My+critical+study+research+log

Week 1: Peer-editing training (March 22-28)

Session 1 in skype:

There was no exact arrangement between me and the girls when we are going to have the first training session in skype but it all worked out fine in the end. Actually, they all contacted me independently but almost at the same time. Thus, I ended up having a skype text chat with them simultaneously. I gave some instructions to one of them and then gave them to the other two students by cutting and pasting them from the first chat. I knew what I was going to do during the first session but didn't have it typed. Thus, the arrangement with me giving the instructins to one of the students first and then cutting and pasting them in the chat windows for the other too.

The first session was devoted to the discussion of the following questions:

1. General introduction to the study: a) The purposes of the study b) The students' role in the project c) General guidelines on the project arrangements

2. Using a wiki a) Introduction to the pbwiki created for the study b) Practice activities
 * Adding text
 * Using the edit function
 * Adding an image
 * Adding a comment at the bottom of the page
 * Saving changes

3. Tasks to do March 22-26:
 * Update the profile
 * Add an image or something else that will tell us something special about you
 * Edit a sample essay I've posted

4. Further tasks
 * Sample MS Word Essay edited by me for discussion with the students
 * Editing essays in blogs
 * Further discussion of the study arrangements: can we use some time next week to do some more things to get you prepared for the active part of the study

March 23-26 Training Activities

I've posted a sample essay for the girls to practise using a wiki. Olga Kuvshinova responded at once but N. Shulga and N. Venchikova still haven't. They promised to submit their entry essays to me by first Th and now Fr. (i.e. today but so far I haven't heard from them, probably l8er? Hope so.) This is one of the most **worrysome aspects of my study** at the moment: by participating in this study the students do me a great favour and I don't fee I can push them too hard, on the other hand, not pushing them can end up in acking or not having the data for the research Don't know what to do about this situation.

Here is a message to the students expaining the activities they have to complete using MS Word which I sent to them today, March 26, both in email and skype.

"I've now put all the materials to practise peer editing using MS Word into a folder in pbwiki. If you follow this link http://writing2gether.pbworks. com/Sample-Essay-edited-in-MS- Word you'll find the explanation of 2 tasks to give you an idea about and let you practise editing essays in MS Word. You'll find a sample essay I've edited and another one you should try to edit in the pbwiki folder Peer Training Session. The file names are: Akhmetvalieva_My_Revision_Word.doc and KudryashevK_Your_Editing.doc. I am not sure how to arrange your work on editing the essay by Kudryashev together with Olga and Nastya best. My suggestion is for each of you to do it first on your own and then compare your variants by posting them in the wiki and discussing them their too. If you have a better idea, great! I'll be glad to use yours.

Any progress with your own essay?

Looking forward to hearing from you".

March 26

1. Added MS Word Training Materials to the pbwiki. 2. Had a skype session with O. Kuvshinova during which we did the following: a) I went though the sample essay I edited in MS Word with her and explained the possible editing and commenting options I used. b) Explained how to comment using the "insert" function, add a commantary and make a footnote. She's going to try making her comments using these options on her own and ask for help if necessary. c) Asked me to think of the essay topics for them. d) I started a page in the wiki for the Ss and me to post suggestions for topics they might write their essays about.

NB: She has Word 2003. Need to check with Natasha and Nastya what their versions are.

March 31 - April 11 was on a trip to Oxford first and then Harrogate where I took part in the 44th IATEFl conference. Still haven't heard from Natasha. Nastya posted a set of comments to the training session essay. Thus the training took the following form: a) O. Kuvshinova: 2 sessions (wiki + MS Word) b) A. Venchikova: 1 session (wiki) c) N. Shulga: unavailable

Entry essay: a) O. Kuvshinova + b) A. Venchikova - c) N. Shulga -

I've decided if they in the end join me for this study, I'll use their last year's essays they wrote for the portfolio. Only, of course, there is a question of how it will affect the study results.


 * NB ** N. Shulga has dropped the project before its active part began without explanation. I was unable to get in touch with her until May 1. In a skype conversation that day she just said she could not reach me because she always saw my status as AWAY in skype. It's strange and I have no explanation of the possible reason for that.


 * NNB ** J. Oreshnikova who became the study participant instead of N. Shulga didn't complete the training session I'd designed for the study participants.


 * Question for the interview and/or for discussion in the CST Discussion section: **Did it have any impact either positive or negative on her commenting strategies? What about the other girls?

April 12, 2010

Dear Natasha, Olga and Nastya--

How are you? Are you ready to start working with me and writing Draft 1 of your essay and commenting on the essay drafts of the other two of you? I hope that you remember that what was planned to be done was for the three of you to write your own essay in 3 drafts (with the third one being the final one) and at the same time comment on the drafts of the other two girls. We haven't decided which of you wants to do it in MS Word, a blog and a wiki. To start working quicker to have more time to do it I've decided to assign you to a medium myself at random

a) N. Shulga: blog b) O. Kuvshinova: MS Word c) N. Venchikova: wiki

If for some reason one of you has a strong preference to work in a medium different from my random selection, then, please, decide between the three of you who wants to write her essay in which medium. It'd be great if you let me know by Wednesday whether you stayed if my choice or exchanged your media with each other somehow.

Here is too the schedule of activities for this week:

A**. Post Draft 1 ** of your essay**:** ** April 15 ** a) Student A: posts her essay draft written in MS Word in this wiki b) Student B: posts her essay draft written using a wiki page c) Student C: posts her essay draft written in a blog

B. **﻿Comment on Draft 1** **of your peers' essay drafts: April 18 ** a) Student A: comments on student's B essay in student's B wiki b) Student A: comments on student's C essay in student's C blog c) Student B: comments on student's A essay in student's A MS Word document d) Student B: comments on student's C essay in student's C blog e) Student C: comments on student's A essay in student's A MS Word document f) Student C: comments on student's B essay in student's B wiki

So, what the three of you should do is exchange the essay drafts first and then in the next couple of days post your comments to the other two students using the available comment and edit features of blogs, wikis and MS Word, correspondingly. For assitance and possibIe ways of doing it please refer back to the training session pages in the wiki at []

If we stay with the arrangement above, then Natasha should write her essay draft at []. Natasha should go to the Ning's tab blogs and create a new page for her essay draft which should be posted there preferably by Wd evening ( let's try Wd first ). Olga should write her essay draft in a MS Word and by Wd too send it to Natasha and Nastya using the email service of the Ning. Nastya, in turn, should by Wd post her essay draft in the wiki at []

Once you have posted or exchanged your essay drafts with each other, you should spend the next couple of days adding comments to the drafts of each other. I suggest you focusing on one or several of the following features:

1. content 2. organisation 3. vocabulary 4. grammar

Previously, I told you that I'll tell you specifically which of these areas to focus your comments on and I'm still ready to do it but am not sure whether you'll find it easier or more difficult to have one specific area to comment on. The comments Olga and Nastya made on an essay we have for practice concern all the elements listed above to a certain extent, so let's see how it works without choosing in favour of one of these elements. If we see after commenting on the first draft it's too much we'll choose a more narrow focus for your comments. What do you think?

And now about the essay topics. Originally I was planning that we'll put these essays in the context of a student newspaper with the 3 of you being its correspondents working on writing your articles about some issue of interest to your audience, which as we discussed earlier could be the some problem or issue connected with your university life. I have also made some suggestions along this lines and posted them in the wiki at [] You're welcome to use my suggestions or use your own.

I very much hope that the participation in this project will be interesting for you and will allow you to learn some useful skills for the future.

I'm looking forward to working with you and discussing your works with you too:)

Best,

Natalia Yu. Eydelman

19-20 April

Had beginning of the study interviews with Olga and Nastya in skype. The interview with Julia was conducted using skype chat option because she doesn't has problems with the camera.

25 April

State of progress as of today:

1. O. Kuvshinova: commented on J. Oreshnikova's essay draft. 2. J. Oreshnikova: commented on O. Kuvshinova's draft. 3. N. Venchikova: commented on O. Kuvshinova's essay draft (25 April); on J. Oreshnikova's essay draft (25 April). She sent comments to Olga's draft to me. For J. she also made her comments in Word instead of the wiki. Asked her to send me a copy of her Word commentary to J's essay to me but write her commentary to J. in her wiki. Don't know how much time it'll take and whether I made the right decision. PS 27 Apri l Got it wrong with Nastya's commentary to J. She didn't make a comment in the wiki and neither does she have a commentary in Word as I thought. So, there is a de lay with J. proceeding with revising her essay. 26 April

Had a skype session with N Venchikova she initiated to let me know she is ready with her essay draft but can't figure out how to post it the Ning. However, we quickly resolved the problem (she managed to publish it with some guidance from me), so the most recent update on essay drafts is that 1. Olga Kuvshinova has all the materials necessary to revise her essay draft 2. J Oreshnikova has to wait till tomorrow for Nastya's commentary 3. N. Venchikova has posted her essay draft for the girls to comment.


 * NB ** She added some comments to her own draft at the bottom asking for advice on its tone and the degree of persuasiveness

It's getting more and more interesting. Here are some hypotheses and questions that emerge from the work done so far:

1) Hypothesis #1: Peer commentary addresses the issues of grammar and vocabulary use more that those of content and organizarion (N. Venchikova's commentary to her own essay draft disproves this hypothesis (?)) Have to see what happens next.

2) Hypothesis #2: The type/kind (?) of commentary depends on the student's level of proficiency in the language and writing as well as understanding of what constitutes a good piece of writing.

3) Hypothesis #3: The quality of commentary depends on the student's level of proficiency in the language and writing. Questions: ** 1. Is having 2 sets of commentaries at the same time difficult to handle?

27 April

Still no commentary from Nastya to J.:(((

But Olga has submitted a revised draft of her essay!

So now we're behind the original schedule by about a week. Don't know how it is going to affect the data collection completion. Probably, it's not very good that it's happening but what can I do about it other than what I have been doing all these days, i.e. trying to stay in touch with the girls and keeping coordinating their communication with each other.

29 April

Nastya has posted her comments to Julia's draft 1 of the essay.

Now the next things for the girls to do are 1. O. Kuvshinova: 2. J. Oreshnikova: revise draft 1; comment on O. Kuvshinova's essay draft 2 3. N. Venchikova: revise draft 1 after getting the commentary from J. Oreshnikova

I've found Nastya'a comments to Julia's essay draft rather insightful. I wonder what their depth depends 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?

May 1

J. Oreshnikova sent her commentary to O. Kuvshinova and wrote again to me that she didn't use the frame I have created for my classes. Interesting:)

May 2

J. Oreshnokova posted her comments to N Venchikova in her blog. Also, we had this email exchange you can see below:

2010/5/2 Natalia Eydelman  Dear Julia--

Thanks a lot for posting the revised draft of your essay. How did it go? Was it easier/more difficult/the same revising it a second time?

Natalya Yu Eydelman

2010/5/2 Юлия Орешникова  Dear Natalia, For now I have also added comments for Nastya at Ning!About revising the essay: **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!=) **

Best wishes,Julia.

Dear Julia--

Thanks for your comments and reflection on revising your own essay taking into account the girls' comments! I fully understand what you mean by "a real work to do!" This is what I'm going to interview you about when you finish revising your essay once again after another set of comments from the girls. How much time does this work takes you? It's not smth you can do very quickly, isn't it?

Have a good weekend!

Hope the weather in Moscow is nice. In Leeds it's very windy and I'd say kind of cold (don't laugh, with the wind the feel is much colder than w/o it). Do you know that in the weather forecast here and in the States they give you the temperatures and also how it feels with the wind and stuff?

Best,

Natalya Yu Eydelman

This is where the girls are with their essay drafts and comments as of today:


 * || Draft 1 || Comments || Draft 2 || Comments || Draft 3 ||
 * Oreshnikova || + || + O+N || + ||  ||   ||
 * Venchikova || + || + N+J ||  ||   ||   ||
 * Kuvshinova || + || + N+J || + N+J || + J || + ||

3.05.10 (1.10 am)

====Had a look at Julia's comments to Nastya's essay draft. They almost exclusively refer to the questions Nastya posed herself at the end of her essay draft about its tone and the choice of topic. These are the questions J has adressed in her commentary at some length. She also commented one some minor language points one of them correctly ( * not so...as vs as...as) and the other one not (suggested spelling "Russian" with a small letter).====

**Question #1:** 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? ** Question #2 : ** 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?

NB: A suggestion: have a look at Varley's concordancing article for a possible way of structuring my critical study


 * 20.05.2010 **

Had the study exit interview with O. Kuvshinova in skype (video chat) on Tuesday May 18 and J. Oreshnikova (skype messenger) on Wednesday May 19. Thursday May 20 had a short video chat with A. Venchikova to be continued tomorrow from a different location in skype messenger.

During the interview with J. Oreshnikova yesterday she mentioned how strongly she reacted to A. Venchikova commentary to her essay draft thinking she was not delicate enough. She thinks that the medium of electronic communication is such that the participants of communication should be more reserved in expressing their opinions (** I might be imposing my own interpretation and need to check this against the transcript !**)

However, it's interesting to note how Nastya and Julia reacted to each other's commentaries. Nastya thought she Julia, on the other hand said that at first Nastya's comments made her really angry because she dis not expect such a level of criticism from another student. However, when she considered them more carfefully, she found them helpful and acted on those concerning grammar and vocabulary. At the same time she pointed out that she thought her essay was interesting in content from the very beginning, so she didn't act on Nastya's comments about the content! **( again check against the transcript ****)

Notes made May 21, 2010 PS** I conducted the interview with O. Kuvshinova using skype video only. (May 14**) PSS** I conducted the interview with O. Kuvshinova using skype video only. Can't think why I did not use the messenger option as well.
 * PSSS** With J. Oreshnikova I used skype messenger only because she does not have a camera. (May 19)
 * PSSSS** With A, Venchikova the interview was conducted in two parts.
 * Part 1** took place May 20 and was a video chat. I also used the skype messenger to ask my questions and send her a copy of a table with affordances of different tools to complete. I also gave her a copy of the interview questions she asked to have to prepare for the interview better. (May 20)
 * Part 2** should take place May 21 and will be conducted in skype messenger

It seems to me the last portion of my interview with A. Venchikova yesterday was lost (Pamela closed the session because of an error but I thought the recording was still saved as had happened before. But it seems this time it didn't happen. I don't think any information I need from the interview was lost but I can't find the information about the time we agreed to have the second session today. I remember to have agreed on 9 pm Nsk time but Nastya has not contacted me yet. It's 9.25 pm now in Nsk.

Got a skype message from Olga Kuvshinova at 10 pm Nsk time that Nastya could not post her essay draft in the blog and have a session in skype with me today because she had run out of money on her internet account. Let's hope she will still get in touch with me shortly. It would be great if I managed to interview her before the end of this week.

3.06.10

Hypothesis: (?) wikis generate the most feedback because of a larger variety of commenting options and ease of adding them in various ways (too inspecific)