The influence of students and teachers characteristics on the efficacy of face-to-face and computer supported collaborative learning

Computers and Education

Volumn 51, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 109-128

  Solimeno, Andrea ^a   Mebane, Minou Ella ^a   Tomai, Manuela ^a   Francescato, Donata ^a  

^a SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

Author keywords

Asynchronous communication; Cooperative collaborative learning; Evaluation methodologies; Personality traits; Teaching learning strategies

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK; KNOWLEDGE ENGINEERING; LEARNING SYSTEMS; TECHNICAL PRESENTATIONS;

ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION; COOPERATIVE/COLLABORATIVE LEARNING; EVALUATION METHODOLOGIES; PERSONALITY TRAITS; TEACHING/LEARNING STRATEGIES;

STUDENTS;

EID: 43549108316     PISSN: 03601315     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2007.04.003     Document Type: Article

References (123)

1. Alavi M. Computer-mediated collaborative learning: An empirical evaluation. MIS Quarterly 18 2 (1994) 159-174
2. Allen M., Bourihis J., Burrell N., and Mabry E. Comparing student satisfaction with distance education to traditional classrooms in higher education: A meta-analysis. The American Journal of Distance Education 16 2 (2002) 83-97
3. Anderson T., Rourke L., Archer W., and Garrison R. Assessing teaching presence in computer conferencing transcripts. Journal of the Asynchronous Learning Network 5 2 (2001). http://www.aln.org/alnweb/journal/jaln-vol5issue2v2.htm Retrieved 27 December 27 2004 from
4. Aragon S.R., Johnson S.D., and Shaik N. The influence of learning style preferences on student success in online versus face-to-face environments. The American Journal of Distance Education 16 4 (2002) 227-243
5. Aviv R. Educational performance of ALN via content analysis. The Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 4 2 (2000). http://www.aln.org/alnweb/journal/Vol4_issue2/le/reuven/LE-reuven.htm Retrieved 27 December 2004 from
6. Bandura, A. (1989). The multidimensional self-efficacy scales. Unpublished Test. Stanford University, Stanford, California.
7. Bandura, A. (2001). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales (revised). Available from Frank Pajares, Emory University.
8. Bales R.F. A set of categories for the analysis of small group interaction. American Sociological Review 16 (1950) 461-468
9. Barbera E. Quality in virtual education environments. British Journal of Educational Technology 35 1 (2004) 13-20
10. Beare P.L. The comparative effectiveness of videotape, audiotape, in delivery of continuing teacher education. American Journal of Distance Learning 3 (1989) 57-71
11. Belar C.D. Graduate education in clinical psychology: "We are not in Kansas anymore". American Psychologist 53 (1998) 456-464
12. Benbunan-Fich R., and Hiltz R. Impacts of asynchronous learning networks on individual and group problem solving: A field experiment. Group Decision and Negotiation 8 5 (1999) 409-426. http://www.alnresearch.org/Data_Files/articles/full_text/benbunan.htm Retrieved 27 December 2004 from
13. Berge, Z., & Collins, M. (1996). Facilitating interaction in computer mediated on-line courses. FSU/AECT Distance Education Conference, Tallahasee, FL.
14. Bernard R.M., Lou Y., Abrami P.C., Wozney L., Borokhovski E., Wallet P., et al. How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research 74 3 (2004) 379-439
15. Bisciglia M.G., and Monk-Turner E. Differences in attitudes between on-site and distance-site students in group teleconference courses. The American Journal of Distance Education 16 1 (2002) 37-52
16. Biuk-Aghai, R. P., & Simoff, S. J. (2004). Patterns of virtual collaboration in online collaboration systems. In Proceedings of the IASTED international conference on knowledge sharing and collaborative engineering, St. Thomas, USVI (pp. 57-62), November 22-24.
17. Bocconi S., and Pozzi F. Un modello di comunicazione del formatore in rete. Tecnologie didattiche 18 3 (1999) 25-36
18. Calcaterra A., Antonietti A., and Underwood J. Cognitive style, hypermedia navigation and learning. Computers & Education 44 (2005) 441-457
19. Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., & Borgogni L. (2000). BFQ: Big Five Questionnaire, manuale. Organizzazioni Speciali, Firenze.
20. Caprara G.V., Gerbino M., and Delle Fratte A. Autoefficacia interpersonale. In: Caprara G.V. (Ed). La valutazione dell'autoefficacia (2001), Erickson, Trento 51-61
21. Carey J.M., and Kacmar C.J. The impact of communication mode and task complexity on small group performance and member satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior 13 1 (1997) 23-49
22. Cavanaugh C.S. The effectiveness of interactive distance education technologies in K-12 learning: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications 7 1 (2001) 73-88
23. Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. ELearning: The learning curve (2003), CIPD, London
24. Chen S. A cognitive model for non-linear learning in hypermedia programmes. British Journal of Educational Technology 33 4 (2002) 449-460
25. Chickering A., and Gamson Z. Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin 39 (1998) 3-7
26. Choi N., Fuqua D.R., and Griffin B.W. Exploratory analysis of the structure of scores from the multidimensional scales of perceived self-efficacy. Educational and Psychological Measurement 61 3 (2001) 475-489
27. Davie, L., & Wells, R. (1992). Empowering the learner through computer-mediated communication. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Distance education for corporate and military training (Readings in Distance Education, No. 3, pp. 104-112). American Centre for the Study of Distance Education, The Pennsylvania State University.
28. Day, M., & Batson, T. (1995). The network-based writing classroom: The ENFI idea. In Z. L. Berge & M.P. Collins (Eds.), Computer-mediated communication and the online classroom, Volume II: Higher education (pp. 25-46).
29. De Fruyt S., and Mervielde I. Personality and interests as predictors of educational streaming and achievement. European Journal of Personality 10 (1996) 405-425
30. de Vries E., Lund K., and Baker M. Computer-mediated epistemic dialog: Explanation and argumentation as vehicles for understanding scientific notions. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 11 1 (2002) 63-103
31. DeTure M. Cognitive style and self-efficacy: Predicting student success in online distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education 18 1 (2004) 21-38
32. Draves W. Teaching on-line (2000), Lern Books, River Falls, Wis
33. Ellis A.E. Personality type and participation in networked learning environments. Educational Media International 4 1 (2003) 101-114
34. Eysenck H.J. Relation between intelligence and personality. Perceptual and Motor Skills 32 (1971) 637-638
35. Fahy P.J. Online and face-to-face group interaction processes compared using Bales' interaction process analysis (IPA). European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning (2006) I-January to June
36. Francescato D., Mebane M.E., Porcelli R., Attanasio C., and Pulino M. Developing professional skills and social capital through computer supported collaborative learning in university contexts. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 65 2 (2007) 140-152
37. Francescato D., Mebane M., Sorace R., and Vecchione M. EMPO: una scala di misurazione dell'empowerment personale e politico. Giornale Italiano di Psicologia 1 (2007) 255-277
38. Francescato D., Porcelli R., Mebane M.E., Cuddetta M., Klobas J., and Renzi P. Evaluation of the efficacy of collaborative learning in face-to-face and computer-supported university contexts. Computers in Human Behavior 22 (2006) 163-176
39. Garrison R., Anderson T., and Archer W. Critical thinking in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education 2 2-3 (2000) 87-105
40. Gokhale A.A. Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology Education 7 (1995) 1
41. Gray D.E., Ryan M., and Coulon A. The training of teachers and trainers: Innovative practices, skills and competencies in the use of eLearning. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning II (2004)
42. Hannay M., and Newvine T. Perceptions of distance learning a comparison of online and traditional learning. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 2 March (2006) 1
43. In: Harasim L.M. (Ed). Online education: Perspectives on a new medium (1990), Prager/Greenwood, New York
44. Harasim L.M., and Yung B. Teaching and learning on the Internet (1993), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada
45. Hass C. Writing technology: Studies on the materiality of literacy (1996), Erlbaum, Manwah, NJ
46. Heckman R., and Annabi H. A content analytic comparison of learning processes in online and face-to-face case study discussions. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 10 2 (2005) article 7
47. Hiltz S.R. The virtual classroom: Learning without limits via computer networks (1994), Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, NJ
48. Jahng N., Krug D., and Zhang Z. Student achievement in online distance education compared to face-to-face education. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning I (2007)
49. Johnson H. Dialogue and the construction of knowledge in e-learning: Exploring students' perceptions of their learning while using blackboard's asynchronous discussion board. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning I (2007)
50. Johnson D.W., and Johnson R. Cooperation and competition: Theory and research (1989), Interaction Book Company, Edina, MN
51. Kanuka H. A principled approach to facilitating distance education: The Internet, higher education and higher levels of learning. Journal of Distance Education 17 2 (2002) 70-86
52. Kanuka H., and Anderson T. Online social interchange, discord, and knowledge construction. Journal of Distance Education 13 1 (1998) 57-74
53. Katz Y.J. Attitudes affecting college students' preferences for distance learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 18 (2002) 2-9
54. Keirsey D., and Bates M. Please understand me: Character and temperament types (1984), Prometheus Nemesis, Del Mar, CA
55. Klobas, J., & Renzi, S. (2000). Students' psychological responses to a course supported by collaborative learning technologies: Measurement and preliminary results. The Graduate School of Management Discussion Papers Series, 2000-2/3. GSM, Nedlands, Western Australia.
56. Klobas J., Renzi S., Francescato D., and Renzi P. Meta-response to on-line learning. Ricerche di Psicologia 25 1 (2002) 236-259
57. Kreijnsa K., Kirschner P.A., and Jochems W. Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer supported collaborative learning environments: A review of the research. Computer in Human Behavior 19 (2003) 335-353
58. La Noce F. E-learning. La nuova frontiera della formazione (2002), Franco Angeli, Milano
59. Learning Technologies, LDSA (2003). At http://www.ccm.ac.uk/ltech/dysg/definition_of_elearning. asp.
60. Lehtinen, E., Hakkarainen, K., Lipponen, L., Rahikainen, M., & Muukkonen, H. (1999). Computer supported collaborative learning: A review of research and development. The J.H.G.I. Giesbers Reports on Education 10, Department of Educational Sciences, University of Nijmegen.
61. Ligorio M.B. Integrating communication formats: Synchronous versus asynchronous and text-based versus visual. Computers & Education 37 (2001) 103-125
62. Ligorio M.B., Talamo A., and Simons R.J. Synchronic tutoring of a community on-line. Mentoring and Tutoring 10 2 (2002) 137-152
63. Liu M., Papathanasiou E., and Hao Y.W. Exploring the use of multimedia examination formats in undergraduate teaching: results from the fielding testing. Computers in Human Behavior 17 (2001) 225-248
64. Lombardi, S., Forte, G., Di Nocera, F., Sementina, C., & Renzi, P. (2004). Tutoring matters: Investigating the role of communication on e-learning effectiveness. In P. Grew & G. Valle (Eds.), TEL. 03 Proceedings: International conference on technology enhanced learning, FAST, Milan, IS.
65. Lou Y., Abrami P.C., and d'Apollonia S. Small group and individual learning with technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research 71 3 (2001) 449-521
66. Machtmes K., and Asher J.W. A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of telecourses in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education 14 1 (2000) 27-46
67. Massy, J. (2003). Quality and eLearning in Europe: Summary report 2002. Reading: Bizmedia.
68. Mawhinney C.H., and Lederer A.L. An investigating of the relationship between managerial personality type and computer use. Journal of End User Computing Winter (1996) 4-11
69. McGee, P., & Boyd, V. (1995). Computer-mediated communication: Facilitating dialogues. In Internet, URL: 4.
70. McPherson M., and Nunes M.B. The role of tutors as an integral part of online learning support. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning I (2004)
71. Meyer K.A. When topics are controversial: Is it better to discuss them face-to-face or online?. Innovative Higher Education 31 3 (2006) 175-186
72. Miller L.M. Using learning styles to evaluate computer-based instruction. Computers in Human Behavior 21 (2005) 287-306
73. Molinari D.L. The role of social comments in problem-solving groups in an online class. The American Journal of Distance Education 18 2 (2004) 89-101
74. Moore M.G. Editorial: Distance education theory. The American Journal of Distance Education 5 3 (1991) 1-6
75. Morris, E. J. S., & Zuluaga, C. P. (2003). Educational effectiveness of 100% online I.T. courses. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/auckland03/proceedings/papers.
76. Nelson T., and McFadzean E. Facilitating problem-solving groups facilitator competences. Leadership & Organization Development Journal 19 2 (1998) 72-82
77. Nigro G. Contributo alla taratura italiana della Scala di Controllo Interno-Esterno (I-E) di Rotter. Bollettino di Psicologia Applicata 168 (1983) 29-41
78. Olson D.R. The World on Paper: The Conceptual and Cognitive Implications of Reading and Writing (1994), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York
79. Palloff R.M., and Pratt K. Lessons from the cyberspace classroom: The realities of online teaching (2001), Jossey-Bass Inc., San Francisco, CA
80. Pastorelli C., and Picconi L. Autoefficacia scolastica, sociale e regolatoria. In: Caprara G.V. (Ed). La valutazione dell'autoefficacia (2001), Erickson, Trento 87-104
81. Pastorelli C., Vecchio G.M., and Boda G. Autoefficacia nelle life skills: soluzione dei problemi e comunicazione interpersonale. In: Caprara G.V. (Ed). La valutazione dell'autoefficacia (2001), Erickson, Trento 137-146
82. Pellerey M. Questionario sulle Strategie d'Apprendimento (1996), LAS, Roma
83. Perkins R.F. Using hypermedia programs to administer tests: Effects of anxiety and performance. Journal of Research on Computing in Education 28 2 (1995) 209-220
84. Phipps R., and Merisotis J. What's the difference? A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education (1999), The Institute for Higher Education Policy, Washington, DC
85. Pickering J. Teaching on the internet is learning. Active Learning-Using the Internet for Teaching 12 (1995) 9-12
86. Piotrowski C., and Vodanovich S.J. Is Web-based instruction popular in psychology? A national survey. Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 727-732
87. Poirier C., and Feldman R.S. Teaching in cyberspace: Online versus traditional instruction using a waiting-list experimental design. Teaching of Psichology 31 1 (2004) 59-62
88. Ragan, V. K. (1996). Choreographing a case class. Note 9-595-074. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing Division.
89. Reed M.D., and Overbaugh R. The effects of prior experience and instructional format on teacher education students' computer anxiety and performance. Computers in the Schools 9 2/3 (1993) 75-89
90. Ross J.L., Drysdale M.T., and Schulz R.A. Cognitive learning styles and academic performance in two postsecondary computer application courses. Journal of Research on Computing in Education 33 (2001) 400-412
91. Rotter J.B. Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs 80 (1966) (1, Whole No. 609)
92. Rourke L., Anderson T., Garrison D.R., and Archer W. Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education 14 3 (1999) 51-70. http://cade.athabascau.ca/vol14.2/rourke_et_al.html Retrieved 27 December 2004 from
93. Rudestam K.E. Distributed education and the role of on-line learning in training professional psychologists. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 35 4 (2004) 427-432
94. Russell T.L. The no significant difference phenomenon (1999), North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC
95. Salmon G. E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online (2000), Kogan Page, London
96. Santo S.A. Virtual learning, personality, and learning styles. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities & Social Sciences 62 (2001) 137
97. Scardamalia M., and Bereiter C. Student communities for the advancement of knowledge. Communications of the ACM 39 4 (1996) 36-37
98. Schrum L., and Hong S. From the field: Characteristics of successful tertiary on-line students and strategies of experienced on-line educators. Education and Information Technologies 7 1 (2002) 5-16
99. Shachar, M., & Neumann, Y. (2003). Differences between traditional and distance education academic performances: A meta-analytic approach. Available online at http://www.agecon.ksu.edu/accc/kcdc/PDF Files/differences.pdf.
100. Shepherd, C. (2000). Evaluating on-line learning. Fastrak Consulting.
101. Shepherd, C. (2000). The real time on-line docente. Fastrak Consulting.
102. Sherman C. Using the World Wide Web to teach everyday applications of social psychology. Teaching of Psychology 25 (1998) 212-216
103. Shermis M.D., and Lombard D. Effects of computer-based test administrations on test anxiety and performance. Computers in Human Behavior 14 1 (1998) 111-123
104. Shirani A.I., Tafti M.H.A., and Affisco J.F. Task and technology fit: a comparison of two technologies for synchronous and asynchronous group communication. Information & Management 36 3 (1999) 139-150
105. Sipusic, M. J., Pannoni, R. L., Smith, R. B., Dutra, J., Gibbons, J. F., & Sutherland, W. (1999). Virtual collaborative learning. A comparison between face-to-face tutored video instruction (TVI) and distributed Tutored Video Instruction (DTVI). Final Report Sun Microsystems, Palo Alto, CA.
106. Smith H.M., and Betz N.E. Development and validation of a scale of perceived social efficacy. Journal of Career Assessment 8 (2000) 283-301
107. Smith M.A., and Senior C. The internet and clinical psychology: A general review of the implications. Clinical Psychology Review 21 1 (2001) 129-136
108. Sonnenwald D.H., and Li B. Scientific collaboratories in higher education: Exploring learning style preferences and perceptions of technology. British Journal of Educational Technology 34 4 (2003) 419-431
109. Sounder W.E. The effectiveness of traditional vs. satellite delivery in three management of technology masters degree programs. The American Journal of Distance Education 7 (1993) 37-52
110. Trending G. Telematics and online teacher training: The POLARIS project. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 13 (1997) 261-270
111. Ungerleider, C., & Burns, T. (2003). A State of the Field Report to the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada and Industry Canada. A systematic review of the effectiveness and efficiency of Networked ICT in Education, Vancouver. Available online at http://www.cmec.ca/stats/SystematicReview2003.en.pdf.
112. Vodanovich S.J., and Piotrowski C. An Internet-based approach to legal issues in industrial-organizational psychology. Journal of Educational Technology Systems 28 1 (1999) 67-73
113. Walther J.B., Loh T., and Granka L. Let me count the ways. The interchange of verbal and nonverbal cues in computer-mediated and face-to-face affinity. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 24 1 (2005) 36-65
114. Wang Y. Internet uses in university courses. International Journal on E-Learning 6 2 (2007) 279-292
115. Wang A.Y., and Newlin M.H. Characteristics of students who enroll and succeed in psychology web based classes. Journal of Educational Psychology 92 (2000) 137-143
116. Whiteman J., Scott E.M., and McElnay J.C. Analysis of pharmacists' attitudes toward a distance learning initiative on health screening. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 58 3 (1994) 300-306
117. Wilson E.V. Student characteristics and computer-mediated communication. Computers & Education 34 (2000) 67-76
118. Wong A.T. DL for continuous education. Educom Review 32 2 (1990) 12-16
119. Workman M. Performance and perceived effectiveness in computer-based and computer-aided education: Do cognitive styles make a difference?. Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 517-534
120. Young S.S.C. In search of on-line pedagogical models: Investigating a paradigm change in teaching through the school for all community. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 20 (2004) 133-150
121. Zhao, Y., Lei, J., Yan, B., & Tan, S. (2004). What makes the difference? A practical analysis of research on the effectiveness of distance education. Available online at http://ott.educ.msu.edu/literature/report.pdf.
122. Zobdeh-Asadi, S. (2004). Differences in personality factors and learners' preference for traditional versus on-line education. Dissertation Abstract International Section A: Humanities & Social Sciences, vol. 65(2-A), p. 436.
123. Zorfass, J. (1998). Strategies to ensure that on-line facilitators are successful. Education Development Center.