本研究主要探討在網路合作學習環境中，各目標導向組（精熟趨向目標、精熟逃避目標、精熟趨向＋逃避目標、表現趨向目標、表現逃避目標與表現趨向＋逃避目標）在團體效能、網路合作註記、線上討論行為與團體表現之差異以及其預測力。總計146名（73組）修讀計算機概論課程之高職生，使用「網路合作註記工具」進行線上合作註記。研究方法採質量並行，質化部分採內容分析法，以了解小組合作註記行為之品質；量化部分採問卷調查法與相關統計分析，以了解學生之目標導向、團體效能與線上討論行為以及變項間的關係。
本研究結果顯示，精熟趨向目標組在高層次註記與整體合作註記較其他組別為佳，但在整體合作註記則與表現趨向目標組沒有差異。在團體表現方面，精熟趨向目標組只顯著優於表現逃避目標組，表現趨向目標組則優於其他組別，但與精熟趨向目標組沒有差異。此外，各目標組在團體效能、中層次、低層次註記與線上討論皆無顯著差異。在各目標導向之預測力方面，研究結果顯示，精熟趨向目標與精熟趨向＋逃避目標能顯著預測團體效能，且精熟趨向、精熟逃避與精熟趨向＋逃避目標亦皆能顯著預測線上討論行為。另外，表現逃避目標對低層次註記則具負向預測力。有關團體效能、線上合作行為與團體表現之關係，研究結果顯示，高團體效能組之網路合作註記行為與團體表現亦較佳，團體效能亦可顯著預測線上討論行為。再者，網路合作註記與低層次註記行為能顯著預測團體表現，線上討論行為則無法預測團體表現。本研究之註記行為與線上討論行為亦無顯著相關。最後依據本研究之發現進行討論，並且進一步提出教學及未來研究之建議。

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the differences in collective efficacy, online collaborative annotation, online discussion behavior and group performance among groups of goal orientations (i.e., mastery approach goal (MA), mastery avoidance goal (MV), mastery approach+avoidance goal (MAV), performance approach goal (PA), performance avoidance goal (PV) and performance approach+avoidance goal (PAV)) in CSCL. The total of 146 students (73 groups) from a vocational high school participated in this study. The students were instructed to annotate collaboratively by using online collaborative annotation tool. Both qualitative and quantitative methods were applied for data analysis. The content analysis was to analyze the students’ online collaborative annotations, while some quantitative methods were to analyze the reliability of the questionnaires for goal orientations, collective efficacy and online discussion behavior, as well as the relationships among the investigated variables.
The results indicated that mastery approach groups had better high-level collaborative annotation and online collaborative annotation than the other groups, but there was no difference in online collaborative annotation between mastery approach groups and performance approach groups. With respect to group performance, mastery approach groups only had better group performance than performance avoidance groups, but performance approach groups had better group performance than the others except mastery approach groups. In addition, there were no significant differences in collective efficacy, middle and low-level annotation as well as online discussion behavior among groups. With respect to the predictive capability of goal orientations, both mastery approach and mastery approach+avoidance goals significantly predicted collective efficacy, and mastery goals (MA, MV, MAV) predicted online discussion behavior. Moreover, performance avoidance groups negatively predicted low-level annotation. As for the relationships among collective efficacy, online collaborative behavior and group performance, the results showed that collective efficacy significantly predicted online discussion behavior, and high collective efficacy groups also had better online collaborative annotations and group performance. Moreover, both online collaborative annotation and low-level annotation behavior significantly predicted group performance, while online discussion behavior could not predict performance. Further, there was no significant relationship found between online collaborative annotation and online discussion. The implications and suggestions for future research were provided.

一、 中文部分
吳明清（1991）。教育研究：基本觀念與方法之分析。臺北市：五南。
吳明清（1996）。教育研究-基本觀念與方法分析。臺北市：五南。
鄧惠方（2013）。線上文字註記環境中，全面/序列型認知風格在註記自我效能、線上註記行為、學習策略及學習表現之角色。國立台灣科技大學數為學習與教育所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
二、 英文部分
AbuSeileek, A. F. (2011). Hypermedia annotation presentation: The effect of location and type on the EFL learners' achievement in reading comprehension and vocabulary acquisition. Computers & Education, 57, 1281-1291.
Alstete, J. W., & Beutell, N. J. (2004). Performance indicators in online distance learning courses: a case study of management education. Quality Assurance in Education, 12(1), 6–14.
Ames, C. (1992). Achievement goals and the classroom motivational climate. In D. H. Schunk & J. Meece (Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom (pp. 327-348). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1987). Mothers' belief about the role of ability and effort in school learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 18, 409-414.
Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students' learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 260-267.
Ball, E., Franks, H., Jenkins, J., McGrath, M., & Leigh, J. (2009). Annotation is a valuable tool to enhance learning and assessment in student essays. Nurse Education Today, 29, 284-291.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived Self-Efficacy in Cognitive Development and Functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117-148.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 75-78.
Barak, M., Herscoviz, O., Kaberman, Z., & Dori, Y. J. (2009). MOSAICA: A web-2.0 based system for the preservation and presentation of cultural heritage. Computers and Education, 53, 841–852.
Bernacki, M. L., Byrnes, J. P., & Cromley, J. G. (2012). The effects of achievement goals and self-regulated learning behaviors on reading comprehension in technology-enhanced learning environments. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37, 148-161.
Bipp, T., Steinmayr, R., & Spinath, B. (2012). A functional look at goal orientations: Their role for self-estimates of intelligence and performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 280-289.
Brickley, D. (2004). Collaboration, knowledge representation and automatability. Retrieved from the Internet Poetry Archive web site: http://www.w3.org/Collaboration/
Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1990). Communities of learning and thinking, or A context by any other name. In D. Kuhn (Ed.), Developmental perspectives on teaching and learning thinking skills (pp. 108-126). Basel: Karger.
Chao, P. Y., Chen, G.-D., & Chang, C.-W. (2010). Developing a cross-media system to facilitate question-driven digital annotations on paper textbooks. Educational Technology & Society, 13, 38–49.
Chen, C. J., & Liu, P. L. (2012). Comparisons of learner-generated versus instructor-provided multimedia annotations. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(4), 72-83.
Chen, C. M., & Chen, F. Y. (2014). Enhancing digital reading performance with a collaborative reading annotation system. Computers & Education, 77, 67-81.
Cheng, C. K., Paré, D. E., Collimore, L. M., & Joordens, S. (2011). Assessing the effectiveness of a voluntary online discussion forum on improving students’ course performance. Computers & Education, 56, 253-261.
Chiang, Y. T., Yeh, Y. C., Lin, S. S. J., & Hwang, F. M. (2011). Factor structure and predictive utility of the 2×2 Achievement Goal Model in a sample of Taiwan students. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 432-437.
Cho, Y., & Shim, S. S. (2013). Predicting teachers' achievement goals for teaching: The role of perceived school goal structure and teachers' sense of efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 32, 12-21.
Chung, J., & Monroe, G. S. (2003). Exploring Social Desirability Bias. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(4), 291-302.
Chung, S. J., Severance, C., & Chung, M. J. (2003). Design of support tools for knowledge building in a virtual university course. Journal of Interactive Learning Environments. 11(1), 41-57.
Coutinho, S. A., & Neuman, G. (2008). A model of metacognition, achievement goal orientation, learning style and self-efficacy. Learning Environment Research, 11(2), 131-151.
Covington, M. V. (2000). Goal theory, motivation, and school achievement: An integrative review. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 171-200.
Csernica, J., Hanyka, M., Hyde, D., Shooter, S., Toole, M., & Vigeant, M. (2002). Practical guide to teamwork, version 1.1. College of Engineering, Bucknell University.
Cury, F., Elliot, A. J., Da Fonseca, D., & Moller, A. (2006). The Social-Cognitive model of achievement motivation and the 2 x 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 666-679.
De Wever, B., Schellens, T., Valcke, M., & Van Keer, H. (2006). Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review. Computers & Education, 46, 6-28.
Denton, P., Madden, J., Roberts, M., & Rowe, P. (2008). Students' response to traditional and computer-assisted formative feedback: A comparative case study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(3), 486-500.
Dewiyanti, S., Brand-Gruwel, S., Jochems, W., & Broers, N. J. (2007). Students'_experiences with collaborative learningin asynchronous Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 496-514.
Ding, N., Wei, J., & Wolfensberger, M. (2015). Using Epistemic Synchronization Index (ESI) to measure students' knowledge elaboration process in CSCL. Computers & Education, 80, 122-131.
Diseth, Å. (2011). Self-efficacy, goal orientations and learning strategies as mediators between preceding and subsequent academic achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 191-195.
Dowson, M., & McInerney, D. M. (2003). What do students say about their motivational goals?: Towards a more complex and dynamic perspective on student motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(1), 91–113.
Dupeyrat, C., & Marine ́, C. (2005). Implicit theories of intelligence, goal orientation, cognitive engagement, and achievement: a test of Dweck’s model with returning to school adults. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 43–59.
Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040-1048.
Dweck, C., & Leggett, E. (1988). A Social-Cognitive Approach to Motivation and Personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256-273.
Elliot, A, & Harackiewicz, J. (1996). Approach and avoidance achieve- ment goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 461-475.
Elliot, A. (1997). Integrating the “classic” and “contemporary” approaches to achievement motivation: A Hierarchical model of achievement motivation. In M. Maehr & P. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 243-279). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Elliot, A., & McGregor, H. (2001). A 2 x 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 501-519.
Erçetin, G. (2010). Effects of topic interest and prior knowledge on text recall and annotation use in reading a hypermedia text in the L2. ReCall, 22(2), 228-246.
Fitzsimmons, T. J. (2007). Using communities of practice for the professional development of workplace learning and performance professionals (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Capella University). Retrieved from: http://gradworks.umi.com/3288858.pdf
Francescato, D., Porcelli, R., Mebane, M., Cuddetta, M., Klobas, J., & Renzi, P. (2006). Evaluation of the efficacy of collaborative learning in face-to-face and computer-supported university contexts. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(2), 163–176.
Gao, F. (2013). A case study of using a social annotation tool to support collaboratively learning. Internet and Higher Education, 17, 76-83.
Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presences in online learning: interaction is not enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133-148.
Gibson, C. B., Randel, A. E., & Early, P. C. (2000). Understanding group efficacy, Group and Organization Management, 25(1), 67-97.
Glover, I., Xub, Z., & Hardakerc, G. (2007). Online annotation – Research and practices. Computers and Education, 49, 1308–1320.
González, M. G., Burke, M. J., Santuzzi, A. M., & Bradley, J. C. (2003). The impact of group process variables on the effectiveness of distance collaboration groups. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(5), 629-648.
Grant, H., & Dweck, C. S. (2003). Clarifying achievement goals and their impact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 541–553. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.541
Greene, B. A., Miller, R. B., Crowson, M., Duke, B. L., & Akey, K. L. (2004). Predicting high school students’ cognitive engagement and achievement: contributions of classroom perceptions and motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 462–482.
Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., & Elliot, A. J. (1998). Rethinking achievement goals: When are they adaptive for college students and why?. Educational psychologist, 33(1), 1-21.
Harden, R. M., Crosby, J. (2000). AMEE Guide No 20: The good teacher is more than a lecturer – the twelve roles of the teacher. Medical Teacher, 22(4), 334–347.
Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American psychologist,52(12), 1280-1300.
Horizon Report (2007). The Horizon Report 2007. Retrieved from: http://www.nmc.org/pdf/ 2007_Horizon_Report.pdf
Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288.
Hwang, A., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2009). Seeking feedback in blended learning: competitive versus cooperative student attitudes and their links to learning outcome. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25, 280–293.
Hwang, W. Y., & Hsu, G. L. (2011). The effects of pre-reading, and sharing mechanisms on learning with the use of annotations. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(2), 234-249.
Hwang, W. Y., Shadiev, R., & Huang, S. M. (2010). Effect of multimedia annotation system on improving English writing and speaking performance. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 6249, 1-12.
Hwang, W. Y., Wang, C. Y., & Sharples, M. (2007). A study of multimedia annotation of Web-based materials. Computers & Education, 48(4), 680-699.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1996). Cooperation and the use of technology. In D. H. Johnson (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 1017–1044). New York: Simon and Schuster Macmillan.
Johnson, T. E., Archibald, T. N., & Tenenbaum, G. (2010). Individual and team annotation effects on students' reading comprehension, critical thinking, and meta-cognitive skills. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1496-1507.
Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., & Wilson, B. G. (1998). Learning with Technology: A Constructivist Perspective. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Merrill.
Kadivar, P., Kavousian, J., Arabzadeh, M., & Nikdel, F. (2011). Survey on Relationship between Goal Orientation and Learning Strategies with Academic Stress in University Students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 453-456.
Kaplan, A., & Maehr, M. L. (1999). Achievement goals and student well-being. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 330–358.
Kapur, M., Voiklis, J., & Kinzer, C. K. (2008). Sensitivities to early exchange in synchronous computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) groups. Computers & Education, 51, 54-66.
Ke, F. (2013). Online interaction arrangements on quality of online interactions performed by diverse learners across disciplines. Internet and Higher Education, 16, 14-22.
Keser, H., Uzunboylu, H., & Ozdamli, F. (2011). The trends in technology supported collaborative learning studies in 21st century. World Journal on Educational Technology, 3(2), 103-119.
Keys, T. D., Conley, A. M., Duncan, G. J., & Domina, T. (2012). The role of goal orientations for adolescent mathematics achievement Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37, 47-54.
Khezri azar, H., Lavasani, M. G., Malahmadi, E., & Amani, J. (2010). The role of self-efficacy, task value, and achievement goals in predicting learning approaches and mathematics achievement. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5, 942-947.
Khoo, Y. Y. (2012). The Effectiveness of Collaborative Online Learning among Undergraduates in Principle Economics Classes. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 1(1), 231-241.
Laal, M., Laal, M., & Kermanshahi, Z. K. (2012). 21st Century Learning; Learning in Collaboration. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 1696-1701.
Lan, Y. F., Tsai, P. W., Yang, S. H., & Hung, C. L. (2012). Comparing the social knowledge construction behavioral patterns of problem-based online asynchronous discussion in e/m-learning environments. Computers & Education, 59, 1122-1135.
Lavasani, M. G., Weisani, M., & Ejei, J. (2011). The role of achievement goals, academic motivation, and learning strategies in statistics anxiety: Testing a causal model. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 1881-1886.
Lavoué, É., Molinari, G., Prié, Y., & Khezami, S. (2015). Reflection-in-action markers for reflection-on-action in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning settings. Computers & Education, 88, 129-142.
Lee, C., & Farh, J. L. (2004). Joint effects of group efficacy and gender diversity on group cohesion and performance. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53(1), 136–154.
Lee, Y. H. (2015). Facilitating Critical Thinking Using the C-QRAC Collaboration Script: Enhancing Science Reading Literacy in a Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Environment. Computers & Education, 88, 182-191.
Leidner, D. E., & Jarvenpaa, S. L. (1995). The Use of Information Technology to Enhance Management School Education: A Theoretical View. MIS Quarterly, 19(3), 265-291.
Liaw, S. S., Chen, G. D., & Huang, H. M. (2008). Users' attitudes toward Web-based collaborative learning systems for knowledge management. Computers & Education, 50(3), 950–961.
Liem, A. D., Lau, S., & Nie, Y. (2008). The role of self-efficacy, task value, and achievement goals in predicting learning strategies, task disengagement, peer relationship, and achievement outcome. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 486-512.
Lin, J. W., & Lai, Y. C. (2013). Harnessing Collaborative Annotations on Online Formative Assessments. Educational Technology & Society, 16(1), 263-274.
Lin, P. C., Hou, H. T., Wang, S. M., & Chang, K. E. (2013). Analyzing knowledge dimensions and cognitive process of a project-based online discussion instructional activity using Facebook in an adult and continuing education course. Computers & Education, 60, 110-121. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.017
Lindsley, D. H., Brass, D. J., & Thomas, J. B. (1995). Efficacy-performance spirals: A multilevel perspective. Academy of Management Review, 20, 645-678.
Lipponen, L. (2002). Exploring foundations for computer-supported collaborative learning. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Computer support for collaborative learning: Foundations for a CSCL community. Proceedings of the computer-supported collaborative learning 2002 conference (pp. 72–81). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lonn, S., Aguilar, S. J., & Teasley, S. D. (2015). Investigating student motivation in the context of a learning analytics intervention during a summer bridge program. Computers in Human Behavior, 47, 90-97.
Luo, W., Hogan, D., & Paris, S. G. (2011). Predicting Singapore students' achievement goals in their English study: Self-construal and classroom goal structure. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 526-535.
MacKnight, C. B. (2000). Teaching critical thinking through online discussion. Educause Quarterly, 4, 38-41.
Madjar, N., Kaplan, A., & Weinstock, M. (2011). Clarifying mastery-avoidance goals in high school: Distinguishing between intrapersonal and task-based standards of competence. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 268-279.
Maehr, M. L., & Midgley, C. (1991). Enhancing student motivation: A schoolwide approach. Educational Psychologist, 26, 399-427.
Mallonee, R. L. (1999). Goals, Motivation, and Performance. American String Teacher, 49(3), 66-67, 69-70.
Mansfield, C. (2012). Rethinking Motivation Goals for Adolescents: Beyond Achievement Goals. Applied Psychology-an International Review-Psychologie Appliquee-Revue Internationale, 61(4), 564-584. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2012.00506.x
Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative Content Analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1(2).
Microsoft (1998). Microsoft Word. http://www.microsoft.com/office/word/default.htm
Middleton, M., & Midgley, C. (1997). Avoiding the demonstration of lack of ability: An underexplored aspect of goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 710-718.
Midgley, C. (2002). Goals, goal structures, and patterns of adaptive learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Midgley, C., Kaplan, A., & Middleton, M. (2001). Performance-approach goals: Good for what, for whom, under what circumstances, and at what cost? Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 77–86.
Morgan, M., Brickell, G., & Harper, B. (2008). Applying distributed cognition theory to the redesign of the 'Copy and Paste' function in order to promote appropriate learning outcomes. Computers & Education, 50(1), 125-147.
Nesbit, J. C., Winne, P. H., Jamieson-Noel, D., Code, J., Zhou, M., MacAllister, K., Bratt, S., Wang, W., & Hadwin, A. (2006). Using cognitive tools in gstudy to investigate how study activities covary with achievement goals. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(4), 339-358.
Nicholls, J. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91, 328-346.
Nokelainen, P., Kurhila, J., Miettinen, M., Floreen, P., & Tirri, H. (2003). Evaluating the role of a shared document-based annotation tool in learner-centered collaborative learning. Paper presented at the The 3rd IEEE International Conference.
Nokelainen, P., Miettinen, M., Kurhila, J., Floréen, P., & Tirri, H. (2005). A shared document-based annotation tool to support learner-centred collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(5), 757–770.
Ortega, A., Sánchez-Manzanares, M., & Gil, F. (2010). Team learning and effectiveness in virtual project teams: The role of beliefs about interpersonal context. The Spanish journal of psychology, 13(1), 267-276.
Patel, J., & Aghayere, A. (2006). Student' perspective on the impact of a web-based discussion forum on student learning. Paper presented at the Frontiers in Education Conference, San Diego, CA.
Phan, H. P. (2009). Amalgamation of future time orientation, epistemological beliefs, achievement goals and study strategies: Empirical evidence established. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 155-173.
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, 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, 1087-1102.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451-502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-686.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Pintrich, P. R., Conley, A. M., & Kempler, T. M. (2003). Current issues in achievement goal theory and research. International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 319–337.
Plass, J. L., O'Keefe, P. A., Homer, B. D., Case, J., Hayward, E. O., Stein, M., & Perlin, K. (2013). The Impact of Individual, Competitive, and Collaborative Mathematics Game Play on Learning, Performance, and Motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4), 1050-1066. doi: 10.1037/a0032688
Porter-O’Donnell, C. (2004). Beyond the yellow highlighter: teaching annotation skills to improve reading comprehension. English Journal, 93(5), 82–89.
Razon, S., Turner, J., Johnson, T. E., Arsal, G., & Tenenbaum, G. (2012). Effects of a collaborative annotation method on students' learning and learning-related motivation and affect. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 350-359.
Rehman, A., & Haider, K. (2013). The impact of motivation on learning lf secondary school students in Karachi: An analytical study. Educational Research International, 2(2), 139-147.
Robert, C. A. (2009). Annotation for knowledge sharing in a collaborative environment. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13, 111-119.
Roscheisen, M., Mogensen, C., & Winograd, T. (1994). Shared Web annotations as a platform for third-party value- added information providers: Architecture, protocols, and usage examples (Technical Report CSDTR/DLTR). Retrieved from Stanford University, Digital Library: http://www- digilib.Stanford.edu/digilib/pub/reports/commentor.ps
Rovai, A. P. (2007). Facilitating online discussions effectively. Internet and Higher Education, 10, 77-88.
Ruble, J. E., & Lom, B. (2008). Online Protocol Annotation: A Method to Enhance Undergraduate Laboratory Research Skills. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 7, 296-301.
Schickler, M., Mazer, M., & Brooks, C. (1996). Pan-Browser Support for Annotations and Other Meta-Information on the WWW. Special Issue of Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 28(7-11), 1063-1074.
Schoor, C., & Bannert, M. (2011). Motivation in a computer-supported collaborative learning scenario and its impact on learning activities and knowledge acquisition. Learning and Instruction, 21(4), 560-573. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.11.002
Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. R. (2008). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Seltzer, W. (2000). Annotation Engine. Retrieved from: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/projects/annotate.html
Serrano-Cámara, L. M., Paredes-Velasco, M., Alcover, C., & Velazquez-Iturbide, J. Á. (2014). An evaluation of students’ motivation in computer-supported collaborative learning of programming concepts. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 499-508.
Shovein, J., Huston, C., Fox, S., & Damazo, B. (2005). Challenging Traditional Teaching and Learning Paradigms: Online Learning and Emancipatory Teaching. Nursing Education Perspectives, 26(6), 340-343.
Sins, P., van Joolingen, W., Savelsbergh, E., & van Hout-Wolters, B. (2008). Motivation and performance within a collaborative computer-based modeling task: Relations between students' achievement goal orientation, self-efficacy, cognitive processing, and achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 58-77.
Skaalvik, E. M. (1997). Self-enhancing and self-defeating ego orientation: Relations with task and avoidance orientation, achievement, self-perceptions, and anxiety. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(1), 71-81.
Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409-426). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Stegmann, K., Wecker, C., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2012). Collaborative argumentation and cognitive processing: an empirical study in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment. Instructional Science, 40, 297–323.
Steinmayr, R., Bipp, T., & Spinath, B. (2011). Goal orientations predict academic performance beyond intelligence and personality. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 196-200.
Su, A. Y. S., Yang, S. J. H., Hwang, W. Y., & Zhang, J. (2010). A Web 2.0-based collaborative annotation system for enhancing knowledge sharing in collaborative learning environments. Computers & Education, 55, 752-766.
Sutherland, K. (1997). Electronic text: Investigations in method and theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Suthers, D., & Xu, J. (2002). Kukakuka: An Online Environment for Artifact-Centered Discourse. Proceedings of the Eleventh International World-Wide Web Conference.
Traxler, J. (2007). Defining, Discussing and Evaluating Mobile Learning: The moving finger writes and having writ... The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 8(2).
van Yperen, N. W., Elliot, A. J., & Aseel, F. (2009). The influence of mastery-avoidance goals on performance improvement. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 932-943.
Vercellone-Smith, P., Jablokow, K., & Friedel, C. (2012). Characterizing communication networks in a web-based classroom: Cognitive styles and linguistic behavior of self-organizing groups in online discussions. Computers & Education, 59, 222-235.
Vrugt, A., Oort, F. J., & Zeeberg, C. (2002). Goal orientations, perceived self-efficacy and study results amongst beginners and advanced students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(3), 385-397.
Walker, C. O., Greene, B. A., & Mansell, R. A. (2006). Identification with academics, intrinsic/extrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy as predictors of cognitive engagement. Learning and Individual Differences, 16, 1−12.
Wang, D. Y., Lin, S. S. J., & Sun, C. T. (2007). DIANA: A computer-supported heterogeneous grouping system for teachers to conduct successful small learning groups. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1997-2010.
Wang, S. L., & Hwang, G. J. (2012). The role of collective efficacy, cognitive quality, and task cohesion in computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL). Computers & Education, 58(2), 679-687. doi: DOI 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.09.003
Wang, S. L., & Lee, J. H. (2015, May). The role of collective efficacy and modeling in online collaborative annotation and performance in CSCL. Paper presented at the DLSA, Sapporo, Japan.
Wang, S. L., & Lin, S. S. J. (2007). The effect of group composition of self-efficacy and collective efficacy on computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(5), 2256–2268.
Wang, S. L., Hsu, H. Y., Lin, S. S. L., & Hwang, G. J. (2014). The Role of Group Interaction in Collective Efficacy and CSCL Performance. Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 242–254.
Webb, E., Jones, A., Barker, P., & van Schaik, P. (2004). Using e-learning dialogues in higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 41(1), 93-103.
Weed, D., Spurlock, A., & Forehand, W. (2014). On-line discussions in nursing education: Increase retention and utilize innovative teaching strategies. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 9, 27-29.
Wentling, T. L., Park, J., & Peiper, C. (2007). Learning gains associated with annotation and communication software designed for large undergraduate classes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 36-46.
Whyte, G. (1998). Recasting Janis’s groupthink model: The key role of collective efficacy in decision fiascoes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73(2/3), 185–209.
Winton, S. L., & Kane, T. D. (2015). Effects of group goal content on group processes, collective efficacy, and satisfaction. Journal of Applied Social Psychology.
Wolfe, J. L. (2000). Effects of annotations on student readers and writers. Paper presented at the The fifth ACM conference on Digital libraries, San Antonio, Texas, United States.
Wolfe, J. L. (2008). Annotations and the collaborative digital library: Effects of an aligned annotation interface on student argumentation and reading strategies. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 141-164.
Yang, S. J. H., Chen, I. Y. L., & Shao, N. W. Y. (2004). Ontology Enabled Annotation and Knowledge Management for Collaborative Learning in Virtual Learning Community. Educational Technology & Society, 7(4), 70-81.
Yang, S. J. H., Zhang, J., Su, A. Y. S., & Tsai, J. J. P. (2011). A collaborative multimedia annotation tool for enhancing knowledge sharing in CSCL. Interactive Learning Environments, 45-62.
Yang, X., Yu, S., & Sun, Z. (2013). The effect of collaborative annotation on Chinese reading level in primary schools in China. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(1), 95-111.
Yee, K. P. (1998). CritLink: Better Hyperlinks for the WWW. Retrieved from: http://crit.org/ ping/ht98.html
Yeh, S. W., & Lo, J. J. (2009). Using online annotations to support error correction and corrective feedback. Computers & Education, 52(4), 882-892.
Zhang, Y., & Wildemuth, B. M. (2009). Qualitative Analysis of Content. In B. Wildemuth (Ed.), Applications of Social Research Methods to Questions in Information and Library Science (pp. 308-319). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Zhao, K., & Chan, C. K. K. (2014). Fostering collective and individual learning through knowledge building. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 9(1), 63-95.
Zhu, E. (2006). Interaction and cognitive engagement: An analysis of four asynchronous online discussions. Instructional Science, 34, 451–480.