Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| Wed, Apr 23 2025, 20:08:58 PDT | [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time ] |
| Subject: Merged text | |
|
Author: Michael de Souza |
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: Mon, Aug 19 2013, 20:01:03 PDT Guys, this is my attempt to mix our ideas, make comments and let's try to get it better: The authors establish connections between their own studies and previously published studies in the Introduction section, Collaborative Writing: Theoretical Bases, Benefits and Concerns, Collaborative Writing with Technology and in the Discussion part. It is more salient and important in the Discussion section, because it provides a connection between what has been previously done in the area and what they found in their own analysis. They made such connections in order to complement the researches about the nature of the collaborative writing process. It also raises the issues of what needs additional research. Establishing a connection with other studies gives credibility to the article itself, as well as provides more detailed information and theories to base the arguments shown in the article. In the section "material and methods" we can see that the purpose of it is outline the way researchers conducted the process in order to make results understandable, by providing detailed information about the participants, how they organized their work together, and by explaining how empirical data was collected and analyzed. Also, we must emphasize how the empirical data and facts are important for the achievement of the general objectives of the article, thus, we cannot forget that as a scientific work these will support the arguments that are presented, as the way to relate it to the theory cited, as well as to give credibility, accuracy and validity to the study. It is also important because the study was made through observation and the authors previously defined what kind of data they wanted to collect and then analyze. We also believe the data and facts presented were sufficient to convince us of the conclusions that the authors have proposed because they showed statistical data about what they have analyzed, having a sufficient sampling rate, and the results are accurate and according to the reality. They presented the evolution of collaborative writing using Web-based word processing tools and what is involved in this process: contributions and benefits using such technologic resource. Finally, the purpose and relevance of the “Discussion Section” is to interpret the results by raising questions and providing explanations through discussion of the relevant information they found and make connections between the authors’ study and the previous literature analyzed, as well as to foment new studies. In sum, they have shown that the success of collaborative writing depends on some factors inherent to the process and the level of participants. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| Subject | Author | Date |
| Re: Merged text | Bárbara | Mon, Aug 19 2013, 20:07:46 PDT |