Possible+interview+questions

a) How competent do you feel you are in using the computer? b) You have to write/comment in -MS Word -wiki -blog
 * Additional background questions: **
 * Questions about technology**

Which of these modes were you familiar with before the start of the study?

c) Which of these media did you find easier/more difficult to master using if you were not familiar with it before? d) If you were familiar with a particular mode, were you using the commenting options you already knew or came up with some additional ones in the process of this study? Can you give an example?


 * 9. Julia placed her comments about the minor points concerning the mechanics under 1) and 2) at the bottom of her comments: is it helpful? Is there some better way of placing them? Should in the future students be made aware of such a way of commenting? **(based on J's comments to N's Draft 1)

10. Your primary mode of work was: a) MS Word b) wiki c) blog

a) Which features of your mode of work you liked? b) Which did you find difficult to use or to undertand the comments in? c) Which fearures of the other two media you find attractive? Why? d) Which fearures of the other two media you find not attractive? Why?

1. What do you consider a good piece of writing? 2. Judging by what criteria you consider a piece of writing good/satisfactory/poor? 3. What did you choose to comment on? Why? 4. What governed your decision to continue exchanging your comments in the blog (N Venchikova's medium)?
 * About the writing process**

If there's just one set of comments, then why didn't you continue exhanging comments

5. What the depth of the commentary depend on? What is the contribution of the training and practice in peer-editing and mastering the writing skills to the comments'd quality and what's the contribution of the natural course of development?

6. Was it easier/more difficult/the same revising the essay a second time?

Answering this question in ner email of May 2 (because I asked her about it) Julia that revising it the second time that "**it was more difficult to correct than to write=) Because taking into account both of the girls comments was...I won't say very hard.. .but a real work to do!=) **"

7. ** Question for the interview and/or for discussion in the CST Discussion section: **

J. Oreshnikova did not participate in the traning session prior to the study. Did it have any impact either positive or negative on her commenting strategies? What about the impact of the training session on the commenting strategies of the other two participants who had previous experience in F2F peer-editing?

However, she recalled when she was commenting on Draft 2 of O. Kuvshinova's essay edited in MS Word that her English teacher involved them in giving oral feedback to each other.

**8. Was the content of her comment framed by Nastya's asking the girls' advice about them and could it have been different had she not asked these questions?** (based on J's comments to N's Draft 1) 10. How did you decide which comments you received from the girls to use when editing your work? 11. What kind of comments were more helpful? 12. Comments in which of the media did you find more helpful? 13. What features of these comments made them helpful?

PS: I sometimes found it diffucult to separate the questions into those purely referring to the writing side of the study and to its technological side.