Constructivism has been a major conceptual framework that guides and shapes new instructional approaches (Fosnot, 1996; Wilson, 1996). This specific approach to learning and instruction has heavily influenced the design of ICT-based learning environments (Jonassen, 1991). Collaborative learning involves the joint construction of meaning through interaction with others (Lewis, 2000; Littleton & Hakkinen, 1999). Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) is based on the pedagogical assertion that students learn - construct knowledge - through group interaction (Gerlach, 1994). A specific type of CSCL is the use of asynchronous discussion groups. A parallel e-learning environment (ELE) for a first-year university course was implemented for Flemish and Chinese university students in Educational Sciences, in Dutch and Chinese languages separately. The use of asynchronous discussion groups is one of the main features of the e-learning environments. Research questions of the present study are: 1) will the students have a more positive attitude towards the constructivist e-learning environment compared to the conventional learning environment? 2) can they be motivated to adapt their learning strategies that are more in line with the requirements of the e-learning environment? A full population of first-year students studying Educational Sciences from a Flemish university and a university in Beijing participated in this study. A questionnaire was developed to determine students perception of the conventional and the e-learning environments. The research instrument consisted of several subparts. The different dimensions taken into account are Learning resources, Discussion, Critical Thinking, Problem-based Learning, Peer Learning, Help seeking, Interaction and Assessment. Next to a questionnaire, interviews are undertaken to understand their perception and appreciation of the learning environments.The Motivated Strategies of Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) (Pintrich, Smith, Garcia & McKeachie, 1991) is used before and after the ELE implementation to assess the motivation and learning strategies of students, in the scales of Intrinsic goal orientation, Extrinsic goal orientation, Control of learning beliefs, Self-efficacy for learning and performance, Rehearsal, Elaboration, Critical thinking, Metacognitive self-regulation, Peer learning and Help seeking. Several analysis procedures were used to answer our research questions. T-tests for independent samples were used to analyze the differences/similarities of students' perception of learning environments; paired t-tests were used to compare the differences of students' motivated strategies before and after the implementation of e-learning course. Regression analysis was used to analyse if certain types of motivation and learning strategies predict students' appreciation of the constructivist e-learning environment. The Flemish students have a more positive attitude towards the e-learning environment compared to the conventional learning environment and this with regard to almost all dimensions. However, the Chinese students have a lower perception of the constructivist e-learning environment compared to the conventional learning environment for all dimensions. This indicates that the Chinese students possibly are not used to the constructivist learning approach. It also implies that the e-learning environment which is parallel to the Flemish e-learning environment needs to be adapted considering the Chinese students' characteristics. Although the perceptions of ELE of Chinese students are significantly lower than the Flemish students, the Chinese students are motivated to adapt their learning strategies towards learning strategies that are more in line with the constructivist learning approach. Moreover, it is found that the 'discussion' dimension of the e-learning environment has a positive relationship with students' intrinsic motivation, critical thinking and elaboration strategy. Therefore, learning and instructional design should foster students' motivated strategies and eventually their achievement and knowledge construction.Fosnot, C.T. (1996). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In C.T. Posnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press Wilson, B.G (1996). Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publication. Jonassen D (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology, Research and Development, 39, 3, 5-14. Lewis, R. (2000). Human activity in learning societies. Invited paper. In Young, S.SC., Greer, J., Maurer, H. & Chee, Y.S. (eds.). Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers in Education, ICCEICCAI 2000. Learning Societies in the new Millenium. National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan, pp. 36-45. Littleton, K. & Häkkinen, P (1999). Learning Together: Understanding the Processes of Computer- Based Collaborative Learning. In: Dillenbourg, P. (ed.): Collaborative learning, cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 20-30). London. Gerlach, J. M. (1994). Is this collaboration? In K. Bosworth & S. J. Hamilton (Eds.) Collaborative learning: Underlying processes and effective techniques, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. , e.g. Computer Assisted Learning