Collaborative Writing in a Collaborative Department: Establishing a Departmental Wiki to Create Constructive Knowledge and Community among University Students

Jasmine Williams Karen Kuralt, PhD - Chair George Jensen, PhD Joseph Williams, PhD PROBLEM STATEMENT My first two theory courses as a graduate student were intimidating. When I read, I felt as though I was vaguely interpreting the theories, but I couldnt call them to mind and I couldnt integrate them into my own understanding. I began to search for other input on the theorist. Being a digital native, I immediately went to Google and Wikipedia. My findings were limited to information about the theorists in other fields without a focus on rhetoric. Theorists contributions seemed to be focused on one of two things: science or art. But Plato described rhetoric as mere cookery, so of course there was no mention of it. For example, when Googling Francis Bacon return results lead to a few essays that can be downloaded on Bacon, books for purchase, and a sentence on Wikipedia that states Bacon developed the scientific study of rhetoric. His Wikipedia page lists his influences in science and law, but no mention of rhetoric (Google: 11/26/2013).

When I went to class, I realized that this was a common issue for many graduate students in the Professional and Technical Writing MA program (PTW). Often times, PTW graduate students struggle with understanding what theorists are trying to assert and struggle to understand the theory itself. As the semester progressed, I would continue the same process. Some days I would read and grasp things, only to realize I missed the mark during class. On other days, I found that I was right on it. Regardless, every day, after class, I left with a much better understanding of the theorist and the theory after discussions with my instructor and classmates. But I couldnt take them with me at all times, and in the meantime, how was I to read 40-50 pages and emerge with some comprehension of the text? I began to envision a wiki specific to rhetoric that students would create and access to further their understanding of theorists in the field. PURPOSE STATEMENT Reading theoretical text can be an intense read for new scholars emerging into the field (graduate students). This can easily result in misinterpretations and misreading of the text. The expertise of the instructor is helpful but not available during study time. When students feel illprepared for class, this can further elevate the average stresses of the graduate student, and make students question their own intellect. There is a need to develop a tool that assists graduate students in collaborative knowledge building for the field of Rhetoric and Writing.

One of the most common tools available for collaborative knowledge building is the web 2.0 tool, wiki.. Wikis encourage collaborative knowledge creation making it a fitting platform for collaborative pedagogy in a learner-centered classroom. A wiki is defined as a knowledge management tool that allows individuals to create, edit, and link web pages as well as add pictures, sounds, and movies to a web site while also providing a means for asynchronous communication and collaboration among members of a wiki community (OBannon and Britt 294). I propose to create a departmental wiki for the Rhetoric and Writing Department that can be maintained by rhetoric and writing graduate and undergraduate students. The wiki would be integrated as a part of the final project for rhetoric and writing theory courses. Students can contribute to the wiki either by generating a new entry or editing a current entry. Undergraduate students would include entries that relate rhetoric to other fields, such as the rhetoric of football or the rhetoric of domestic violence. Graduate students would include entries about theorists and/or concepts, such as Kenneth Burke and terministic screens. Graduate students would also participate in the practice of editing, known as shaping in the terms of wiki activity, the continuous revision of ones own and others contribution to a Wiki (Majchrzak and Wagner 455). Over multiple semesters, the accumulation of entries would result in a fully developed wiki. Aspirations for the wiki include use in First-Year-Composition as a reference and recruitment tool for the Department of Rhetoric and Writing, and open editing use for rhetoric and writing students not currently enrolled in a theory course. For the purposes of this project, I will design a prototype wiki from solicited theory of rhetoric papers and presentations from graduate, undergraduate students, and alumni. I will create a pilot wiki using either MediaWiki, WikiSpaces, or Confluence software. The student and alumni contributions will be curated and placed into the prototype wiki to create an initial entry for specific theorists or concepts in the Rhetoric and Writing field. Once entries are entered, students and instructors will be solicited to test the prototype wiki. Surveys will be used to collect data regarding the experiences with the wiki and knowledge creation. Data collected from the pilot will be used to determine student willingness to use the wiki, to indicate troubleshoot areas, and to detect possible apprehension about use of the wiki. Data collected from instructors will be used to assess their willingness to integrate the wiki and to determine the need for instructional materials.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE Among many web 2.0 technologies, wikis have a reputation of being quick, flexible resources for instant web publishing. Wikis are a collection of web pages hyperlinked to create a knowledge system. Wiki users can edit any page on the wiki at any time. The use of the web browser as the access portal allows revision free of system restraints. A mock system of checks

and balances is implemented in the revision process of most wikis. This allows users to view any changes made to the wiki and to revert back to previous states if necessary. The abilities to add audio, video, images, protect pages, integrate discussion threads, and customize reading, writing, and access rights have made wikis a favored social software for educators. Breaking traditions This enthusiasm for the wiki has caused for experimentation by teachers and trainers alike, resulting in numerous publications on wiki usage, classroom experiences, and classroom implications. Among these studies, many patterns emerge regarding successes and failures of wiki assignments. For these studies, the person who determined the success or failures of the wiki was either the researcher (or educator) or the learner. Methodologies included either student self-assessment or instructor evaluation of wiki usage based upon a specific model. These opposing perspectives provide a comprehensive view of wiki usage in educational settings ranging across the disciplines and into the workplace. The motivation for much of the research was to test the wiki for noted problems and address apprehension by participants. The researchers (or educators) used a variety of environments to test various outcomes from wiki usage. Some discovered new findings while others recounted similar problems. A common problem with integration of wiki usage for the instructor is the perceived sacrificing of authority. The instructors role is not sacrificed with the implementation of a classroom wiki. Studies have shown that teachers are able to maintain classroom authority while also guiding students along their coursework (Daspit and D'Souza; Manion and Selfe; Wheeler, Yeomans, and Wheeler). In fact, students receptions of wikis are influenced by the teachers own perception of wikis. Studies shows that when teachers are enthusiastic about wiki usage, students have increased ability to absorb new knowledge and higher levels of understanding (Daspit and D'Souza 677; Sheehy). But it may be difficult for teachers to be enthusiasts when they are unsure of how students will respond. Teaching students accustomed to traditional modes of teaching in a nontraditional mode is another common issue, but careful planning and necessary reevaluating of assessment measures may solve a portion of the problem. Researchers indicate that traditional modes have not met all of students various learning styles; however, nontraditional modes of teaching may be met with anxiety by overwhelmed students (Karsavvidis 226; Randolph 120). Studies show that adding a classroom wiki as a supplement to a traditional classroom can accommodate a wide range of needs for students and for instructors (Daspit and D'Souza; O'Bannon and Britt 295). One study indicates that careful scaffolding of wiki assignments and guided practice enables students to become familiar with the technology, even to the point of adequately assessing themselves (Manion and Selfe 36). When students can become more interactive with these nontraditional modes of teaching, they can become more autonomous learners. Rethinking audiences

Students enjoy the empowerment that the wiki provides but with greater levels of autonomy also comes anxiety. As with any social software, wikis revamp the timeless question of all writing: what of audience? In numerous studies, students reported high levels of anxiety about posting work before a public audience but less anxiety when posting before students in their classroom (Avci and Askar 202; Liu 62-63). Students are also apprehensive about sharing their work with other students due to fear of competition or plagiarism (Heafner and Friedman 291; Dlouh and Dlouh 171; Wheeler, Yeomans, and Wheeler; O'Bannon and Britt; Karsavvidis). To students benefit, studies report that students thought more critically about their work when constructing for a public audience. Initially, students may work more in competition than collaboration, but when genuine discussion occurs through discussion forums, the authenticity of the interaction increases and dispels anxiety. The fear of plagiarism can be resolved with the revision history for instructor access (Daspit and D'Souza; Wheeler, Yeomans, and Wheeler; Karsavvidis 225; Su and Beaumont 425). The greatest issue and potentially most detrimental issues of audience related to wikis is the inhibition to edit others work (Karsavvidis; Wheeler, Yeomans, and Wheeler; Su and Beaumont; O'Bannon and Britt). There appears to be no quick fix solution to this problem; however, studies show that students gain confidence the longer they use wikis (Su and Beaumont; Heafner and Friedman). Building communities The most successful wikis seems to involve community building that takes places over a longer period of time than one semester. One study indicated that students who composed their literature reviews in a wiki for a period of one year showed positive shifts in perceptions of wiki usage. Students actively commented on one anothers worked, showed comments tha t illustrated critical thinking, and stated that they felt comfortable commenting on one anothers work. Use of a wiki more than one semester appeared to have a positive effect on many outcomes (Su and Beaumont). And a workplace wiki study indicated that workers felt a greater sense of community when they contributed to the wiki (Majchrzak and Wagner). The key is participation. Studies indicate that if participants feel in conflict with the text, they are more likely to contribute to the wiki in the spirit of contributing to a greater body of knowledge. (Majchrzak and Wagner; Kimmerle, Moskaliuk, and Cress). One Possible Solution Wiki use in the classroom appears to be a process of trial-and-error. Some of the best results suggest that problems with wiki usage in the classroom may be addressed with a long term wiki such as the Department of Rhetoric and Writing wiki prototype. Students will have the opportunity to develop and maintain the wiki while also creating community. Ideally, the prototype wiki will address the wiki issues by doing the following:

Increasing longevity by expanding the wiki tasks across multiple semesters (Su and Beaumont) Using concepts to achieve conceptual understanding (Heafner and Friedman; Kimmerle, Moskaliuk, and Cress). Exposing students to an authentic audience to improve their critical thinking skills (Liu). Enhancing student esteem and reputation within the department (Dlouh and Dlouh; Heafner and Friedman; Majchrzak and Wagner) Blending traditional and nontraditional modes of teaching to increase student learning (Daspit and D'Souza). Supplementing the course content of the existent curriculum (Daspit and D'Souza)

This pilot study will lay the framework for a larger scale wiki project by attempting to address the aforementioned issues and answering the three research questions needed to estimate wiki usage. METHODOLOGY AND TENTATIVE THESIS TIMELINE My methodology will seek to accumulate data to answer the following research questions: 1. Will students feel they have a better understanding of rhetoric concepts or theorists after engaging in the wiki pilot? 2. Will students be willing to contribute partial knowledge to the wiki in favor of the greater community? 3. Will instructors be willing to integrate wiki technology into their course to help students improve their understanding of the courses theorists or concepts? To answer these questions, I will take the following steps: TASK Develop a survey questionnaire of Likert scale statements, multiple-choice, and open responses. Send IRB materials. Select either the MediaWiki, Wikispaces, or Confluence Wiki software. Become fluent in selected wiki software. Create questionnaire in online survey system. Continue drafting literature review DATE Completed December 6th December 7th December 21st

December 7th December 21st December 13th

Literature review draft 1 Send email to multiple Rhetoric and Writing listservs requesting students and alumni to submit theory papers and presentations. Send informational materials, consents forms, and contributor survey to participants (See Appendix A) Curate content and divide 10-15 papers into 3-5 subjects. Use content from papers to generate 3-5 wiki entries based on subjects, copying and pasting portions of papers to accumulate into a cohesive wiki entry. Contact wiki contributors and other Rhetoric and Writing students to participate in pilot. Contact Rhetoric and Writing instructors to interact with prototype. Distribute link to wiki pilot and appropriate questionnaires. Conduct Wiki Pilot - Part I Students will read wiki entries and have the choice to complete one of the following tasks: Read entries to gauge your new level of understanding of the theory or theorists. Contribute and/or edit writing of the theories/theorists. Tag and/or hyperlink to a similar article or include a(n) article(s) you would tag and/or hyperlink to if available. Students will complete questionnaire. (See Appendix B) Conduct Wiki Pilot - Part II Instructors will read wiki entries and will have the

January 6th December 6th January 21st (contingent upon IRB approval) December 6th January 21st (contingent upon IRB approval) December 6th January 21st (contingent upon IRB approval) December 6th January 21st (contingent upon IRB approval)

December 6th January 21st (contingent upon IRB approval)

December 6th January 21st (contingent upon IRB approval) December 6th January 21st (contingent upon IRB approval)

December 6th January 21st (contingent upon IRB approval)

choice to complete one of the following task: Read entries to gauge your new level of understanding of the theory or theorists. Contribute and/or edit writing of the theories/theorists. Tag and/or hyperlink to a similar article or include a(n) article(s) you would tag and/or hyperlink to if available. Instructors will complete questionnaire. (See Appendix C) Collect data

December 6th January 21st (contingent upon IRB approval) No later than March 1st March 7th by 5PM March 14th March 28th April 11th April 25th May 1st

Collect data and analyze Graduate application due Draft 1 sent to thesis members Make changes to draft and resend Make changes to draft and resent Defend thesis CONCLUSION

My goal is to understand how students interact with the wiki, possible motivations for these interactions, and if students feel they have learned more information based on their brief use of the wiki. I would also like to understand students perceptions a nd comfort levels of integrating their own ideas with others in the form of a wiki. I hope that instructors are willing to use the wiki in their classrooms. My goal is that both students and instructors will share enthusiasm for the wiki and be willing to use the wiki as a learning and community tool for the Rhetoric and Writing Department. TENTATIVE THESIS OUTLINE Introduction -Background of problem -Problem statement -Purpose statement Review of Literature

-History of wiki and social software -Wiki usage in the classroom -Selected wiki software information Methodology -Statement of procedure -Pilot procedure -Survey analysis methods Results -Student survey data -Instructor survey data Discussion -Student and instructors response discussion -Acknowledgement of limitations -Analysis of strengths and weaknesses in pilot -Implications for departmental wiki Conclusion

REFERENCES Avci, Ummuhan, and Askar, Peter. The Comparison of the Opinions of the University Students on the Usage of Blog and Wiki for Their Courses. Educational Technology & Safety. 15. 2. (2012): 194-205. Academic Search Complete. Web. 16 Sept. 2013 . Cuseo, Joe. The Case and Context for Learner-Centered Pedagogy. Web. 14. Sep. 2013. Daspit, Joshua J. and DSouza, Derrick E. Using the Community of Inquiry Framework to Introduce Wiki Environments in Blended-Learning Pedagogies: Evidence From a Business Capstone Course. Academy of Management Learning & Education. 11. 4 (2012): 666683. Academic Search Complete. Web. 4 Sept. 2013. Dlouh, Jana and Dlouh, Ji. Use of Wiki Tools for Raising the Communicative Aspect of Learning. European Conference of e-Learning. Ed. Prague, Czech Republic: Charles University Environment Center, Print. Hanstedt, Paul. Reforming General Education: Three Reasons to Make Writing Across the Curriculum Part of the Conversation. Liberal Education. (2012): 49-51. Academic Search Complete. Web. 30 Aug. 2013. Heafner, Tina, and Friedman, Adam. Wikis and Constructivism in Secondary Social Studies: Fostering a Deeper Understanding. Computers in the Schools. 25. (3-4). (2008): 288302. Education Search Complete. Web. 11 Oct. 2013. Howard, Rebecca. Collaborative Pedagogy A Guide to Composition Pedagogies. Eds. Tate, Gary, Rupiper, Amy, and Schick, Kurt. 54-70. New York: Oxford UP, 2001. Print. Karasavvidis, Ilias. Wiki uses in higher education: exploring barriers to successful implementation. Interactive Learning Environments. 18. 3. (2010): 219-231. Academic Search Complete. Web. 16. Sept. 2013. Kimmerle, Joachim, Moskaliuk, Johannes, and Cress, Ulrike. Using Wikis for Learning and Knowledge Building: Results of an Experimental Study. Educational Technology & Society. 14.2. (2011): 138-148. Academic Search Complete. Web. 16 Sept. 2013. Kuralt, Karen. Collaborative Literacy in the Writing Classroom: A Theory of Pedagogy. Diss. Purdue University, 2004. Print. Lih, Andrew. The Wikipedia Revolution: How a Bunch of Nobodies Created the Worlds Greatest Encyclopedia. New York: Hyperion, 2009, Print.

Liu, Xun. Empirical Testing of a Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: An Exploratory Study of Educational Wikis. Communication Education. 59.1. (2010):52-69. Academic Search Complete. Web. 18 Sept. 2013. Majchrzak, Ann., Wagner, Christian., Yates, Dave. The Impact of Shaping on Knowledge Reuse for Organizational Improvement with Wikis. MIS Quaterly. 37. 2. (2013):455-469. Academic Search Complete. Web. 4 Sept. 2013. Manion, Christopher E. and Selfe, Richard. Sharing an Assessment Ecology: Digital Media, Wikis, and the Social Work of Knowledge. Technical Communication Quarterly.21. (2012): 25-45. Academic Search Complete. Web. 10 Sept. 2013. Maui Island Guide. Mauimapp. n.d. Web. 12 Oct. 2013. OBannon, Blanche W., and Britt, Virginia G. Creating/Developing/Using a Wiki Study Guide: Effects on Student Achievement. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 44. 4 (2012): 293-312. Academic Search Complete. Web. 10 Sept. 2013. OSullivan, Dan. Wikipedia: A New Community of Practice? Britain: MPG Books Group, 2009. Print. Randolph, Gary B. Collaborative Learning in the Classroom: A Writing Across the Curriculum Approach. Journal of Engineering Education. (2000): 119-122. Academic Search Complete. Web. 04 Sept. 2013. Sheehy, Geoffrey. The Wiki as Knowledge Repository: Using a Wiki in a Community of Practice to Strengthen K-12 Education. TechTrends. 52.6. (2008): 55-60. Academic Search Complete. Web. 6 Sept. 2013. Su, Feng, and Beaumont, Chris. Evaluating the use of a wiki for collaborative learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. 47. 4. (2010): 417-431. Academic Search Complete. Web. 19 Sept. 2013. theory. Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, 2013. Web. 30 Oct. 2013. Walker, Martin, A. Wikipedia as a Resource for Chemistry. Enhancing Learning with Online Resources, Social Networking, and Digital Libraries. New York: American Chemical Society, 2010. 80-92. Print. Wheeler, Steve, Yeomans, Peter, and Wheeler, Dawn. The good, the bad and the wiki: Evaluating student-generated content for collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology. 39. 6. (2008): 987-995. Academic Search Complete. Web. 19 Sept. 2013.

APPENDIX A Contributor Survey 1. What is your age? a) 18 - 21 b) 22- 25 c) 26 - 30 d) 30 - 35 e) 36 - 40 f) 41 - 50 g) 51 - 60 e) Over 61 f) Prefer not to answer 2. What is your gender? a) Male b) Female c) Other d) Prefer not to answer 3. Please specify your ethnicity or race. a) American Indian or Alaska Native b) Asian c) Black or African - American d) Hispanic or Latino e) White or Caucasian f) Other g) Prefer not to answer 4. Which of the following best describes your roles at UALR? a) Undergraduate i) 31 to 60 hours ii) 61 to 90 hours iii) Over 90 hours b) Graduate student ONLY c) Graduate assistant i) Teaching assistant ii) UWC intern iii) Other ____________________ d) Other __________________ *If you are not a student, please exit this questionnaire and contact the researcher at jcclark@ualr.edu to receive assistance.

Theory is defined as a system of general principles and ideas intended to explain something, related to a specific subject (Merriam-Webster). For the remaining questions, I will use the term theory course to refer to a course grounded in the reading of academic scholarship used to explain phenomena in specific fields. A theory course does not necessarily have to contain the word theory in its course title. In actuality, all academic courses are grounded in theory; however, this term is meant to apply to courses heavily based in theoretical concepts that are explicitly taught as theory to its students. 5. How many theory courses have you taken throughout your college career? a) 1- 2 b) 3 - 4 c) 5 - 6 d) Over 6 6. How many theory courses have you taken in the Department of Rhetoric and Writing? a) 1 - 2 b) 3 - 4 c) 5 - 6 d) Over 6 7. Please select all of the rhetoric and writing theory courses you have taken. a) Theories of Rhetoric and Writing (Undergraduate/Graduate) b) Composition Theory c) Language Theory d) Theory of Technical Communication e) Rhetorical Theory f) List any other courses that you feel are relevant ________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ 8.Please rate your reasons for choosing to participate in this study on a scale of 1-5 with five being I strongly agree, three being neutral, and one being I strongly disagree: To share my work with others. To collaborate with others. To contribute to a new department endeavor. To experiment working with a wiki. To enhance my reputation within the department. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1

To impress my instructors. To assist the researcher(s).

5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1

APPENDIX B Tester Survey PART A: Demographic questions If you contributed writing(s) to the wiki, please skip to PART B. 1. What is your age? a) 18 - 21 b) 22- 25 c) 26 - 30 d) 30 - 35 e) 36 - 40 f) 41 - 50 g) 51 - 60 e) Over 61 f) Prefer not to answer 2. What is your gender? a) Male b) Female c) Other d) Prefer not to answer 3. Please specify your ethnicity or race. a) American Indian or Alaska Native b) Asian c) Black or African - American d) Hispanic or Latino e) White or Caucasian f) Other g) Prefer not to answer 4. Which of the following best describes your roles at UALR? a) Undergraduate i) 31 to 60 hours ii) 61 to 90 hours iii) Over 90 hours b) Graduate student ONLY c) Graduate assistant i) Teaching assistant ii) UWC intern iii) Other ____________________ d) Other __________________

*If you are not a student, please exit this questionnaire and contact the researcher at jcclark@ualr.edu to receive assistance. Theory is defined as a system of general principles and ideas intended to explain something, related to a specific subject (Merriam-Webster). For the remaining questions, I will use the term theory course to refer to a course grounded in the reading of academic scholarship used to explain phenomena in specific fields. A theory course does not necessarily have to contain the word theory in its course title. In actuality, all academic courses are grounded in theory; however, this term is meant to apply to courses heavily based in theoretical concepts that are explicitly taught as theory to its students. 5. How many theory courses have you taken throughout your college career? a) 1- 2 b) 3 - 4 c) 5 - 6 d) Over 6 6. How many theory courses have you taken in the Department of Rhetoric and Writing? a) 1 - 2 b) 3 - 4 c) 5 - 6 d) Over 6 7. Please select all of the rhetoric and writing theory courses you have taken. a) Theories of Rhetoric and Writing (Undergraduate/Graduate) b) Composition Theory c) Language Theory d) Theory of Technical Communication e) Rhetorical Theory f) List any other courses that you feel are relevant ________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ 8. Please rate your reasons for choosing to participate in this study on a scale of 1-5 with five being I strongly agree, three being neutral, and one being I strongly disagree: To share my work with others. To collaborate with others. To contribute to a new department endeavor. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1

To experiment working with a wiki. To enhance my reputation within the department. To impress my instructors. To assist the researcher(s).

5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1

PART B: Attribution of Work If you did not contribute writing(s) to the wiki, please skip to PART C. 1. Please rate your agreement the following statements on a scale of 1-5 with five being I strongly agree, three being neutral, and one being I strongly disagree: I feel that my work was adequately represented. I feel that my contribution was valuable. I feel that the information I read in the wiki expanded my knowledge on the subject matter. 2. Please rate your agreement the following statements on a scale of 1-5 with five being I strongly agree, three being neutral, and one being I strongly disagree: I was able to easily find my contribution(s). My work was easily identifiable among other works. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1

3. Please rate your level of comfort on a scale of 1-5 with five being Very comfortable, three being neutral, and one being Not comfortable. NOTE: PTW represents Professional and Technical Writing program Submitting my entry to the researcher Arriving to test the wiki Navigating the wiki PTW graduate students viewing my work 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1

PTW undergraduate students viewing my work Viewing my work integrated with others Possibly editing others work Possibly others editing my work My instructor(s) viewing my work Other instructors viewing my work My work being used to teach other PTW students My work being used to teach composition students My work being used when I am no longer a student at UALR PART C: Overall Wiki Experience

5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1

5 4 3 2 1

5 4 3 2 1

1. Thinking about programs like Wikipedia, how would you describe your interactions with technology? 2. Please describe your experiences working with others for in-class activities, peer revision, and major projects. If you used technology, did this technology alter your collaborative experience? 3. Please rate the following statements on a scale of 1-5 with five being I strongly agree, three being neutral, and one being I strongly disagree: I feel the information listed was accurate. I feel the information listed was relevant. I feel the information listed expanded my knowledge on one or more of the entries. I feel the information listed has expanded my 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1

understanding on one or more of the entries. 4. Please rate the following statements on a scale of 1-5 with five being I strongly agree, three being neutral, and one being I strongly disagree: I found the wiki easy to navigate. I found the wiki program intuitive. This wiki program seemed familiar to me. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1

5. Based on your experience with the wiki, would you be willing to take a course that uses the wiki and be willing to contribute your writing to the wiki? Why or why not? 6. Based on your experience with the wiki, would you be willing to allow others to edit your work? Why or why not? Would you be willing to edit others work? Why or why not?

APPENDIX C Instructor Survey PART A: Instructor Demographic Questions 1. What is your age? a) 21 - 30 b) 31 - 40 c) 41 - 50 d) 51 - 60 e) 61 - 70 f) 71 - 80 g) 81 - 90 e) Prefer not to answer 2. What is your gender? a) Male b) Female c) Other d) Prefer not to answer 3. Please specify your ethnicity or race. a) American Indian or Alaska Native b) Asian c) Black or African - American d) Hispanic or Latino e) White or Caucasian f) Other g) Prefer not to answer 4. Do you teach online? Y/N 5. Please select which best describes your use of the Blackboard shell accompanying your courses? a) I dont use it. b) I only use it for my syllabus and/or reading materials. c) I use it for my syllabus, reading materials, and other portions of my course.

Theory is defined as a system of general principles and ideas intended to explain something, related to a specific subject (Merriam-Webster). For the remaining questions, I will use the term theory course to refer to a course grounded in the reading of academic scholarship used to explain phenomena in specific fields. A theory course does not necessarily have to contain the word theory in its course title. In actuality, all academic courses are grounded in theory; however, this term is meant to apply to courses heavily based in theoretical concepts that you explicitly taught as theory to your students. 7. How many different theory courses (not sections) have you taught throughout your career? a) 1- 2 b) 3 - 4 c) 5 - 6 d) Over 6 8. How many different theory courses (not sections) have you taught in UALRs Department of Rhetoric and Writing? a) 1 - 2 b) 3 - 4 c) 5 - 6 d) Over 6 7. Please select all of the Rhetoric and Writing Theory courses you have taught. a) Theories of Rhetoric and Writing (Undergraduate/Graduate) b) Composition Theory c) Language Theory d) Theory of Technical Communication e) Rhetorical Theory f) List any other courses that you feel are relevant ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ PART B: Instructor Technology Experiences 1. Thinking about programs like Wikipedia, how would you describe your interactions with technology? 2. As an instructor, what type of technologies have you used in your classroom? Do you use these technologies for collaboration? PART C: Instructor Wiki Experiences 1. What do you think would be the most useful about this wiki in relation to the courses you teach?

2. What challenges or concerns would you have adapting this wiki into your course? 3. Would use this wiki in the courses you teach? Why or why not?