iSean

profetic.org has an interesting analysis of wikis and their fit into education here. the focus is on the university context, but much of the thinking is more universal in nature. i am not going to get too deeply involved in an analysis of what they have written, but i am curious about some things. first, nearly every benefit described (e.g., maximize interplay, democratic, real time, collaboration) could also be applied to other tools. i only bring this up because my personal experience trying to use a wiki in education was not that pleasant. and, i admit that i probably went into it with the wrong attitude . . . but, i have done similar work to what i tried with the wiki and found better success using Google Docs. just look at these help files pertaining to using Docs for collaborative writing. Google Docs has it all and they are about as easy to use as MS Word . . . in fact, students can start in Word and transfer writing into Docs fairly seamlessly. For example, look at the tool for commenting on a collaborative piece:

Comments are a handy way of inserting notes alongside your regular document content. People added as viewers and as collaborators will be able to see any comments. Each comment is automatically stamped with your username and the date, and can be invaluable for communicating with collaborators about specific parts of the document, as well as making notes about changes you’ve made or would like to make. When you publish your document as a web page, post it to your blog, or print it, the comments will disappear.

but that feature in Google Docs also addresses one of the pitfalls mentioned for wikis:

Since wiki authors are typically anonymous; unless the group is extremely limited and/or identification of textual input is imposed, one will not normally know who the author is. Thus, unlike threaded discussions in which the writer is identified, it is usually impossible to identity contributions to a wiki (Schwartz et al, 2004).

Such anonymity poses enormous questions for academic institutions wherein rewards (grades, bursaries, grants, publications and hirings) are still typically based on individual contributions and efforts. However, it is possible to insist upon authorial identification within any given wiki. But the advantages of “non-identifiable authorship” may outweigh the disadvantages in certain academic sectors. Garcia & Steinmueller (2003) outline three potential advantages:

1) an intensification and diversification of non-ownership/non-proprietary models; 2) an emergence of self/other identification hybrids; and 3) the proliferation of consumer/producer horizontal assemblages, reflecting the multi-authored character of information goods produced through collaborations.

granted, an instructor could set up the wikis so that everyone has to register and so that no anonymous comments are allowed. but, Google Docs keeps track of every comment and edit and revision, etc. in a way that makes it very easy for instructors to evaluate the contributions, etc. i know i sound like an advertisement, but i really do believe that Google Docs will make life easier for many teachers who are trying to implement collaborative writing in their classes. plus, Google Docs don’t require MySQL space or server issues, etc. — they just work.

Technorati Tags: ed tech, Google, Google Docs, wikis, technology in education