Cover not available
Part of
L2 Collaborative Writing in Diverse Learning Contexts
Edited by Mimi Li and Meixiu Zhang
[Language Learning & Language Teaching 59] 2023
► pp. 130–154

Chapter 6
Online collaborative L2 writing

Using synchronous and asynchronous tools with Arabic as a second language learners

| King Saud University
| University of Melbourne

Despite growing interest in computer-mediated collaborative writing (CMCW), very few studies have considered the effects of using a range of digital tools on learners’ behaviour. Our longitudinal study (15 weeks), conducted with Arabic as a second language learners in Saudi Arabia, investigated how learners engage in CMCW tasks using Google Docs and WhatsApp. The 31 participants formed eight dyads and five triads to complete four tasks. We analysed discussions and comments derived from Google docs and WhatsApp chats for patterns of interaction and use of online tools. Of five patterns of interaction identified, cooperative and collaborative predominated. Learners used the two tools simultaneously to foster collaboration. The findings provide new insights into CMCW tasks in an underexplored L2 learning context.

Keywords: collaborative writing, Google Docs, WhatsApp, patterns of interaction, Arabic learners
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Participants
  • Tasks and tools
  • Data collection
  • Data analysis
    • Coding data for patterns of interaction
    • Coding for use of online tools
  • Findings
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 17 August 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.59.06alm
References
Abrams, Z.
(2019) Collaborative writing and text quality in Google Docs. Language Learning & Technology, 23(2), 22–42.Google Scholar
Almalki, H.
(2021) Investigating online collaborative writing among Arabic L2 students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Melbourne.
Arnold, N., Ducate, L., & Kost, C.
(2012) Collaboration or cooperation? Analyzing group dynamics and revision processes in wikis. CALICO Journal, 29(3), 431–448. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aufa, F., & Storch, N.
(2021) Learner interaction in blended collaborative L2 writing activities. In M. P. García Mayo (Ed.), Working collaboratively in second/foreign language learning (pp. 151–176). De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cho, H. Y.
(2017) Synchronous web-based collaborative writing: Factors mediating interaction among second-language writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 37, 37–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018) Synchronous small-group collaborative writing via web-based word processing: What facilitates or constrains learners to achieve their goals in summary reports? (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Toronto.
Donato, R.
(1994) Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 33–56). Ablex.Google Scholar
Elabdali, R., & Arnold, N.
(2020) Group dynamics across interaction modes in L2 collaborative wiki writing. Computers and Composition, 58, 102607. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elola, I., & Oskoz, A.
(2010) Collaborative writing: Fostering foreign language and writing conventions development. Language Learning & Technology, 14, 51–71.Google Scholar
Fernandez-Dobao, A.
(2016) Peer interaction and learning: A focus on the silent learner. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning. Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 33–62). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hsu, H. C.
(2019) Wiki-mediated collaboration and its association with L2 writing development: An exploratory study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(8), 945–967. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kessler, G.
(2009) Student-initiated attention to form in wiki-based collaborative writing. Language Learning & Technology, 13(1), 79–95.Google Scholar
Kessler, G., & 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, 23(1), 41–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kessler, G., Bikowski, D., & Boggs, J.
(2012) Collaborative writing among second language learners in academic web-based projects. Language Learning & Technology, 16(1), 91–109.Google Scholar
Kim, Y.
(2017) The nature of peer interaction: Role relationships formed in pair interaction. 영어교육: English Teaching, 72(1), 131–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuteeva, M.
(2011) Wikis and academic writing: Changing the writer–reader relationship. English for Specific Purposes, 30(1), 44–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, M.
(2013) Individual novices and collective experts: Collective scaffolding in wiki-based small group writing. System, 41(3), 752–769. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, M., & Kim, D.
(2016) One wiki, two groups: Dynamic interactions across ESL collaborative writing tasks. Journal of Second Language Writing, 31, 25–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, M., & Zhu, W.
(2017a) Good or bad collaborative wiki writing: Exploring links between group interactions and writing products. Journal of Second Language Writing, 35, 38–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017b) Explaining dynamic interactions in wiki-based collaborative writing. Language Learning and Technology, 21(2), 96–120.Google Scholar
Mabrito, M.
(2006) A study of synchronous versus asynchronous collaboration in an online business writing class. The American Journal of Distance Education, 20(2), 93–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oskoz, A., & Elola, I.
(2012) Understanding the impact of social tools in the FL writing classroom: Activity theory at work. In G. Kessler, A. Oskoz, & I. Elola (Eds.), Technology across writing contexts and tasks (pp. 131–153). CALICO.Google Scholar
Rouhshad, A., & Storch, N.
(2016) A focus on mode: Patterns of interaction in face-to-face and computer-mediated modes. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning (pp. 267–290). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Storch, N.
(2001) How collaborative is pair work? ESL tertiary students composing in pairs. Language Teaching Research, 5(1), 29–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002) Patterns of interaction in ESL Pairwork. Language Learning, 52, 119–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013) Collaborative writing in L2 classrooms. Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2021) Collaborative writing: Promoting languaging among language learners. In M. P. García Mayo (Ed.) Working collaboratively in second/foreign language learning (pp. 13–34). De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swain, M.
(2006) Languaging, agency and collaboration in advanced second language proficiency. In H. Byrnes (ED.), Advanced language learning: The contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky (pp. 95–108). Continuum.Google Scholar
Tan, L., Wigglesworth, G., & Storch, N.
(2010) Pair interactions and mode of communication: Comparing face-to-face and computer mediated communication. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 33(3), 1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Timmis, S.
(2012) Constant companions: Instant messaging conversations as sustainable supportive study structures amongst undergraduate peers. Computers & Education, 59(1), 3–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, L.
(2019) The impact of computer-mediated contexts on interaction pattern of ESL learners in collaborative writing. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 28(5), 547–562. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Warschauer, M., & Grimes, D.
(2007) Audience, authorship, and artifact: The emergent semiotics of Web 2.0. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 27, 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhai, M.
(2021) Collaborative writing in a Chinese as a foreign language classroom: Learners’ perceptions and motivations. Journal of Second Language Writing, 53. 100836. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhang, M., Gibbons, J., & Li, M.
(2021) Computer-mediated collaborative writing in L2 classrooms: A systematic review. Journal of Second Language Writing, 54. 100854. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhao, H., Sullivan, K. P. H., & Mellenius, I.
(2014) Participation, interaction and social presence: An exploratory study of collaboration in online peer review groups. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(5), 807–819. DOI logoGoogle Scholar