Study on the Dynamic Nature of Learning in Collaborative Writing

Cooperative learning is an area that falls under the active learning paradigm, and academics are always seeking for new methods to further their grasp of this topic. According to Mar (1997), examples of instructional strategies and grouping structures include "instructional strategies or grouping structures in which students are separated into diverse groups to perform instructional tasks" (page 8). This is an excerpt from the full article. Through the lens of this concept, cooperative education may be understood in the best possible way. In addition to this, Mar made reference to the research that was carried out by Johnson and Johnson (1989) in addition to the research that was carried out by Totten, Sills, Digby, and Ross (1991), who discovered that "[r]esults from a meta-analysis of these [cooperative learning environments] data reveal that the average students in the cooperative situations outperformed their counterparts who were in competitive and individualistic environments" (p. 9). due students are frequently given individualized writing tasks as a component of their overall learning experience in this subject area, this knowledge is particularly relevant in the sphere of English education due of the nature of the subject matter.

According to research conducted by Roca et al. (1999, 2001) and Woodall (2002), writers who are writing in their second language (L2) may periodically go back to writing in their original language while doing so. Several studies (including Antón and Camilla's 1998 study, as well as Swain and Lapkin's 1998 study, Villamil and Guerrero's 1996 study, and Antón and Camilla's 1998 study) have shown that L2 writers communicate with one another in their native tongue when they are working together. According to Wang and Wen (2002), one of the most significant differences between The difference between writing in a first language and writing in a second language is that writers of L2 have the advantage of being able to write in more than one language. Writers of a first language are limited to only one language. When they are writing in the L2, they may notice that their brains constantly switch between the L1 and the L2 as they do so. The author of the book that was published in 2003 by Nation claims that it is simpler to understand the meaning of a foreign word in L1 when the sentence containing the term is both identifiable and functional. According to Qi (1998), when participants were challenged to engage higher-order thinking abilities, they increased their usage of their first language. L1 was employed to assist in the production of concepts, the growth of thoughts, the checking of word meanings, and the process of compensating in order to get over the constraints of "working memory." According to the findings of Whalen and Ménard (1995), authors of intermediate level L2 who are more adept employ elements of their L1 when writing in their L2 language. These writers were able achieving their textual and pragmatic aims. Research has shown that students gain when they are allowed to use their L1 while learning in the classroom, despite the worries of teachers. Students should be allowed to speak in their mother tongue throughout class if doing so would assist them in coming up with fresh concepts or learning the meaning of new terms in the second language more rapidly through translation.

Only a few of study initiatives have, up until this point, taken into account the role that humour plays in collaborative writing. Ohta's (1995) study is the only one that examines the role that humour plays in the setting of collaboration. Another example of study that has found fun generative writing processes is that conducted by Daiute and Dalton (1988, 1993). These studies illustrate how young kids play with language while coming up with character names for a tale in which they are actively involved. The International Communication Association (Berger 1976) provides the following definition of humor: "the expression of incongruous meaning in a manner that provokes laughter." This is the definition of humor that was offered by the International Communication Association. Group dynamics are used as a management strategy to moderate or strengthen power relationships (Holmes, 2000). In addition to their more common functions of building rapport (Hay, 1994), establishing and maintaining solidarity fostering learning and community, and creating a sense of cohesion group dynamics are also used to create a sense of cohesion . There is no guarantee that the use of humor will result in constructive outcomes all of the time. A form of humor that puts down other people's "faces" is a style of comedy that is a form of humor that can be potentially detrimental to the health of the audience members who are seeing it. The term "putdown humour" is defined as "an effort to gain enjoyment at the cost of something or someone," and it manifests itself "via an insult, degrading joke, teasing, sarcasm, or self-deprecating comment." They performed study to examine the influence that putdown humor had on the establishment of a temporary organization and found that it was a crucial component in the process of drawing new members. They concluded that the group had been successful as a result of the use of putdown humor. The growing trust among the members of the group as well as their growing feeling of camaraderie were put to the test when they were told a series of putdown jokes, all of which were laughed off with flying colors by the group. In the idea that the benefits of collaborative writing outweigh its drawbacks, many businesses opt to have their staff work on projects as members of teams rather than individually. This includes the employment of writers as members of such teams. On the other hand, we will discuss how essential aspects such as the make-up of a team, the capabilities of its members, and a productive dynamic among the group are to the accomplishment of a business endeavour. For the time being, let's have a look at the benefits of collaborative writing that have been specifically outlined below.

• Writing that is produced in collaboration with others has the potential to foster a more pleasant environment for work. As a result of the fact that the members of the team are responsible for a portion of the project's writing, it is necessary for them to maintain verbal, electronic, and, in some instances, even virtual communication with one another. These interactions frequently lead to the development and cultivation of a collegial attitude, which eventually results in a workplace that contributes to the general well-being of the business.

• Environments that are more favourable to the creation of collegial attitudes are more likely to foster the development of collegial attitudes. When working together to build a final product, it is essential to bear in mind the wide range of people who will be reading the product in its final form. When a group of individuals are brought together with the intention of attaining diversity in mind, the work that they produce has a greater tendency to be sensitive to the several cultures and audiences that they serve. This is because the diversity aim was in mind when they were brought together. If, for example, the team integrates the skill sets of women, men, members of the LGBT community, cis and non-cis males and females, as well as individuals of various ethnicities and cultures, then the final product will have taken into consideration the complexities that are associated with a variety of different groups.

 This is not something that can easily be performed by a single author or author group in an uncomplicated manner.Employees who have been with the company for a short period of time as well as those who have been there for a longer period of time can take advantage of the opportunity given by collaborative writing to improve their abilities as both leaders and subordinate team Once upon a time, a wise person made the observation that "to be a good leader, you must learn to follow." It is true that every once in a while, a person will come along who is destined to be a genuine leader; but, the ability to follow the lead of others is the single most critical quality that any leader can possess in order to be successful. Employees who have been given the opportunity to advance their careers and have also received proper preparation for such advancements often go on to become the most effective leaders in the organization. This is because they are able to comprehend the tasks that are at hand and have compassion for the difficulties that are a direct result of the responsibilities that have been given to them. When businesses make the choice to switch up the responsibilities of the members of a team, they provide their staff members with the opportunity to do a variety of tasks within the context of the team. There are a variety of roles that might fall under this category, including that of team leader, recorder, researcher, editor, and reporter.

• The practice of collaborative writing fosters increased engagement in active learning, which has a number of educational benefits, and this is one of the benefits of collaborative writing. When employees collaborate on writing projects, they place themselves in a position to improve their present talents while also gaining opportunities to learn new ones. It's possible that this will be a learning experience for everyone concerned. This is owing to the fact that they are working with other coworkers, some of whom may have more experience than they have in a certain area of specialization, and so they are learning from each other. The expansion of the business is aided by the production of written work that results from cooperative efforts. When every member of the team believes that their contribution is not only meaningful but also essential to the success of the project, they participate in it as owners rather than as workers, which ultimately has an influence on the bottom line, which is profit. And when a firm has achieved success as a direct result of fully engaged employees who see their contributions as the reasons for the company's success, it is certain that the company will continue to exist for a significant amount of time into the foreseeable future. This is because the employees view their contributions as the reasons for the company's success.

collaboration. The formulation of clear objectives is a prerequisite for writing in either solitary or group settings. It is essential, right from the beginning of the project, that the objective be made crystal clear in order to maximize the likelihood of the project's success. The team has to have a goal or an end result that is crystal clear in order for them to have any chance of being successful. They serve as a "lighthouse" that can be seen from a distance, and they guide the members to "safe harbors" or to a satisfying conclusion. From the very beginning, everyone of the team members should have a clear understanding of what is expected of them individually. She should be aware of both her own position on the team as well as the link between that role and the responsibilities and obligations of the other members of the group. Every member of the team should be aware that she plays a significant part in determining whether or not the project is successful. She will have a negative effect on the outcomes of the project if she does not complete her role with an inside-out mindset (a term that was coined by Blanchard, Ripley, and Parisi-Carew to describe the necessity for collaboration to begin on the inside of a person's heart, move to her intellect, and finally to her hands – where the work is done). Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that the group be provided with a setting in which they may congregate and talk about the project. In this setting, they should be able to, among other things, pose questions, share ideas, and provide feedback on the entire project.

Another approach for obtaining success in joint endeavors is developing the capacity to organize fruitful meetings that enable participants to readily share their thoughts and talents. This is an important aspect of successful collaboration. Instead than only letting one member of the team speak at a time and anticipating that the other members would simply hear what is being said, the success of this endeavor is frequently contingent on the group's ability to engage in skillful practices of attentive listening. The distinction between the two, listening and hearing, is largely dependent on the target and purpose of the person doing the processing. In his book titled "The Science and Art of Listening" which was published in 2012, Seth Horowitz makes the following distinction between the two: "The ability to pay attention is what separates someone who merely has a sense of hearing from someone who has the talent of listening." In order to truly listen, as opposed to merely hearing what is being said, you must first decide (or make a plan) to comprehend what is being communicated, and then you must give your undivided attention to whatever is being sent. When "The richness of life is not found in the volume and the rhythm," he adds. "Instead, the richness of life is found in the timbres and the variances that may be discerned.

Cooperative learning that takes place in person is considered to be the classic kind of collaborative learning. When compared to online collaborative learning, it is a classroom-based teaching style in which the instructor and students meet face to face in the classroom. A collaborative effort is required of the pupils in this case in order to accomplish an assignment. It is a classic classroom format, in which professors and students interact in a physical location. The instructor writes on a blackboard, and the students take notes in their notebooks thereafter. Face-to-face learning, An environment in which there is "a greater feeling of leadership from the teacher, and it is not as simple for pupils to disregard the instructor." Students and instructor gather in a room, which provides a strong physical backdrop for the discussion. The meeting is structured in a'stop and start' way. Everyone who is participating must be there at the same time, date, and location. Time is critical and serves as a constraint. Deadlines are frequently adhered to because there is a strong expectation that they will be completed on time and because it is not really practicable to continue into the following period of time. Work on one thing at a time and go through the agenda item by item is how most people operate. Work has been condensed and narrowed in scope." The kind of analysis varies and is "frequently reliant on the amount of time available." Discussions are often concluded within the meeting, and they take place within a predetermined time range, making it less likely that participants would lose track of where they are in the process. During meetings, there is typically little opportunity for thinking and even less chance that talks will be altered." In meetings, there is "anxiety at the outset and throughout the meeting—participation is uneven and generally dominated by men, although the group may attempt to distribute time equitably among members." It is necessary to take pauses in between sessions." Hearing without contributing may be considered inappropriate in a face-to-face context." Conversations are more rapid because of the immediacy of interactions and discussions, and they are less likely to cover as much depth; instead, they are more broad in nature; the group receives feedback, which may be verbal or visual. In a face-to-face learning scenario, there is the option of free-riding and avoiding delivering feedback; there is no permanent record of input; and there is the chance of quick responding to group at a time."

1. To determine whether or whether dyads can co-create possibilities for language acquisition and, if so, how such opportunities are manifested in reality 2. To get a better knowledge of post collaborative "change" in individual writing and the dynamic nature of learning in collaborative writing.

The audio-lingual learning approach was developed by the United States Army during World War II, when they recognized the need for multilingual interpreters, army soldiers, and translators for war-related operations and developed an audio-lingual learning strategy. It asserts that language acquisition is dependent on habit formation and behaviorist theory, among other things. Language as a characteristic may be acquired with the use of a set of reinforcement, and the learner can get positive and negative feedback based on right and incorrect usages of the trait, respectively, after learning the trait. It is the instructor's responsibility to prevent the student from exploiting incorrect characteristics in language usages. Audio-lingual technique is similar to direct method in that it focuses on teaching the language directly to the learner without the assistance of the learner's native language in order to describe and explain the use, grammar, and vocabulary of the target language. In contrast to the direct technique, which primarily focuses on vocabulary acquisition, the audio-lingual method places a greater emphasis on grammatical exercises. Because it is crucial to master grammar, the instructor demonstrates the right usages in the appropriate and anticipated manner, and the student repeats what he has heard. While maintaining the same pattern, the instructor teaches new language, which the students must use in the context of the already established structure. There are no hard and fast rules of teaching provided in the audio-lingual contest, and participants must remember the normal grammatical rules as they compete. By repeating a certain construct over and over again, the learner eventually memorizes it and can apply it spontaneously. This exercise allows the student to comprehend many other existing structures in the target language, which ultimately leads to increased acquisition and retention of the language. Teaching modules are mainly based on preplanned grammar exercises over which the student has little control, and they are designed to be as engaging as approach of language education is diametrically opposed to communicative language teaching in every way. The following are the methods of the audio-lingual technique, as taught via drills and pattern practise: 1. Learners listen to a sample dialogue 2. Learners revise line by line of the given dialogue 3. Learners practice substitutions in the pattern drills (key words or phrases in the dialogue) (Richards, 1986).

The applied linguists of the United Kingdom were the ones who came up with this method of language education. From the 1950s until the 1980s, this method was widely used all across the globe. Language is seen from the perspective of its structural organization. Realistic approaches are stressed in this technique, which focuses on words and phrases that are taught from real-life circumstances. As a result, the meanings of the words and sentences are always in relation to the contexts in which they are used. Due to the fact that the classroom environment is often restricted for situational learning, the teacher must be proactive and innovative in this circumstance. He or she must generate imagined situational teaching in and outside of the classroom by selecting situations from outside. The major characteristics of situational language teaching are as follows: 1. The primary aspect of situational language instruction is the emphasis on vocabulary and reading. 2. It is beneficial to get familiar with the most common grammatical structures and patterns of English, commonly known as situational tables. 3. Language acquisition is the creation of habits. 4. Using analogies successfully in language learning practise is believed to be the cornerstone of learning. 5. Errors in the use of words are evaluated negatively and are thought to be detrimental. This results in the creation of harmful habits. 6. The meaning of the phrases and words may be taught by relating them to the actual and cultural worlds, respectively.

Since its debut at the beginning of the 1970s, the Communicative Language Teaching technique has been widely regarded as the most effective language teaching method for achieving language proficiency. It is widely regarded as the most important source of inspiration for those involved in the planning, implementation, and analysis of English language instruction around the globe. In this approach, the objective of communication or engagement is seen as the most essential one. In today's world, the communicative approach is the most widely utilised technique of language education, and communicative methodology remains relevant because of its enormous successes. A communication revolution occurs, the accomplishments are always preserved in their original form. It is the ultimate objective of CLT to develop communicative competence rather than grammatical competence since the focus is on how to learn the target language for a variety of purposes rather than just mastering the language's grammar and syntax. As a result of CLT, one of the primary goals is the capacity to construct text kinds such as report narratives and interviews. Another aim is the continuation of interaction by sustaining situational changes while using a variety of tactics

These alterations may, in turn, foster learner autonomy, as well as agential behaviour and self-learning.We feel that this study is a humble beginning of perceiving the "learner resources" in a way that is really good and developing. We discovered, via the examination of the collaborative discourse, that despite the alterations in the educational settings, the learners' past semiotic resources did still assist in minimising their writing challenges. This was despite the fact that the learners had not been exposed to the ations. Indirect evidence suggests that the social interaction between the students may have an influence on the dyads' involvement with one another, risk-taking, and feedback-giving beyond just increasing the number of L possibilities. The current investigation did not focus on this particular facet of the problem. Despite this, there is a requirement to investigate it. To conclude, we would like to point out that the findings of this study in no way diminish the significance of either the teaching profession, the competencies of teachers, or the interactions between teachers. On the other hand, we suggest that teacher efforts should not stifle, nullify, or otherwise invalidate the student resources, but rather pave the way for the learner resources to be utilised to the most extent possible.

approach to language teaching. ELTJ, 57(3): 278- 287. 2. Bazerman, e. (1980). A relationship between reading and writing: The conversational model. College English, 41(6): 656-661. 3. Beare, S. (2000). Differences in Content Generating and Planning Processes of Adult L1 and L2 Proficient Writers. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Ottawa: Canada. 4. Benson, C. (2009). Designing effective Schooling in Multilingual contexts: The strengths and limitations of Bilingual 'models'. In Mohanty, A. K., Minati Panda, Robert Phillipson and Tove Skutnabb-Kangas (Eds.) Multilingual Education for Social Justice: Globalising the local. New Delhi: Orient Longman. 5. Bereiter, c., & Scardamalia, M. (1983). Does learning to write have to be so difficult? In A. Freedman, I. Pringle, & J. Yalden (Eds.), Learning to write: First language, second language. New York: Longman Inc. (pp. 20-33). 6. Beretier and Scardamalia, (1985). Children's Difficulties in Learning to Compose. In Wells, G and Nicolas, J. (Eds.) Language and Learning: An Interactional Perspective. East Sussex: The Palmer Press. (pp.l 04- 116). 7. Bereiter, c., & Scardamalia, M. (1994). The Psychology of Written Composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 8. Berninger, V., Vaughan, K, Abbott, R., Begay, K, Byrd, K, Curtin, G., Minnich, J. ,& Graham, S. (2003). Teaching spelling and composition alone and together: Implications for the simple view of writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94: 291-304. 9. Bhatia, T. K. and Ritchie, W. C. (2004). Bilingualism in South Asia. In T.K Bhatia and W.C. Ritchie (Eds.) The Handbook of Bilingualism. Malden, M.A : Blackwell. 10. Bialystok (1982). On the relationship of knowing and using linguistic forms. Applied Linguistics, 3 (3): 181-206. 11. Bialystok, E. (1992). Attentional control in children's metalinguistic performance and measures offield independence. Developmental Psychology, 28: 654-664. 13. Bialystok, E. (2001 b). Bilingualism in development: Language, literacy, and cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press. 14. Bialystok, E. Martin, M. M., and Viswanathan, M. (2005). Bilingualism across the lifetime: the rise and fall of inhibitory control. International Journal of Bilingualism, 9: 103-119. 15. Bialystok, E., Craik, F.I.M., Klein, R., & Viswanathan, M. (2004). Bilingualism, aging, and cognitive control: Evidence from the Simon task. Psychology and Aging, 19: 290- 303.

Research Scholar, Kalinga University