videos or other interactive material through the widget option in the wiki. In this way, the level of collaboration could even reach deeper level of mutual understanding between teachers and learners. Assessing web 2.0 tools is becoming a major concern in the digital age. Educational researchers such as Greenhow et al. (2009), for instance, call for a stronger research focus on Web 2.0 technologies aimed at investigating learning potentialities as well as emerging ethical issues related to Web 2.0 tools. Although further investigation is still needed in this direction, there have been a growing number of studies which have illustrated some interesting wiki application in education. As an example, Kessler and Bigowsky (2010, p. 43), reiterate the importance of emphasising collaboration rather than competition; a concept initially introduced by Ware (2004). This point is connected with wiki contributions which, cannot be evaluated


22

according to traditional standards but require new approaches as the one investigated by Trentin (2008). What appears evident from the study is that a wiki involves a great amount of autonomous learning which, increases chances for learners to maintain, practice and improve their communicative competency. The concept of developing autonomous collaborative learning through the use of wikis has been the main focus of Kessler and Bigowsky’s study (2010). To summarise, the most important elements which have emerged from this brief pilot study, illustrate that a wiki contributes to a higher level of collaboration, the increase of confidence and the possibility to have almost instant feedback without time constraints. Similar results were also obtained by Su and Beaumont (2010) in a study evaluating essential aspects of collaborative learning in higher education through the use of wikis. Further evidence is also provided by another study which focussed on students’ perception of a wiki involving 92 graduate students (Chang et al, 2010-2011). However, despite the numerous positive aspects connected to using a wiki, it is necessary to take into consideration its vulnerabilities. At first, vandalism and other types of cyber attacks may appear as the most evident though, as previously mentioned, there are also other ethical concerns which should be tackled to avoid language which may result offensive to a particular socio-cultural group. Particular importance should be given to this aspect as the number of learners worldwide studying English as a second language is continuously growing (Crystal, 2004), thus universal guidelines should be provided to ensure, as far as possible, the implementation of a democratically safe, multicultural Web 2.0 learning environment.


23

REFERENCES

Bakhtin M. M. (1981) The Dialogic Imagination, University of Texas Press Slavic series; no. I, Translation of Voprosy literalury i estetiki, Austin, University of Texax Press Chang Y. , Morales-Arroyob M. A., Thanc H., Tunc Z. and Wang Z. 2010-2011, Collaborative learning in wikis, Education for Information 28 (2010/2011) 291–303 Crystal D. (2004, 2nd edn) English as a Global Language, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press Deleux G., Guattari F. (1980), A Thousand Plateaus, Translation by Brian Massumi, London and New York, Continuum Hall J. K. (2012, 2nd edn) Teaching and Researching Language and Culture, Harlow, Pearson Education Limited Kessler G. and Bikowski D. (2010) Developing collaborative autonomous learning abilities in computer mediated language learning: attention to meaning among students in wiki space, Computer Assisted Language Learning Vol. 23, No. 1, February 2010, 41–58 Kimmerle J., Moskaliuk J., Harrer A., & Cress U. (2010) Visualizing co-evolution of individual and collective knowledge. Information, Communication and Society, 13, 1099-1121. Lund A., (2008) Wikis: a collective approach to language production, ReCALL 20(1): 35-54. 2008 © European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning OU E852, Unit 9, Video: Wikis in University Teaching and Learning -

Richard Buckland UNSW, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1-8OOrBi0o, (last accessed 03/09/2012) Su F. and Beaumont C. (2010) Evaluating the use of a wiki for collaborative learning, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, Vol. 47, No. 4, November 2010, 417–431 The British Association for Applied Linguistics (1994 – 2006), Reccomendation on Good Practice in Applied Linguistics, http://www.baal.org.uk/dox/goodpractice_full.pdf (accessed on 20/05/2012)


24

Trentin G. (2009) Using a wiki to evaluate individual contribution to a collaborative learning project, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2009, 25, 43–55 Vygotsky L. S. (1978) Mind in society: The development of higher

pshychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.), Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press Ware, P.D. (2004). Confidence and competition online: ESL student perspectives on webbased discussions in the classroom, Computers and Composition, 21(4), 451–468. Sykes J. M., Oskoz A., Thorne S. L. (2008), Web 2.0, Synthetic Immersive Environments, and Mobile Resources for Language Education, CALICO Journal, 25(3), p-p 528-546


25

8. Appendixes

Appendix 1 – Project Explanation, its purpose and definition of a wiki


26

Translation of Appendix 1

Hello everyone,

I'm preparing a pilot project to improve written production in Business English

through the use of a so-called WIKI (such as wikipedia, which is a type of wiki) as

part of my Master's in Applied Linguistics for the Open University.

The course will likely start from:

June 1 to 15 July 2012 (subjected to change according to your availability).

At the beginning of each week, you will be given a topic on which you can write

your considerations.

The particularity of the wiki is that it uses the COLLABORATIVE LEARNING concept,

namely all participants contribute to whatever has been written with the possibility

to vary or modify whatever has been written by another colleague.

The purpose of the project is to verify, as hours spend in class are limited:

1. If collaborative learning effectively increases participation regarding written

production (writing).

2. If collaborative learning is efficacious to build-up self-confidence in writing skills.

The advantages for you are:

a. The possibility to practice your English for free with a final feedback on the

performance.

b. The possibility to acquire new skills regarding the use of a wiki (very easy and

intuitive)

I'd be deeply grateful if you were interested in the project. In a positive case, I

would like to ask you to let me know via e-mail as soon as possible.

Thank you and see you soon!

Appendix 2 – Personal Username and Password to access the WIKI


27

Appendix 3 – Sample of Informed Consent

Si informano tutti coloro che hanno partecipato al progetto di Antonella Dagostino che la vostra identità verrà trattata in maniera confidenziale e non verrà mai rivelata per alcun motivo. I dati raccolti su base di anonimato relativi all’indagine potrebbero essere utilizzati per scopi scientifici o educativi. Tuttavia, qualora la Open University o chi per essa, necessitasse di visionare i documenti originali contenenti i vostri dati identificativi sarà obbligata a rispettare la protezione della privacy come previsto dalle leggi vigenti e per nessun motivo potrà rilasciare alcuna informazione che possa far risalire alla vostra reale identità. Firma per accettazione ___________________

The present is to inform all those participating to Antonella Dagostino’

project that your identity will be treated confidentially and will not be

revealed for any reasons. The anonymous data collected related to the

investigation may be used for scientific or educational purposes.

However, if The Open University or other organisation acting on its

behalf, needed to view the original documents containing your identity

data, it will be obliged to comply with current laws to ensure that data

or information related to your identity cannot be released no matter

the reason.

To be signed for acceptance

_______________________

Appendix 4 – Sample of informal students’ feedback via e-mail