Comments on Bailey Cundiff's Paper on Google Docs

Before reading this paper, I knew of Google docs but I had no idea what Google Docs was. I wasn't sure what made it different from Word or a blog. I knew that it could be a place where multiple people could access the document for use.

I like the idea of real-time grading. I think this is definitely something all teachers can get in to. Even if we just create a recording software that has the microphone on as well as you can see the teachers mouse move and the words he/she is typing. This could go a long way towards helping the students that need to be helped. 

I do see a few flaws to this idea, particularly with the microphone. Some teachers and graders, myself most especially included, tend to watch TV or do other things while s/he grades. It might be very awkward for students to try to listen to their teacher when they can hear the things going on in the background. Another problem would be when we do get sidetracked by other things, we may see quite a bit of dead time on the recording where the teacher does something other than the work shown. This may, though, put the focus squarely on the teacher to get the grading done in a more efficient and timely manner.

I do like the idea of this being used in the peer review system as I think it will make things better for those who are struggling. It will also require the students to actually read the paper and answer the questions the student who wrote the paper may have. With them going over it verbally and visually I really do believe a student will have a better feel for what needs to be done making a paper better.

I disagree with the belief you raise that students with a quieter voice can be on an equal playing field with the louder, more vocal students. I think the students who tend to answer quicker will also be more likely to edit faster and notice things that are mistakes faster. According to what you have written google docs doesn't allow for multiple different editing ideas to be posted by students at the same time. This creates a quick draw scenario where it will force students to want to edit quickly when editing in a group instead of for the most effective revision possible.

Your section "Knowledge Formation in Collaboration" on page four brings up an interesting idea. I wonder if, in future versions, you may see computers translating quickly the writing being discussed. This would allow bilingual students to write comments in their own languages so they can comment quickly. The software would then translate it into the language of the paper in pseudo real-time allowing for the other students to understand what the comment says and react to it.

I definitely agree that the teacher has to guide students through this work to make it a more useful tool. Just like with any tool in the teacher tool belt, showing your students how to use the system and telling them why they should invest in using the system are crucial to a class's effectiveness in teaching its students.

Overall, thank you so much for doing this paper as I had no real knowledge of this subject. I think this software will be a very useful tool for students in the future and every teacher should be aware of it. I will definitely try to find a way to use this in many of the classes I plan to teach. Sorry if it seems I'm playing devil's advocate but I think pointing out the negatives is something that should be known so that we can continue to make the service better.