In summarizing the research on collaborative learning, the quest for the holy grail of effective collaborative learning has not yet ended. The use of the GLAID framework tool for the design of collaborative learning in higher education may contribute to better aligned designs and hereby contribute to more effective collaborative learning. The GLAID framework may help monitor, evaluate and redesign projects and group assignments. We know that the perception of the quality of the task, and the extent to which students feel engaged, influences the perception of students of how much they learn from a GLA. However, perceptions alone are only an indication of what is learned. A next step is to study exactly what those learning outcomes are. This leads to a more difficult question: how can we measure the learning outcomes? Although a variety of research underlines the large potential of collaboration for learning outcomes, the exact learning outcomes of team learning can only be partly foretold. During collaborative learning students could partly achieve the same or similar learning outcomes, but as each individual learning internalizes what is learned from the collaborative learning by his/her given prior experiences and knowledge, the learning outcomes of collaborative learning are probabilistic (Strijbos, 2011), and therefore attaining specific learning outcomes is likely but not guaranteed. If learning outcomes are different per individual and are probabilistic, how can we measure those learning outcomes? Wenger, Trayner, & De Laat (2011) regard the outcomes of learning communities as value creations that have an individual outcome and a group outcome. This value creation induced by collaborative learning consists, for example, of changed behaviour in the working environment as well as the production of useful products or artefacts. Tillema (2006) also describes that communities of inquiry can lead to the design of conceptual artefacts: products that are useful for a professional working environment.