Exploring the impact of online peer-editing using Google Docs on EFL learners’ academic writing skills: a mixed methods study

References

• Apple, K. J., Reis-Bergan, M., Adams, A. H., & Saunders, G. (2011). Online tools to promote student collaboration. In D. S. Dunn, J. H. Wilson, J. Freeman, & J. R. Stowell (Eds.), Getting connected: Best practices for technology enhanced teaching and learning in high education (pp. 239–252). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Blair, R. M. (2006). Beyond crossroads: Implementing mathematics standards in the first two years of college. Memphis, TN: American Mathematical Association of Two-Year Colleges.
   Google Scholar
• Blau, I., & Caspi, A. (2009). Sharing and collaborating with Google Docs: The influence of psychological ownership, responsibility, and student's attitudes on outcome quality. In E. T. Bastiaens (Ed.), Proceedings of the World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 3329–3335). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
   Google Scholar
• Bloch, J. (2008). Technologies in the second language composition classroom. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bower, M., & Richards, D. (2006). Collaborative learning: Some possibilities and limitations for students and teachers. Paper presented at the 23rd Annual Ascilite Conference: Who's Learning? Whose Technology? Sydney.
   Google Scholar
• Boyatzis, R. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Brodahl, C., Hadjerrouit, S., & Hansen, N. K. (2011). Collaborative writing with web 2.0 technologies: Education students’ perceptions. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 10, 73–103.
   Google Scholar
• Buss, K., & Karnowski, L. (2000). Reading and writing literary genres. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
   Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K. (1994). The grounded theory method: An explication and interpretation. In B. Glaser (Ed.), More grounded theory methodology (pp. 95–115). Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, T. (2016). Technology-supported peer feedback in ESL/EFL writing classes: A research synthesis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(2), 365–397.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chou, P. N., & Chen, H. H. (2008). Engagement in online collaborative learning: A case study using a web 2.0 tool. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4(4), 574–582.
   Google Scholar
• Chu, S. K. W., & Kennedy, D. M. (2011). Using online collaborative tools for groups to co-construct knowledge. Online Information Review, 35(4), 581–597.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chu, S., Kennedy, D., & Mak, M. (2009). MediaWiki and Google Docs as online collaborative tools for group project co-construction. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Management, (pp. 1–14). Hong Kong. Dec 3-4, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Conner, A. (2000). Motivating middle school students to revise and edit. English Journal, 90, 72–79.
   Google Scholar
• Conner, N. (2008). Google Apps: The missing manual. Sebastopol, CA: O'Relly Media.
   Google Scholar
• Coyle, J. E. Jr. (2007). Wikis in the college classroom: A comparative study of online and face-to-face group collaboration at a private liberal arts university. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kent State University College and Graduate School of Education, Health and Human Services. Retrieved from https://etd.ohiolink.edu/. http://www.ohiolink.edu/etd/sendpdf.cgi/Coyle,%20James%20E.,%20Jr..pdf?acc_num=kent1175518380
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M., & Hanson, W. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook on mixed methods in the behavioral and social sciences (pp. 209–240). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• 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). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Godwin-Jones, R. (2008). Emerging technologies web-writing 2.0: Enabling, documenting, and assessing writing online. Language Learning & Technology, 12(2), 7–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goold, A., Coldwell, J., & Craig, A. (2010). An examination of the role of the e-tutor. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(5), 704–716.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gralla, P. (2010 , April 23). Google Docs better; ready to take on office. Computerworld. Retrieved from http://www.cio.com.au/article/344145/google_docs_better_ready_take_office
   Google Scholar
• Guerra, A., & Bota, J. (2011). Collaborative writing using Google Docs: Insights from writing projects in intermediate French classes. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies, Barcelona, Spain (pp. 6147–6154, Retrieved from https://library.iated.org/publications/EDULEARN11).
   Google Scholar
• Hedin, B. (2012). Peer feedback in academic writing using Google Docs. In Proceedings of LTHs 7:e Pedagogiska Inspirationskonferens, (pp, 1–3). Lund.
   Google Scholar
• Holliman, R., & Scanlon, E. (2006). Investigating cooperation and collaboration in near synchronous computer mediated conferences. Computers & Education, 46(3), 322–335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huhta, A., Luoma, S., Oscarson, M., Sajavaara, K., Takala, S., & Teasdale, A. (2002). DIALANG: A diagnostic language assessment system for learners. In J. C. Alderson (Ed.), Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Case studies (pp. 130–145). Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
   Google Scholar
• Ishtaiwa, F. F., & Aburezeq, I. M. (2015). The impact of Google Docs on student collaboration: A UAE case study. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 7, 85–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kastman-Breuch, L. (2004). Virtual peerreview: Teaching and learning about writing in online environments. New York, NY: SUNY Press.
   Google 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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kieser, A. L., & Golden, F. O. (2009). Using online office applications. Distance Learning, 6(1), 41–46.
   Google Scholar
• Koch, M. (2010). Utilizing emergent web-based software tools as an effective method for increasing collaboration and knowledge sharing in collocated student design teams (Unpublished master's thesis). Eugene: University of Oregon.
   Google Scholar
• Kowal, M., & Swain, M. (1994). Using collaborative language production tasks to promote students’ language awareness. Language Awareness, 3(2), 73–93.
   Google Scholar
• Lagana, J. R. (1972). The development, implementation and evaluation of a model for teaching composition which utilizes individualized learning and peer grouping ( Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh.
   Google Scholar
• Lamy, M., & Hampel, R. (2007). Online communication in language learning and teaching. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Lazonder, A. W. (2005). Do two heads search better than one? Effects of student collaboration on web search behaviour and search outcomes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), 465–475.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, W. C., & Yang, S. C. (2013). Exploring the roles of Google.doc and peer e-tutors in English writing. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 12(1), 79–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, J., & Sadler, R. W. (2000, March). The effects of peer versus teacher comments in both electronic and traditional modes on ESL writers’ revisions. Paper presented at the 34th annual TESOL Convention, Vancouver.
   Google Scholar
• Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer's own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18, 30–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. W. (2007). Social software and participatory learning: Pedagogical choices with technology affordances in the Web 2.0 era. In ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings ascilite Singapore 2007 (pp. 664–675). Nanyang: Centre for Educational Development, Nanyang Technological University . Retrieved December 2–5, 2007, from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/mcloughlin.pdf
   Google Scholar
• McCarter, S. (2012). IELTS introduction: Study skills. MacMillan Education, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Milman, N. (2012). The flipped classroom strategy: What is it and how can it best be used. Distance Learning, 9(3), 85–87.
   Google Scholar
• Min, H. T. (2006). The effects of trained peer review on EFL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 118–141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morales, C. R., & Collins, S. (2007). Google Suite for higher education ( ID No. DEC0703). Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/DEC0703.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Morse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Nagin, C. (2003). Because writing matters: Improving student writing in our schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Oishi, L. (2007). Working together: Google Apps goes to school. Technology & Learning, 27(9), 46–47.
   Google Scholar
• Oxnevad, S. (2013). 6 powerful Google Docs features to support the collaborative writing process. Retrieved January 2, 2013, from http://www.teslej.org/wordpress/issues/volume14/ej55/ej55m1/
   Google Scholar
• Perron, B. E., & Sellers, J. (2011). Book review: A review of the collaborative and sharing aspects of Google Docs. Research on Social Work Practice, 21(4), 489–490.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pham, V. P. H., & Usaha, S. (2016). Blog-based peer response for L2 writing revision. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(4), 724–748.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravid, G., Kalman, Y. M., & Rafaeli, S. (2008). Wiki books in higher education: Empowerment through online distributed collaboration. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1913–1928.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riazi, A. M., & Candlin, C. N. (2014). Mixed-methods research in language teaching and learning: Opportunities, issues and challenges. Language Teaching, 47(2), 135–173.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rick, J., & Guzdial, M. (2006). Situating CoWeb: A scholarship of application. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(1), 89–115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riley-Huff, D. A. (2010). Using Google wave and docs for group collaboration. Library Hi Tech News, 27(4–5), 12–14.
   Google Scholar
• Sharp, V. (2009). Computer education for teachers: Integrating technology into classroom teaching (6th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Sheridan, J. (Ed). (1995). Writing-across-the-curriculum and the Academic Library: A guide for librarians, instructors, and writing program directors. Connecticut: Greenwood Press.
   Google Scholar
• Skylar, A. A. (2009). A comparison of asynchronous online text-based lectures and synchronous interactive web conferencing lectures. Issues in Teacher Education, 18(2), 69–84.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, R. O. (2005). Working with difference in online collaborative groups. Adult Education Quarterly, 55(3), 182–199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strayer, J. (2012). How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation and task orientation. Learning Environments Research, 15(2), 171–193.
   Google Scholar
• Suwantarathip, O., & Wichadee, S. (2014). The effects of collaborative writing activity using Google Docs on students’ writing abilities. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(2), 148–156.
   Google Scholar
• Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 320–337.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, J. (2008). Don't be afraid to explore Web 2.0. Education Digest, 74(4), 19–22.
   Google Scholar
• Tsui, A. B., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments ? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 147–170.
   Google Scholar
• Twu, H. L. (2009). Effective wiki strategies to support high-context culture learners. TechTrends, 53, 16–21.
   Google Scholar
• University of Cambridge ESOL Examinations. (2011). Score processing, reporting and interpretation. Retrieved November 11, 2011, from http://www.ielts.org/researchers/score_processing_and_reporting.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Vallance, M., Towndrow, P. A., & Wiz, C. (2010). Conditions for successful online document collaboration. TechTrends, 54(1), 20–24.
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, A. (2011). Writing for IELTS: Collins English for exams. London: Harper Collins Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, C. C. R. (2010). Using Google Docs to facilitate collaborative writing in an English language classroom practice. TESL-EJ, 14(3), 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Zhou, W., Simpson, E., & Domizi, D. P. (2012). Google Docs in an out-of-class collaborative writing activity. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 24(3), 359–375.
   Google Scholar
• Zorko, V. (2009). Factors affecting the way students collaborate in a wiki for English language learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(5), 645–665.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar