Computer-Supported Collaborative L2 Learning

Part of the Chinese Language Learning Sciences book series (CLLS)


This chapter serves two purposes. First, it reviews the existing computer-supported collaborative second-language learning studies. A second purpose of the chapter is to echo Chap.  2 by concentrating on representational tools to present the rationale of social shaping of the technology. Affordances of technology can change depending on the users’ background and contexts. The chapter explains the necessity and possibility of a close analysis of how users (including both teachers and students) appropriate a representational tool for collaborative knowledge construction.


  1. Aditomo, A., Calvo, R., & Reimann, P. (2011) Collaborative writing: Too much of a good thing? Exploring engineering students’ perceptions using the repertory grid. In H. Spada, G. Stahl, N. Miyake, N. Law, & K. M. Cheng (Eds.), Connecting Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning to Policy and Practice: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 128–136). Hong Kong: International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
  2. Arnold, N., Ducate, L., & Kost, C. (2009). Collaborative writing in wikis: Insights from culture project in German class. In L. Lomicka & G. Lord (Eds.), The next generation: Social networking and online collaboration in foreign language learning (Vol. 5, pp. 115–144). CALICO monograph series. San Marcos, TX: Texas State University.Google Scholar
  3. Aviv, R., Erlich, Z., Ravid, G., & Geva, A. (2003). Network analysis of knowledge construction in asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3), 1–23.Google Scholar
  4. Bera, S., & Liu, M. (2006). Cognitive tools, individual differences, and group processing as mediating factors in a hypermedia environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 295–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blake, R. (2000). Computer mediated communication: A window on L2 Spanish interlanguage. Language Learning and Technology, 4(1), 120–136.Google Scholar
  6. Blake, R., Wilson, N. L., Cetto, M., & Ballester, C. P. (2008). Measuring oral proficiency in distance, face-to-face, and blended classrooms. Language Learning & Technology, 12(3), 114–127.Google Scholar
  7. Brodahl, C., Hadjerrouit, S., & Hansen, N. K. (2011). Collaborative writing with web 2.0 technologies: Education students’ perceptions. Journal of Information Technology Education, 10, 73–104.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, J. S., & Adler, R. P. (2008). Minds on fire. Open education, the long trail, and learning 2.0. Educause Review, 43(1), 16–32.Google Scholar
  9. Chan, T. W. (2013). Sharing sentiment and wearing a pair of ‘field spectacles’ to view classroom orchestration. Computers & Education, 69, 514–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen, W., & Looi, C. K. (2007). Incorporating online discussion in face to face classroom learning: A new blended learning approach. Australasian Journal of Educational Research, 23(3), 308–327.Google Scholar
  11. Chen, W., Looi, C. K., & Tan, S. (2010). What do students do in a F2F CSCL classroom? The optimization of multiple communications modes. Computers & Education, 55, 1159–1170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Collentine, K. (2009). Learning use of holistic language units in multimodal, task-based synchronous computer-mediated communication. Language Learning & Technology, 13(2), 68–87.Google Scholar
  13. Darhower, M. (2002). Interactional features of synchronous computer-mediated communication in the intermediate L2 class: A sociocultural case study. CALICO Journal, 19(2), 249–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. de Groot, R., Drachman, R., Hever, R., Schwarz, B., Hoppe, U., Harrer, A., et al. (2007). Computer supported moderation of e-discussions: The ARGUNAUT approach. In C. Chinn, G. Erkens, & S. Puntambekar (Eds.), Mice, minds, and society—The computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) Conference 2007 (pp. 165–167). International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
  15. Désilets, A., & Paquet, S. (2005). Wiki as a tool for web-based collaborative story telling in primary school: A case study. Paper presented at the Proceedings of Ed-Media 2005, World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications. Chesapeake: AACE.Google Scholar
  16. Dillenbourg, P., & Jermann, P. (2010) Technology for classroom orchestration. In M. S. Khine & I. M. Saleh (Eds.), New science of learning: Cognition, computers and collaboration in education (pp. 525–552). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  17. Dillenbourg, P., & Tchounikine, P. (2007). Flexibility in macro-scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 23, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2009). The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning: From design to orchestration. In N. Balacheff, et al. (Eds.), Technology-enhanced learning (pp. 3–19). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dillenbourg, P., Zufferey, G., Alavi, H., Jermann, P., Do-Lenh, S., & Bonnard, Q. (2011). Classroom orchestration: The third circle of usability. In H. Spada, G. Stahl, N. Miyake, N. Law, & K. M. Cheng (Eds.), International Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 2011 (pp. 510–517), Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  20. Dimitriadis, Y. A. (2010). Supporting teachers in orchestrating CSCL classrooms. Paper presented at the 7th Pan-Hellenic Conference with International Participation. Korinthos, Greece: University of Peloponnese.Google Scholar
  21. Dimitriadis, Y., Prieto, L. P., & Asensio-Pérez, J. I. (2013). The role of design and enactment patterns in orchestration: Helping to integrate technology in blended classroom ecosystems. Computers & Education, 69, 496–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dobao, A. F. (2012). Collaborative writing tasks in the L2 classroom: Comparing group, pair, and individual work. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(1), 40–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dwyer, N., & Suthers, D. D. (2006). Consistent practices in artifact-mediated collaboration. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1, 481–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Elen, J., & Clarebout, G. (2007). Supporting learning: Increasing complexity? Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1162–1166.Google Scholar
  25. Ellis, R. (1999). Theoretical perspectives on interaction and language learning. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Learning a second language through interaction (pp. 3–33). Philadelphia, PA, USA: John Benjamins B.V.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Elola, I., & Oskoz, A. (2010). Collaborative writing: Fostering foreign language and writing conventions development. Language Learning and Technology, 14(3), 51–71.Google Scholar
  27. Enyedy, N. (2005). Inventing mapping: Creating cultural forms to solve collective problems. Cognition and Instruction, 23(4), 427–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fernandez-Garcia, M., & Martinez-Arbelaiz, A. (2002). Negotiation of meaning in non-native speaker-non-native speaker synchronous discussions. CALICO Journal, 19, 279–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fischer, F., Bruhn, J., Gräsel, C., & Mandl, H. (2002). Fostering collaborative knowledge construction with visualization tools. Learning and Instruction, 12, 213–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gillies, R. M. (2006). Teachers’ and students’ verbal behaviors during cooperative and small-group learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 271–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Goos, M., Galbraith, P., & Renshaw, P. (2002). Socially mediated metacognition: Creating collaborative zones of proximal development in small group problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49, 193–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hakkarainen, K. (2009). A knowledge-practice perspective on technology-mediated learning. Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4, 213–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hakkarainen, K., Paavola, S., & Lipponen, L. (2004). From communities of practice to innovative knowledge communities. LLine—Lifelong Learning in Europe, 9(2), 74–83.Google Scholar
  34. Hämäläinen, R., & Oksanen, K. (2012). Challenge of supporting vocational learning: Empowering collaboration in a scripted 3D game – How does teachers’ real-time orchestration make a difference? Computers & Education, 59, 281–293.Google Scholar
  35. Hämäläinen, R., & Wever, B. D. (2013). Vocational education approach: New TEL settings—New prospects for teachers’ instructional activities? International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 8, 271–291.Google Scholar
  36. Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching: Exploring disciplinary spaces and the role of inquiry-based learning. In R. Barnett (Ed.), Reshaping the university: New relationships between research, scholarship and teaching (pp. 67–78). London: McGraw Hill/Open University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kanselaar, G., & Jaspers, J. (2007). Visualization of participation: Does it contribute to successful computer-supported collaborative learning? Computers & Education, 49, 1037–1065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kanselaar, G. (2008). Effects of representational guidance during computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 38, 59–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jaworski, B. (2006). Theory and practice in Mathematics teaching development: Critical inquiry as a mode of learning in teaching. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9(2), 187–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jeong, H., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2016). Seven affordances of computer-supported collaborative learning: How to support collaborative learning? How can technologies help? Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 247-265.Google Scholar
  41. Kenning, M.-M. (2010). Collaborative scaffolding in online task-based voice interactions between advanced learners. ReCALL, 22(2), 135–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kern, R. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Effects on quantity and quality of language production. Modwn Lanpage Journal, 79, 457–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kern, R., & Warschauer, M. (2000). Theory and practice of network-based language teaching. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 1–19). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Kern, R., Ware, P., & Warschauer, M. (2008). Networked-based Language Teaching. In N. V. Deusen-Scholl & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education (2nd ed., Vol. 4, pp. 281–292).Google Scholar
  45. Kessler, G. (2009). Student-initiated attention to form in Wiki-based collaborative writing. Language and Education, 13(1), 79–95.Google Scholar
  46. Kessler, G., & Bikowski, D. (2010). Developing collaborative autonomous language learning abilities in computer mediated language learning: Attention to meaning among students in wiki space. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(1), 41–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kessler, G., Bikowski, D., & Boggs, J. (2012). Collaborative writing among second language learners in academic web-based projects. Language Learning & Technology, 16(1), 91–109.Google Scholar
  48. Kim, Y., & McDonough, K. (2008). The effect of interlocutor proficiency on the collaborative dialogue between Korean as a second language learner. Language Teaching Research, 12, 211–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kozma, R. (2003). The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 205–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Larusson, J. A., & Alterman, R. (2007). Tracking online collaborative work as representational practice: Analysis and tool. In The 3rd International Conference on Communities and Technologies, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.Google Scholar
  51. Liang, M. Y., & Bonk, C. J. (2009). Interaction in blended EFL learning principles and practice. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 6(1), 3–15.Google Scholar
  52. Liu, C. C., & Kao, L. C. (2007). Do handheld devices facilitate face-to-face collaboration? Handheld devices with large shared display groupware to facilitate group interactions. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 23(4), 285–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Long, M. (1985). A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based language teaching. In K. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann (Eds.), Modeling and assessing second language acquisition (pp. 77–99). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  54. Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  55. Looi, C. K., Chen, W., & Ng, F. K. (2010). Collaborative activities enabled by GroupScribbles (GS): An exploratory study of learning effectiveness. Computers & Education, 54(1), 14–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Looi, C. K., Song, Y. J., Wen, Y., & Chen, W. L. (2013). Identifying pivotal contributions for group progressive inquiry in a multimodal interaction environment. In D. D. Suthers, et al. (Eds.), Productive multivocality in the analysis of group interactions, computer-supported collaborative learning series (Vol. 16). New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media.Google Scholar
  57. Mackey, A., & Silver, R. E. (2005). Interactional tasks and English L2 learning by immigrant children in Singapore. System, 33, 239–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Mak, B., & Coniam, D. (2008). Using wikis to enhance and develop writing skills among secondary school students in Hong Kong. System, 36, 437–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Medina, R., & Suthers, D. (2012). Inscriptions becoming representations in representational practices. Journal of Learning Sciences, 22, 33–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Negretti, R. (1999). Web-based activities and SLA: A conversation analysis research approach. Language Learning & Technology, 3(1), 75–87.Google Scholar
  62. Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Oliver, M. (2011). Technological determinism in educational technology research: Some alternative ways of thinking about the relationship between learning and technology. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 27, 373–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Onrubia, J., & Engel, A. (2012). The role of teacher assistance on the effects of a macro-script in collaborative writing tasks. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 7, 161–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Ortega, L. (1997). Processes and outcomes in networked classroom interaction: Defining the research agenda for L2 computer-assisted classroom discussion. Language Learning & Technology, 1(1), 82–93.Google Scholar
  66. Ortega, L. (2007). Meaningful L2 practice in foreign language classrooms: A cognitive-interactionist SLA perspective. In R. M. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 180–207). NewYork, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Oskoz, A., & Elola, I. (2010). Meeting at the wiki: The new arena for collaborative writing in foreign language courses. In M. Lee & C. McLaughlin (Eds.), Web 2.0-based E-learning: Applying social informatics for tertiary teaching (pp. 209–227). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  68. Overdijk, M., & van Diggelen, W. (2008). Appropriation of a shared workspace: Organizing principles and their application. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 165–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Overdijk, M., van Diggelen, W., Kirschner, P. A., & Baker, M. (2012). Connecting agents and artifacts in CSCL: Towards a rationale of mutual shaping. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(2), 193–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Pellettieri, J. L. (2000). Negotiation in cyberspace: The role of chatting in the development of grammatical competence. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 59–86). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Pennington, M. (1993). Exploring the potential of word processing for non-native writers. Computers and the Humanities, 27(3), 149–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Pinkwart, N., Aleven, V., Ashley, K., & Lynch, C. (2006). Toward legal argument instruction with graph grammars and collaborative filtering techniques. In M. Ikeda, K. Ashley, & T. W. Chan (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS 2006) (pp. 227–236). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  73. Prieto, L. P., Villagrá-Sobrino, S., Jorrín-Abellán, I. M., Martínez-Monés, A., & Dimitriadis, Y. (2011). Recurrent routines: Analyzing and supporting orchestration in technology-enhanced primary classrooms. Computers & Education, 57, 1214–1227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Puntambekar, S., Stylianou, A., & Goldstein, J. (2007). Comparing classroom enactments of an inquiry curriculum: Lessons learned from two teachers. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(1), 81–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Reimann, P., Calvo, R., Yacef, K., & Southavilday, V. (2010). Comprehensive computational support for collaborative learning from writing. In S. L. Wong et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Computers in Education (pp. 129–137), Putrajaya, Malaysia.Google Scholar
  76. Roschelle, J., Dimitriadis, Y., & Hoppe, U. (2013). Classroom orchestration: Synthesis. Computers & Education, 69, 523–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Sandoval, W. A., & Daniszewski, K. (2004). Mapping trade-offs in teachers’ integration of technology-supported inquiry in high school science classes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(2), 161–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: A challenge for the design of new knowledge media. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1(1), 37–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Schneider, R. M., Krajcik, J., & Feld, P. B. (2005). Enacting reform-based science materials: The range of teacher enactments in reform classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Technology, 42(3), 283–312.Google Scholar
  80. Sharples, M. (2013). Shared orchestration within and beyond the classroom. Computers & Education, 69, 504–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  82. Slof, B., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., Janssen, J., & Phielix, C. (2010). Fostering complex learning-task performance through scripting student use of computer supported representational tools. Computes & Education, 55, 1707–1720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Song, Y. J., & Looi, C. K. (2012). Linking teacher beliefs, practices and student inquiry-based learning in a CSCL environment: A tale of two teachers. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(1), 129–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Southavilay, V., Yacef, K., & Calvo, R. A. (2009). WriteProc: A framework for exploring collaborative writing processes. In Proceedings of the 14th Australasian Document Computing Symposium (pp. 129–136), Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
  85. Stahl, G. (2005). Group cognition in computer-assisted collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 21, 79–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Surry, D. W., & Ensminger, D. (2001). What’s wrong with media comparison studies? Educational Technology, 41(4), 32–35.Google Scholar
  87. Suthers, D. D. (2006). Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning-making: A research agenda for CSCL. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(2), 315–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Suthers, D. D., & Hundhausen, C. D. (2003). An experimental study of the effects of representational guidance on collaborative learning processes. Journal of Learning Sciences, 12(2), 183–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Suthers, D. D., Connelly, J., Lesgold, A., Paolucci, M., Toth, E. E., Toth, J., et al. (2001). Representational and advisory guidance for students learning scientific inquiry. In K. D. Forbus & P. J. Feltovich (Eds.), Smart machines in education: The coming revolution in educational technology (pp. 7–35). Menlo Park: AAAI/MIT.Google Scholar
  90. Suthers, D. D., Lund, K., Rosé, C., Dyke, G., et al. (2011). Towards productive multivocality in the analysis of collaborative learning. In H. Spada, G. Stahl, N. Miyake, N. Law & K. M. Cheng (Eds.), International Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 1015–1022). Hong Kong. Google Scholar
  91. Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition (pp. 97–114). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  92. Swain, M. (2001). Integrating language and content teaching through collaborative tasks. Canadian Modern Language Review, 58(1), 44–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82(iii), 320–338.Google Scholar
  94. Tabak, I., & Reiser, B. (1997). Complementary roles of software-based scaffolding teacher and student interactions in inquiry learning. In R. Hall, N. Miyake, & N. Enyedy (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (pp. 289–298). Toronto, ON, Canada: AACE.Google Scholar
  95. Thorne, S. L. (2008). Mediating technologies and second language learning. In D. Leu, J. Coiro, C. Lankshear, & M. Knobel (Eds.), Handbook of research on new literacies (pp. 417–449). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  96. Toyoda, E., & Harrison, R. (2002). Categorization of text chat communication between learners and native speakers and native speakers of Japanese. Language Learning & Technology, 6(1), 82–99.Google Scholar
  97. Tuomi, I. (2002). Networks of innovation: Change and meaning in the age of the Internet. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  98. van Drie, J., Van Boxtel, C., Jaspers, J., & Kanselaar, G. (2005). Effects of representational guidance on domain specific reasoning in CSCL. Computer in Human Behavior, 21, 575–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy and authenticity. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  100. Warner, C. N. (2004). It’s just a game, right? Types of play in foreign language CMC. Language Learning & Technology, 8(2), 69–87.Google Scholar
  101. Warschauer, M. (1997). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice. The Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 470–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Warschauer, M. (2010). Invited commentary: New tools for teaching writing. Language Learning and Technology, 14(1), 3–8.Google Scholar
  103. Wegerif, R., McClaren, B. M., Chamrada, M., Schreuer, O., et al. (2010). Exploring creative thinking in graphically synchronous dialogues. Computers & Education, 54, 613–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Wen. Y., Looi, C. K., & Chen, W. L. (2011). Who are the beneficiaries when CSCL enters into Second Language classroom. Global Chinese Journal of Computers in Education, 7(1).Google Scholar
  105. Wong, L. H., Chen, W., Chai, C. S., Chin, C. K., & Gao, P. (2011). A blended collaborative writing approach for Chinese L2 primary school students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(7), 1208–1226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Yanguas, Í. (2010). Oral computer-mediated interaction between L2 learners: It’s about time! Language Learning & Technology, 14(3), 72–93.Google Scholar
  107. Yeh, S. W., Lo, J. J., & Huang, J. J. (2011). Scaffolding collaborative technical writing with procedural facilitation and synchronous discussion. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(3), 397–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Nanyang Technological UniversityNational Institute of EducationSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations