Creativity and Wikis: Partnering Virtual Teams, Technology, and Social Work Education

Patricia Coccoma
Assistant Professor
Department of Social Work
Florida Gulf Coast University
Fort Myers, FL 33965 USA
pcoccoma@fgcu.edu

Cheryl A. Peppers
Master of Social Work Graduate
Department of Social Work
Florida Gulf Coast University
Fort Myers, FL 33965 USA
capepper@eagle.fgcu.edu

Jane K. Molhoek
Master of Social Work Student
Department of Social Work
Florida Gulf Coast University
Fort Myers, FL 33965 USA
jkmolhoe@eagle.fgcu.edu

Abstract The use of the Internet and the World Wide Web in higher education curricula has given rise to both challenges and opportunities for students and universities. Today's students face competing work, family, and study demands, and the ability to attend classes online in an asynchronous manner is a major advantage for many of them. At the same time, universities often have limited classroom space and other campus-based facilities, and are finding it prudent to invest their resources in the provision of online and blended courses. This paper describes a social work curriculum adapting, in part, to these needs by offering a core course in an online learning environment, with course topics being presented and course objectives fulfilled through collaborative teamwork assignments making use of wikis. Each team's wiki assignment was subject to peer evaluation by other students in the course. Both quantitative assessment results as well as qualitative evaluation data were collected and analyzed, and they reflect the benefits and limitations of the activity in terms of the attainment of the targeted course objectives. Keywords: social work education, wikis, virtual teams, collaborative online learning, Web 2.0, peer assessment

Introduction

The use of technology in higher education, including social work education, continues to gain momentum. Blended and fully online courses include the use of computers and Internet technologies, including the World Wide Web, to facilitate asynchronous communication as well as synchronous chats that add a real-time dimension to online learning. The advent of "Web 2.0" (O'Reilly, 2005) tools has opened up new opportunities for student engagement and collaborative learning in the online environment. This paper reports on the development, results, and recommendations arising from the use of one such Web 2.0 tool, wikis, in a social work course, with a particular emphasis on its usefulness in fostering the achievement of course objectives.

A recent graduate-level online learning course offered by the Department of Social Work at Florida Gulf Coast University (FGCU) entitled Social Welfare and History included a group project in which student teams researched, developed, and edited content and material on approved topics and posted them to a wiki site. The teams met online in chat rooms and, at times, in person to develop, plan, and address the expectations of the wiki site assignment. Each team's final wiki site was opened to another student team for evaluation using an instructor-created rubric. The results reflect effective acquisition and mastery of the course material by students through the use of web-based (specifically, Web 2.0-based) technology.

Literature Review

The trend in higher education shows a continual rise in the use of Internet/web-based technologies to facilitate learning. Driven by student demand and the availability of these technologies, increasing numbers of traditional, campus-based universities now offer online courses. Social work departments within these universities have established online learning offerings within their curricula. A review of the literature points toward a continuation of this trend, and an extension into the realm of team-based online learning. Web 2.0 tools and technologies provide a wide array of platforms for interactive and participatory learning; wikis are one such tool that can be employed in collaborative or team-based assignments, in both online and face-to-face classroom settings.

In their book Teg's 1994, Theobald and Scott (1972) presented a fictional account that portrayed a graduate student from the year 1994 traveling worldwide, accessing data through a globally connected computer system, communicating with her mentor and peers through e-mail while conducting her studies at various campus locations. Nearly 40 years later, Moore (2005) commented that "we are rapidly approaching technical readiness for the Virtual University" (p. 4). More recently, Dew (2010) cited the diminishing role of faculty, the changing needs of students, and especially the dominance of technology as key trends in higher education:

[Trend] 3. The continuous changes in technology that impact learning, including the use of the Internet, the digitizing of all the world's books, the complete transition of all technical journals to electronic format, the ascendency of online teaching and instructional designers over classroom teaching, and the use of ever changing technology, such as iPods and iPhones to deliver educational content. (p. 47)

Indeed, the number of students taking online courses at higher education institutions is growing at an exponential rate. The Internet is now routinely used to connect students who are located in various geographical areas, giving them the opportunity to attend higher education courses remotely (Maple, 2010). Many brick-and-mortar universities now offer online and blended courses to complement their on-campus courses; this parallels the emergence of fully online universities, the students of which need never set foot onto a campus to complete their degrees. The flexibility and convenience of online learning allows users to access materials, interact with their instructors and peers, and partake in learning activities at any time and from any place, thereby extending formal learning opportunities and experiences to learners who are unable to attend traditional face-to-face classes. At the same time, online learning has been shown to be more cost effective, allowing teachers to supervise more students while maintaining quality outcomes (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010). Blended or hybrid learning, which involves using a combination or mix of online and face-to-face learning delivery, also provides the opportunity to differentiate instruction to accommodate varied learning styles, interpretations, and points of view (Maple, 2010).

A meta-analysis and review of published research commissioned by the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development (Means et al., 2010) culminated in the finding that overall, online learning courses (either fully online or blended) produced modestly stronger student learning outcomes than those delivered solely in face-to-face mode. The study revealed that face-to-face learning fared better than online learning when the traditional lecture format was utilized, but at the same time emphasized that some of the literature showed online learning surpassed classroom-based instruction in the achievement of declarative knowledge outcomes (Means et al., 2010). In social work education in particular, online learning was found to be largely as effective as traditional learning formats. In a study comparing the interaction of learning environments with teaching techniques in social work education, Huerta-Wong and Schoech (2010) found the face-to-face mode to be superior to online learning only when experiential instructional techniques such as active listening and reflective thinking were employed. Their recommendation is that social work educators explore the feasibility of incorporating experiential learning constructs into the framework of a virtual learning environment.

Comparing learning environments and modes is complex, given the numerous factors and variables that exist. Yet, reasons for the apparent success of online learning may be related to the fact that students are often required to take responsibility for their own learning when studying online. Collaborative learning occurs in the online environment when the students assume a more constructive role in developing their own knowledge, proactively assisting one another and becoming involved in one another's learning trajectories. This is a shift from the conventional transmission of information from instructors to students by way of lectures. Here, students collaborate and contribute to one another's learning processes at multiple levels, giving rise to a greater ability to think critically and apply their knowledge in an open arena for others' benefit (Gomez, Wu, & Passerini, 2010; Strijbos & De Laat, 2010). They work actively to construct their own mental models about a topic, as opposed to passively receiving and regurgitating information (Maple, 2010). Active learning requires students to think deeply about a given topic and communicate their thoughts in an organized way (Scheuerell, 2010). Online learning can be of assistance in this regard, as it affords the creation of a multi-sensory learning experience. In online learning courses, a variety of media and strategies are at the instructor's disposal to increase students' chances of success in achieving the course objectives, including but not limited to creative design of interactive scenarios, use of audio-visual content that caters to students' affective needs, and inclusion of responsive feedback mechanisms (MacFadden, Moore, Herie, & Schoech, 2005). Indeed, learning in the 21st century has moved beyond paper-based, lecturer-driven, synchronized, and controlled course content (Maple, 2010).

Enter student teams – a collaborative learning structure. A study of students who worked in teams to produce webpages for a social studies project (Scheuerell, 2010) found that undertaking the collaborative project: (1) motivated students to connect with peers; and (2) enhanced their ability to work within a team – a valuable commodity in today's workforce. The author cites a number of additional benefits of collaborative learning evident in his study: both high- and low-achieving students demonstrated learning gains from the activity; students made greater efforts to achieve, with improvements seen in long-term retention, intrinsic motivation, time on task, and critical thinking; there was decreased competition among students, with higher-achieving students enhancing their skills through working with peers of lesser ability while also reporting that they enjoyed working those peers (Scheuerell, 2010).

Web 2.0 technologies, including wikis, have only recently entered the online educational world, and have been quite favorably received for their ability to serve as platforms for student collaboration and teamwork. According to Leuf and Cunningham (2001), the originators of the wiki concept:

a wiki is a freely expandable collection of interlinked webpages, a hypertext system for storing and modifying information – a database, where each page is easily edited by any user with a forms-capable Web browser client. Content can be directly linked to that found in other wikis (interwiki) and in Web documents. (p. 14)

In citing Leuf and Cunningham's definition, Schwartz, Clark, Cossarin, and Rudolph (2004) further add that with wikis, "Content can be directly linked to that found in other wikis (interwiki) and in Web documents" ("Defining wikis," para. 1).

Glassman and Kang (2011) propose that, while Web 2.0 technologies are broad in scope and still in their infancy, among those technologies, blogs and wikis are the most relevant for education, in particular due to their ability to lend themselves to the logics of thinking, including deduction, induction, and abduction (the logic of discovery). More specifically, Glassman and Kang observe that "the logic of abduction is more difficult to fit into learning confined by space and/or time" (p. 95), and wikis are especially suited to addressing this problem. They contend that "Wiki technology may fit the promise of Web 2.0 in education more than any other technology. It fosters integrated problem solving, and advanced understanding of the fungible nature of information and cooperation" (p. 109, emphasis in original).

Studies attesting to the educational effectiveness of using wikis have been rapidly emerging. Varga-Atkins, Dangerfield, and Brigden (2010), who worked with medical students, found the use of wikis to be beneficial in the development of professionalism in two ways:

First, wikis acted as a shared knowledge base for hard-to-find resources on professionalism. Second, it was precisely when students reflected on the difference between interacting in wikis and their online social spaces, or when they considered whether or not to post a resource that their sense of professionalism emerged. (p. 824)

A study by Donne (2012) revealed that students felt the use of wikis was effective in helping them develop such a shared knowledge base, and that the process of researching, interpreting, and then posting information increased their understanding of a topic. In addition, many felt they simultaneously learned more about, and developed skills in, teamwork and cooperation. Similarly, Jones (2010) reported that using a wiki to build upon their knowledge in a collaborative manner resulted in students' forming a deeper appreciation of the material. Bookstaver, Rudisill, Bickley, McAbee, Miller, Piro, and Schulz (2011) also found that the use of wikis provided an avenue for a team approach within the classroom, which was later heralded as a strength of the course. Walsh's (2010) investigation demonstrated how wikis could be used to foster the collaborative building of student expertise in technical communication. According to Kimmerle, Moskaliuk, and Cress (2011), in their experimental study, the use of wikis encouraged and enabled students to engage concurrently in individual learning and collective knowledge creation. Collier (2010) noted that, while using wikis, students actively exercised skills that enhanced memory retention, while Paus-Hasebrink, Wijnen, and Jadin (2010) observed enhanced motivation of their students through the use of the technology for project-based learning. Ioannou (2011) discovered that groups using wikis displayed higher levels of collaborative interaction, generation of new ideas, questioning, agreements, and modifications than those using threaded discussion boards, but concluded that more empirical evidence was needed to substantiate the effectiveness of the technology.

Thus, contemporary literature points resoundingly to the value and importance of a constructivist approach to learning, which entails empowering students to actively construct their own knowledge as well as collaborate with one another to search for and negotiate shared meanings, understandings, and solutions. To this end, wikis have been emerging as a tool of choice in recent years for facilitating collaborative online learning in which students work in teams to create shared knowledge artifacts.

Context and Design of the Course

The first-year graduate course Social Welfare and History is part of the core Master of Social Work (MSW) curriculum at FGCU. This course was historically taught in a campus classroom; however, due to an increase in the number of students (who were needing to commute to the campus) and difficulty with allocating physical classroom space, a decision was made to offer the course in an online format using the ANGEL learning management system (LMS). The expectation of the course was that students, by applying critical thinking skills, would simultaneously acquire and exchange information about social welfare and history in a scholarly manner, in keeping with the core competencies defined by the Council of Social Work Education (2008).

Syllabus and Objectives

The course syllabus, which included an outline of the course and a definition of the course objectives, informed students that the course would provide an introduction to the historical and current status of social welfare policies, systems, and professional social work practice in the United States. The primary objective was to provide them with the opportunity to comprehend and become familiar with the historical foundations of social work and the current structure of the social welfare service delivery system. Key course assignments included online participation through weekly asynchronous discussion posts, a social welfare analysis paper, and a team-based wiki presentation project (the subject of the present paper).

In carrying out the evaluation reported in this paper, the main question considered was, "Did students achieve the targeted course objectives in the online learning environment through the completion of the team-based wiki presentation project?" The course objectives included:

1. Understanding the historical foundations of social work as well as the current structures of social welfare services and the influence of human diversity on social problems, social policy, and social work practice;
2. Understanding the effects of social welfare in service delivery, social work practice, and the attainment of individual and social wellbeing in the areas of welfare reform, child welfare, crime and delinquency, family life, health care, mental health, the workplace, homelessness, and aging through the application of evidence-based research;
3. Being able to to discuss the changing nature of social justice from a comparative global perspective;
4. Developing individual communication skills in describing, analyzing, synthesizing, and presenting a social welfare policy response to a current individual/societal problem critical to clinical community social work practice.

The Assignment

The wiki project required students to work in teams to creatively portray a social welfare historical movement (settlement houses, early organizations, public welfare movement, etc.) in the online format of a wiki site. This was one of two major assignments in the course. This assignment and the social problem analysis paper each carried a weight of 35% of the final grade, while participation in the online discussion for the course was weighted at 30% of the final grade. Each team was able to select a social welfare movement in the U.S. or another country on which to focus, but they had to obtain approval from the instructor so as to avoid duplication of the topic by another team. Each team was assigned a wiki template on Google Sites, a free and easy-to-use platform for creating webpages and wikis. This platform allows for one or more users to jointly create, update, and manage a multiple-page website incorporating text, audio, video, graphics, and links to other material within the site or elsewhere on the Web.

Each team collaboratively added to and edited their wiki site until they were satisfied that the site was complete. Upon arrival of the due date, each team's wiki was made available to another team for peer review and grading; a rubric was provided to facilitate scoring. All of the wikis were eventually made accessible for the entire class to review.

Participants

A total of 30 first-year MSW graduate students in seven teams, including 26 females and 4 males, completed the wiki assignment during two successive years (2010 and 2011). The students ranged in age from their early 20s to their mid 50s, and they all lived off campus. In the first year, there were 20 students in four teams; in the second year, there were 12 students in three teams. Team assignment was performed using a random generator within ANGEL. The course instructor initially established a wiki template for each team in Google Sites. E-mails inviting students to join their respective wiki templates were generated and distributed automatically by Google Sites. Additionally, the course instructor supplied assignment guidelines and basic instructions on how to use the templates.

Method

A brief orientation to the course and the ANGEL environment for the course (Figure 1) was provided to students in an on-campus session held during the first week of the semester. During this session, the assignment requirements were discussed, at which time grading rubrics were handed out to students. The course instructor gave a demonstration of the basic mechanics of a wiki template on Google Sites.

Figure 1. Social Welfware and History ANGEL site

The wiki assignment was due 10 weeks into the semester. Upon completion, each wiki site was assigned to another team for grading using a rubric developed by the course instructor (a copy of which appears in Appendix A). The rubric comprised six categories: Introduction, Content, Graphics, Visual/Audio Effects, Texts, and Citations; each category was weighted (by points) in four detailed subsections. Members of the grading team were to individually grade the wiki site and each submit their completed rubric to the instructor via the assignment dropbox feature within ANGEL. The instructor determined the mean score for each team's wiki, which was translated into an overall letter grade as described in the course syllabus. Each team member received the same assignment grade, which accounted for part of their individual course grade. Upon allocation of the team grades, the wiki sites were released to all students for viewing.

Results

The primary course objective was to have students gain an understanding of the historical foundations of social work and the current structure of the social welfare service delivery system. The quantitative and qualitative results are presented below.

Quantitative Results

In 2010, there were 24 students initially enrolled in the course, of whom 1 withdrew from the course, and the remaining 23 completed the wiki assignment. All students were asked to use the rubric to grade another team's finished assignment; 19 returned completed rubrics, for an 82.6% response rate. In 2011, 13 students initially enrolled in the course, and once again, there was 1 dropout, with the remaining 12 students all completing the wiki assignment. This time, all 12 students returned completed rubrics (a 100% response rate), giving an overall, combined response rate for both years of 91.3%.

The questions on the rubric directed students to evaluate the Introduction, Content, Graphics, Video/Audio, Text, and (use of) Citations within the relevant wiki assignment. In the 2010 course offering, the majority of the assignments received favorable scores in the Introduction (88.4%), Content (87.5%), Graphics (96%), Video/Audio (89.4%), Text (91.7%), and Citations (80.2%) (see Figure 2).

Figure 2. Assignment scores – 2010

In 2011, the majority of the assignments also received favorable scores in the Introduction (93.75%), Content (92.18%), Graphics (93.75%), Video/Audio (98.4%), Text (89%), and Citations (85.4%) (see Figure 3). Qualitative comments were offered to support the scores.

Figure 3. Assignment scores – 2011

Qualitative Results

In addition to scoring others' wiki sites, as part of the rubric, students were required to comment on the assignment itself. The following are some of the comments made regarding the use of an online, technology-based group assignment involving the creation of a website:

"I really enjoyed this project. It utilized a different medium to present our information, one that took advantage of our increasingly technological world and was more challenging than a PowerPoint presentation. The website allowed us to add more in depth exploration into the topic and more information organized in a user friendly way. I think that it challenged us more to find new and better developed ways to work with our peers in a group."

"At first, I was apprehensive about doing a group project in an online class, and concerned as I have never done a wiki page before, but I thoroughly enjoyed the project as a whole. I learned more about the subject and how it changed and advanced social work."

"This was a great learning experience! Not only did we learn about the content of our chosen topic (Civil Rights Movement), but we enhanced our technical skills, our research skills and our team skills." (Figure 4 shows a screenshot of the finished site produced by this student's team.)

Figure 4. "The Civil Rights Movement" wiki presentation site (by Team B)

The following quotes are representative of the feedback students submitted regarding their learning as a result of their involvement in reviewing other teams' wikis:

"I think this site was extremely informational and added to my current knowledge of the civil rights movement... My favorite part of the entire page was probably the timeline and the introduction because they were informative, concise and very interactive. I also must comment on the content that talked about today's issues even in the context of international, very good stuff."

"I found this to be very educational."

"I was really not familiar about the New Deal, but after reading their page I have more knowledge and clarity about this topic."

"Team D's site sold me... they did the job of helping me understand that if a person who labored as a child and therefore has no education... the cycle begins again of no education." (See Figure 5 for a screenshot of Team D's site.)

"This site is visually explosive, I love it! The information presented and covered every aspect of human trafficking that I knew about, I learned a great deal as well."

Figure 5. "Global Child Labor" wiki presentation site (by Team D)

In summary, the assignment satisfied the course objective of enabling students to develop an understanding of the historical foundations of social work and the current structure of the social welfare service delivery system. This was accomplished through an online collaborative learning activity that yielded additional benefits in the way of student cohesion and the development of technological and teamwork skills. While the sample size appears small, it is reflective of registered class size. The assignment completion rate was 94.5% across the two years.

Overall, students' rubric-based reviews of other teams' completed wiki sites were positive. Qualitative comments were indicative of students' mastery of the learning objectives as well as their personal growth from completing the assignment. Few negative comments were offered.

Discussion

The switch in the delivery format of the Social Welfare and History course from traditional face-to-face lectures to asynchronous online learning was made primarily in response to increasing student enrollments and limited availability of classroom space. The switch was done by incorporating lectures, discussions, and assignments into an online learning environment within the ANGEL LMS. Students in the online course were required to undertake a team-based wiki presentation assignment on a social welfare issue of their choice, for which Google Sites was used as the platform.

The process of completing the wiki assignment was met with limitations, both anticipated and unexpected. The lack of immediacy and person-to-person accessibility of the instructor and peers was identified as an area of limitation of the asynchronous online format. Time delay in accessing additional information from the instructor, as well as in meeting with teammates, was another shortcoming of the wiki assignment in terms of the way it was implemented. In an attempt to address this problem, a chat room was established within the ANGEL site for the course to encourage and allow students to hold synchronous virtual meetings. That facility was used occasionally by the student teams. Additionally, the instructor was also able to join in on the virtual meetings and/or meet with student teams on campus upon request to provide input and assistance. Other problems and issues that arose were student specific, such as failure to respond to e-mail requests from the instructor to meet in person. One recommendation for the future would be to schedule one or two live class meetings on campus or using a videoconferencing tool like Skype or Adobe Connect, during which the instructor could provide clarification on students' most frequently asked questions in relation to the assignment, follow up on their progress, and give them the opportunity to seek further advice and guidance.

Another recommendation is for an improved orientation to the online learning course, environment (in this case, ANGEL), and assignments to take place prior to the start of the semester. A detailed introduction to, and training in the use of, the online learning environment could be incorporated into the Department's new MSW student and annual faculty orientations. Lastly, some students did not have the same access to one another as some of their classmates did through other face-to-face courses they were enrolled in that semester, due to their registration status in the program (part time, non-matriculating). It is recommended that in future offerings of Social Welfare and History, the course instructor hold on-campus meetings at regular intervals throughout the duration of the course to help mitigate this inequality and reduce the isolation that may be experienced by those studying entirely online in a given semester. This would effectively bring the course into a blended or hybrid format. Doing so, however, may reintroduce other barriers such as the shortage of classroom space.

Conclusion

The course described in this paper was offered in online mode for the first time in the MSW program at FGCU in 2010, with the wiki assignment also being conducted in this mode for the first time in that year. Online learning has experienced tremendous uptake at academic institutions in the U.S. and worldwide, and as a result, learning technologies such as LMSs have become more sophisticated and user friendly; the same applies for Web 2.0 technologies such as wikis. These developments parallel student use of technology for communication and social networking purposes in other facets of their lives.

The change in course delivery format and the limitations of unequal technological skills of students posed some challenges and delayed access for some students to information they required. However, the need to have face-to-face contact time with the instructor and team members was offset by the flexibility arising from the ability to participate asynchronously, and the team-based wiki assignment enabled students to learn about social welfare issues and social policies through collaborative knowledge building and exchange with team members as well as through peer review and critique of other teams' work. The outcome was captured through the rubric reviews by all students. All in all, the results support the conclusion that students were successful in achieving the targeted course objectives through the completion of the wiki assignment, and that they enjoyed and benefited immensely from the experience.

References

Bookstaver, P., Rudisill, C., Bickley, A., McAbee, C., Miller, A., Piro, C., & Schulz, R. (2011). An evidence-based medicine elective course to improve student performance in advanced pharmacy practice experiences. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 75(1), 1-6. doi:10.5688/ajpe7519

Collier, J. (2010). Wiki technology in the classroom: Building collaboration skills. Journal of Nursing Education, 49(12), 718. doi:10.3928/01484834-20101117-02

Council of Social Work Education. (2008). Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards. Alexandria, VA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.cswe.org/File.aspx?id=13780

Dew, J. (2010). Global, mobile, virtual, and social: The college campus of tomorrow. The Futurist, 44(2), 46-50. Retrieved from https://www.softchalkcloud.com/lesson/files/pTI8K1cR5kwfJH/dew.pdf

Donne, V. (2012). Wiki: Using the web connections to connect students. TechTrends, 56(2), 31-36. doi:10.1007/s11528-012-0561-9

Glassman, M., & Kang, M. J. (2011). The logic of wikis: The possibilities of the Web 2.0 classroom. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(1), 93-112. doi:10.1007/s11412-011-9107-y

Gomez, E., Wu, D., & Passerini, K. (2010) Computer-supported team-based learning: The impact of motivation, enjoyment and team contributions on learning outcomes. Computers & Education, 55(1), 378-390. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.003

Huerta-Wong, J., & Schoech, R. (2010). Experiential learning and learning environments: The case of active listening skills. Journal of Social Work Education, 46(1), 85-101. doi:10.5175/JSWE.2010.200800105

Ioannou, A. (2011). Online collaborative learning: The promise of wikis. International Journal of Instructional Media, 38(3), 213-223.

Kimmerle, J., Moskaliuk, J., & Cress, U. (2011). Using wikis for learning and knowledge building: Results of an experimental study. Educational Technology & Society, 14(4), 138-148. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info/journals/14_4/13.pdf

Leuf, B. A., & Cunningham, W. (2001). The wiki way: Quick collaboration on the Web. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Jones, P. (2010). Collaboration at a distance: Using a wiki to create a collaborative learning environment for distance education and on-campus students in a social work course. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 30(2), 225-236, doi:10.1080/08841231003705396

MacFadden, R. J., Moore, B., Herie, M., & Schoech, D. (2005). Web-based education in the human services: Content and connections. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 23(1), 1-9. doi:10.1300/J017v23n01_01

Maple, M. (2010). Developing web-based distance education for rural social work students. Women in Welfare Education, 9, 40-49. Retrieved from http://www.aaswwe.asn.au/download/2010/WIWE_9_2010.pdf

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf

Moore, B. (2005). Key issues in web-based education in the human services: A review of the literature. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 23(1), 11-28. doi:10.1300/J017v23n01_02

O'Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Retrieved from http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html

Paus-Hasebrink, I., Wijnen, C. W., & Jadin, T. (2010). Opportunities of Web 2.0: Potentials of learning. International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics, 6(1), 45-62. doi:10.1386/macp.6.1.45/1

Scheuerell, S. (2010). Virtual Warrensburg: Using cooperative learning and the Internet in the social studies classroom. Social Studies, 101(5), 194-199. doi:10.1080/00377990903493861

Schwartz, L., Clark, S., Cossarin, M., & Rudolph, J. (2004). Technical evaluation report 27. Educational wikis: Features and selection criteria. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5(1). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/163/244

Strijbos, J.-W., & De Laat, M. F. (2010). Developing the role concept for computer-supported collaborative learning: An explorative synthesis. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 495-505. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.08.014

Theobald, R., & Scott, J. M. (1972). Teg's 1994: An anticipation of the near future. Chicago, IL: Swallow.

Varga-Atkins, T., Dangerfield, P., & Brigden, D. (2010). Developing professionalism through the use of wikis: A study with first-year undergraduate medical students. Medical Teacher, 32(10), 824-829. doi:10.3109/01421591003686245

Walsh, L. (2010). Constructive interference: Wikis and service learning in the technical communication classroom. Technical Communication Quarterly, 19(2), 184-211. doi:10.1080/10572250903559381

Appendix A: Peer Review Marking Rubric

TEAM REVIEWED: __________________________________   DATE: ________________

Wiki Site Name: ____________________________________________________________

	16	12	8	2	Total
Introduction	The introduction is compelling and provides motivating content that hooks the viewer from the beginning and keeps the audience's attention.	The introduction is clear and coherent and evokes interest in the topic.	The introduction does not create a strong sense of what is to follow.	The introduction does not orient the audience to what will follow.
Content/ organization	The content includes a clear statement of purpose or theme and is creative, compelling and clearly written. A rich variety of supporting information contributes to understanding the project's main idea. Events and messages are presented in a logical order.	Information is presented as a connected theme with accurate, current supporting information that contributes to understanding the project's main idea.	The content does not present a clearly stated theme, is vague, and some of the supporting information does not seem to fit the main idea or appears as a disconnected series of scenes with no unifying main idea.	The content lacks a central theme, clear point of view and logical sequence of information. The viewer is unsure what the message is because there is little persuasive information and only one or two facts about the topic. Information is incomplete, out of date, and/or incorrect.
Graphics	The graphics and/or animation assist in presenting an overall theme that appeals to the audience and enhances concepts with a high impact message. Graphics explain and reinforce key points during the presentation.	The graphics and /or animations do depict and assist the audience in understanding the flow of information or content.	Some of the graphics and/or animations seem unrelated to the topic/theme and do not enhance concepts.	The graphics and/or animations are unrelated to the content. Graphics do not enhance understanding the content, or are distracting decorations that detract from the content.
Video/audio effects	Added video/audio effects enhanced the presentation of the Wiki while promoting the message. The additions were appropriate, greatly in step with the topic and without technical difficulty (i.e., slack time).	The use of video/audio effects added to the Wiki presentation but with limited effect in promoting the message. The additions were somewhat associated with the topic. There was some technical difficulty.	The video/audio effects were present. They were not associated with the topic and had limited effect in promoting the message of the wiki.	None used.
Text	The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text. Use of italics, bold, and indentations enhances readability. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point.	Sometimes the fonts are easy-to-read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability.	Overall readability is difficult with lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold or lack of appropriate indentations of text.	The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text and small point size of fonts, inappropriate contrasting colors, poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting.
Citations	Sources of information are properly cited and the audience can determine the credibility and authority of the information presented.	Most sources of information use proper citation format, and sources are documented to make it possible to check on the accuracy of information.	Most sources of information use proper citation format, but without making it possible to check on the accuracy of information.	There were no citations of information or sources used.

Use of the rubric:

• Take time to review your assigned team's wiki project. Read to understand and comprehend. Study any links, webcasts, or podcasts. Based upon your reviewing the wiki site, address each of the areas above. This is not a popularity contest, so use critical thinking and be realistic about your grading. I will also be grading each project as well.
• Add comments below or in the message box provided in the assignment dropbox. Save your completed rubric. Give it a new name, i.e., rubric_teamone. Then, upload it to the assignment dropbox by the due date.

COMMENTS: