Students value eleven distinct collaboration quality indicators spanning individual and group levels of evaluation¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Thematic analysis of open-ended survey responses from students who used a CA tool for 12 weeks identified 11 distinct collaboration quality indicators valuable for evaluating collaborative effort. → Tochukwu Dominic Eze 2026

Evidence¶

Tochukwu Dominic Eze 2026¶

Tochukwu Dominic Eze, Lucas Zurbuchen, Khalil Anderson, Marcelo Worsley. (2026). A collaboration literacy analytics framework (CLAF): Investigating students' perspectives on collaboration quality indicators and feedback utilization. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-026-09475-w

q2 · i? · qualitative · r?

Qualitative survey study of 290 university students after 12 weeks of CA tool-mediated group activities; deductive-inductive thematic analysis of open-ended responses. The authors report that “Our analysis revealed 11 distinct indicators” at individual and group levels. No effect size is printed, so impact is not coded.

"Our analysis revealed 11 distinct indicators: communication, discussion and idea contribution, task contribution and completion, progress, result and achievement, group dynamics, knowledge of the topic and project, learning and growth, participation, effort and time investment, and peer review."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Students' generative AI use in upper secondary schoolwork clusters into four practices — explanation, creation, inspiration, and improvement — comprising eleven sub-processes — related