Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effects of group awareness support in CSCL on students’ learning performance: A three-level meta-analysis

  • Published:
International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Group awareness (GA) is essential for computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL), as it informs learners about other group members’ activities, knowledge, and emotions. A key advantage of GA support is that it can collect, process, and visualize GA information, which provides a basis for students’ reflection and adjustment during collaborative learning, thus facilitating their learning performance. However, empirical findings regarding the effectiveness of GA support have been inconsistent. The present study conducted the first three-level meta-analysis of 46 empirical studies to examine the effects of GA support on students’ learning performance and further explore the possible moderating factors that may have contributed to the inconsistencies of primary studies. The results indicated the following: (1) GA support in CSCL had a moderate significant effect on students’ learning performance (Hedges’g = 0.46, p < 0.001); (2) GA support in CSCL had the greatest influence on students’ cognitive development (Hedges’g = 0.49, p < 0.001), followed by behavioral participation (Hedges’g = 0.47, p < 0.001), and then social emotion (Hedges’g = 0.38, p < 0.001); and (3) GA support type and group size were the only two significant moderating factors. Based on these findings, we propose several theoretical and pedagogical implications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The data underlying this article will be shared on reasonable request to the corresponding author.

References

* = study included in the meta-analysis

  • Aggarwal, P., & O’Brien, C. L. (2008). Social loafing on group projects: Structural antecedents and effect on student satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Education, 30(3), 255–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baltes, B. B., Dickson, M. W., Sherman, M. P., Bauer, C. C., & LaGanke, J. S. (2002). Computer-mediated communication and group decision making: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior And Human Decision Processes, 87(1), 156–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 307–359.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • *Bodemer, D. (2011). Tacit guidance for collaborative multimedia learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1079-1086

  • Bodemer, D., & Dehler, J. (2011). Group awareness in CSCL environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1043–1045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond, C. F., & Titus, L. J. (1983). Social facilitation: A meta-analysis of 241 studies. Psychological Bulletin, 94(2), 265.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bonito, J. A. (2000). The effect of contributing substantively on perceptions of participation. Small Group Research, 31(5), 528–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021). Introduction to meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, C. M., & Ammons, J. L. (2003). Free riding in group projects and the effects of timing, frequency, and specificity of criteria in peer assessments. Journal of Education for Business, 78(5), 268–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buder, J. (2011). Group awareness tools for learning: Current and future directions. Computers in human behavior, 27(3), 1114–1117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Buder, J., & Bodemer, D. (2008). Supporting controversial CSCL discussions with augmented group awareness tools. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 123-139

  • Cai, Z., & Fan, X. (2020). A comparison of fixed-effects and random-effects models for multivariate meta-analysis using an SEM approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 55(6), 839–854.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cai, Z., Mao, P., Wang, D., He, J., Chen, X., & Fan, X. (2022). Effects of scaffolding in digital game-based learning on student’s achievement: A three-level meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 34(2), 537–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capdeferro, N., & Romero, M. (2012). Are online learners frustrated with collaborative learning experiences? International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(2), 26–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Chen, C. M., Li, M. C., & Liao, C. K. (2023). Developing a collaborative writing system with visualization interaction network analysis to facilitate online learning performance. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(9), 6054–6073.

  • Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Daspit, J. J., & D’Souza, D. E. (2012). 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), 666–683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Dehler, J., Bodemer, D., Buder, J., & Hesse, F. W. (2009). Providing group knowledge awareness in computer-supported collaborative learning: Insights into learning mechanisms. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(02), 111-132

  • *Dehler Zufferey, J., Bodemer, D., Buder, J., & Hesse, F. W. (2010). Partner knowledge awareness in knowledge communication: Learning by adapting to the partner. The Journal of Experimental Education, 79(1), 102-125

  • Dehler, J., Bodemer, D., Buder, J., & Hesse, F. W. (2011). Guiding knowledge communication in CSCL via group knowledge awareness. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1068–1078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dourish, P., & Bellotti, V. (1992, December). Awareness and coordination in shared workspaces. In Proceedings of the 1992 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work (pp. 107-114).

  • Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997). Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. Bmj, 315(7109), 629–634.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • *Engelmann, T., & Hesse, F. W. (2010). How digital concept maps about the collaborators’ knowledge and information influence computer-supported collaborative problem solving. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5, 299-319

  • *Engelmann, T., & Hesse, F. W. (2011). Fostering sharing of unshared knowledge by having access to the collaborators’ meta-knowledge structures. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), 2078-2087

  • *Engelmann, T., Kolodziej, R., & Hesse, F. W. (2014a). Preventing undesirable effects of mutual trust and the development of skepticism in virtual groups by applying the knowledge and information awareness approach. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 9, 211-235

  • *Engelmann, T., Kozlov, M. D., Kolodziej, R., & Clariana, R. B. (2014b). Fostering group norm development and orientation while creating awareness contents for improving net-based collaborative problem solving. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 298-306

  • *Engelmann, T., Tergan, S. O., & Hesse, F. W. (2009). Evoking knowledge and information awareness for enhancing computer-supported collaborative problem solving. The Journal of Experimental Education, 78(2), 268-290

  • *Farrokhnia, M., Pijeira-Díaz, H. J., Noroozi, O., & Hatami, J. (2019). Computer-supported collaborative concept mapping: The effects of different instructional designs on conceptual understanding and knowledge co-construction. Computers & Education, 142, 103640

  • Galikyan, I., & Admiraal, W. (2019). Students’ engagement in asynchronous online discussion: The relationship between cognitive presence, learner prominence, and academic performance. The Internet and Higher Education, 43, 100692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Gijlers, H., & de Jong, T. (2009). Sharing and confronting propositions in collaborative inquiry learning. Cognition and Instruction, 27(3), 239-268

  • *Gijlers, H., Weinberger, A., van Dijk, A. M., Bollen, L., & van Joolingen, W. (2013). Collaborative drawing on a shared digital canvas in elementary science education: The effects of script and task awareness support. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8, 427-453

  • Gross, T., Stary, C., & Totter, A. (2005). User-centered awareness in computer-supported cooperative work-systems: Structured embedding of findings from social sciences. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 18(3), 323–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo, L. (2022). How should reflection be supported in higher education?—A meta-analysis of reflection interventions. Reflective Practice, 23(1), 118–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzzo, R. A., Jackson, S. E., & Katzell, R. A. (1987). Meta-analysis analysis. Research in Organizational Behavior, 9(1), 407–442.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Hadwin, A. F., Bakhtiar, A., & Miller, M. (2018). Challenges in online collaboration: Effects of scripting shared task perceptions. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13, 301-329

  • *Hayashi, Y. (2020). Gaze awareness and metacognitive suggestions by a pedagogical conversational agent: an experimental investigation on interventions to support collaborative learning process and performance. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 15, 469-498

  • Higgins, J. P., & Thompson, S. G. (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in medicine, 21(11), 1539–1558.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, X., Ng, J. T., & Chu, S. K. (2022). Implementing learning analytics in wiki-supported collaborative learning in secondary education: A framework-motivated empirical study. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 17(3), 427–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, J., & Bodemer, D. (2013). Coordinated computer-supported collaborative learning: Awareness and awareness tools. Educational psychologist, 48(1), 40–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Janssen, J., Erkens, G., & Kanselaar, G. (2007a). Visualization of agreement and discussion processes during computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in human behavior, 23(3), 1105-1125

  • *Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kanselaar, G., & Jaspers, J. (2007b). Visualization of participation: Does it contribute to successful computer-supported collaborative learning?. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1037-1065

  • Janssen, J., Erkens, G., & Kirschner, P. A. (2011). Group awareness tools: It’s what you do with it that matters. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1046–1058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Järvelä, S., & Hadwin, A. F. (2013). New frontiers: Regulating learning in CSCL. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 25–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Järvelä, S., Kirschner, P. A., Panadero, E., Malmberg, J., Phielix, C., Jaspers, J., ..., & Järvenoja, H. (2015). Enhancing socially shared regulation in collaborative learning groups: Designing for CSCL regulation tools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63, 125-142.

  • Jeong, H., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Jo, K. (2019). Ten years of computer-supported collaborative learning: A meta-analysis of CSCL in STEM education during 2005–2014. Educational Research Review, 28, 100284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Jongsawat, N., & Premchaiswadi, W. (2009). An empirical study of group awareness information in web-based group decision support system in a field test setting. 7th International Conference on ICT and Knowledge Engineering (pp. 15–23). Bangkok, Thailand: Siam University.

  • Jongsawat, N., & Premchaiswadi, W. (2011). A study of two different experimental settings for group awareness information in a web-based group decision support system. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 10(02), 231–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Jongsawat, N., & Premchaiswadi, W. (2014). A study towards improving web-based collaboration through availability of group awareness information. Group Decision and Negotiation, 23, 819-845

  • Kim, J. (2013). Influence of group size on students’ participation in online discussion forums. Computers & Education, 62, 123–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Kimmerle, J., & Cress, U. (2008). Group awareness and self-presentation in computer-supported information exchange. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 85-97

  • *Kimmerle, J., Cress, U., & Hesse, F. W. (2007). An interactional perspective on group awareness: Alleviating the information-exchange dilemma (for everybody?). International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65(11), 899-910

  • Kirschner, P. A., Kreijns, K., Phielix, C., & Fransen, J. (2015). Awareness of cognitive and social behaviour in a CSCL environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(1), 59–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Kozlov, M. D., Engelmann, T., Buder, J., & Hesse, F. W. (2015). Is knowledge best shared or given to individuals? Expanding the Content-based Knowledge Awareness paradigm. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 15-23

  • Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2003). Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: A review of the research. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 335–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Kwon, K., Hong, R. Y., & Laffey, J. M. (2013). The educational impact of metacognitive group coordination in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1271-1281

  • *Lai, C. L. (2021). Effects of the group‐regulation promotion approach on students’ individual and collaborative learning performance, perceptions of regulation and regulation behaviours in project‐based tasks. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(6), 2278-2298

  • Lai, X., & Wong, G. K. W. (2022). Collaborative versus individual problem solving in computational thinking through programming: A meta-analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(1), 150–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le, H., Janssen, J., & Wubbels, T. (2018). Collaborative learning practices: teacher and student perceived obstacles to effective student collaboration. Cambridge Journal of Education, 48(1), 103–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Y., Li, X., Zhang, Y., & Li, X. (2021). The effects of a group awareness tool on knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(3), 1178–1196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Lin, J. W. (2018). Effects of an online team project-based learning environment with group awareness and peer evaluation on socially shared regulation of learning and self-regulated learning. Behaviour & Information Technology, 37(5), 445-461

  • *Lin, J. W., & Tsai, C. W. (2016). The impact of an online project-based learning environment with group awareness support on students with different self-regulation levels: An extended-period experiment. Computers & Education, 99, 28-38

  • *Lin, J. W., Lai, Y. C., Lai, Y. C., & Chang, L. C. (2016a). Fostering self‐regulated learning in a blended environment using group awareness and peer assistance as external scaffolds. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(1), 77-93

  • *Lin, J. W., Szu, Y. C., & Lai, C. N. (2016b). Effects of group awareness and self-regulation level on online learning behaviors. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(4), 224-241

  • *Lin, J. W., Tsai, C. W., Hsu, C. C., & Chang, L. C. (2021). Peer assessment with group awareness tools and effects on project-based learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(4), 583-599

  • Lipponen, L., Rahikainen, M., Lallimo, J., & Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Patterns of participation and discourse in elementary students’ computer-supported collaborative learning. Learning and instruction, 13(5), 487–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Little, E. O. (1998). Collaborative learning and the social facilitation theory in basic actuarial mathematics. Columbia University.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Liu, M., Liu, L., & Liu, L. (2018). Group awareness increases student engagement in online collaborative writing. The Internet and Higher Education, 38, 1-8

  • Luo, H., Chen, Y., Chen, T., Koszalka, T. A., & Feng, Q. (2023). Impact of role assignment and group size on asynchronous online discussion: an experimental study. Computers & Education, 192, 104658.

  • *Ma, X., Liu, J., Liang, J., & Fan, C. (2023). An empirical study on the effect of group awareness in CSCL environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(1), 38–53

  • *Michinov, N., & Primois, C. (2005). Improving productivity and creativity in online groups through social comparison process: New evidence for asynchronous electronic brainstorming. Computers in human behavior, 21(1), 11-28

  • Miller, M., & Hadwin, A. (2015). Scripting and awareness tools for regulating collaborative learning: Changing the landscape of support in CSCL. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 573–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., PRISMA Group, T. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Annals of internal medicine, 151(4), 264–269.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Munneke, L., Andriessen, J., Kanselaar, G., & Kirschner, P. (2007). Supporting interactive argumentation: Influence of representational tools on discussing a wicked problem. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1072–1088.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogata, H., & Yano, Y. (2000). Combining knowledge awareness and information filtering in an open-ended collaborative learning environment. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11(1), 33–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ollesch, L., Heimbuch, S., & Bodemer, D. (2021). Improving learning and writing outcomes: Influence of cognitive and behavioral group awareness tools in wikis. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 16(2), 225–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Ollesch, L., Venohr, O., & Bodemer, D. (2022). Implicit guidance in educational online collaboration: Supporting highly qualitative and friendly knowledge exchange processes. Computers and Education Open, 3, 100064

  • OzaydınOzkara, B., & Cakir, H. (2018). Participation in online courses from the students’ perspective. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(7), 924–942.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, Y., Yu, J. H., & Jo, I. H. (2016). Clustering blended learning courses by online behavior data: A case study in a Korean higher education institute. The Internet and Higher Education, 29, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Phielix, C., Prins, F. J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2010). Awareness of group performance in a CSCL-environment: Effects of peer feedback and reflection. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 151-161

  • *Phielix, C., Prins, F. J., Kirschner, P. A., Erkens, G., & Jaspers, J. (2011). Group awareness of social and cognitive performance in a CSCL environment: Effects of a peer feedback and reflection tool. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1087-1102

  • *Pifarré, M., Cobos, R., & Argelagós, E. (2014). Incidence of group awareness information on students' collaborative learning processes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(4), 300-317

  • *Puhl, T., Tsovaltzi, D., & Weinberger, A. (2015). Blending Facebook discussions into seminars for practicing argumentation. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 605-616

  • Radkowitsch, A., Vogel, F., & Fischer, F. (2020). Good for learning, bad for motivation? A meta-analysis on the effects of computer-supported collaboration scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 15, 5–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, M. S. (2005). The file-drawer problem revisited: a general weighted method for calculating fail-safe numbers in meta-analysis. Evolution, 59(2), 464–468.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological bulletin, 86(3), 638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sangin, M., Molinari, G., Nüssli, M. A., & Dillenbourg, P. (2011). Facilitating peer knowledge modeling: Effects of a knowledge awareness tool on collaborative learning outcomes and processes. Computers in human behavior, 27(3), 1059–1067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saqr, M., Elmoazen, R., Tedre, M., López-Pernas, S., & Hirsto, L. (2022). How well centrality measures capture student achievement in computer-supported collaborative learning?–A systematic review and meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 35, 100437.

  • *Schnaubert, L., & Bodemer, D. (2019). Providing different types of group awareness information to guide collaborative learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 14, 7-51

  • Schnaubert, L., & Bodemer, D. (2022). Group awareness and regulation in computer-supported collaborative learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 17(1), 11–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Schreiber, M., & Engelmann, T. (2010). Knowledge and information awareness for initiating transactive memory system processes of computer-supported collaborating ad hoc groups. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1701-1709

  • Shepperd, J. A. (1993). Productivity loss in performance groups: A motivation analysis. Psychological bulletin, 113(1), 67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slof, B., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., Jaspers, J. G., & Janssen, J. (2010). Guiding students’ online complex learning-task behavior through representational scripting. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 927–939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soller, A., Martínez, A., Jermann, P., & Muehlenbrock, M. (2005). From mirroring to guiding: A review of state of the art technology for supporting collaborative learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 15(4), 261–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Stegmann, K., Wecker, C., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2012). Collaborative argumentation and cognitive elaboration in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment. Instructional Science, 40, 297-323

  • Sterne, J. A., & Egger, M. (2001). Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis: Guidelines on choice of axis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 54(10), 1046–1055.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Straus, S. G. (1997). Technology, group process, and group outcomes: Testing the connections in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups. Human-Computer Interaction, 12(3), 227–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Strauß, S., & Rummel, N. (2021). Promoting regulation of equal participation in online collaboration by combining a group awareness tool and adaptive prompts. But does it even matter?. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 16, 67-104

  • Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., & Jochems, W. M. (2004). Designing for interaction: Six steps to designing computer-supported group-based learning. Computers & Education, 42(4), 403–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sung, Y. T., Yang, J. M., & Lee, H. Y. (2017). The effects of mobile-computer-supported collaborative learning: Meta-analysis and critical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 87(4), 768–805.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Talan, T. (2020). The effect of mobile learning on learning performance: A meta-analysis study. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 20(1), 79–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talan, T. (2021). The effect of computer-supported collaborative learning on academic achievement: A meta-analysis study. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 9(3), 426–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viechtbauer, W. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of statistical software, 36, 1–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Wang, A., Yu, S., Wang, M., & Chen, L. (2019). Effects of a visualization-based group awareness tool on in-service teachers’ interaction behaviors and performance in a lesson study. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(5-6), 670-684

  • Wang, L. H., Chen, B., Hwang, G. J., Guan, J. Q., & Wang, Y. Q. (2022). Effects of digital game-based STEM education on students’ learning achievement: a meta-analysis. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wecker, C., & Fischer, F. (2014). Where is the evidence? A meta-analysis on the role of argumentation for the acquisition of domain-specific knowledge in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 75, 218–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wouters, P., Van Nimwegen, C., Van Oostendorp, H., & Van Der Spek, E. D. (2013). A meta-analysis of the cognitive and motivational effects of serious games. Journal of educational psychology, 105(2), 249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, B., Yu, X., & Gu, X. (2020). Effectiveness of immersive virtual reality using head-mounted displays on learning performance: A meta-analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(6), 1991–2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Yilmaz, R., & Karaoglan Yilmaz, F. G. (2020). Examination of the effectiveness of the task and group awareness support system used for computer-supported collaborative learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 1355-1380

  • Yücel, Ü. A., & Usluel, Y. K. (2016). Knowledge building and the quantity, content and quality of the interaction and participation of students in an online collaborative learning environment. Computers & Education, 97, 31–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, S., Che, S., Nan, D., & Kim, J. H. (2023). How does online social interaction promote students’ continuous learning intentions?. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1098110.

Download references

Funding

This study is supported by the Research on the theory and Practice of Computational Thinking oriented Artificial Intelligence Education Framework in primary and secondary schools (No.72274076).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Artificial Intelligence in Education, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, China

    Dengkang Chen, Yi Zhang, Heng Luo, Zhifang Zhu, Jingsi Ma & Yuru Lin

Authors
  1. Dengkang Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yi Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Heng Luo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zhifang Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jingsi Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yuru Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yi Zhang.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 8 Overview of the characteristics of the included studies
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, D., Zhang, Y., Luo, H. et al. Effects of group awareness support in CSCL on students’ learning performance: A three-level meta-analysis. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn 19, 97–129 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-024-09418-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-024-09418-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation