Feb 23, 2009 ... Seminar Penyelidikan & Inovasi Pendidikan .... Three moderators (students) were
elected to facilitate the site and sometimes initiate the.
Seminar Penyelidikan & Inovasi Pendidikan Kebitaraan Bahasa Peringkat Kebangsaan Tahun 2009
Tarikh:
20 – 22 Oktober 2009
Tempat:
Beverly Hotel Kota Kinabalu
Nama Penyelidik:
NORHERANI MONING, PhD GRACE CHANG SIEW YENG
Tajuk Penyelidikan: INNOVATIVE SCAFFOLDING FOR ACADEMIC WRITING Institusi / Organisasi: IPGM KAMPUS ILMU KHAS, KUALA LUMPUR Sesi & Waktu Pembentangan:
INNOVATIVE SCAFFOLDING FOR ACADEMIC WRITING
Norherani Moning, PhD and Grace Chang Siew Yeng
ABSTRACT The internet has provided a new avenue as provider of information for the past decade. With the introduction of the Web 2.0 application, the internet now has a dual role: as a source of knowledge and as a medium for information sharing. One of the important features in this application is the interactive webpages such as the blog, wikipedia, wikispaces and many more. With this comes its potential as a channel for educator to enable learning beyond the classroom. This study examined the use of the wikispaces as a platform for scaffolding academic writing. A wikispaces site was created for the Foundation Course students to discuss various content areas in Social Studies. Initially, the main purpose was to create an avenue for students to discuss and express their ideas and thoughts in the subject. Students‟ posts were analysed and three main themes emerged from these postings. Focus group interviews were then administered based on the top five most frequent posts of each theme. The categories revealed students‟ posts vary from giving opinions, simply chatting and having a real discussion. The focus group interview was to allow students clarify their motives of contribution to the group be it giving opinion, chatting or really discussing the issues. The interviews were also aimed to find out students‟ perception of the wikispaces as a platform for academic discussion beyond the classroom. The site proved to be more valuable and having good potential as innovative scaffolding to assist students in academic writing.
INTRODUCTION The Web 2.0 – a more advance internet application – offers its users a variety of interactive and convenient avenues for many more exploration and exploitation. It has improved application that enables users to express, create, published and most importantly share ideas and views on an online publication.
The sharing capacity of Web 2.0 permits interactive transactions to
flourish. Users employ social sharing sites like MySpace and Bebo to socialize and create network, photo sharing sites like Flickr and Picasa, and share videos using Youtube. Blogs are prevalent among users to share thoughts and ideas on a daily basis as an online diary. Whilst wikispaces are often use to produce collaborative work. Blogs and wikispaces are useful tools in enhancing students‟ collaborative effort in networking and sharing capacity. Cyberspace has filled up the void in assisting students to be independent, creative and collaborative in working with one another that goes beyong space and time, and be adjusted to one‟s own pace. On this 2
note these applications help in supporting pedagogical activities outside the classroom, or more specifically enable some form of innovative scaffolding to students‟ various academic endeavours. BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Prior to the present study, findings in a prelimenary study on the use of the wikispaces as an educational tools revealed that students welcome the platform as „a discussion roundtable‟ (Norherani Moning and Grace Chang, 2007) where they could put their thoughts into words and post online, so that others could read and comment. They could also post a forum topic and invite others to give ideas. All these had enabled them to present their arguments in written form and in so doing, provided practice for writing.
Recognising this potential of using the wikispaces as a tool to enhance students writing (), the researchers decided to examine the possibility of it operating as not only a collaborative platform but also a scaffolding medium in aiding students‟ academic writing.
At the beginning of the second semester this year, a wikispaces was created for a group of Foundation Course students (who will be the participants in this research). These students are Form 5 school leavers who scored well (A1 or A2) in the Bahasa Inggeris paper in SPM (Malaysian Certificate of Education). The duration of the course is 45 weeks, or three academic semesters, during which time they are expected to be prepared for study in Year 1 of the B. ED programme in a foreign university. Thus, the academic components for the course concentrate on up-grading their English language proficiency and also on training their critical and analytical thinking skills. One of these components is Social Studies. The component requires students to read extensively on selected topics and themes, write critical essays with good arguments, and do oral presentation of their written pieces. In other words, to score well in Social Studies, students are expected to be proficient in the English language, in both oral and written skills.
Academic writing demands good language accuracy. And this becomes a big challenge for these 60 students. While they pick up enough to present their work fairly well orally, they do not fare similarly in writing. They do not have the rhetoric skills in making their writings deliver the intended message with precision and clarity. As a result, what they can put forth in an oral presentation will only come across partially in writing, hampering the quality of their written work. 3
To prevail over this shortcoming, providing a means for them to pen down whatever they discuss seems a good strategy – and using the wikispace seems a move in the right direction as it enable group discussion to turn into online interactive collaboration of ideas .
The wikispaces served as a platform for students to discuss intellectually after the regular college hours. It also served as a monitoring device for the lecturers to oversee the discussion. Three moderators (students) were elected to facilitate the site and sometimes initiate the discussion. The organiser (lecturer) concern managed the pages from time to time and posted related topics for a particular theme discussed during lectures or class interaction.
RELATED LITERATURE REVIEW
The interactive web pages in the Web 2.0 application have created a rich online social network. People interaction has become borderless and timeless. While it started of to serve the online community a channel for communication, educationists see its potential as tools that parallel to the social constructivist learning theory.
Propanents of such theory argue that language
learning is paramount during social interaction, especially if there are some „more able‟ individuals in the group (Vygostky, in Cullip 1999).
Social Constructivist Pedagogy
Current teaching practice is not in sync with the current trend of the internet users particularly the students (Hardman and Carpenter, 2007). There is a widening gap in knowledge and use of the internet between the schools and students (Oblinger and Oblinger, 2006). The current generation can be described as “digital native” (Prensky, 2001a) since “they are the native speakers of digital language in computers, video games, cell phones, email and the web” (Mahmud M. Shihab, 2008). The students posses a superior level of familiarity using web applications compared to the teachers who are often called as “digital immigrants” (Oblinger and Oblinger, 2005). Teachers need to adapt their practices using critical thinking and the internet skills to create a new perspective of an effective pedagogy that would address the widening gap between current teaching methods and technological competencies.
The education system strives in a linear fashion for example in writing, beginning with the introduction to the conclusion; teachers impart knowledge the students receive and so on. With 4
the advent of technology teachers have to grasp new competencies to change this linear system. Socio constructivist learning environments promote learner centred paradigm with students learning collaboratively, interacting and forming a learning community. Internet applications provide a great opportunity for collaborative strategies and networking to sustain social constructivist pedagogy (Bruns and Humphrey, 2005)
Academic Scaffolding via the Internet
Teachers as well as learners have discovered the potential of the wikis as a platform for academic use beyond the classroom without face-to-face interaction. One of its many uses is creating sites for collaborative writing and scaffolding writing (Wheeler and Wheeler, 2007). The wikis also enable teachers to monitor students academic writing via online application or onlinetutoring.
The dynamics for this interaction is almost unlimited as it not only transcient space
and time, it also provides an unthreatening environment that allows students to brainstorm for ideas collabotatively, then put them down in print and edit and republish. Wikispaces and Blogs for Collaborative Writing
Collaborative writing between two persons or more is currently prevalent among writers to produce texts via the internet (Ede and Lunsford, 1990). The main basis is for individuals to give different ideas and perspective on a given project. In the area of education the internet serves a similar foundation in giving individual student a channel to express and give their ideas on a common topic.
Wikispaces and blogs provide a similar opportunity for young writers to put forth their idea and collaboratively work towards producing a text. The applications that allow editing and improving on the text is one of the many useful features of the wikispaces.
The capacity for the
wikispaces to keep the entries and posts of previous drafts allow students to keep track of how their works have been improved or new ideas being added to sustantiate further their arguments. This is especially useful for beginning writers as they will be able to recognise the process of developing a good piece of academic writing. Research on the use of wikispaces as a tool for enhancing academic writing skills proved that this application has a positive impact on students – especially the „struggling‟ writers – to improve academic writing texts, as it provides a continuous scaffolding (Wheeler and Wheeler, 2007). 5
Wikispaces or Blogs?
A blog, or web log, shares writing and multimedia content in the form of posts (starting point entries) and comments (responses to the posts). While commenting, and even posting, are open to the members of the blog or the general public, no one is able to change a comment or post made by another. The usual format is post-comment-comment-comment, and so on. For this reason, blogs are often the vehicle of choice to express individual opinions. Wikis on the other hand give rooms for groups to change and edit a website as they see fit for the organization. It is a group effort and any changes can be negotiated and collaboratively worked on. Any queries or discussions are recorded and each individual will be held responsible for any changes created on the web.
From the pedagogical perspective, these extra interactive features that the wiki has over blogs make it a provider of not only a channel for discussion, but at the same time a platform for writing practice. In other words, these applications help in supporting pedagogical activities that go beyong space and time, which also enable some form of innovative scaffolding to students‟ various academic endeavours. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The main purpose was to analyse the type of posts and explore the rationale behind these posts. The second aim, which was a follow-up action to the prelimenary study, was to investigate the type of scaffolds that students need to improve their writing.
It is the
researchers‟ hope that this will shake lights on creating a more systematic and effective scaffold for the students in the future. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The following questions served as guidelines to the research: 1. How do the students respond to the use of the wikispaces as a discussion platform? 2. What kind of posts do the students contribute to the wikispaces discussion? Why such preferences? 3. Is better organisation of ideas developed in the posts among the top users?
6
RESEARCH DESIGN
Based on the research questions this study demands a qualitative approach to the design. The main data were the posts from the wikispaces and they were analysed qualitatively. All the posts were printed out and coded.
From these codes, categories were formed and three
themes emerged. After identifying the themes for the types of posts that students put up on the wikispaces, these posts were counted and the top five most frequent users were identified for a focus group interview. The interview were taped, transcribed verbatim and analysed. The Participants
The participants in this study are grouped as follows: a) Posts counted by categories: all 60 Foundation Course students b) Focus group interview: five students highest number of posts for each of the three most popular categories The Focus Interview
During the focus interview, the participants were prompted using the questions guide below to address the Research Questions: a) What do you do when starting a discussion? b) What are the steps taken before you post a question? c) What should be added to the wikispaces? d) Why didn‟t you elaborate on your post? e) What do you think should be added? f)
What do you think should be in the Wikispaces to help develop your idea?
Participants also discussed other issues as it emerged in the discussion.
In addition the
researchers encouraged the participants to rationalise and justify their reasons.
7
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS The main data for this study are the students‟ posts to the wikispaces. The posts were downloaded and printed out and then analysed. The data is analysed inductively using the constant comparative method (Lincoln and Guba, 1958).
The posts in the wikispaces were first counted according to class. There were al-together 778 posts to date (February to mid-September). Of the three classes, FC1 seemed to be the most active participants contributing a total of 277 posts, followed by FC3 with 255 posts, and FC2 with 246 posts.
An example of a student‟s post is as follows: Figure 1: A Student's Post
nisak Implications of Globalisation for Knowledge and Learning We have globalisation and we have education. Both of this when mixed together will improve on the education system in Malaysia because as we implement the technology in our education system, it will help students to search for more information and basically obtaining knowledge which cannot be found in the textbook. Although the consequences globalisation may bring to the students, it can help to teach the students on using technology as a part of learning. The effects of globalisation can help to improve our society in terms of business, economy, education, technology and even lifestyle. We are more exposed to the worldwide news and the information obtained is not limited. Thus, through my point of view, if we use or manipulate globalisation wisely, we can be able to improve ourselves and be on the same track as some of the developed country in the world. Do you agree with me? Posted Aug 11, 2009 10:05 pm - [delete]
8
Findings and Discussion
The findings from the analysis of data will be discussed with reference to the research questions.
Research Question 1: How do the students respond to the use of the wikispaces as a discussion platform?
No. of Posts
Diagram 1: Posts Counted According to Class 280 270 260 250 240 230 FC1
FC2
FC3
Class
Diagram 1 above clearly showed that students were indeed very receptive to the use of the wikispaces as a discussion platform for Social Studies. On an average, there were 24.31 posts per week. The average posting by each individual participant in the duration of the study was about 12.96 posts, which was approximately 0.425 post per week.
This poor logon with
reference to individual could be due to the lack of online facility in the institute. Those who logon frequently used the broadband facility which they had obtained personally. However this shortcoming was rectified in Semester 2 (July 2009 onwords) as the wifi facility in the college had been installed. Diagram 2, 3 and 4 below showed the rise in number of logon from July onwards. Diagram 2: Posts* by Participants (by Months) (Source: wikispace statistic)
9
These posts were by participants who had posted a question or started a forum, and returned a few days later to rewrite or edit what they had posted earlier. They were counted as „Edits‟ in the wikispaces statistic. During the focus group interview, some actually said that they read their friends‟ comment and rewrite or edit their previous posts. In other words, the wikispaces did provide them a channel to discuss beyond the classroom. On the other hand, some posts took a different approach. These posts were generated by participants who wrote in response to others‟ posts, or who wrote on a new topic and invited others to comment or join the discussion. These are counted as „Messages‟ by the wikispaces statistic (refer Diagram 3 below). Diagram 3: Posts** by Participants (by Months) (Source: wikispace statistic)
There were yet another group known as the „Editors‟ recorded in the wikispaces statistic. These were participants who were invited by the researcher to help in monitoring the discussion in the wikispaces. As shown in Diagram 4 below, they were active from the beginning. Diagram 4: Post by Participants (by Months) (Source: wikispace statistic)
10
In general, it could be said that participants were very receptive in using the wikispaces as a „roundtable‟ for discussion. Their type of posts varied as there was no structured instruction. However, when analysis was done, six main themes emerged. Table 1 below showed the statistic of these themes.
Table 1: Emerging Themes in the Posts
Themes
discussion
attempting task set
chat
expressing personal opinions
sharing information
regurgitating information
starting a discussion
No. Of Posts (Class)
47
35
58
97
19
0
21
60
40
65
67
14
0
0
46
15
118
48
25
3
0
Total
153
90
241
212
58
3
21
Research Question 2: What kind of posts do the foundation students contribute to the wikispaces discussion? Why do they send this type of posts?
There were seven emerging themes as shown in Table 1.
Of these seven themes, three
recorded higher number of posts than the others. These themes were: discussion (153 posts), chat (241 posts) and expressing personal opinions (212 posts). The top five participants with the highest number of posts in these three categories were identified (refer Table 2, 3, and 4).
Table 2: Real Discussion
Table 3: Expressing Personal Opinion
Table 4: Chatting
Participants
No. Of Posts
Participants
No. Of Posts
Participants
No. Of Posts
DS1
9
PS1
22
CS1
9
DS2
19
PS2
11
CS2
19
DS3
10
PS3
8
CS3
10
DS4
24
PS4
7
CS4
24
DS5
14
PS5
9
CS5
14
A focus group interview was arranged where students were prompted with questions to elicit answers that allow the students to rationalise and justify their contribution to the wikispaces. These interviews were transcribed and later analysed inductively using the constant comparative approach. 11
Real Discussion
Real discussions (Table 2) were when students post an issue to the viewers and explain their stand to the matter. These students usually would forward their ideas and opinion first to open the discussion. They would wait for responses from their peers and debate or continue with the discussion. They would elaborate on the points put forward earlier, give support or evidence to their argument. Normally this kind of post would prolong to a few more exchanges where they would finally resolve or conclude the issue (Appendix 1). The discussion would develop further to another subtopic.
Students who posted real discussions were initiators who gave their own opinion and started the ball rolling. One of the reasons why students preferred to start the discussion was to be in control of the topic and then to be the leader of the discussion. They knew that sending in the first post they will set the pace of the discussion and in control of the dialogue.
DS1: when I log in the wikispace I tend to start my own discussion first because from there they will follow. I will start my own post first, a new topic anything on the subject and then I will know that there are others that will follow and start discussing on the topic. That is why I tend to start my own post first. They will add on more points from there I will add more points and start discussing.
These students were able to lead because they were avid readers. They would start-off reading a related topic to find sources for example based on the lectures given.
One student
mentioned:
DS2: well, usually when we start a discussion just according to what we have learn for the day in class so from there we just start off the discussion by posting out some ideas then posted out the question for others to follow in reply.
To develop further the discussion, these students would return and edit or rewrite their posts which were usually supported with proof of facts gathered from their readings and sources. These students are well prepared when they were arguing their points. In other words these students enjoyed challenges and being challenged. They would not like to be superficial with
12
their argument thus they always would have a reference that could substantiate the arguments. Student 3 commented:
DS3: I will read my friends comments first then after that I read overall and then I would give my opinion, if let say contradict to my friends I would support my opinions because every time I log on into wikispace I will have my SS book with me so it will substantiate my points. I feel that my points is correct and I get from my friends like you know we did debate on this particular topic about war and then afterwards it were debating, I will supporting the points and she will supporting her points as well so that is how we learn. I will like waiting for the reply and message that person if they replied or not. When she did post like this then I will find more materials to support my points and then end up agree somehow something like that.
The five students agreed that being involved in the wikispaces discussion improved their reading and writing skills. The posts helped them to practice using a number of new terms and vocabulary in the subject matter. By posting new ideas they were able to use the term in the appropriate context. The posts could also allow them to elaborate on the content that they had chosen to work on, and by posting they were actually verbalising their ideas in a well organised manner, which in turn provided opportunity for academic writing. In addition, this practice also provided a channel for them to make the right interpretation of the term and definition. Having to define and interpret the situation gives them practice in giving their personal view in a more academic discourse. Student 2 justified:
DS2: We got to know better about some definitions. Yes because SS is very hard to elaborate and if you don’t elaborate right it will turn out to produce another meaning. From there we learn to use the appropriate content to appropriate place form our reading and our knowledge to write. In terms of content, more appropriate. Appropriate in meaning for some topics they are very confusing to use, so appropriate means to use direct quotations from the topic and give the right ones as in the right details.
13
To sum up, students who participated actively in this category would eventually improve in their writing skills, especially academic writing, where ideas were put forth as argument and justified with good examples, or supported with views and findings from authority in the field. Expressing Personal Opinions
The next theme which emerged from the posts is expressing personal opinions (Table 3). This group of posts were posts which put forth a personal view of a certain issue, gave explanation and support to the issue and stop immediately when there were others who responded to the post. The issue however was not developed, nor defended or reiterated to make a stand. These posts merely put forth a new idea and allow others to discuss the matter. It is usually a one off contribution, with no intention of prolonging the debate.
The focus group interview revealed that the students were mostly responding to the previous post sent by their peers. Students stated that they were contributing to a dialogue and „taking turns‟ to answer or respond to the issue. They explained that they would answer the post from others and wait for their friends to respond and elaborate on the issues. A student explained: PS2: Probably I’ll wait for the others to respond to what I have posted. If there are facts given I will kept on and on.
These students would read posts from others and would interject when they agreed to an idea or comment made by their peers. Most of the time, these posts were based on their own personal experience, with little reference to or justification from reliable sources. After posting they would just wait for the others to contribute to the conversation.
One of the students
explained:
PS1: this is because I feel that what I post on the Wikispace is actually my personal opinion and how I can relate to the rest. I read the previous posts. Then after that, I’ll put out my own ideas and after that I will stop la.
The rests of the students agreed what they wrote were their own personal views and what came into mind at that point of time. They also agreed that they did not read much and was not prepared to engage in a prolonged debate of the issue. This was the main reason why most of 14
the students seldom involved in more than one post. The inability to express themselves was not due to their linguistic shortcomings but rather the lack of depth in their reading of content matter. They explained that sometimes they tried to hold the discussion longer but backed out due to lackind in confidence of the subject matter. PS3: I believe that I try to discuss the topic but then maybe because I don’t read much. I write something from my own experience… what I know for the topic… what I feel… so… I try to put some good points but unfortunately I didn’t include data, facts, all that.
Another reason why the posts were not supported was because the students were not prepared for the topic and others could not remember exactly what and where they had read the facts or obtained such information. Thus when they could not remember where the information was taken they failed to support with proof, and so their posts remain as their own personal view. One of the students claimed: PS4: Alright. The reason that I didn’t elaborate on my point is because I will read the post. And then the next thing I just write whatever that comes into my mind. I just write my personal opinion. If I agree, I said why. And if I don’t, I said why also. It’s just that I did not support it or justify my point. But I did say that you know… once I read this here and there… it’s just that I don’t remember where I read it. So… it’s not that… you know… it happened that I can’t remember… I can’t recall the…where did I read it. So… that is why I did not elaborate much. Besides that, my knowledge on SS is very little so I dare not elaborate much. Ya. I did actually. But I just find it hard to remember each and every of the points there. It’s like what I find logic and reasonable, I write, I remember.
The above excerpt explained the whole rationalisation of this category of posts. These students were not readers but they were interested to know and be a part of the reading and writing community of the wikispaces. They wanted to belong to the community but did not walk the extra mile of preparing themselves for a longer intellectual discourse but rather intervened when they had an opinion or a view on a certain issue. The inability to interact longer than just a post limits them to hold a real discussion on the wikispaces.
15
Chatting
The final theme which emerged from the pool of data is chatting (Table 4). Chatting belongs to the type of posts when students socialise and broaden their social networking in the wikispaces. These posts could be talking about other interest like football, movies, a particular lecturer or enquiring about information regarding sites or content on social studies. Posts which belong to this category could also be talking about certain issues but the language use is informal, a mere mention sometimes, a comment in passing without any real substance and support or evidence. It was interesting to note that the students refused to admit that they were chatting but rather giving personal views or opinion – which should be viewed as discussion. All five students were surprised and initially in a state of denial and insisted that they were discussing a personal view. CS2: as for me, im not sure erm, I mean when I knew I’m in the chatting list. it’s quite surprising. I’m not sure how to differentiate where erm.. discussion and chatting. Like er.. “hi, how are you?” it’s like more to personal opinion..
The student above and the other four students denied that they were chatting and merely extending their networking, more in the social aspect than in the academic faculty. These students tried to rationalise their posts explaining that the post might look like a chat probably because they exchanged social greetings and asked personal questions. Others rationalised that they seemed to be chatting due to their use of informal language, one student insisted: CS3: okay, um, as for me it’s the same thing where I think I don’t think I’m chatting in there because er, so far I think I post personal opinion whether I agree or disagree and maybe the use of informal language and some transactions and more colloquial words makes that more to chatting but still for me, I still believe that I’m not chatting.
However, the students agreed that they might have used informal language in a relax manner which should not mean that they were chatting. They persisted with the idea that they did not treat the wikispaces like a social chatroom, but an academic one, as the topic they were engaged in were always serious and academic, though they were merely expressing themselves in reply to other‟s posts. She explained:
16
CS4: the use of language that makes the, the… discussion looks more informal and relaxing la. sometimes it, sometimes if that go to the extent that we’re chatting, sometimes we do condemn each other right, but not to the extent that we’re using it as a chat room. … No. The student further explained that as they answered a friend‟s post they might be out of focus and side-tracked from the initial issue. Thus they were just going with the flow of the conversation in the wikispaces allowing such activity to happen without realising that they are actually chatting and discussing. The student insisted that he was influenced by the previous post, in retaliation to what was posted earlier. He commented: CS2: yeah, before this I didn’t realize that I am chatting. then yesterday when we were.. when it had this column that I have chat discussion, send information, now I realize that it’s actually not a discussion, more on sharing personal opinions as well as chatting.
The students later admitted that their posts might seem like a chat because they always start off their posts with greetings and they seldom substantiated what they said with examples which were pertinent. They later realised that without a good support and substance from reliable sources or authorities in the field, their posts would turn out to be a mere chat and not even expressing opinion. Research Question 3: Is better organisation of ideas developed in the posts among the top users?
The wikispaces was created with the primary aim of providing a channel for discussion on issues related to Social Studies among the Foundation Course students. The researchers believed that when students worked collaboratively in content areas, they also provided scaffolding for each other in writing the ideas down. To examine if the frequent participation in real discussion did help in enhancing students‟ academic writing skills, two students with the highest number of posts in the real discussion category were highlighted and their earliest posts and the most recent one were compared. The comparison focused on the organisation of ideas and development of an argument.
17
Figure 2: DS4 First Post
huiying Discrimination All humans are just a bunch of hypocrites. All talk but no work done. How can we eradicate of discrimination when everyone is just hypocrites? Apparently, all of it began in school level. Teachers are supposed to educate students on how discrimination of any ways should not be allow but yet they still the teachers themselves too practise discrimination? In the end, the whole issue will never be able to resolve as long as the humans are full of themselves. They only think that they are right and the other is wrong. Can one person be able to make a difference? Posted Feb 23, 2009 9:34 pm - [delete]
DS4 earliest post in February on Discrimination (for the theme Gender and Society) showed that the tone was not academic but aggressive. It appeared that DS4 was just throwing questions and remarks without further justification. It was also difficult to identify the topic sentence or focus of her discussion. The ideas put forth were thus weak and argument lack cohesiveness. On further investigation on DS4‟s posts it was noted that she did not return to justify or discuss in depth what she had posted. During the focus group interview, DS4 explained that:
DS4: when I start a topic I usually start off with something that I feel interesting so that I can get the members to join my discussion and then from there I hope we can learn something and add on something because usually the topic that we started is usually regarded to SS. From that onwards, at first they will start joining in, they will be adding on discussions after that it will sometimes continue to become debate and then chatting. It always like that in almost every post then I will just leave it.
However as DS4 was a deligent participant of the posts in this category, some improvement in the most recent post was noted. In this post, DS4 gave a very good opening paragraph on Globalisation and Education. Though the follow-up paragraphs needed further elaboration, the improvement in organisation in academic writing was obvious.
18
huiying How Do We Grow a Global Mindset? „Think local and act global‟. This approach starts with the assumption that global expansion is best served by adaptation to local insights and initiatives in different markets around the world. Diversity is looked upon as a source of opportunity, whereas strategic cohesion plays a secondary role. However, bear in mind that developing a global mindset is a lengthy and timeconsuming process. 1. Read. For a person with an intention to grow a more global mindset, reading is a great thing to do. 2. Take a local field trip. Cities have areas populated by various groups whose ethnicity is different from yours, whatever your ethnicity is. Take a walking tour, eat in a restaurant, shop in the stores and chat with people you meet. 3. Networking. Seek out individuals who are from other parts of the country or hail from a distant shore. Get to know them as individuals as well as learning about their cultures, language, religion, history, etc. And, after establishing a relationship of mutual respect, have them give you their impressions of your country; i.e Malaysia.
Figure 3: DS4 Most Recent Post
4. Travel abroad. This is the most obvious way to grow a more global mindset to many people but often the least utilized. If money is an issue, start a travel fund and do some research to find a country that is inexpensive. Take advantage of international business trips. Get in a couple days early or stay and extra few days to dig deeper into the economics, politics, art, history, etc. of the city. Or, take a side trip. erm... think out of the box? Posted Sep 21, 2009 9:23 pm - [delete]
DS4‟s started off with a catchy phrase: think local and act global.
This was followed by
explaining the phrase, at the same time setting the frame for the elements needed to act as what the phrase mean. The elements listed after that required further elaboration; however they would act as good topic sentence for each paragraph. Thus, it would be fair to say that through the many practices that DS4 had had in being a frequent and deligent participants in the wikispaces, there were obvious improvement in developing an idea in writing.
19
Another frequent participant of the real discussion category was DS2 (19 posts). Below was DS2‟s first post in July:
nisak NAM is relevant? It is still viewed as a relevant organisation as somehow it acts as a way to help the developing countries to carry out their plan as a whole group, making it easier to work together to accomplish what the member states want. Posted Jul 30, 2009 11:40 pm - [delete]
Figure 5: DS2 First Post
The post by DS2 in Figure 3 above was not classified as a real discussion in the analysis, but it was DS2 first post. In this post, DS2 was just like most of the others – posting a personal opinion, without elaboration and justification from other sources.
During the focus group
interview, DS2 revealed that by reading others posts would enhance the organisation of the post – topic sentence and supporting details, and enrich one‟s content knowledge.
DS2: when I log in the wikispace I tend to start my own discussion first because from there they will follow. I will start my own post first, a new topic anything on the subject and then I will know that there are others that will follow and start discussing on the topic. That is why I tend to start my own post first. They will add on more points from there I will add more points and start discussing.
20
Then in a more recent post by DS2:
nisak Malaysia and its focuses to develop K-based economy As Malaysia strives to become a fully industrialised country by the year 2020, the government focuses on developing a knowledge-based economy. In working towards this goal, the education sector needs to be revamped in order to ensure that the future generation will be ready for such task or requirement. What are the changes needed by the government especially in the education sectors, to develop Malaysia and its society in becoming a knowledge-based economy and society?
Figure 4: DS2 Most Recent Post
Education helps to provide the country with human capital. In developing a knowledge-based economy, Malaysia has to take several steps in changing the education system to complement the goal of developing a k-based economy which requires a society equipped with proper knowledge. Firstly, Malaysia has to use English as a global language by teaching Science and Mathematics in English. This is to give adequate information to students when they face the challenges ahead in their career life. Moreover, it will link to the k-based economy because in a k-based economy, research and development are the essentials needed to improve on our economy. Therefore, through the teaching of Science and Mathematics in English, it can produce a society equipped with k-based students who knows how to adapt themselves in the changing world of technology. What are other changes and innovations needed to produce a k-based economy in Malaysia? Posted Sep 24, 2009 3:21 pm - [delete]
Comparatively, this recent post by DS2 showed remarkable improvement in organisation and presentation of ideas. The introductory paragraph was focus and set the frame for discussion. The follow up discussion was structured and ideas well developed. All these were not seen in July in the very first post. As revealed during the focus group interview, gathering information and contents by reading others‟ posts then rewrite one‟s own did help in the quality of the piece of writing. 21
DS2: firstly I post my own topic and second I will read all the other posts from other classes’ then I will add on if there is just the same topic in other classes’ discussion so I will add on my topic and I will post more information on my own. After that, I will go on to other class to view other people’s post and after that find more information on the net and on the spot I will post the details. Based on evidence from these two participants‟ posts, it is affirmative that the wikispaces does provide some form of scaffolding in helping to develope these students‟ academic writing. However, to ensure better scaffolding, a more structured monitoring schedule by the researchers is necessary.
IMPLICATION AND RECOMMENDATION
Through the focus group interview, a number of issues emerged. Among these, the most interesting and with real implication to this study was that on the type of scaffolding to be provided.
These students were of the opinion that with more structured monitoring and
involvement from the researchers, the wikispaces‟ potential as innovative scaffolding in developing academic writing skills could be maximised.
While all the participants acknowledged that they benefitted one way or another by being involved in the wikispaces, all of them agreed (FG 1, FG2 & FG3)that they need more lecturer‟s intervention or involvement for the wikispaces. They claimed that by monitoring their discussion they will know that they are not off track and will be more serious in their contribution of the posts. Students from the first group insisted that constant lecturers‟ intervention will encourage students to be actively involved in the discussion. One of the students explained:
DS1: if the lecturer is posting something they would know that they are being monitored and they would simply stop chatting and they would know whether they are right or wrong and their opinions could be accepted and could be put in essay or not Students from the second and third group also agree that the lecturer‟s involvement will help them to improve in their writing and be more aware of what they write in their posts. The
22
intervention could help students to support what they have produced and instead of merely expressing their opinion. PS5: I think…erm… I heard from the suggestions that lecturers can log on… so… sometimes I do realize that I’m giving personal opinions only. So… maybe… because lack of justification of the topic. I tend to just give my personal opinions. So… when there is a lecturer post in… that lecturer can monitor our posts and say that you need more elaboration with that certain post.
On a similar note, students from the third group also felt that they need a lecturer to oversee and monitor their posts so as to be on the right track of the discussion. The student claimed: CS2: er what, we involve lecturers‟ comments as well. if we … discussion so that we can know that our point is relevant or not. we can monitor as well if we.. misleading information. Somehow they are influenced when they read the post, they er.. precede it to be like if said, somehow wrong.
There were other suggestions that students felt they need to improve the wikispaces for example the lecturer could lock the conversation and summed up that particular issue before moving on to the next issue. Two contradicting ideas emerged from the Real Discussion group (Table 2 – DS1, DS2, DS3, DS4 and DS5) and Chatting group (Table 4 – CS1, CS2, CS3, CS4 and CS5), the former suggested that social networking should be separated and exercised on a different page while the later suggested that such pages were not necessary as students should be allowed to interact not only among their community but with other students from other cyber community, whereby they felt would enrich further their knowledge. CONCLUSION
The wikispaces is definitely useful and has high potential as scalffolding tools in assisting students in their academic endevours. Based on findings from this study, suggestions from students will be considered seriously in the next stage of using this online facility.
23
REFERENCES
Bruns, A., & Humphreys, S. (2005). Wikis in teaching and assessment: The M/cyclopedia project. Proceedings of the 2005 International Symposium on Wikis, SanDiego, CA, USA: October
16-18,
25-32.
Retrieved
September
2009
from
Http://www.wiksym.org/ws2005/proceedings/paper.03.pdf
Cullip, Peter F. (1999) Scaffolding Literacy Learning: Vygotsky in the Classroom. The English Teacher. Vol XXVIII June 1999.
Ede, L. & Lunsford, A. (1990). Singular text/plural authors. Perspectives on on collaborative writing. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Hardman, J. & Carpenter, D. (2007). Breathing fire into Web 2.0. Learning & Leading with Technology,
34(5),
pp.
18-21.
Retrieved
September
2009
from
http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen
Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic Enquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Mahmud, M. Shihab, (2008). Web 2.0 tools improve teaching and collaboration in English language classes. Paper presented at the National Educational Computing Conference 2008, San Antonio Texas, USA
Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. L. (2005). Educating the net generation. Retrieved February , 2009, from
Parker, K.R., & Chao, J.T. (2007). Wiki as a Teaching Tool. Interdisciplinary journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 3, 57-72.
Prensky, M. (2001a). Digital natives, digital immigrants: Part I. On the Horizon, 9(5), pp. 1-6.
Wheeler, S. & Wheeler, D, (2007) Evaluating Wiki as a tool to promote academic writing skills. Conference ICL2007. September 26-28, 2007, Villach Austria.
24
