Ina Blau and Avner Caspi The Open University of Israel What Type of Collaboration Helps? Psychological Ownership, Perceived Learning and Outcome Quality of Collaboration Using Google Docs כל האיורים מתוך: http://pro.corbis.com/ Ina Blau and Avner Caspi The Open University of Israel

Collaboration and changing others’ products Learners tend to avoid changing other students’ written products (Dalke et al., 2007) Students often feel that it is inappropriate to edit others' work (Coyle, 2007) Many are reluctant to interfere with “somebody else’s material” (Konja & Ben-Zvi, 2008)

Psychological Ownership Psychological ownership - the object is experienced as connected with the self or becomes a part of the "extended self“ Ownership can be also felt toward nonphysical entities, such as ideas, words, creations, academic products (Pierce, Kostova & Dirks, 2003) or information (Raban & Rafaeli, 2007)

Design Five groups of participants Phase 1: Phase 2 (two-ways): Control Publishing Reading Draft Suggesting Editing Phase 2 (two-ways): Control: Keeping document Publishing: Sharing on the Web Reading: Reading peer’s draft Suggesting: Suggesting comment to peer’s draft Editing: Editing peer’s draft Phase 3: Control Publishing Reading Revise Suggesting Editing

Hypotheses Ownership: Control, Publishing, and Reading - high, Suggesting - low, Editing group - lowest Perceived learning: Cognitive aspect: similar for all groups; Socio-emotional aspect lowest in Editing group Quality of outcomes: Control, Publishing, and Reading - low, Suggesting and Editing groups - high

Method Participants: 118 undergraduates (80% women) from the Department of Education and Psychology at the Open University. Age range: 16-54, Mean: 27.1 Instruments and Procedure: Each participant read the same academic material in Hebrew and was asked to write a document using Google Docs with up to 400 words, evaluated the quality of their draft, read another document, revised their own document, reevaluate the quality of the final version, and report a sense of ownership, perceived quality of collaboration and perceived learning

Results: 1. Ownership

Results: 2. Perceived learning Participants in all groups perceived their learning to be high for both the cognitive aspect and the socio-emotional aspect

Results: 3. Perceived outcome quality As hypothesized, the quality of a revised document was seen as higher only after collaborative learning

Results: 4. Perceived quality of collaboration Participants in all groups believed that collaboration results in better documents Evaluation of the contribution of collaboration was asymmetric: students felt that while they did not exacerbate the document they read or edited, others made their document worse when reading, suggesting or editing it

Conclusions Psychological ownership: Editing and Reading resulted in low level, whereas Suggesting and Publishing resulted in high level No differences in perceived learning The quality of a revised document was seen as higher only after collaborative learning Students believe that a document that was written collaboratively might have a higher quality than a document written alone, but evaluation of the contribution of collaboration was asymmetric

מתוך פוסט: שיתוף מניסיוני בעבודה עם ויקי מתוך פוסט: שיתוף מניסיוני בעבודה עם ויקי "באחת ממטלות הקורס X נתבקשנו ליצור מעין מאגר מושגים מתוך התכנים הנלמדים בקורס. היה על כל סטודנט לכתוב הגדרות לשני מושגים ולהתייחס לפחות לארבעה מושגים של אחרים. בתחילה חשבתי שהרעיון נפלא וכתבתי את שני המושגים שלי (אחרי מחשבה והשקעה רבה). השתדלתי להוסיף, להרחיב, להבהיר ולא למחוק או לשנות מושגים של אחרים. אך עד מהרה הצטערתי לגלות שאנשים "הסתערו" על מושגי מחקו, שינו, הוסיפו והנורא מכל הפכו את הגדרת המושג לשגויה. היות והציון שלנו הושפע ממידת השתתפותנו בוויקי החברים לא תמיד הקדישו זמן ומחשבה לתכנים ולתחושות של האחר..."