History: aw1l 3.1 Results

Source of version: 3

Version

!! Results
The opinion from the teaching staff about the advantages and disadvantages of the Wiki methodology compared to the traditional is summarised in Table 2. 

||::__Table 2. Advantages and disadvantages detected by the teaching staff after using a work methodology based on Wiki__::
::__Advantages__:: | ::__Disadvantages__::
Possibility of individual evaluation of the participation in group work, thanks to the easy and fast accessibility to each others' part of the work | The used Wiki tool did not generate, at the time of use in the project, a report of the individual activity of each student, and thus, many hours of manual work from the teacher were needed
More availability of the group document that allows the easy and fast follow-up by the teaching staff of the development of the work | Existence of other better known tools at everybody's reach of easier handling and being WYSIWYG (visual editing; "What You See Is What You Get"), even though they lack some features to ease collaboration in big groups and they can be slower than the Wiki
Retrieval of erased parts or former versions | Difficulties of connection and lack of computers
Historical record of the writing of the work (who, when, what, ...) | Novelty of the Wiki methodology that is not very know yet by the educative community and that has to learn to use it
Chance to get immediate and automatic notification by e-mail when changes are made in the document | Possible saturation of the e-mail
Higher simplicity and speed to apply markup styles to the text | Texts with very complex format are difficult or impossible to be made with Wiki
||
On the student side, there where a total of 229 surveys and 223 autorecording tables collected of invested time (divided in methodologies and subjects in Table 3).

{SHEET(id=13)}Table 3. Subjects, degrees and cicles, students, type of work{SHEET}

The extra comments voluntarily written by the students in their surveys in the blank fields (Table 4) show that, the students value very positively the collaborative writing methodology based on Wiki because:
* it allows them cooperating without travelling to meet, 
* it allows them observing the development of their mates' work,
* it is a dynamic communication tool, 
Some of them point out their interest in knowing new tools or the security to have their data on the Internet, (apparently) "free from accidents or viruses".

The negative valuation of Wiki methodology, usually comes from connecting problems to Internet o from the lack of time to learn the specific Wiki markup. Most of the negative valuations correspond to problems in organisation: too big or disperse groups, or work organised inadequately. A group declared that they lacked time to deepen at the same time in the three activities: 
# the writing work itself 
# learning the methodology of working in group
# learning the Wiki technology

A count of the extra comments voluntarily written by the students in their surveys in the blank fields is shown in Table 4, classified by type of methodology and feeling. Some examples of each type of comments are included in the full version of this communicaction.

{SHEET(id=2)}Table 4. Surveys and autorecording tables handed in, for each work methodology and subject.{SHEET} 

Three literal comments are shown as example of each type, to illustrate the kind of student comments, among the total number of those comments collected

__Three examples of POSITIVE comments expressed after working with the WIKI methodology__
# ''"The time that you devote to it is minor than if it was traditional methodology and can be coordinated with many more people"''
# ''"It has not been necessary to meet out of the university since we could make it through the wiki"''
# ''"In FVA I do not use the Wiki because my colleague of work is not very in favor, so we let it be. Anyway, I have to say that the idea is very good, I think that for the works in group (especially when they are mass groups, of 4 people, for instance, I mean) it is a great thing. I always thought, and here the question is already personal, that four persons in front of a computer, once everybody successfully get to meet a day (one of the most usual handicaps ), it is very little productive. I find it more "efficient" if we create general ideas when we meet in person, and then being able afterwards to work each one at his/her home. The fact of sharing files and seeing what the others have been changing is perfect, and if we add up that the forum already goes very well for the hourly incompatibilities of the members of the group, then we have a good combination."''

__Three examples of NEGATIVE comments expressed after working with the WIKI methodology__
# ''"I believe that working with the Wiki can serve to facilitate the exchange of information but that it is necessary that the people of the group meet in person to argue how to do it..."''
# ''"I have lost a lot of time on reworking lost texts (6 or 7 occasions), suffering because you cannot make a backup while you work"''
# ''"I think that the Wiki can only be useful if all the members of the group have daily access to Internet and the habit of using it"''

__Three examples of POSITIVE comments expressed after working with the TRADITIONAL methodology__
# ''"I have not had any problem to communicate with the members of the group since that we are together in the class and taking profit of the smae spare hours is very helpful"''
# ''"I think that the meetings in person improve the work much more, they are an enrichment for the person"''
# ''"All the possible doubts that we have had, have been able to ask directly to the teacher and this is also well"''

__Three examples of NEGATIVE comments expressed after working with the TRADITIONAL methodology__
# ''"I think that we were too many people and that we have not been enough identified among ourselves. Perhaps it is that I am not used to make works in big groups"''
# ''"Too big working group, so that it is very difficult to be able to meet altogether or even simply a representative of each group"''
# ''"Difficulty in organizing the work, lack of spirit of group"''

History

Legend: v=view , s=source , c=compare, d=diff

Information	Version	Action
Tue 06 de June, 2006 17:07 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.166.105	12 Current	v s
Sat 03 de June, 2006 16:30 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.153.74	11	v s c d
Sat 03 de June, 2006 15:13 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.153.74	10	v s c d
Sat 03 de June, 2006 16:19 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.153.74	9	v s c d
Sat 03 de June, 2006 15:13 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.153.74	8	v s c d
Sat 03 de June, 2006 15:02 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.153.74	7	v s c d
Sat 03 de June, 2006 15:02 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.153.74	6	v s c d
Sat 03 de June, 2006 11:32 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.180.153.74	5	v s c d
Fri 02 de June, 2006 15:08 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.177.57.188	4	v s c d
Fri 02 de June, 2006 14:37 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.177.57.188	3	v s c d
Fri 02 de June, 2006 12:07 CEST by Xavier.dePedro from 83.177.57.188	2	v s c d

Page: 1/2

Enable pagination per page

SourceHistory

Col·laboren

Traduccions automàtiques