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. 155–180

Chapter 7
Peer interaction in collaborative L2 writing across synchronous and asynchronous CMC modes

| Chung Yuan Christian University

This study examined the patterns and focus of peer interaction in collaborative L2 writing across text-based synchronous and asynchronous computer-mediated communication (SCMC and ACMC). Participants comprised 22 college EFL learners, who completed two Google-Docs-based collaborative expository writing tasks via text-based SCMC or text-based ACMC. Google Docs comments and history were analyzed. The predominant interaction pattern in text-based SCMC was expert/novice, followed by the collaborative pattern. In text-based ACMC, dominant/dominant, dominant/passive, and dominant/withdrawn were the predominant patterns. During peer interaction, learners focused on content and language rather than on organization, regardless of modality. In text-based SCMC, learners focused equally on language and content. In text-based ACMC, learners focused more on language than on content.

Keywords: asynchronous computer-mediated communication, collaborative writing, peer interaction, synchronous computer-mediated communication
Article outline
  • Introduction
    • Patterns of peer interaction in computer-mediated L2 CW
    • The focus of peer interaction in computer-mediated L2 CW
    • Patterns and focus of peer interaction in L2 CW across modalities
  • The study
  • Methodology
    • Participants
    • Writing tasks
    • Procedure
  • Data coding and analyzing
    • Patterns of peer interaction
    • Collaborative dialogue
    • Exit questionnaire
  • Results
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 17 August 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.59.07hsu
References
Arnold, N., Ducate, L., & Kost, C.
(2012) Collaboration or cooperation? Analyzing group dynamics and revision processes in wikis. CALICO Journal, 29, 431–448. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aydin, Z., & Yildiz, S.
(2014) Using wikis to promote collaborative EFL writing. Language Learning & Technology, 18(1), 160–180.Google Scholar
Bradley, L., Lindström, B., & Rystedt, H.
(2010) Rationalities of collaboration for language learning in a wiki. ReCALL, 22(2), 247–256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Donato, R.
(1994) Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In J. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 33–56). Ablex.Google Scholar
Elola, I., & Oskoz, A.
(2010) Collaborative writing: Fostering foreign language and writing conventions development. Language Learning & Technology, 14(3), 51–71.Google Scholar
Fujii, A., Ziegler, N., & Mackey, A.
(2016) Peer interaction and metacognitive instruction in the EFL classroom. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda. (pp. 63–89). 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
(2022) Peer interaction and attention to form in web-based synchronous and asynchronous L2 collaborative writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning. 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
Kim, Y., & McDonough, K.
(2011) Using pretask modelling to encourage collaborative language learning opportunities. Language Teaching Research, 15(2), 183–199. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kost, C.
(2011) Investigating writing strategies and revision behavior in collaborative wiki projects. CALICO Journal, 28(3), 606–620. 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.
(2013) Patterns of computer-mediated interaction in small writing groups using wikis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(1), 61–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017a) Explaining dynamic interactions in wiki-based collaborative writing. Language Learning & Technology, 21(2), 96–120.Google Scholar
(2017b) 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
McDonough, K., De Vleeschauwer, J., & Crawford, W. J.
(2019) Exploring the benefits of collaborative prewriting in a Thai EFL context. Language Teaching Research, 23(6), 685–701. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McDonough, K., & Mackey, A.
(Eds.) (2013) Second language interaction in diverse educational contexts. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Neumann, H., & McDonough, K.
(2015) Exploring student interaction during collaborative prewriting discussion and its relationship to L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 27, 84–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ortega, L.
(2009) Interaction and attention to form in L2 text-based computer-mediated communication. In A. Mackey & C. Polio (Eds.), Multiple perspectives on interaction: Second language research in honor of Susan M. Gass (pp. 226–253). Routledge.Google Scholar
Rouhshad, A., & Storch, N.
(2016) A focus on mode: Patterns of interaction in face-to-face and computer-mediated contexts. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 267–289). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sato, M.
(2017) Interaction mindsets, interactional behaviors, and L2 development: An affective-social-cognitive model. Language Learning, 67(2), 249–283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sato, M., & Ballinger, S.
(2012) Raising language awareness in peer interaction: A cross-context, cross-methodology examination. Language Awareness, 21, 157–179. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(Eds.) (2016) Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Storch, N.
(1998) A classroom-based study: Insights from a collaborative text reconstruction task. ELT Journal, 52, 291–300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1999) Are two heads better than one? Pair work and grammatical accuracy. System, 27, 363–374. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002) Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning, 52(1), 119–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013) Collaborative writing in L2 classrooms. Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019) Collaborative writing. Language Teaching, 52(1), 40–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swain, M.
(1995) Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principles and practice in the study of language (pp. 125–144). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2000) The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97–114). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2006) Languaging, agency, and collaboration in advanced second language proficiency. In H. Byrnes (Ed.), Advanced language learning: The contributions of Halliday and Vygotsky (pp. 95–108). Continuum.Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S.
(1998) Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 320–337. DOI logoGoogle 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, 1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, L.
(2019) The impact of computer-mediated contexts on interaction patterns of ESL learners in collaborative writing. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 28(5), 547–562. DOI logoGoogle Scholar