Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage

socially and cognitively in an online environment?

ETAP 680 Critical Introduction to Educational Research Instructor: Professor Donna Rogers

Final Project
Fostering Social and Cognitive Engagement in an Online Environment through Wikis

Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

Joy Yien-ling Quah

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

Content
1.0 2.0 3.0 Introduction Purpose of the Investigation Literature Review 3.1 3.2 3.3 4.0 The Use of Wikis in Knowledge Building Developing Disciplinary Knowledge through Wikis Higher Order Thinking in Online Environments 3 3 4 5 9 12 14 15 16 19 19 21

Methodology 4.1 4.2 4.3 Research Design Data Collection and Methods of Data Analysis Sample Data Sheet.

5.0

Conclusion

References

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

1.0

Introduction Cress & Kimmerl (2008) have called for a systematic analysis of the potential of wikis as

tools for knowledge building in the light of knowledge-creating competencies in a knowledge society (p.106). They assert that while the social processes of using wikis have been investigated, the cognitive and meta-cognitive processes have been studied less frequently. The basic concept for using wiki in an educational setting is that is able to support rapid and easy creation and editing of web contents, capturing these cognitive processes, and displaying them as historical contexts for further cognitive processes (Twu, 2009, p.16). 2.0 Purpose of the Investigation The purpose of this investigation is to show how the process of contributing to a wiki can provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage in higher levels of cognitive processing which are vital for productive engagement in online higher education settings. The types of cognitive processing will be investigated through an analysis of the content of the wikis in order to identify evidence of internalization and externalization of learning. The asynchronous interaction and notes behind the wiki pages will also be analysed. The preliminary categories for analysing the processes and products of thinking will be based upon a combined framework of thinking processes adapted from Newman, Webb, and Cochrane (1995, as cited in Landis, Swain, Friehe and Coufal, 2007, p.137) and Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2001, as cited in McLoughlin & Mynard, 2009, p.151). The participants in this investigation are a group of first-year pre-service ESL teachers, enrolled in a reading methodology class in a teacher education institute in Malaysia. They will work collaboratively in teams of 3 to build a course wiki which includes pages for review of

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

books and articles, ideas and lesson plans for developing writing, plus articles and discussion of issues in the teaching of writing. This study is being conducted because, according to Schwab (2000) and Woodbridge (2004), At varied different levels, both professional development programs for teachers currently in the classroom and programs for preparing future teachers should provide technology-rich experiences throughout all aspects of the training (as cited in Cautinho, 2008, p.239). UNESCO (2008) supports this view and asserts that in order to live, learn and work successfully in the 21st century, students and teachers must utilize technology effectively to solve problems, make decisions, contribute creatively and effectively as communicators, collaborators, publishers and producers (UNESCO, as cited in Cautinho, p.239). 3.0 Literature Review Wikis are a Web 2.0 application, which allow for distributed participation and collaboration (Knobel & Lankshear, 2006, p. 81). Earlier approaches to collaborative writing on the Web have been extended recently through the ease of use and transparency of writing in wikis. These affordances support flat structures of participation, authoring, and annotation. Wikis are intended to promote texts that are unfolding in their collective processes of meaning making in and across time. What perhaps most distinguishes wikis compositionally are the ways their features can facilitate shared patterns of trust and adaptation in the shaping of collaborative resources (Carr, Morrison, Coxa & Deacon, 2007, p.267).

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

3.1

The Use of Wikis in Knowledge Building

While it is generally agreed that higher education should develop higher-order cognitive skills such as critical thinking and deep understanding, there is debate as to the most conducive contexts for developing these skills (Fox & MacKeogh, 2003, p.122). There are several reasons why the Wiki holds much potential as a very suitable context for developing higher-order cognitive skills. This is based on the premise that for higher-level cognitive skills to develop, Ohlsson (as cited in Fox & MacKeogh, 2003, p.123) has proposed that students must be engaged in some kind of problem-solving and epistemic tasks. In producing a Wiki, participants are engaged epistemic tasks. It is posited that the engagement in epistemic tasks which includes describing; explaining; predicting; arguing; critiquing/evaluating and defining may (p.123) may help participants engage in higher-order thinking processes. It has been pointed out that Ohlssons epistemic tasks seem to be very similar to the processes identified by a number of researchers in online and collaborative learning (Fox & MacKeogh, 2003, p.123). Ohlsson (cited in Fox et al, p.123) has also pointed out that generating content also seems to be a necessary activity in developing thinking. The production of discourse, which is part of the creation of content, is a display of cognition which forms the basis of deep understanding. He cited cognitive researchers who have insisted that human beings display their understanding in the generation of symbols. In particular, he claims, there is a connection between abstract knowledge (which he views as the basis of a deep understanding) and discourse. (Ohlsson, cited in Fox et al, 123). In producing content for the Wiki, participants are engaged in discourse which will exercise different aspects of their cognitive abilities.

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

A study by Matthew and Felvegi (2009) demonstrated that wikis were an effective context for developing content knowledge and also facilitated discussion processes which led to deeper understanding of course material. This study investigated the process of how contributing to a class wiki affected the learning of preservice teachers enrolled in a language arts methods class (p. 51). Participants included 37 preservice teachers enrolled in three sections of a field-based language arts methods class during two semesters (p.51). As part of the course requirements, students added course content to a class wiki housed on PeanutButter Wiki at http://llls4434.pbwiki.com. The wiki consisted of 40 pages, including an introductory front page, a table of contents page, 11 pages covering course content, and a 26-page dictionary (p. 56.). Matthew and Felvegi reported that students reflections indicate that contributing to the class wiki led to a deeper processing of the course content (p.51.) Not only were students reading and rereading the wiki pages, they also reported careful reading of the course textbooks. Their quests for relevant material to contribute to the wiki led them to read and reflect on the content in their textbooks (p.59). They added that had it not been for the required wiki assignment, the students would have spent less time reading and studying their textbooks. Hence, contributing to the wiki required students to carefully read their textbooks and to synthesize what they learnedAs students read, they compared and contrasted the information in their textbooks and on the wiki pages to ensure that they understood the material in order to add meaningful content to the wiki. This comparing and contrasting of information from different sources gives me a better understanding of the material and embeds it into my memory, wrote one student (p.59). Matthew et al added that The collaborative knowledge creation resulted in the

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

preservice teachers deeply processing and learning the material. Further, they combined knowledge gained from other teacher preparation courses with the new knowledge gained in their language arts methods class, which resulted in a deeper learning of the course content and a rich understanding of the connections between their courses (p.68). The findings by Matthew et al supports Kress and Kimmerls (2008) assertion that contributing to an article not only allows the creation of an artifact (p.110). The authors posit that the mental effort necessary for the externalization of knowledge can extend peoples individual knowledge, because externalization requires deeper processing and clarification (p.110). Therefore, the authors assert that, people who contribute to a wiki article cannot externalize their own knowledge without some changes in their individual knowledge. Through the externalization process people often deepen their knowledge and clarify their understanding. So externalization can lead to individual learning processes, and people who contribute to a wiki article can expand their own individual knowledge (p.110). In contrast, a study by Kasemvillas and Olfman (2009) seemed to negate some of the positive claims made for using wikis to promote deeper understanding and to motivate engagement with course content. The participants in the study were enrolled in a class in knowledge management (KM). According to Kasemvillas et al (2009), the students were required to write and edit an introductory textbook on the subject. This was the only assignment for the course. The class was composed of six males and three females. Each student chose what major topics he or she wished to be responsible for writing in the KM book (p.48).

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

According to the authors, Course evaluations showed that the students were less than somewhat satisfied with the organization of the course and the amount they learned in the course (p.51). One concern that emerged from written comments was that it is difficult to write a text about a topic area where students have no previous knowledge. (Kasemvilas et al, 2009, p. 51). This finding seemed to contradict Higdon and Topzs (2009) assertion that engaging in generating content through the use of blogs and wikis promote deep, conceptual understanding of core course concepts (p.107). The students in the study apparently felt that they had very little knowledge to begin with and needed some input before they could feel sufficiently confident to develop course content independently through the use if wikis. Additionally, one of the findings revealed that the lack of an affordance which supports threaded discussions had a negative impact on the learners. Over time, students in the class found it increasingly difficult to post their comments and discuss the content of a wiki page in its discussion page (Kasemwillas et al, p. 52). The findings of this research suggests that the technical difficulties that are associated with the lack of support for threaded discussions may make the wiki a less than suitable medium for establishing interactive environments in which technology is used to support and enhance collaborative learning processes (Jonassen, Peck & Wilson, 1999, cited in Wheeler, Yeomans & Wheeler, 2008, p. 987 ). The students sensed a lack of control and accountability in such a collaborative setting (Kasemwillas et al, p. 52). This finding contradicts Kress and Kimmerls (2007) assertion that the act of generating content can also lead to individual learning processes in the contributors. In this study, generating content had the opposite effect. It resulted in the students feelings of

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

confusion and frustration. This suggests that the affordances of a technology, or problems associated with it potentially impede learning experiences of students. Perhaps, in this instance alternative technology tools may have better supported the discussion. The selection of tools is therefore a pedagogical issue which needs to be addressed in order to more effectively facilitate students learning experiences. 3.2 Developing Disciplinary Knowledge through Wikis

According to Carr et al (2007) wikis also offer interesting pedagogical possibilities because as a product, they serve to share actual disciplinary knowledge, which is valuable in contexts of higher education where high value is placed on critical reflection concerning discipline-specific content. Procedurally, they may also assist in the gathering, appraisal, placement, and distribution of the students knowledge. For lecturers, understanding cognitive processes in the acquisition and sharing of knowledge opens up new pedagogical opportunities. It allows for increased meaning making by and between students (p.267). A study conducted by DiPietro, Drexler, Kennedy, Buraphadeja, Liu, and Dawson (2008) seemed to confirm Carrs assertion. In this study, 7 doctoral students were assigned to build a course wiki as a form of preparation for their doctoral qualifying examinations. Each student was expected to produce content related to his own area of expertise and also content related to key course concepts, learning theories and other resources. The content was placed at PBwiki (www.pbwiki.com), and the majority of course discussion and effort centered on development of this tool and modifications in order to best meet group needs (DiPietro, 2008, p. 29).

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

The finding of this study suggested that group collaboration and collegial support benefited participants in a number of ways. Collaboration on the wiki, article discussions, and class activities helped build a professional bond between the students and a feeling of, were all in this together (p.30). The researchers also reported that through building the wiki content, participants created foundations on which respective dissertations could be built, while concomitantly scaffolding peers along the way (p.31). A contrasting result, however, was found in a study by Carr, Morrison, Cox, and Deacon (2007). While DiPietro et als (2008) study reported the positive impact of working collaboratively on a wiki, a study conducted by Carr, Morrison, Cox, and Deacon (2007) highlighted problems of potential breakdowns in group dynamics in collaborative projects . The study by Carr et al focused on a project to innovate the use of wikis for collaborative writing within student groups in a final-year undergraduate political science course. The primary questions guiding our research were in what ways could wikis assist collaborative learning in an undergraduate course in political science and how we could support educators in the effective use of wikis (p.266). The collaborative writing exerciseculminated in the production of individually composed essays and collaboratively written introductions and conclusions by student teams (p.271). The results of this study by Carr et al indicated that participants reported limited confidence in the ability of their peers to deliver agreed outcomes in the group project. They had limited initial knowledge of their groups because members were chosen by the tutors. One student remarked You dont know their level of grammar or English grasp, suggesting that reluctance to edit weak writing by a peer (may have impacted) group dynamics. Some students

10

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

(also) described tensions within their groups resulting from personality differences, a lack of common goals, and limited commitment to collaboration by some group members who were just not interested.It seems that resistance was directed at teamwork and that if group members were committed to working well together they would do so both face-to-face and online (p. 275). It was also reported that a small minority made no use of their wikis while another group of students used them only for compliance purposes to demonstrate an advanced or final draft online (p.276). This study highlights one of the potential problems which can arise from collaborative work on a wiki when members fail to see themselves as members of a community and therefore resist participating. This suggests that group dynamics is a key element in collaborative group work on a wiki which needs to be addressed to ensure the effectiveness of the experience of building communities of practice. According to DiPietro et al (2010), success of any course is highly correlative to group dynamics. While there is no recipe for the perfect balance, the academic department, instructor, and course participants must all come to the table with an attitude of transparency and collegiality (p.31). Since social networking technologies, especially Wikis, involve a large element of altruistic behavior (Cole, 2009, p146) the success or failure of a wiki project is determined by the level of cooperation within the group.

11

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

Disengagement with contributing to a wiki was also reported in a study by Cole (2009). The project initiated by the author sought to promote student engagement through the use of wikis on an undergraduate course. Cole reported that the Wiki had little impact on student engagement simply because the participating students chose not to post to the Wiki (p.146). The researcher, however, did point out that a significant level of curiosity expressed by students suggests that the fault lay not with the technology but with an unattractive course design (p.146). 3.3 Higher Order Thinking in Online Environments

In a survey of rubrics of online programmes, Penny and Murphy (2009) found that promoting thinking was a core goal of online instruction. In the survey, they found that the performance for cognitive core categories took precedent over other categories like mechanics and interactivity. They listed performance criteria categories assigned to the cognitive core category which appeared most often in rubrics and they encompassed elements like: Thinking and reflection Analysis, evaluation, interpretation, application and synthesis Quality and relevance Arguments Ideas, insights, connections and links Quality of content Feedback, incorporation, interweave and integration References and support Fox and MacKeough (2003) proposed a framework for analysing cognitive processes consisting 16 items which include inviting critique, reflecting on personal experience, evaluating personal positions, agreeing with ideas of others, expanding ideas of others, critiquing and challenging the ideas of others, negotiating and interpreting, defining, summarizing previous contributions, proposing action based on developed ideas.

12

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

A study conducted by Bomar (2009) indicated that participants on a wiki project were actively engaged in higher order thinking behaviours outlined by Fox and MacKeough (2003) above. In Bomars study, honours biology students were asked to read current research on cells with each student assigned to one part of the cells structure (p.40 ). After reading his or her individual articles, each student created a wiki page on the class wiki for the assigned cell structure. Wiki content included the name of the research articles and links. To complete the wiki page, students submitted articles summaries, and were responsible for researching and clarifying any terminology or potential comprehension questions that might arise from others (p.40). The findings of the study revealed that the students tackled more difficult research articles that the teacher assigned. Students produced strong summaries of the content, in-depth background about the topic and clear definitions. Discussion pages were thoughtful, and students responses to classmates questions helped their peer master content. The peer evaluation processes resulted in constructive and encouraging feedback. Students helped one another identify weak areas in their summaries, identify supporting content, and made writing and editing suggestions (p.40). The study by Bomar revealed that the cells wiki project provided many opportunities for complex cognitive processing which resulted in emergent knowledge (p.112), which is new knowledge inferred from existing knowledge. A person would not have been able to create this knowledge if she or he had not been internalizing information from work with the wiki. This emergent knowledge is a result of the collaboration and as such represents collaborative knowledge building which is more than mere knowledge sharing. In collaborative knowledge building something qualitatively new has developed (Cress & Kimmerle, 2008, p.112).

13

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

In another study, the building of content knowledge seemed to engage students in higher order thinking through problem-solving and epistemic tasks (p.123) which was suggested by Ohlsson (as cited in Fox & MacKeogh, 2003). Mak and Coniam (2008) investigated authentic writing through the use of wikis by Year 7 ESL learners in a secondary school in Hong Kong. The wikis were used as a collaborative writing platform to produce with minimal input and support from their teachers wiki content that describes the different facilities and features of their school. Over a period of two months, as an integral part of their ESL homework, groups of students designed and put together, through a series of successive drafts, a description of their secondary school which they had joined from primary school a few months previously (p.437). The students engagement in higher order thinking became evident as the study progressed. The researchers found that as students were working towards completing their project the reorganization of ideas begins to become more evident, especially when students started comparing their experiences on homework, tests and quizzes, and the teachers they had in primary and secondary school (p.447). It was also found that individuals content contributions lengthened as they grew in confidence and expanded or reorganise their original contributions (p.447). This suggests evidence of complex cognitive processing involving higher order thinking.

14

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

4.0

Methodology: In the present study, purposive sampling will be used to select participants for the

investigation. The 30 participants are from an established group of trainee teachers enrolled in a reading methodology class in their second year of an ESL teaching degree programme. The reading methodology class aims to helps students gain knowledge of the principles and practice of teaching reading to ESL students. Part of the syllabus of this course includes a section on different approaches in teaching reading strategies to students. In order to expose students to a range of methodologies in the teaching of reading strategies, they will be required to develop wiki pages around content about strategies like Reciprocal Teaching, SQ3R, Read-write-Pair-Share and others. Students will work in groups of four to build the content. These and discussions resulting from students interactions while building the wiki will be assessed. Therefore before the students begin the project, they will be given guidelines and a rubric adapted from Neuman, Webb and Cochranes (1995) categories of critical thinking in order to familiarize them with the thinking skills they will be expected to demonstrate. 4.1 Research Design:

This study will be a mixed study, in which qualitative and quantitative data will be collected, analyzed and presented. The qualitative aspect of this study will attempt to investigate the complexity of a phenomenon, which in this case, involves critical thinking displayed by students during online asynchronous discussions around the building of content for a wiki. The design will include elements of a qualitative case study because according to Baxter & Jack 2008, p.544), qualitative case studies enable researchers to answer how and why type

15

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

questions, while taking into consideration how a phenomenon is influenced by the context within which it is situated. Therefore they recommend a case study methodology because they assert that it provides opportunities to gain tremendous insight into a case (p.544). This method, they add, enables the researcher to gather data from a variety of sources and to converge the data to illuminate the case (p.544). Since the aim of this research is to gain deeper insight into how the process of participating in discussions help students to engage in critical thinking, elements of the qualitative case study method has been selected. The quantitative section of the study helps to provide a broad view of how the students perceptions either changed, remained constant or became more negative as a result of participating in the project. The analysis of the quantitative data will provide a wider perspective on the phenomena in contrast to the qualitative data which will provide deeper insights. 4.2 Data Collection and Methods of Data Analysis:

Qualitative and quantitative data will be collected for this project in order to gather evidence of critical thinking during online discussions and also during the development of the wiki content. Students experience of online discussions and participating in content building through the wiki will be collected through semi-structured interviews with 3 main respondents. The basic constructs for the semi structured interview will be based on the framework developed by Newman, Webb & Cochrane (1995). This framework was reviewed by Landis, Swain, Friehe & Coufal (2007), who found that interrater reliability was difficult to achieve using this framework.

16

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

However, there could still be several advantages in using the framework. This will be a useful way to construct interview questions and also narrow the focus the interviews. It will also be useful as preliminary categories to analyze the data from the transcripts. Data from the interview will be analyzed through content analysis. Common themes that emerge will be categorized, and relationships between the themes will be examined. In order to establish interrater reliability when coding and categorizing data, a Cohens Kappa test will be conducted.
Constructs Relevance Indicators R+ relevant statements Interview Questions When you were discussing, did you stray away from the topic and discuss something else? Did you manage to gain a better understanding of some issues related to reading strategies? What are some new ideas you introduced to the wiki content? Do you remember suggesting any new ideas when you were doing the project, like maybe some new way of doing something? In your discussions, did you ever brig up you own experiences? Did you every talk about your experiences teaching reading during teaching during teaching practice?

Importance

I+ important points/issues

Novelty: new information, ideas, solutions

Bringing outside knowledge or experience

Ambiguities: clarified or confused Linking ideas, interpretation

NP+ new problem-related information NI+ new ideas for discussion NS+ new solutions to problems NQ+ welcoming new ideas NL+ learner (students) brings new things in OE+ drawing on personal experience OC+ referring to course material OM+ using relevant outside material OK+ evidence of using previous knowledge OP+ course-related problems brought in (e.g., students identify problems from lectures and texts) OQ+ welcoming outside knowledge : AC+ clear, unambiguous statements A+ discussing ambiguities to clear them up L+ linking facts, ideas, and notions L+ generating new data from information collected

Critical assessment and Justification

C+ critical assessment/evaluation of own or others contributions CT+ tutor prompts for critical evaluation P+ relating possible solutions to familiar situations P+ discussing practical utility of new ideas

Practical utility (grounding)

Were there times when you were unsure of something? What did you do about it? Do you remember making some links with other ideas or information from your other classes? How is this experience going to be useful to you? Did you at any point say this is good/not so good. Did you say why? Did you provide any solutions or alternative suggestions? How will doing this project be useful to you?

Fig 1. Interview Questions Constructed from Framework to Measure Critical Thinking and Computer Supported Group Learning
Adapted from Newman, D. R. & Webb, D., and. Cochrane, C. (1995). A content analysis method to measure critical thinking and computer supported group learning, Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century, 3(2), 6768. In Landis, M, Swain, K. D., Friehe, M. J. & Coufal, K. L. (2007). Evaluating critical thinking in class and online: Comparison of the Newman Method and the Facione Rubric. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 28(3), 135143.

17

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

Evidence of critical thinking will also be collected through transcripts from the comments page of the wiki, which will provide qualitative data for analysis. The data from the transcripts gathered from the comments page of the wikis will be analyzed using conceptual framework for analyzing critical thinking discussions from Garrison et al (2001), which has been adapted by McLoughlin et al (2009). The method the researchers used to establish interrater reliability was Cohens kappa, for which they achieved 0.64 reliability. For purposes of the present research, a test for interrater reliability will be conducted, also using Cohens kappa.
Category Triggering Indicators Recognizing the problem Sense of puzzlement Integration Convergence among members Convergence within a single message Connecting ideas Synthesis Creating solutions Social-Cognitive Processes Presenting background information that culminates in a question Asking questions Messages that take discussions in new directions Unsubstantiated contradiction of previous ideas Many ideas/themes presented in one message Personal narratives/descriptions/facts/(not used as evidence Author explicitly characterizes message as exploration, eg. Does that seem right? Adds to established points but does not systematically defend/justify/develop Offers unsupported opinions Reference to previous message Followed by substantiated agreement eg. I agree because Building on, adding on to others ideas Justified, developed, defensive, yet tentative hypothesis

Exploration

Divergence within the online community Divergence within single message Information exchange Suggestions for consideration Brainstorming Leaps to conclusion

Resolution

Vicarious application to real world Testing solutions Defending solutions

Fig 2. Garrison et als Framework for Analyzing Critical Thinking and Cognitive Presence
Adapted from Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 723. In McLoughlin, D. & Mynard, J. (2009). An analysis of higher order thinking in online discussions. Innovations in Education and Teaching International,46(2), 147160.

18

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

Perceptions of improvement in knowledge, skills and confidence will be collected through retrospective pre-post questionnaires which will be administered before and after the project. The participants will be asked to indicate their responses on a seven-point rating scale. Since this questionnaire is not from an established source, it will be put through tests to ensure its reliability. The data from the pre-post retrospective questionnaire will be analysed using a dependent t-test to determine if there is a significant difference in students perceptions of their knowledge, skills and confidence as a result of participating in the project. 4.3 Sample Data Sheet.

This is a sample data sheet for measuring students perceptions of improvement after they have participated in the project. A t-test will be conducted to determine if the perceptions of improvement are significant.
Question1 Subject S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 Pre 3 4 2 4 3 Post 6 5 3 5 6 Diff D 3 1 1 1 3 D*D 9 1 1 1 9 Question 2 Pre 2 3 4 1 2 Post 5 6 4 4 5 Diff D 3 3 0 3 3 D*D 9 9 0 9 9

5.0

Conclusion: The findings of the studies are valuable because they potentially inform the design of

learning environments and classroom practices in order to maximize opportunities for students to engage meaningfully with content and other learners through building content for wiki. The studies suggests that there is a need to address issues related to collaborative work on wikis including technology challenges, building positive trusting and social relationships, and helping students to appreciate the value of contributing wikis. Twu (2009) has suggested that effective 19

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

instruction could engage students in a blog or online discussions that compare advantages and disadvantages of wiki instruction and traditional instruction, provide wiki tutorials, ask students to share previous wiki experiences (p.18). The benefits of a wiki should be discussed with students: content creations, revisions, and collaboration versus cooperation. Content creation should focus on synthesizing multiple viewpoints and ideas. Revision should be seen as ideas developing and emerging rather than corrections of entries (p18). In the social dimension, It is critical to encourage students to create and participate in a whole-class community, group community, or community outside of the class (p.18). Additionally, instructors must allow groups to take ample time to build positive and healthy communities (in order) to allow students to participate, and exercise a greater level of trust in others (p.20).

20

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

References:

Baxter, P. & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design And implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4). Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR13-4/baxter.pdf Bomar, S. (2009). A biology reading response wiki. Knowledge Quest, 37(4), 40-41. Carr, T., Morrison, A., Coxa, G., Deacon, A. (2007). Weathering wikis: Net-based learning meets political science in a South African university. Computers and Composition, 24, 266284. doi: 10.1016/j.compcom.2007.06.001. Cautinho, C. P. (2008). Web 2.0 tools in pre-service teacher education programs: An example from portugal. Retrieved from http://repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt/bitstream/1822/8467/1/Ecel%202008.pdf Cole, M. (2009). Using Wiki technology to support student engagement: Lessons from the trenches. Computers & Education, 52, 141146. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.07.003 Cress, U., & Kimmerle, J. (2008). A systemic and cognitive view on collaborative knowledge building with wikis. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 105122. DOI 10.1007/s11412-007-9035-z DiPietro, J. C., Drexler, W., Kennedy, K., Buraphadeja, V., Liu, F. & Dawson, K. (2010). Using wikis to collaboratively prepare for qualifying examinations: An example of implementation in an advanced graduate program. TechTrends, 54(1), 25-32. Fox, S. & MacKeogh, K. (2003). Can E-learning promote higher-order learning without tutor overload?. Open Learning, 18(2), 121-134. doi: 10.1080/0268051032000081833. Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 723. In McLoughlin, D. & Mynard, J., An analysis of higher order thinking in online discussions. Innovations in Education and Teaching International,46(2), 147160. DOI: 10.1080/14703290902843778. Higdon, H. & Topaz, C. (2009). Blogs and wikis as instructional tools: A social software adaptation of just-in-time teaching. College Teaching, 57(2), 105-110. Jacobs, J. (2003). Communication over exposure: the rise of blogs as a product of cybervoyeurism. In Wheeler, S., Yeomans, P., & Wheeler, D., The good, the bad and the wiki: Evaluating student-generated content for collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6), 987995. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00799.x 21

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L. & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill. In Wheeler, S., Yeomans, P., & Wheeler, D., The good, the bad and the wiki: Evaluating student-generated content for collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6), 987995. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00799.x Kasemvilas, S. & Olfman, L. (2009). Design alternatives for a mediawiki to support collaborative writing in higher education classes. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 6, 45-64. Knobel, M., & Lankshear, C. (2006). Discussing new literacies. Language Arts,84 (1), 7886. Mak, B. & Coniam, D. (2008). Using wikis to enhance and develop writing skills among secondary school students in Hong Kong. System, 36, 437455. doi:10.1016/j.system.2008.02.004. Matthew, K. I., Felvegi, E., Callaway, R.A. (2009). Wiki as a collaborative learning tool in a language arts methods class. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(1), 51 72 McLoughlin, D. & Mynard, J. (2009). An analysis of higher order thinking in online discussions Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 46(2), 147160. doi: 10.1080/14703290902843778 Newman, D. R. & Webb, D., and. Cochrane, C. (1995). A content analysis method to measure critical thinking and computer supported group learning, Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century, 3(2), 6768. In Landis, M, Swain, K. D., Friehe, M. J. & Coufal, K. L., Evaluating critical thinking in class and online: Comparison of the Newman Method and the Facione Rubric. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 28(3), 135143. Ohlsson, S. (1995) Learning to do and learning to understand: a lesson and challenge for cognitive modeling, in Reimann, P. & Spada, H. (Ed) Learning in Humans and Machines: towards an interdisciplinary learning science. London: Pergamon. In Fox, S. & MacKeogh, K., Can E-learning promote higher-order learning without tutor overload? Open Learning, 18(2), 121-134. doi: 10.1080/0268051032000081833. Penny, L. & Murphy, E. (2009). Rubrics for designing and evaluating online asynchronous Discussions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(5), 804820. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00895.xl.

22

Joy Quah Guiding Question: How can contributing to a wiki provide a meaningful context for pre-service teachers to engage socially and cognitively in an online environment?

Schwab, R. (2000). Technology and the changing roles and responsibilities of teacher educators. In Cautinho, C. P., Web 2.0 tools in pre-service teacher education programs: An example from Portugal. Retrieved from http://repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt/bitstream/1822/8467/1/Ecel%202008.pdf Twu, H. (2009). Effective wiki strategies to support high-context culture learners. TechTrends, 53(5), 16-21. UNESCO (2008). ICT competency standards for teachers. In Cautinho, C. P., Web 2.0 tools in pre-service teacher education programs: An example from Portugal. Retrieved from http://repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt/bitstream/1822/8467/1/Ecel%202008.pdf Wheeler, S., Yeomans, P., & Wheeler, D. (2008).The good, the bad and the wiki: Evaluating student-generated content for collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6), 987995. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00799.x. Woodbridge, J. (2004). Technology Integration as a Transforming Teaching Strategy. In Cautinho, C. P., Web 2.0 tools in pre-service teacher education programs: An example from Portugal. Retrieved from http://repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt/bitstream/1822/8467/1/Ecel%202008.pdf

23