Obwohl Zusammenarbeit bei Wiki im Werkzeug angelegt ist, führt der Einsatz in der Lehre nicht zwingend zur wirklichen Zusammenarbeit. Die Autoren haben festgestellt, das oft wenige Lernende viel beitragen und im Gegenzug viele wenig beitragen. Zudem werden die Beiträge relativ spät vor dem Abgabetermin im Wiki eingetragen, so dass andere nur wenig davon profitieren können.

This paper describes a wiki implementation of a collaborative writing task undertaken by undergraduate psychology students. Assessment of the task was based on minimum contribution requirements and these were successfully verified using a series of bespoke wiki log analysis routines. However, given the nature of the task, we were also interested in assessing the degree to which students behaved cooperatively and collaboratively in developing their contributions and whether this might be determined or inferred through a more detailed analysis of number, timing and scope of contributions. We explore this potential and in doing so identify prospective deficiencies in both our learning design and students’ and educators’ use of wikis. Potential approaches for mitigating or ameliorating such problems are then discussed.

Wikis are widely promoted as collaborative writing tools and are gaining in popularity in educational settings. However, while wikis include features that are designed to facilitate collaboration, it does not necessarily follow that their use will ensure or even encourage collaborative learning behaviour. The few empirical studies that have considered this issue report equivocal findings. We assessed students collaborative behaviour based on their contributions to a wiki-based shared writing task using a variety of text and time based metrics. We found little evidence of collaboration despite adopting a learning design that was intended to support it. While overall participation was high, a relatively small proportion of students did the bulk of the work and many students’ contributions were superficial. Students made little use of the wiki’s commenting feature – a critical tool for contextualising and coordinating their contributions for and with others, and the majority of contributions were made very late in the task, making the possibility of extensive collaboration unlikely. These findings are discussed in relation to factors that may lead to the more successful integration of innovative, technology based learning activities into broader undergraduate curricula.