For example, in one case study the author discussed the effectiveness of using small groups of students for collaborative course projects (Murphy, Mahoney, & Harvell, 2000). The author described how group collaboration was often ineffective when students were unable to coordinate their schedules to enable collaboration. If several students could only interact on weekends, but other students in the same group were able to interact only on weekdays, there were often several days between communication exchanges (e-mail messages, file exchanges, or discussion posts). When this occurred, the group's progress was slow and cumbersome. As I read this discussion of effectiveness, I recognized this as an instructional condition of student synchronicity - the ability of students in a group to coordinate the timing of their interactions with the other members of their group. If students cannot coordinate their schedules so that collaboration-focused interactions are timed appropriately, the instructional method is not likely to be effective.

• International students with a common language must be willing and able to participate in the learning community (Turbill, 2001).
• Lecturers are willing and able to use interactive questioning techniques in a synchronous online environment to engage students during a lecture (Eggers, 1999).
• The instructor must practice effective online discussion behavior and protocol, and be able to communicate and model this behavior to students (Burton, 1998).
• Students should have similar professional or academic interests and backgrounds (Wegerif, 1998).
• Students must be willing and able to moderate and facilitate online discussions (Vrasidas & McIsaac, 1999).