Keywords
distance graduate programs
collaborative platforms
computer-supported collaborative learning
How to Cite
Abstract
This study aims to comparatively analyze three collaborative platforms widely used in distance graduate programs: Moodle, Blackboard, and Google Classroom. The research employs descriptive qualitative methodology with bibliographic research, examining academic sources from the past five years. The analysis was based on the conceptual framework of the four structuring axes of Virtual Learning Environments. Results identified shared meaning construction as the central concept of collaborative practices, aligning with Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning theoretical foundations. Work coupling establishes different degrees of interdependence, from loosely coupled to tightly coupled work. The comparison demonstrated that Moodle features balanced functionality across the four structuring axes, suiting environments requiring versatility between different collaboration degrees; Blackboard excels in sophisticated hierarchical management, better suited for loosely coupled work; while Google Classroom offers superior adaptability through an integrated system, suited for project-based collaborations requiring intensive temporal coordination for tightly coupled work. These findings reveal that different technological configurations favor specific collaborative models, contributing to addressing gaps in understanding platform suitability for diverse research contexts. Remote academic collaboration in distance graduate programs presents multiple dimensions transcending purely technological aspects, facing methodological and theoretical limitations. The investigation confirms effective application of the four structuring axes framework for analyzing collaborative platforms. Future research could conduct empirical analyses of comparative platform effectiveness, conceptual framework refinement, and analytical scope expansion.
References
[1] M. Gibbons, C. Limoges, H. Nowotny, S. Schwartzman, P. Scott, and M. Trow, The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Sage, 1994. (in English).
[2] D. H. Sonnenwald, “Scientific collaboration,” Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 643-681, 2007, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/aris.2007.1440410121. (in English).
[3] R. E. Verhine and L. M. V. Dantas, “Distance education graduate programs: Perspectives from international experience,” Education & Society, vol. 45, e283826, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/ES.283826. (in Portuguese).
[4] D. Porter and K. Perris, “Institutional partnerships and collaborations in online learning,” in Handbook of open, distance and digital education. Springer, 2023, pp. 585-604, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-2080-6_32. (in English).
[5] M. S. Granovetter, “The strength of weak ties,” American Journal of Sociology, vol. 78, no. 6, pp. 1360-1380, 1973. [Online]. Available: https://landanyjobyouwant.com/sites/default/files/publications/the_strength_of_weak_ties_and_exch_w-gans.pdf. (in English).
[6] O. Zawacki-Richter and T. Anderson, “Introduction: Research areas in online distance education,” in Online distance education: Towards a research agenda, [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235335312_Online_distance_education_Towards_a_research_agenda. (in English).
[7] V. Vyshkivska, Y. Sylenko, O. Golikova, T. Tsehelnyk, and O. Patlaichuk, “Analysis of the experience and prospects of the implementation of the Moodle platform for the organization of distance learning in Ukrainian universities,” in Environment. Technology. Resources. Rezekne, Latvia Proceedings of the 15th International Scientific and Practical Conference, vol. II, 2024, pp. 512-518, doi: https://doi.org/10.17770/etr2024vol2.8078. (in English).
[8] I. A. Ghasim and M. Arshad, “An efficient utilization and comparative analysis of Blackboard Learn and Collaborate in higher education institution,” International Journal of Information and Education Technology, vol. 13, no. 11, pp. 1784-1792, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2023.13.11.1990. (in English).
[9] T. Vakaliuk, O. Spirin, V. Yevdokymov, and A. Yatsyshyn, “Experience of using cloud services for teamwork between supervisor and graduate students,” Information Technologies and Learning Tools, vol. 100, no. 2, pp. 122-140, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v100i2.5321. (in Ukrainian).
[10] G. Stahl, T. Koschmann, and D. Suthers, “Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective,” in Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, R. K. Sawyer, Ed. Cambridge University Press, 2006, pp. 409-426. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/200773374_Computer-supported_Collaborative_Learning_An_Historical_Perspective. (in English).
[11] P. Dillenbourg, S. Järvelä, and F. Fischer, “The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning: From design to orchestration,” in Technology-enhanced learning. Springer, 2009, pp. 3-19, doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9827-7_1. (in English).
[12] D. R. Garrison, E-learning in the 21st century: A community of inquiry framework for research and practice, 3rd ed. Routledge, 2017. (in English).
[13] M. Cleveland-Innes and J. Hawryluk, “Designing online learning communities,” in Handbook of open, distance and digital education. Springer, 2023, pp. 1339-1355, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-2080-6_32. (in English).
[14] A. I. S. Meyer, “Virtual learning environments: Concepts and characteristics,” Kirikerê: Research in Teaching, no. 12, pp. 190-208, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.47456/krkr.v1i12.37409. (in Portuguese).
[15] G. M. Olson and J. S. Olson, “Distance matters,” Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 139-178, 2000, doi: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327051HCI1523_4. (in English).
[16] D. R. Garrison, T. Anderson, and W. Archer, “Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education,” American Journal of Distance Education, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 7-23, 2001, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527071. (in English).
[17] M. Yunus and B. Bachtiar, “Exploring the complexities of thesis writing in the distance mode: Postgraduate students' perspectives, challenges and strategies,” Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, vol. 18, no. 1, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/aaouj-07-2024-0099. (in English).
[18] X. Dai, X. Fu, J. Zuo, and L. Shi, “Application of virtual simulation in education: Current status, hot spots and trends,” in International Conference on Information Technology and Education, 2024, pp. 384-392, doi: https://doi.org/10.70114/acmsr.2024.1.1.P384. (in English).
[19] J. Congmeng and A. N. Mazlan, “Exploring educational technology, online communities, and self-paced learning in enhancing graduate students' health promotion skills in physical education,” Journal of Pedagogical Research, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 56-72, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202527502. (in English).
[20] T. M. Asim, F. Naeem, and A. Yousaf, “Modern trends in e-learning tools and technologies in education with the use of Blackboard,” Humanities and Educational Sciences Journal, vol. 32, pp. 699-715, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.55074/hesj.vi32.786. (in English).
[21] K. Shearer, “Repository Networks: Past, Present and Future,” BIBLIOTHEK – Forschung und Praxis, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 271-274, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/bfp-2022-0005. (in English).
[22] M. Burchart and J. M. Haake, “Supporting collaborative writing tasks in large-scale distance education,” IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, pp. 1-18, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2024.3355791. (in English).
[23] T. Khan and C. S. Hazari, “Open-access software on research productivity in higher education: A scoping review,” Saudi Journal of Engineering and Technology, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 111-117, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.36348/sjet.2025.v10i03.009. (in English).
[24] L. Harasim, Learning theory and online technologies, 2nd ed. Routledge, 2017. (in English).
[25] T. Anderson and J. Dron, “Three generations of distance education pedagogy,” International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 80-97, 2011, doi: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v12i3.890. (in English).
[26] M. M. Silva, G. S. Oliveira, and G. O. Silva, “Bibliographic research in qualitative scientific studies,” Prisma Journal, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 91-109, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://revistaprisma.emnuvens.com.br/prisma/article/view/45. (in Portuguese).
[27] M. Burchart, “Toward scalable support for collaborative writing in highly diverse distance learning groups,” Media Pedagogy, vol. 48, pp. 135-154, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.21240/mpaed/48/2022.06.12.X. (in German).
[28] O. G. Glazunova, A. M. Hurzhii, V. I. Korolchuk, and T. V. Voloshyna, “Selection of digital tools for organizing students' group work in distance education,” Information Technologies and Learning Tools, vol. 94, no. 2, pp. 87-101, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v94i2.5211. (in English).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 Cícero da Trindade, Eliane Quinelato