ASSESSMENT OF JOURNALISM STUDENTS’ WRITING PROJECTS COMPLETED INDIVIDUALLY AND IN COLLABORATION

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.178843

Keywords:

journalistic education; collaboration; collaborative writing; individual writing; group work; prewriting group discussion; writing task

Abstract

The authors discuss the issues and benefits of collaborative writing in journalistic education, comparing the texts written by students in different conditions: in group collaboration, individually after prewriting group discussion, and individually without any collaboration. We used a survey for collecting both quantitative and qualitative data. The participants were 21 second year and 15 third-year students, who wrote 18 fiction stories for preschool children (3 were written in the collaborative writing groups of 4, where the students were allowed to choose partners for small groups; 3 in the collaborative writing groups of 4, where the students were not allowed to choose partners; 6 after prewriting group discussion, and 6 without any collaboration). 12 six-year students evaluated delivered texts. We also interviewed 12 teachers of the Department of Publishing and Editing about the collaborative writing tasks at the meeting of the Department. Teachers’ interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed. The students and teachers expressed positive attitudes towards collaborative writing, that contributes to students’ learning outcomes and prepare them for teamwork. The highest score got the texts written individually after the prewriting discussion. The stories written by the students who were allowed to choose partners in a group work gained higher scores than texts prepared in randomly created groups. The participants in the self-selected conditions reported that they enjoyed а high level of participation, sharing the workload and supportive behaviour. We also observed the evidences of unequal participation of students in collaboration in small groups where the partners were not familiar. The lowest average score got the texts written with no collaboration. So, we proved that there is a need for implementing prewriting group discussions in the learning process. It is necessary to differentiate the role of each student in collaborative writing to evaluate individual results correctly.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Svitlana Fiialka, National Technical University of Ukraine “Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute”

PhD, Assoc.Prof., the Department of Publishing and Editing

Olga Trishchuk, National Technical University of Ukraine "Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute"

Head of the Department of Publishing and Editing, Doctor of Social Communications, Professor

Nadija Figol, National Technical University of Ukraine "Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute"

PhD, Assoc.Prof., the Department of Publishing and Editing

Tetiana Faichuk, O. O. Potebnia Institute of Linguistics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

PhD, Senior Researcher of the Department of Slavic Languages

References

  1. Ayodele, V., Akinkurolere, S., Ariyo, K., Mahmud, O., & Abuya, E. (2017). The teaching of essays, articles and letter writing: cooperative teaching approach. Asian Research Journal of Arts & Social Sciences, 4(2), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.9734/ARJASS/2017/35161
  2. Baker, T., & Clark, J. (2010). Cooperative learning – a double‐edged sword: a cooperative learning model for use with diverse student groups. Intercultural Education, 21(3), 257-268. https://doi:10.1080/14675981003760440
    |
  3. Baker, D., Day, R., & Salas. E. (2006). Teamwork as an Essential Component of High-Reliability Organizations. Health Research and Educational Trust, 41, 1576–1598. https://doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00566.x
    |
  4. Basta, J. (2011). The role of the communicative approach and cooperative learning in higher education. Linguistics and Literature, 9, 125-143. Retrieved 10 September 2019 from http://facta.junis.ni.ac.rs/lal/lal201102/lal201102-06.pdf
  5. Bruffee, K. (2007). A short course in writing: Composition, collaborative learning, and constructive reading (Fourth edition.). New York: Pearson Longman.
  6. Chen, W., & Yu, S. (2019). A longitudinal case study of changes in students’ attitudes, participation, and learning in collaborative writing. System, 82, 83-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.03.005
  7. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. SAGE
  8. Diezmann, C. (2005). Supervision and scholarly writing: writing to learn to write. Reflective Practice, 6(4), 443–457. https://doi:10.1080/14623940500300491
  9. Dowell, N., Nixon, T., & Graesser, A. (2018). Group communication analysis: A computational linguistics approach for detecting sociocognitive roles in multiparty interactions. Behavior Research Methods, 51, 1007–1041. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1102-z
    |
  10. Fernandez Dobao, A. (2012). Collaborative writing tasks in the L2 classroom: Comparing group, pair, and individual work. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 40-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.12.002
    |
  11. Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P., & Kanselaar, G. (2009). Influence of group member familiarity on online collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behaviour, 25, 161-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.08.010
  12. Hashem, A. (2018). The Effectiveness of Using Online Blogging for Students' Individual and Group Writing. International Education Studies, 11(1), 44-51. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1165114
  13. Hei, M., Strijbos, J., Sjoer, E., & Admiraal, W. (2014). Collaborative learning in higher education: lecturers’ practices and beliefs. Research Papers in Education, 30(2), 232-247. https://doi:10.1080/02671522.2014.908407
    |
  14. Inoshita, A., Garland, K., & Sims, K. (2019). English Composition: connect, collaborate, communicate. USA: University of Hawai`i.
  15. Gardner, M. (2017). Writing together for academic publication as a youth-adult PAR team: moving from distance and distaste towards transformative engagement. Educational Action Research, 26 (2), 205-219. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2017.1329093
    |
  16. Kellogg, R. (1990). Effectiveness of prewriting strategies as a function of task demands. The American Journal of Psychology, 103, 327-342. https://doi.org/10.2307/1423213
  17. Kozlov, M., & Große, C. (2016). Online collaborative learning in dyads: effects of knowledge distribution and awareness. Computers in Human Behavior, 59, 389-401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.01.043
  18. Lamminpää, J., & Vesterinen, V. (2018). The use of humour during a collaborative inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 40 (14), 1718-1735. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1508926
    |
  19. Le, H., Janssen, J., & Wubbels, T. (2017). Collaborative learning practices: teacher and student perceived obstacles to effective student collaboration. Cambridge Journal of Education, 48(1), 103-122. https://doi:10.1080/0305764x.2016.1259389
    |
  20. Li, M., & Kim, D. (2016). One wiki, two groups: Dynamic interactions across ESL collaborative writing tasks. Journal of Second Language Writing, 31, 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2016.01.002
  21. Li, M. (2018). Computer-mediated collaborative writing in L2 contexts: an analysis of empirical research. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(8). 882-904. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1465981
    |
  22. McDonough, K., & García Fuentes, C. (2015). Writing to learn language: The effect of writing task on Colombian EFL learners' language use. TESL Canada Journal, 32(2), 67-79. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v32i2.1208
  23. Mozaffari, S. (2017). Comparing student-selected and teacher-assigned pairs on collaborative writing. Language Teaching Research, 21(4), 496-516. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816641703
    |
  24. Prinsley, R., & Baranyai, K. (2015). STEM Skills in the Workforce: What Do Employers Want? Canberra: Australian Government Chief Scientist.
  25. Retnowati, E., Ayres, P., & Sweller, J. (2018). Collaborative learning effects when students have complete or incomplete knowledge. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 32 (6), 681-692. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3444
    |
  26. Riebe, L., Girardi, A., & Whitsed, C. (2016). A Systematic literature review of teamwork pedagogy in higher education. Small Group Research, 47 (6), 619-664. https://doi:10.1177/1046496416665221
  27. Roseth, C., Johnson, D. & Johnson. R. (2008). Promoting early adolescents’ achievement and peer relationships: the effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 223-246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.2.223
    | |
  28. Schnaubert, L., & Bodemer, D. (2019). Providing different types of group awareness information to guide collaborative learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(1), 7-51 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9293-y
    |
  29. Storch, N. (2011). Collaborative writing in L2 contexts: processes, outcomes and future directions’. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 275-288. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190511000079
  30. Storch, N. (2013). Collaborative writing in L2 classrooms. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
    |
  31. Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, 153-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2005.05.002
    |
  32. Wahyudi, D., Hilaluddi, H., & Ader, L. (2018). The Impact of Collaborative Learning on Students’ Writing Ability and Their Motivation in Writing at MTs Negeri 1 Konawe. Journal of Language Education and Educational Technology, 3 (1). http://dx.doi.org/10.33772/jleet.v3i1.6705
  33. Wigglesworth, G., & Storch, N. (2009). Pair versus individual writing: Effects on fluency, complexity and accuracy. Language Testing, 26, 445-466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532209104670
    |
  34. Wilson, L., Ho, S., & Brookes, R. (2017). Student perceptions of teamwork within assessment tasks in undergraduate science degrees. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(5), 786-799. https://doi:10.1080/02602938.2017.1409334
    |
  35. Zheng, Y., Li, C., Liu, S., & Lu, W. (2018). An improved genetic approach for composing optimal collaborative learning groups. Knowledge-Based Systems, 139, 214-225. https://doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2017.10.022

Downloads

Published

2021-12-29

How to Cite

Fiialka, S. ., Trishchuk, O. ., Figol, N. ., & Faichuk, T. . (2021). ASSESSMENT OF JOURNALISM STUDENTS’ WRITING PROJECTS COMPLETED INDIVIDUALLY AND IN COLLABORATION. Advanced Education, 8(19), 114–122. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.178843

Issue

2021: Issue 19

Section

ARTICLES

License

Copyright (c) 2021 Svitlana Fiialka, Olga Trishchuk, Nadija Figol, Tetiana Faichuk

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

    1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).