Using a Wiki to Scaffold Primary-School Using a Wiki to Scaffold Primary-School Students’ Collaborative WritingStudents’ Collaborative Writing

JOURNAL JOURNAL CRITIQUECRITIQUE

Analyzed By:Analyzed By: Norzie Khamis [MP101430] Norzie Khamis [MP101430]

Fatimah Hishamuddin [MP091133]Fatimah Hishamuddin [MP091133] Nurul Shafiza [MP101337]Nurul Shafiza [MP101337]

Evaluated by:Evaluated by: Prof. Dr. Baharuddin bin Aris Prof. Dr. Baharuddin bin Aris

THE JOURNAL:THE JOURNAL:

Written by:Written by:

Woo, M., Chu, S., Ho, A., & Li, X. (2011). Woo, M., Chu, S., Ho, A., & Li, X. (2011).

Taken from:Taken from:Educational Technology & SocietyEducational Technology & Society, , 14 14 (1), 43–54.(1), 43–54.

TITLETITLE

COMMENT : COMMENT : SHOULDSHOULD : :

Short (9 wordsShort (9 words))

UnclearUnclear- Who?- Who?- What?

9 words9 words

Too general - could misleadToo general - could mislead Reflect its contentReflect its content

Short (< 15 words)Short (< 15 words)

Specific yet catchySpecific yet catchy

suggestionsuggestion

Perhaps, a better title would be:Perhaps, a better title would be:

The Use of Wiki in Scaffolding EnglishThe Use of Wiki in Scaffolding English Collaborative Writing Amongst Collaborative Writing Amongst

Primary-School L2 LearnersPrimary-School L2 Learners

abstractabstractBackground Purpose Results Conclusion

Method?

146 words background

Aim/purpose

Methods

results

conclusion

1 paragraph, <300 words

suggestion

The method could have been written such as:

Data were collected qualitatively and quantitatively from aData were collected qualitatively and quantitatively from aclassroom of 38 primary-five students and an English teacherclassroom of 38 primary-five students and an English teachervia questionnaire, a semi-structured interview with the teacher, via questionnaire, a semi-structured interview with the teacher, focus-group discussion with selected students and also from focus-group discussion with selected students and also from students’ editing information that were recorded in the wiki students’ editing information that were recorded in the wiki system.system.

(43 words)(43 words)

INTRODUCTIONProblem Statement Aims

Term Definition

Objectives

Relevant previous study

Terms definition

Relevant previous study

Research Questions

Relevant previous study

Underlying Theories

COMMENT:COMMENT:

Term Definition

Relevant previous study

Clear

Well Supported

Linked with previous study

Limitation of the study?

Learning outcomes?

Adequately organised

CommentsThis research clearly stated how the data is collected – qualitative and quantitativeThe participants were chosen by purposeful sampling. Researchers also stated the reason of choosing those participants.

METHODOLOGYMETHODOLOGY

CommentsIn this research, the procedure to collect the data is through intervention program. Researchers clearly stated how the intervention program was held.

Research instruments

CommentsThis research used multiple source of evidence. All the research instruments are well organized and useful in collecting and analysing the data.

CommentsThe data were analysed very well and sorted it through types of revision. Then it were categorized using an adapted version of Mak and Coniam’ s (2008). The researcher had analysing the data thoroughly.

Data analysis

FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

CONNECTION WITH PREVIOUS STUDYSTUDENTS RESPONSE FROM OPEN ENDED QUESTIONS

FINDINGS & FINDINGS & DISCUSSIONSDISCUSSIONS

DIFFERENT AMOUNT OF THE STUDENTS

Comment:The table is well presented and following the basic thesis manual:-the caption is positioned on top of the table- in the centre because it is a single line-in the journal, this table is only be presented after it is being mentioned for the first time.

-Clearly states the activities on wiki platform-The caption is well placed (centre; bottom of the figure)-Follow the thesis manual

-the caption is at the right place and summarize the types of revisionvery well, it could be better if it is being done in a table with complete rows and column instead of hanging table like so

STUDENTS RESPONSE FROM WIKI’S

TEACHER’S RESPONSE FROM OPEN ENDED QUESTIONS

PROBLEMS AMONGST THE STUDENTS

FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

IMPLICATION OF THE STUDYSUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE

RESEARCH

CONCLUSION & IMPLICATIONSCONCLUSION & IMPLICATIONS

CONCLUSION OF THE STUDY

32 REFERENCES32 REFERENCES

COMPILED - HARVARD SYSTEMCOMPILED - HARVARD SYSTEM7 REFERENCES COMPARATIVELY OLD7 REFERENCES COMPARATIVELY OLD

That’s A WRAP !That’s A WRAP !

• The journal is, overall, adequately organised and The journal is, overall, adequately organised and clearly explained as it is well supported with previous clearly explained as it is well supported with previous studies.studies.

• It follows the basic guideline of a research writing.It follows the basic guideline of a research writing.

• In the conclusion part, this journal further suggests In the conclusion part, this journal further suggests some recommendation for future studies.some recommendation for future studies.

• While the study has merit, tWhile the study has merit, the power of the study  he power of the study  needs to be increased by obtaining a larger sample needs to be increased by obtaining a larger sample

size.  However, this research definitely makes its size.  However, this research definitely makes its contribution to its relevant fieldcontribution to its relevant field..

FROM ,ILT LADIES…FROM ,ILT LADIES…

• NORZIENORZIE

• FATIMAHFATIMAH

• NURULSHAFIZANURULSHAFIZA