assessment and proposal of procedures for using open

ERASMUS+ PROJECT NETCHEM

ICT Networking for Overcoming Technical and Social Barriers in Instrumental Analytical Chemistry Education

Assessment and proposal of procedures for using Open Education Resources and Web Accessed Remote

Instrumental Analysis in Environmental and Food Safety Control

PREP 1.3.

Niš, 2017



2



3

Project acronym NETCHEM

Project full title ICT Networking for Overcoming Technical and Social Barriers in Instrumental Analytical Chemistry Education

Project No 573885-EPP-1-2016-1-RS-EPPKA2-CBHE-JP

Number of grant contracts

2016-2586/001-001

Web address of project www.netchem.ac.rs

Funding Scheme Erasmus+

Coordinator Institution University of Niš

Coordinator Prof. dr. Tatjana Anđelković

Project duration 15.10.2016. – 14.10.2019.

Work package WP1 – Current and Desired level of Knowledge/skills in Technology Enhanced Learning in EFSC

Lead organization of WP1 University of Greenwich (UoG), UK

Task 1.3 Assessment and proposal of procedures for using OER and Instrumental Analysis in EFSC

Task leader University of Niš (UN), Serbia

Version of the document V.03

Date 29/09/2017

Status Draft

Responsible partner UN

Dissemination level External

http://www.netchem.ac.rs/



4



NETCHEM

Authors of the Report

(In alphabetical order)

Adamov Jasna University of Novi Sad

Andjelkovic Darko University of Nis

Andjelkovic Tatjana University of Nis

Andrejic Nenad Analysis

Antic Dragan University of Nis

Antonijevic Milan University of Greenwich

Bogdanovic Sara Zlatiborac

Brahollari Albiona Agricultural University of Tirana

Brossas Annie University Pierre and Marie Currie

Cendic Marina University of Kragujevac

Časlavsky Josef Brno University of Technology

Djekic Sanja Analysis

Djukic Maja University of Kragujevac

Ezan Eric CEA

Fenaille Francois CEA

Gajica Gordana University of Belgrade

Hasaillu Rozeta Agricultural University of Tirana

Ilijevic Konstantin University of Belgrade

Ivancev Tumbas Ivana University of Novi Sad

Ivanovic Milos University of Kragujevac

Jeremic Marija University of Kragujevac

Jevtic Stojanovic Marija Zlatiborac

Joksimovic Zorica Zlatiborac

Jovancicevic Branimir University of Belgrade

Kika Alda University of Tirana

Kodra Mariola Agricultural University of Tirana

Kongoli Renata Agricultural University of Tirana

Kostic Ivana University of Nis

Leovac Macerak Anita University of Novi Sad

Loha Ilir Agricultural University of Tirana

Lopicic Vesna University of Nis

Ljubojevic Vesovic Natasa Zlatiborac

Matovic Zoran University of Kragujevac

Mendham Anrew University of Greenwich

Mihajlovic Ivana University of Novi Sad



NETCHEM

Morina Ariola Agricultural University of Tirana

Mravcova Ludmila Brno University of Technology

Mrkalic Emina University of Kragujevac

Musabelliu Bari Agricultural University of Tirana

Petrovic Biljana University of Kragujevac

Petrovic Evica University of Nis

Radonic Jelena University of Novi Sad

Stanic Zorka University of Kragujevac

Stojiljkovic Natali Aqualeer

Tabet Jean Claude Aqualeer

Trifunovic Srecko University of Kragujevac

Turk Sekilic Maja University of Novi Sad

Vasjari Majlinda University of Tirana

Vukovic Nenad University of Kragujevac

Warnet Anna Aqualeer

Zarubica Aleksandra University of Nis

Zlamalova Helena Brno University of Technology



6

Organization of survey and data collection was performed by (in alphabetical order)

Anđelković Darko University of Niš

Anđelković Tatjana University of Niš

Adamov Jasna University of Novi Sad

Brahollari Albiona, Agricultural University of Tirana

Čendić Marina University of Kragujevac

Đukić Maja University of Kragujevac

Gajica Gordana University of Belgrade

Hasalliu Roseta Agricultural University of Tirana

Ivančev-Tumbas Ivana University of Novi Sad

Ivanović Miloš University of Kragujevac

Jovančićević Branimir University of Belgrade

Kika Alda University of Tirana

Kongoli Renata Agricultural University of Tirana

Kostić Ivana University of Niš

Matović Zoran University of Kragujevac

Radonić Jelena University of Novi Sad

Turk-Sekulić Maja University of Novi Sad

Vasjari Majlinda University of Tirana

Zarubica Aleksandra University of Niš



7

Contents

1 Rational behind the study ...................................................................... 11

2 Open Education Resources ..................................................................... 13

2.1 Massive Open Online Course ............................................................ 16

2.1.1 EdX............................................................................................... 17

2.1.2 Moodle ........................................................................................ 18

2.1.3 Open edX vs. Moodle .................................................................. 25

3 Remote Access to Analytical Instruments .............................................. 27

3.1 Remote Access in Science – key issues ............................................. 27

3.2 Virtual Laboratory versus Remote Access......................................... 29

3.3 Examples of REMOTE PROJECTS ....................................................... 31

3.4 NETCHEM Survey about EU Practice in using OER & WARIAL .......... 33

3.5 NETCHEM Survey about PC Practice in using OER & WARIAL ........... 36

3.6 SWOT in the implementation of OER & WARIAL .............................. 39

4 NETCHEM strategy for implementation of OER & WARIAL .................... 41

4.1 Technical Background and Implementation ..................................... 44

4.2 Pedagogical Background ................................................................... 52

4.2.1 Examples of NETCHEM communications .................................... 55

5 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................... 60

6 REFERENCES ........................................................................................... 62



8



9

List of abbreviations

CPD = Continuing professional development (CPD) courses

EFSC = Environmental and Food Safety Control

HEI = High Education Institution

ICT = Information & computer technology

LLP = Life Long Learning (LLL) Program

NETCHEM = acr. for network in the Project

OER = Open Education Resources

P1 – UN = University of Nis

P2 – UPMC = University Pierre and Marie Curie

P3 – UoG = University of Greenwich

P4 – BUT = Brno University of Technology

P5 – CEA = Le Commissariat à l’énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives

P6 – UB (Serbia) =University of Belgrade

P7 – UNS (Serbia) = University of University Novi Sad

P8 – UNIKG = University of Kragujevac

P9 – AUT = Agricultural University of Tirana

P10 – UT = University of Tirana

P11 – ANL = Analysis d.o.o.

P12 – ESV = Enological station of Vršac

P13 – ZLT = Zlatiborac d.o.o.

P14 – AQ = Aqualeer NGO

PC = Partner Country: Serbia, Albania

SQL = Structured Query Language (Database program)

TEL = Technology enhanced learning

WARIAL = Web Accessed Remote Instrumental Analytical Laboratory (WARIAL)



10

Acknowledgment We thanks to all the participants that were active in this survey and provided their answers.

This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.



11

1 Rational behind the study

This document sets out the strategy for the Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) services and support for teaching and learning at the institutions that comprise NETCHEM project consortium.

NETCHEM Project aims at strengthening the capacities for international cooperation in Serbian and Albanian higher education institutions (HEIs) and enterprises to increase their education level and technical capacities regarding analytical instrumentation usage for Environmental & Food Safety Control (EFSC) through Technology Enhanced Learning and to increase benefits in health, environment, tourism and economy in Serbia and Albania toward their EU pre-accession development.

One of the project goals is to modernize MSc and PhD courses by usage of open education resources (OER) and to develop web accessed remote instrumental analytical laboratories (WARIAL). Additionally, the goal is to develop and enhance the courses for continuous professional development (CPD) at each of participating Universities to increase instrumental analytical techniques application in solving EFSC problems within laboratories. Development of OER platform will provide the possibility of constant availability for consultation and exchange of experience, knowledge and information.

In order to achieve such an objective of the project, one of the tasks of Work package 1 was to analyse the Knowledge/Skills/Practice in using open education resources (OER) and Instrumental Analysis in EFSC domain at universities and in enterprises in EU and PCs and to set up required competences and technical background in using OER and Instrumental Analysis.

The analysis was provided with the use of questionnaires, reviews of on-going study programs, institutional documentation regarding routine laboratory work in industry/enterprises and institutional visits of consortium partners to instrumental analytical laboratories. The teaching/learning infrastructure was examined, laboratory facilities and ICT provision.

The findings from those activities provided the basis in setting up the required competences and technical background in OER and Instrumental Analysis applied in EFSC for Partner Country universities.



12

In this way, it was possible to make deep survey on opinions of actors that participate in both process of education and process of work at the market, either as providers of equipment, or as users of equipment (both potential employers of graduates that coming out from the university). Based on the findings it is possible to see the available resources that can be of use in developing OER, WARIAL and CPDs in both countries, to define the needs related to content that is necessary to deliver in PC countries at each partner, at national or regional level and to define the best available teaching tool for delivering needed contents. This should provide conditions to implement work on the tasks within other relevant work packages efficiently and to contribute to both university and continual professional education in the field of instrumental analysis.

The analysis of the current situation in WP 1, identifying SWOT parameters in using OER, should serve as the basis for the recommended strategies to improve implementation of OER in higher education.

Comparative analysis of EU and PC participating organisations in technology enhanced learning usage was done.

Compilation of all results in activity 1.1 and 1.2 provided the basis in setting of required competences and technical background in OER and Instrumental Analysis applied in EFSC for Partner Country universities.



13

2 Open Education Resources

What does OER mean? Term OER was first adopted at UNESCO’s 2002 Forum on the Impact of Open Courseware for Higher Education in Developing Countries funded by the Hewlett Foundation [1]. Open Educational Resources (OER) describes any type of educational materials in the public domain or introduced with an open license and openly available for use by teachers, educators and students. The term OER generally refers only to digital resources and tends to focus on usage in online. OER typically refers to electronic resources, including those in multimedia formats or any material designed for use in teaching and learning processes: course materials, textbooks, multimedia applications, streaming videos, podcasts, maps, work papers, etc. The nature of these open materials means that anyone can legally and freely copy, use, adapt and re-share them.

OER can originate from universities, faculties, colleges, libraries, publishers and individuals who develop educational resources, and they are willing to share.

Each resource is issued under a license that spells out how it can be used, either be used in their original form or can be modified, remixed, and redistributed.

Depending on the resource, these updates might be made by the creator or by users of the resource. Teachers or individual learners can download OER and use them in formal or informal learning situations.

OER materials are typically found in collections or repositories. The main usages of OER are when:

o university, faculty or college makes available online the resources from

its courses,

o collections of materials gathered from individuals or teachers from a

wide range of separate institutions.

What are advantages/benefits of using OER? All included groups that can use OER (institutions, teachers, staff, students, etc.) have special benefits of using OER:

Learners/teachers can take benefit by:

o educational resources developed in an open environment can be

improved by other educators and make materials most valuable



14

through educational community view (international dimension of

seeing/applying knowledge, not just in certain course),

o informal learning and skills development,

o the opportunity to test out course materials before enrolling – and

compare with other similar courses,

o OERs have the potential to expand pedagogical innovation by

introducing new alternatives for effective teaching.

Student can take benefit by:

o enhanced opportunities for learning by freedom of access (learning at

work, home or any other place),

o expose students and teachers to the other sources where most of

them never find its way into widespread educational use.

Other staff/users can take benefit by:

o collaborative approaches to teaching/learning,

o availability of quality peer reviewed material to enhance their

curriculum,

o professional learning about the processes of OER release,

o increased dialogue within workers in the same institution or from

other institutions,

o preservation and availability of materials.

Educational institutions can take benefit by:

o recognition and enhanced reputation,

o wider availability of academic content and focus on the learning

experience,

o increased capacity to support remote students,

o efficiencies in content production,

o new partnerships/linkages with other institutions and organizations,

o increase of sharing ideas and practice within the institution and

between institutions,

o new relationships with students like they become collaborators in OER

production, release and use.



15

What are disadvantages of using OER?

o no common standard for review of OER accuracy and quality which

lead to the quality of OER can be uneven and depends largely on their

sources,

o some OER are simply ineffective at presenting content in a valuable

manner, and not all OER collections have a feedback mechanism by

which users can share their evaluations about the quality of a

resource. Even within an OER repository that is operated and

sanctioned by a respected institution, individual resources might not

be held to the same standard of quality as the institution’s other

offerings.

o technical requirements to access vary,

o lack of human interaction between teachers and students,

o language barrier since OER are generally available in one language,

o whenever content is shared, and especially when it can be modified,

questions arise over intellectual property and copyright concerns. In

some cases, faculty resistance to opening their resources can be an

obstacle.

Goals of OER? The primary goals are to make higher education better. Higher education will be enhanced with high quality, open, digital content by giving expanded access to educational resources to more learners because open resources are available for independent, self-directed study.

Infrastructure investment – Support teachers and institutions promoting OER by researching on OER effectiveness and the technical basis for OER, open

licenses and accessibility standards. 2-3



16

2.1 Massive Open Online Course

Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are courses designed for large numbers of participants, that can be accessed by anyone anywhere if they have an internet connection, are open to everyone without entry qualifications, and offer a full/complete course experience online for free.

The main characteristics are:

o all aspects of course are delivered online,

o number of participants is larger than usual number in classrooms,

o access of course to all people is without limitations and course can be

accessed anywhere if they have an internet connection,

o open to everyone without entry qualifications – no qualificati-

ons/diplomas needed to participate in the online course,

o course can be completed for free – full course experience without any

costs for participants.

The course offers a full course experience including:

o educational content (may include text, video, audio, simulations,

animation)

o feedback mechanism is provided that can be automatically generated

(only by peers (peer feedback) and/or general feedback from

academic staff, etc.)

o offers possibilities facilitate interaction among peers (and academic

staff but limited) by using social media channels, forums and blogs to

build a learning community

o study guide – includes instructions how to use the presented materials

and interactions and learn from them.

o always includes recognition like a certificate of completion. A formal

certificate is optional and most likely must be paid for.

Structure of MOOCs. The common duration of a MOOC is from 6 to 12 weeks. A standard class becomes in a MOOC a set of videos of 5 – 10 minutes each. The learning of students in a MOOC is usually assessed by multiple-choice questions. It is accessible 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The content is delivered asynchronously (meaning students can access it in their own time and at their own



17

space). Sometimes events can be optional synchronous such as 'live' webinars (interactive sessions) and it requires joining of participants at specific dates/times.

An important component of MOOCs is assignments. Student must upload assignment solutions into the MOOC platform. Assignments can be evaluated and graded:

o Automatically when possible.

o Peer-to-peer: students evaluate and grade themselves.

Another component is the forum, where students post questions that other students can answer.

Usually, there are no pre-requisites for taking a MOOC, apart from having access to a computer with an internet connection. Most of the time, the educational or academic background of students isn't important.

Students usually don't need to buy any books for these courses, because all reading is either be provided within the MOOC content or is linked to open access texts.

2.1.1 EdX

Founded by Harvard University and MIT in 2012, edX is an online learning destination and MOOC provider, offering high-quality courses from the world’s best universities and institutions to learners everywhere.

Difference from other courses is that edX is the open-source platform that powers edX courses and is freely available and because of this educators and technologists can build learning tools and contribute new features to the platform, creating innovative solutions to benefit students everywhere.

EdX courses offer:

o Learning from the best professors and leading industry experts

through presentations, lectures, etc.

o Building knowledge through work with interactive labs, experiments,

etc.

o Availability of expertise and assessments

o Taking of courses anytime and anywhere. You can make your own

schedule

o Connecting with learners from around the world

o Easy-to-use discussion forums about certain themes



18

2.1.2 Moodle

Moodle is a learning platform designed to provide educators, administrators and learners with a single robust, secure and integrated system to create personalised learning environments.

Moodle is an open source learning management system (LMS), a complete package for managing, designing and running courses. It was developed in 2002 by Martin Dougiamas and it originated as a platform for educators with the technology to provide online learning in personalized environments that foster interaction, inquiry and collaboration. In private or public Moodle sites, educators, trainers and employers can create and deliver online courses so their respective audiences can meet and exceed their learning goals.

Although Moodle can be used for many kinds of educational applications, it is based on socio-constructivist principles and most suited for an educational approach involving interaction amongst people rather than transmission of content. Its goal is to provide a set of tools that support an inquiry and discovery-based approach to online learning. Furthermore, its purpose is to create an environment that allows for collaborative interaction among students as a stand-alone or in addition to conventional classroom instruction.

A Moodle course includes user management, enrolment, learner monitoring, activity modules (tools), resources (attached files and links), all visibly arranged on a single main course page.

Pedagogical Attributes. Nowadays, when the computer is a significant part of the learner's daily life, it is inevitable that methods of teaching and learning should components that are based on the computer environment. This new pedagogy employs:

o High-order thinking and learning skills.

o A constructivist approach to science teaching and learning.

o Information, communication, and scientific literacy skills using digital

means and advanced technologies.

Moodle has pedagogical advantages since it was built in accordance with the teaching approach which emphasizes the construction of knowledge through active and interactive learning, and learning multi-sensory experience through multimedia. Learning via Moodle is based on concepts such as independent learning, active learning, self-directed learning, problem-based education,



19

simulations, and work-based learning. Most of these models are based on constructivism in which learners become responsible for regulating their own learning process. Self-regulated learners are motivated, independent, and meta-cognitively active learners in their own learning.

Pedagogically, many Moodle teachers strive to create a learning environment for students where they get choices (and the freedom to make mistakes). This requires tools that support students with self-monitoring tools covering processes like self-planning, time-management, reflection, re-planning, and choice in difficulty level of the activities. Using Moodle can contribute to the ability to teach, the ability to learn and most important to bridge between two main components in the classroom, the teacher and the learner. It provides different environments for learners with dynamic, interactive, nonlinear access to a wide range of information (text, graphics, and animation) as well as to self-directed learning in online communication (e-mail and forums).

Moodle focuses on giving educators the best tools to manage and promote learning and allows teachers to organize, manage and deliver course materials. From a didactic point of view, the usage of multimedia tools to create attractive activities makes the learning process friendlier for students. Consequently, these activities increase the interest of the students in their studies. Teachers can provide students with a large amount of resources that they cannot usually show in the classroom due to time constraints. Lesson tasks within Moodle can be linked to any resources that are uploaded to one's server or that are available on the Internet. The students' exploration of any of the content-based resources can be easily assessed by using any of the Moodle based evaluation and feedback tools.

Moodle is designed in accordance with learning theories, keeping in mind the following pedagogical aspects:

1. All of us are potential teachers as well as learners - in a true collaborative environment we are both.

2. People learn particularly well from the act of creating or expressing something for others to see. Moodle has a wide range of ways in which people can create representations of their knowledge and share them, such as shared and active presentations, forums which provide spaces for discussion and sharing of media and documents; wikis - the collaboratively-built pages useful for group work; glossaries and databases, which allow



20

participants to enter structured media of any type (for example a collection of digital photos or a library of references).

3. People learn a lot by just observing the activity of their peers. In the Moodle page teachers can see everyone in their course. It shows information about the participants and how recently they've been there. They can monitor changes to the course and forum posts, etc., but also things like assignment submissions and quiz attempts. Students can't see the results that other students got from these activities, but they do get some sense that everyone is submitting assignments and this peer pressure helps those who need it. Almost all the modules will "tag" an entry or change with the name of the user, so that teachers and students can see who did what and when. For example, wiki pages all have a history link with full details on every edit.

In any online or distance learning course, communication is key to ensure that the lesson is effective. Moodle allows for communication to happen between the instructor and students and students can also communicate with each other.

Activities of teachers include:

o displaying relevant course information,

o delivering their lectures in different formats,

o storing materials for students - in this case Moodle course serves as a

simple repository,

o having students prepare for a reading, writing or a discussion activity,

o getting student to collaborate in various writing activities, such as

sharing their experiences or opinions with each another, collecting

vocabulary and making glossaries, writing individual or group reports,

collecting links to interesting websites, etc.

o evaluation of students’ knowledge,

o collaboration with students (by emailing / communicating answers

relating to students' concerns),

o monitoring students’ engagement in a course and their frequency of

usage, etc.



21

Students can use Moodle:

o to access relevant course materials and other relevant information

remotely,

o to collaborate on group projects,

o to submit their assignments,

o to keep track of their progress,

o to communicate with teachers and other students, etc.

Course Development and Management Features. In Moodle, courses can be designed and managed to meet various requirements. Classes can be instructor-led, self-paced, blended or entirely online. Teachers can use Moodle to provide course materials such as handouts, lecture notes and PowerPoint presentations to their students. They can also use Moodle in more interactive ways which require input from students; discussion forums, quizzes and assignment drop-boxes are available.

Moodle is easy to use, and should be very straightforward for anyone who is comfortable using the web. In setting up a Moodle course, there is a blank column of topics or weeks and an arbitrarily complex structure can evolve over time. Learners experience maximum control because they can visualize the whole structure and are given full access for free inspection, skipping, jumping back anywhere on the main course page. Moodle allows technically-inexperienced instructors to create useful learning scenarios almost immediately, and then progressively refine them as their skills improve. A typical progression that teachers might go through as they learn to use the Moodle tools includes the following steps:

1. Putting up the handouts (Resources, SCORM)

2. Providing a passive Forum (unfacilitated)

3. Using Quizzes and Assignments (less management)

4. Using the Wiki, Glossary and Database tools (interactive content)

5. Facilitate discussions in Forums, asking questions, guiding

6. Combining activities into sequences, where results feed later activities

7. Introduce external activities and games (internet resources)

8. Using the Survey module to study and reflect on course activity

9. Using peer-review modules like Workshop, giving students more control over grading and even structuring the course in some ways



22

10. Conducting active research on oneself, sharing ideas in a community of peers

Features of Moodle. Moodle has many features that help teachers design and organize their courses. Some of them are:

o Modern, easy to use interface is designed to be responsive and

accessible; the Moodle interface is easy to navigate on both desktop

and mobile devices.

o Personalized Dashboard is used to organize and display courses the

way teachers want, and view at a glance current tasks and messages.

o Simple and intuitive text editor enables teachers to format text and

add media and images with an editor that works across all web

browsers and devices.

o Adding Content - Two types of content can be inserted into sections:

Resources – read-only content such as links to existing documents and

external websites, and Activities – exercises requiring some form of

user interaction, e.g. quizzes, assignments and forums.

o Uploading files - teachers can upload files from their computer by

dragging and dropping the files from your computer straight onto the

Moodle page.

o Embedding external resources – external teaching materials and

assignments can be included into the instruction material. Many

websites provide materials and interactive learning exercises different

from and complementary to Moodle's own resources and activities.

The external tool offers a way for teachers to link to these activities

from within their Moodle course page and where available to have

grades sent back into Moodle.

o Multimedia Integration - Moodle’s built-in media support enables

teachers and students to easily search for and insert video and audio

files into their courses. Moodle includes a wide variety of ways in

which both teachers and students can add media. A teacher, for

example, might include a video or sound file in a Lesson or Quiz which

could then form the basis of a set of questions.



23

o Convenient file management – Moodle lets teachers drag and drop

files from cloud storage services including MS OneDrive, Dropbox and

Google Drive.

o Open standards support provided in Moodle allows teachers to readily

import and export IMS-LTI, SCORM courses and more into Moodle.

o Collaborative tools and activities are used by both students and

teachers to work and learn together in forums, wikis, glossaries,

database activities.

o Moodle’s calendar tool helps teachers keep track of their academic

calendar, course deadlines, group meetings, and other personal

events.

o Notifications provide teachers and students with a possibility to

receive automatic alerts on new assignments and deadlines, forum

posts and also send private messages to one another.

o Track progress - Educators and learners can track progress and

completion with an array of options for tracking individual activities or

resources and at course level.

o Multilingual capability – Moodle allows users to view course content

and learn in their own language, or set it up for multilingual users and

organizations.

o Special-purpose repositories provide institutions with the opportunity

to keep their valuable data where they want to, and also, they allow

the development of e-Portfolios.

o Group management – Moodle enables working in groups, sharing

courses, differentiating activities and facilitation of team work.

o In-line marking – teachers can easily review and provide in-line

feedback by annotating files directly within browser. It also provides

benefits for the students - keeping track of grades online is a key to

keeping students engaged in the learning experience. As they track

their own performance, students can ask questions about grades

faster, adjust their efforts to focus on areas in need of attention and

even catch errors.

https://docs.moodle.org/33/en/Repository



24

o Peer and self-assessment – built-in activities such as workshops and

surveys encourage learners to view, grade and assess their own and

other course members' work as a group.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Moodle. Moodle has advantages and disadvantages for delivering course content whether it is for an online course or an instructor-led course.

Some of the advantages include the following:

o Open Source: Moodle is an open source platform, which means that

its source code is accessible to all. It is distributed under the Public

License. Users and organizations have the freedom to run, study,

share, and modify the software to meet their unique commercial or

non-commercial needs.

o Simple Interface: Moodle is quite user-friendly. This is because of its

simple interface and intuitive navigation, which consists of only three

distinct columns. All training courses can be accessed from the middle

column. It can also be accessible on any mobile device.

o Different types of content formats: One of the advantages of Moodle

is that it allows for many different types of content formats to be

uploaded and available for use by the students and the instructor.

Moodle not only allows for learning to be done online or at a distance

but also it allows for resources to be available to students in who are

in instructor-led classes.

o Different options and tools available for use: There are about 20

different types of activities available (forums, glossaries, wikis,

assignments, quizzes, choices (polls), SCORM metadata, databases,

etc.) and each can be customized quite a lot. The main power of this

activity-based model comes in combining the activities into sequences

and groups, which can help teachers guide participants through

learning paths. There are many other tools that make it easier to build

communities of learners, including blogs, messaging, participant lists

etc., as well as useful tools like grading, reports, integration with other

systems and so on.



25

o Offline Access: For some countries, Internet bandwidth can be a major

issue while delivering online training. Moodle provides the offline

access, which allows remote students to download courses to their

devices and access them offline, later.

o Provisions for people with disabilities: Moodle supports many assistive

technologies such as screen-readers, screen-magnifiers, alternative

mouse and key use, disabling of AJAX and JavaScript, and more.

A disadvantage of Moodle is that it is a technological tool which can be challenging for some students. If the student does not have access to the Internet or some form of technology to utilize Moodle, then this becomes a disadvantage for the student and for the instructor. Another disadvantage to Moodle is that some teachers and students, more specifically adult learners, are resistant and hesitant to using any form of technology for learning. Even though Moodle allows for a great place to organize and store learning content which will be provided to the students, some adult learners are very resistant to utilize technology for learning and they will not use it.

2.1.3 Open edX vs. Moodle

Depending on the specific needs, the teacher can make a choice between these platforms. Both systems support massive open online courses, but some segments are different regarding the features and use in terms of teachers. The performed analysis has shown an original approach in the field of evaluation of both systems, while the similarities are reflected in the overview of its capabilities.

Figure 1. Assessment of edX and Moodle platforms [2]

User management, access restriction, internationalization and reporting, are easier to set and ready to use with Moodle and it is a main advantage of this. Compare to edX, Moodle does too many things but because of that it is easier to adapt client’s requests. On the other side, edX provides a roadmap on what they



26

are working or will work on, and it means that edX is more innovative platform that

could fit with future client requests. 3 – 5



27

3 Remote Access to Analytical Instruments

3.1 Remote Access in Science – key issues

The concept of using remote control in the sciences. Scientists often exploit the advantages of remote access when the experiment they wish to conduct is physically inaccessible by location or danger. The remote laboratory concept is often used, and this is not the new concept. Remote instrumentation is used when instrument is inaccessible because of difficult location or hazardous reasons. For example, all nuclear fission reactors are operated remotely because of the safety issues, exploration spacecraft and deep-sea craft are also remotely controlled.

There are about 100 remote desktop software, with different:

o Operating system support

o Communication protocols

o License politics & Prices for private and commercial usage

Chemistry education through strong laboratory approach is at the heart of many university level chemistry courses. Experimentation is considered as a fundamental part of the education and training of most chemists and so chemistry study programs require great ratio of practical components. The importance of experiments in chemistry education can be seen in stimulation of interest in learning, experiencing the exploration, improving and testing the existing structure of knowledge. Performing experimentation in chemistry teaching is ambitious and demanding task.

Reasons of using remote control in the sciences. Most laboratory experiments require the effective and safe coordination of personnel, equipment, chemicals, samples by skilled staff [6]. Experimental approach in chemistry education is time consuming, expensive and often can be hazardous. Equipment is also limited by the number of pieces and by the novelty of instrumentation. Also, students do not have much laboratory practical experiences and skills and thus must repeat some parts of experiment which rise the cost of the experiment. The experiments usually set the necessity for one to one tutor to student assistance in doing the experiment. However, the remote access is an excellent method for sharing expensive equipment for teaching purposes for more hazardous experiments. Implementation of remote instrumentation method leads to cost-



28

effective e-learning where students at a remote site need only computers and the Internet to perform the experiment.



29

3.2 Virtual Laboratory versus Remote Access

Advantages over the traditional science lab format. There are some advantages over the traditional science lab format:

cost savings (they need only one lab setup, instead of a class set and reduced setup/takedown technician time);

access to labs by more students worldwide including students in remote communities, disabled students;

remote web-based experiments can be re-run and refined by students offer flexibility in the timeframe in which the labs can be conducted

virtual access by interactive computer simulations of instrumentation and experiments allow student seeing what is expected;

remote access allows students and/or researchers to physically carry out real experiments over the Web.

In considering the approach of remote instrumentation in chemistry

education, it is important to emphasize the difference between a virtual laboratory

environment and remote teaching laboratory. A virtual laboratory environment

represents the computer simulation of experiment or instrumentation. The

advantages of virtual laboratories lay in the facts that they can prepare student for

a real experimental situation and support experimental explanation and learning of

theoretical knowledge and concepts. However, the simulation of an experiment

does not exactly reflect the “real” world. Unlike virtual or simulated analytical

instruments, remote control of equipment and experiments allows students to

physically carry out real experiments over the Web. Thus, they obtain the real

results for their real samples, perform the real analysis and make the real discussion

and conclusion.

The remote instrumentation from a distant location gives the real-time

experiment concretizing the understanding of procedures. Thus, by approaching

with the computers, even mobile phones, and Internet-capable devices the

connection to the remote laboratories can be made to trigger the instrument.

The student can alter experimental parameters, run a real experiment,

analyse data collected, and prepare reports both within the supervised teaching

laboratory and outside regular hours.



30

In general, the virtual laboratory offers students special benefits such as

conducting online experiments almost 24 hours a day, without typical limitation in

space and time. Even more, this laboratory offers them doing experiments

selectively, within the fields they are interested in. This flexibility gives new

opportunities to students to improve the interaction between teaching and

learning.

Remote access has also afforded unexpected advantages for the instructor.

Upgrades to instrumental software and hardware require frequent changes to

instrumental analysis course packs or laboratory manuals. Access to the instruments

via the Internet has made these upgrades much easier. Staff can access the

instruments and the key screens needed to utilize the instrumental software can be

captured and pasted into the course pack document on their office computer.

Additionally, student files can be accessed and checked for consistency with reports

submitted for marking from the office computer. Multiple user access to the Web

site permits an instructor to observe students using instruments in the laboratory

via remote access and to interfere when help is requested using a chat tool.



31

3.3 Examples of REMOTE PROJECTS

Cyberlab project EU Project Leonardo da Vinci. Aim of the CyberLab project is to provide easy virtual access to any laboratory equipment by developing a method for distance laboratory training. The challenge is to realise distance laboratory training via video conferencing in a manner that the learning effect gained during traditional laboratory training is maintained. This is difficult to realize as laboratory training is highly complex and interactive in nature, composed of a variety of ergonomic key elements to be identified, as teamwork discussions, visual observation of laboratory details, changing of the experimental set-up and parameters, observing the experiments, handling of probes, microscopes and measuring devices, etc. It is essential to identify the important ergonomic and pedagogic aspects of laboratory training and to try optimally realizing them on an interactive video conferencing level.

Different complementary methods will be developed and evaluated in parallel, e.g. manipulating a microscope by distance, rotating and zooming remote cameras, best communication code between trainees and trainer or operator, etc. A pilot course shall demonstrate the applicability of the developed methods in an integrated, sophisticated manner.

Vision of this project is that finally the partners and any further training organisations can share their complementary laboratory equipment by offering common distance courses for trainees from all over Europe, who can be trained in an easy manner with a large variety of outstanding lab equipment, extending the traditional local training, thus improving the quality of practical skills.

The partnership, involving five countries, is composed of six universities and research institutes, five of complementary laboratory facilities in the subject manufacturing and one medical laboratory, all with different video conferencing expertise. In addition, four relevant industrial partners will critically evaluate the applicability of the developed methods throughout the project.

PEARL project (Practical Experimentation by Accessible Remote Learning). The PEARL project has been developing approaches for enabling real-world experiments to be conducted by students working, remotely from the laboratory, over the Internet by describing of approaches and comparing three specific implementations at the level of the nature of the practical work they support and the technical infrastructures that enables this to be conducted remotely. Initial



32

evaluations by experts and representative student subjects were observed and key lessons for further development work by the project consortium, or others seeking to implement remote experiments, are outlined. Also, analysis of current practice of using OER in EU and PC countries was investigated.



33

3.4 NETCHEM Survey about EU Practice in using OER & WARIAL

As many survey results those obtained here should be considered with a caution. We looked at only several institutions 4 – 5 from 3 different EU countries and within this poll of results we noticed some differences in practices. Therefore, it would be wrong to conclude that what is represented is representative of the HE practices across Europe. Having said that, obtained information is significant and has some significant correlation between different institutions which gives us the opportunity to use data, compare with survey conducted in partner countries (Serbia and Albania), make comparison and suggest/set project specific outcomes.

EU HEs are defined by great effort and some success in using e-learning, OERs and to some extent readiness for teaching via using remote access. When look more closely to instrumental analytical education hands-on approach is crucial in obtaining valuable knowledge, however theoretical knowledge and problem based learning can be enhanced using well developed OERs. Indeed, examples of the Healthcare Learning (http://www.healthcare-learning.com/index.html) company from the UK proves that e-learning, online learning and distance learning can be effective if delivered using structured courses that contain a lot of OERs and e-learning that relays on web-conferences, chatrooms, small online discussion groups etc. Of course, even heavily distance learning must be supported by on site acquisition of necessary skills.

Survey results point out that EU HEIs are prepared and to great extent equipped with necessary skills and tools to advance in teaching of necessary instrumental skills using novel methodologies. However, it is evident that majority of educators in HE sector define time as the crucial limiting factor to advance their personal skills and knowledge. This is important factor when discussion HE’s transitions and new developments.

Students often “mimic” their lecturers, when e-learning is concerned, we didn’t see significant increase in the use of technology driven learning between staff and students. Both groups tent to use mixture of different e-learning tools but predominantly more traditional OERs, less time consuming (e-books, pictures) vs. long and static (simulation, web-conference).

Both groups, staff and students, would like to explore new possibilities hence WARIAL clearly appeal to both groups.

http://www.healthcare-learning.com/index.html



34

Finally, as previously discussed, level of knowledge between what lecturer’s things students have and what student’s thing they possess is in disparity. Having said that questions are not in a direct correlation as staff members were asked to evaluate knowledge before start of MSc and PhD educations whiles students evaluated their current knowledge which may well be towards the middle or end of their MSc or PhD studies. Both groups clearly pointed out that fundamental knowledge and theoretical principles of analytical methods is at greater level compare to application of knowledge (practical instrumental skills and solving complex problems).

Among this sample of highly qualified analysts with a ratio of 74% of PhD, almost 70% have already participated to CPD courses in a wish to develop themselves professionally. They didn’t meet very serious issues during their professional development, neither a language barrier, nor difficulties to find reliable information, nor finding courses at the appropriate level. The lack of experience in handling instruments is the most sensitive point. If the population considered had a BSc, these points would have been certainly reversed!

GC/MS/ECD/FID, HPLC/ UV and LC-MS/MS are the most commonly used techniques and the best known regarding method of development and validation, software, full usage of the possibilities offered and hardware. But the analysts are presenting real lacks in their knowledge of AAS, IC and TOC. And it is in the field of objects and materials that all the techniques considered in this study are demanded.

Today it’s mostly scientific papers, printed publications, databases and other textual materials that are used in their professional education

But there is a large motivation for a great majority of analysts to use OERs and WARIAL and it appears, even if the language is not a real barrier, that they prefer, for 77%, to learn/work in their native language. Anyway as 72% have the chance to improve their knowledge by getting education abroad and as our students are still more encouraged and motivated to go for their studies abroad, we can think that EORs in English will be soon not a problem anymore! But as experienced in France, the ratio of answers has been low due to the fact we didn’t translate the questionnaires in French. As observed in Novi Sad meeting, colleagues of Albania had a good ratio of answers but they had translated their questionnaires. So, this question of the language barrier is not so negligible!



35

In conclusion, even if the analysis of this distributors part must be considered with low impact due the small number of distributors having answered, in this sample:

It appears that there is a lack in knowledge of the design of the instrument for GC/MS/ECD/FID, HPLC/UV, AAS, LC-MS/MS, TOC and C, H, N, O, S /ICP-OES/ICP-OES. Only UV/VIS and ICP-MS are better mastered. Lack in the knowledge of the software are obvious for LC-MS/MS and TOC. The hardware of GC/MS/ECD/FID, HPLC/ UV, AAS, UV/VIS and ICP-MS are the best-known items.

Comparing the behaviour of the distributors and of the analysts in their use of OERs, we can observe that they use in a similar way databases, forums, chats and movies. Web conferences, online courses, webinars and simulation of phenomena are more used by distributors, and still much more are the simulations of instruments, pictures and animations and other textual materials. E-books are unknown or occasionally used by distributors although more often used by analysts. Printed publications and scientific papers are much more used by analysts. These results appear of common sense since distributors need more to focus on the understanding of the instruments by their customers which implies strengthening in communication by using simulations of the instruments.

The fact that analysts use more printed publications and scientific papers is due to the fact they have various and sharp problems to solve depending of their clients’ demands and they need to consult literature which is still commonly read on paper supports.

Bad news for us even if it is not that surprising is that distributors wouldn’t be ready to allow open access to their educational materials to students, professors and professionals in different companies via the NETCHEM platform. None of them use WARIAL in their training courses and most them don’t wish to introduce it into training activities for their customers.

But most them are motivated to introduce OERs in training activities for they customers and in their native language at a ratio of 75%.



36

3.5 NETCHEM Survey about PC Practice in using OER & WARIAL

Analysis of collected data in two partner countries, Albania and Serbia, showed that practice in use of OER is similar. OER is used to small extent, mainly as conservative tool. It is important to say that it was found that wide acceptance of various types of OERs exists in region by both students and teachers and impression is that both would like to use it more and at higher level. Related to this, very diverse practice among universities in usage of Moodle platform or equivalent platforms is found. In both countries, there are universities that use it more frequently and those that does not use it at all, neither any equivalent. So, further promotion of such tools is needed.

WARIAL, as one of not only new teaching tools but also need in modern instrumental analysis which is used by professionals, is interested in participants of the survey in both countries. Very modest experience exists, but clear conclusion related to openness for introduction of it into classroom (confirmed by all interviewed target groups) is present which is good.

Such a positive attitude toward both tools promoted by the NETCHEM project opens the possibility for significant impact on knowledge level by using new teaching/learning tools. Planned stimulation of introduction of multimedia and E-learning tools to wider extent to teachers, students and professionals should give positive example of good practice that eventually can be followed by the others and thus fulfil the project goals. To be successful as much as possible in achievement of project goals, specific needs are highlighted in responses of different target groups. They should be followed in further phases of the project, especially considered when MSc, PhD and CPD courses are designed. Findings can be summarized as follow:

Teachers in the region need training in using of remote desktop software and web conferencing software as well as Moodle platform or LMS. Those are areas where they reported undeveloped skills in both countries. They are mostly positive towards introduction of new e-learning tools in the teaching practice. Majority of them who responded in interviews use analytical instruments in the teaching. However, teaching is organised mostly in groups and as demonstration. In that way, it contributes to theoretical knowledge more than technical skills. Difference between two countries is observed in anticipation of most important issues in interaction with students in Serbia beside material resources based issues, lack of student motivation and independence in work as well as skills for data processing



37

are reported. In Albania, the recognised highest challenge is only the lack of resources. Average satisfaction with own students’ knowledge range between 5-7 in Serbia and 6 – 8 in Albania. When it comes to CPD courses, in both countries teachers expressed the interest to participate in them either as trainee or trainers. In between 50 – 70% of interviewed teachers in region feel competent to deliver CPD courses for professionals that work in EFSC that is very good as a potential to use for achievements of knowledge growth. Teachers in both countries are aware of own needs in knowledge and skills improvement. The training on analytical instruments of new generation is highly positioned in both countries in that respect. Further specific interests per countries are expressed.

Student responses in the region show that the area where improvements should be made are in developing practical skills for work with analytical instruments and skills for solving complex analytical problems. It is the same conclusion although in Serbia half of participating students where MSc and half PhD, while in Albania near 70% was MSc, and the rest PhD. Related to computer software needs, findings were like those of their teachers. Topics of statistical data analysis, remote desktop control software application, web-conferencing and LMS are highlighted as those where lack of skills exists. 50-70% students in the region can use IT classrooms and computers in their department libraries. Student responses related to their experience with work on analytical instruments agreed with data provided from their teachers – they mostly have theoretical knowledge. There are specificities for each university related to available type of techniques.

Heads of HEIs provided information on main source of funding the purchase and maintenance of equipment. That is Ministry in charge. Majority of Heads in both countries would support engagement of the human and equipment resources for establishing common WARIAL courses with other HEIs having in mind necessity to adopt the schedule and resources. Almost all heads in region recognise that further improvement of knowledge of their employees related to instrumental analysis, web-conferencing and application of remote control software are needed. The same is with organisation of CPD courses for professionals which would be supported by universities. In majority of the universities they are already organised in some form.

Analyst's population who works already and that responded to interviews was different in Serbia and Albania. In Serbia, mainly BSc/MSc holders replied while in Albania mainly PhD holders replied. Field of work in Serbia was mostly water related and then food related, while in Albania mostly food, then water and soils



38

related. Professionals indicated mostly more than average assessment of existing knowledge and skills in GC/MS/ECD/FID, HPLC/UV, AAS, FTIR and UV/VIS techniques. Less level is assessed for ICP-MS, TOC in both countries which is most probably consequence of low number of those instruments. Differences exists in LC-MS/MS technique where in Serbia it is assessed as technique where lower level of knowledge exists while in Albania it is not so. Reason for difference might be the different population who responded to interviews and number of present instruments. Certain specificities exist in each country. Analysts for Albania think that they need mostly knowledge and skills related to hardware and method development and validation, while in Serbia, no specific needs among offered types of knowledge that might be needed are especially highlighted. Main motivation of professionals in the region (75 – 86%) is to participate in CPD courses is their own wish to develop themselves professionally which is good base to develop more structured way of delivering such courses. They suggest that CPD courses should be organised in a way to provide real trainings with instruments and development of skills for independent problem solving regardless of the country of origin.

Heads of analytical laboratories confirmed that the investment is made in education of employees. They are just partially satisfied with the knowledge of novice graduate students who are coming from the universities. In both countries, most missing is "project writing" skill, then in Serbia practical work with instruments and in Albania knowledge on relevant regulations and on the third place is vice versa for both countries. Heads of laboratories see the need for training of their employees in instrumental techniques they use. Furthermore, they reported the need for development and validation of methods in both countries as most pronounced that was not so anticipated by the Serbian analysts. Furthermore, specific needs for each country are observed.

Distributers of analytical equipment observe the lack of knowledge in the region on ICP/MS technique. Needs in other techniques are specific for each country. 40 – 50% of distributers deliver trainings to their customers on regular basis in different forms, but with small number of accredited courses. Type of training is mostly demonstration in both countries, but independent work of users at different skill levels is also present in both countries. Different kinds of OERs are utilized during their courses. Very high %, 70-90% of distributers would be ready to place their materials for free use for students, professors and professionals in different companies via future NETCHEM platform which is an opportunity that the project should consider for benefit of all participants.



39

3.6 SWOT in the implementation of OER & WARIAL

Strengths o informal learning and skills development, o potential to expand pedagogical innovation by introducing new

alternatives for effective teaching. o learning by freedom of access (learning at work, home or any other

place), o collaborative approaches to teaching/learning, o increased dialogue within workers in the same institution or from

other institutions, o preservation and availability of materials. o wider availability of academic content and focus on the learning

experience, o increased capacity to support remote students, o efficiencies in content production, o new partnerships/linkages with other institutions and

organizations, o increase of sharing ideas and practice within the institution and

between institutions, o new relationships with students like they become collaborators in

OER production, release and use. Weaknesses

o no common standard for review of OER accuracy and quality o lack of human interaction between teachers and students, o language barrier since OER are generally available in one language

Opportunities

o Technological advances – digital initiatives o Consolidation – combination of service points, cooperation within

units and with external units o Entrepreneurial Opportunities – more grant funding, more support

from related departments o Public Relations – Slowly developing external awareness, branding



40

Threats o External Information Providers – Google, user perspective, keeping

up o Access – Gateway o Facilities – deterioration of collections



41

4 NETCHEM strategy for implementation of OER & WARIAL

Technology enhanced learning (TEL), basically envisioned through OER and WARIAL aspects, has a key role in the achievement of the NETCHEM core objectives in relation to providing an outstanding educational experience for all students.

It is obvious that student learning expectations in higher education is rapidly becoming transformed using digital technologies.

This strategy focuses on the use of digital technologies for the purposes of learning and teaching and its effective management. In articulating a specific TEL strategy, it is intended to define a framework for establishing expectations and priorities in relation to technical and pedagogical background.

The main development priorities that are targeted through the strategy are:

o using technologies to enhance student engagement with learning,

o developing the digital fluency of staff,

o developing the digital skills and capabilities of students,

o facilitating curriculum design for online learning opportunities.

Laboratory exercises and experiments comprise essential part of any

chemistry study programme. Implementation of distance mode in laboratory

component of chemistry courses is the way of providning wider access into real

experiments. Remote access offers experience of real doing measurement, close to

virtual reality. The instrumental techniques that can usually undergone this

procedure are:

o Nuclear magnetic resonance,

o Mass spectrometry,

o High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) or

o Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS),

o Ion chromatography,

o ICP-MS,

o UV/VIS.



42

On-line interpretation of chromatograms, spectral data, mass spectrometry identification through database fingerprints and fragmentation patterns or FT-Infrared spectroscopy are just a couple of examples where the chemistry student or vocational learner can vastly benefit.

Special effectiveness can be achieved on more complicated and expensive instrumentation controlled with specialized and licensed software and drivers, which cannot be easily installed on the client (student/ vocational learner) side.

In instrumental analysis applications, access to a variety of databases (e.g., spectral and mass spectrometry databases) would be provided as aid in compound identification. Other approaches to facilitate training in this distance mode would be possibility to use option of frequently asked questions coupled with a troubleshooting flowchart or decision tree to help students solve some difficulties, for example access to instrumentation and/or the process of instruction. This would be particularly important to guide students when accessing the distance mode for the first time when the need for guidance is most critical.

Remote laboratories are a step beyond the computer-generated laboratory simulations. They are alternative to work in a real laboratory. Remote teaching laboratories are being employed in four ways [6]:

1. for demonstration and observations of experiment;

2. for caring out measurements (especially real-time measurements);

3. for manipulation of instruments in experiments;

4. for collaboration at a distance.

Observation. Facilitating observations remotely is by far the simplest and most robust version of a remote experiment. Usually the observer interaction is minimal and is often limited to controlling for example the camera (control of astronomical camera or electron microscope).

Measurement. A few examples include measuring the reaction kinetics in chemistry, thermal conductivity experiments in food engineering, chemical analysis using gas chromatography or carrying out single crystal X-ray diffraction measurements.

Manipulation. In addition to observing and measuring, some remote experiments will require actual physical control of objects. This could be the control of an electric motor or more interactive robotic operations, such as manipulating a mechanical arm.



43

Collaboration. Certainly, one advantage of Internet access is that it can facilitate sharing not only of experiments and instruments, but also of data. This employs observation and measurement, along with collaboratively pooling individual student findings to gain better statistical results. Others are also taking advantage of the remote-control environment to incorporate a collaborative component to their teaching practical’s.



44

4.1 Technical Background and Implementation of NETCHEM project

Some basic features regarding technical requirements for successful remote access session are:

o Instrumental Analytical Equipment,

o audio/video equipment set in the laboratory,

o audio/video equipment set in the lecture room,

o software requirements,

o connections and signals.

The basic elements to be provided are: computers with access to install plugins and software, high speed internet access, speakers, microphones, video projector (for multiple viewers), Voice Over Internet Protocol software with username and password (Skype preferred), Team Viewer.

One of possible suggestion of needed equipment for implementation of

distance learning mode in chemistry curriculum according to NETCHEM project plan

is:

PC Monitor 22” (Display diagonal 21,5 – 22" Res. FULL HD 1920×1080,

ports: HDMI/DVI, with HDMI/DVI cable),

LCD TV 55” (Display diagonal 55” Full HD 1920×1080, USB, HDMI),

Screen for Video beam – projector (Diagonal min. 250 cm),

Convertible Laptop (2-in-1) Microsoft Surface Pro 12.3 i5 8Gb 256GB Multi-

Touch Tablet 2017 Model (12.3" 10-Point Touch Display, 2736 × 1824

Screen Resolution, Windows 10 pro, USB 3.0, Mini DisplayPort, microSD

Slot, 2.6 GHz Intel Core i5-7300U (Dual-Core) Weight < 1 kg, Keyboard +

pen; Var 1: 8 GB, 256 GB SSD; Var 2: 4 GB, 128 GB SSD),

Fig. 2 Convertible Laptop



45

Wireless display Adapter MIRACAST (Microsoft) Wi-Fi CERTIFIED™

Miracast® technology, USB/HDMI, remote connection with a 23-foot range

or more, Adapter length: 103.5×22×11 mm, USB extension cable: 159 mm.

Fig. 3 Wireless display Adapter MIRACAST

PC desktop mini ITX (Intel CPU LGA1151 Intel® Celeron® Dual-Core G3900,

2.8GHz BOX 14nm; AMD 'APU FM2 AMD A6-6400K, 3.9GHz/ Radeon™ HD

8470D or better GIGABYTE MB - SOCKET 1151 - GA-H110N, 8GB RAM, 256

GB SSD, USB 3.0, LAN, Audio, USB 2.0, HDMI & DVI, mini ITX case,

56×220×200 mm

Multi-device keyboard and mouse (Wireless Bluetooth) (Keyboard

LOGITECH K780, K480, K380, Mouse LOGITECH Thriatlon)

Fig. 4 Multi-device keyboard and mouse

Data storage & transfer (Docking station for hard discs USB 3.1 (10Gbps)

Dual-Bay Dock for 2.5"/3.5" SATA SSD/HDDs. Access data from two

2.5/3.5” SATA SSD/HDDs over ultra-fast USB 3.1 Gen 2; Support for SATA I,

II and III (up to 6 Gbps); USB Type A interface for backward compatibility

with USB 3.0, 2.0 (e.g. StarTech SDOCK2U313) – Internal HDD 6 TB; Internal

SSD 256 GB; Internal SSD 512 GB; External HDD 2 TB; External DDD 6 TB;

Micro SD Card 512 GB Micro SD Card 256 GB; Server RAM Memory 2×16

GB.



46

Laptop – Full HD 1920×1080 (laptop display 15.6“; resolution 1920×1080;

keyboard full size with numerical pad; 8 GB RAM; 256 GB SSD

PC Headphones (WIRED: MICROSOFT LifeChat LX-3000, USB 2.0; WIRELESS:

Bluetooth connection, on-ear or over-ear, with microphone, foldable, Near

Field Communication (NFC), e.g. SONY MDR-ZX220BTB, Bluetooth black)

WEB Cameras (720p – Logitech C270; HD 720p middle class, USB

compatible with Skype and Win 10; 1080p Full HD – Logitech C922 Pro

stream USB, HD Web camera higher class Full HD 1080p at 30 fps & 720p

at 60 fps st compatible with Skype and Win 10)

Presentation pointer (Logitech Spotlight presentation remote MS

PowerPoint, Win 10; Spotlight connects instantly via USB receiver or

Bluetooth®. It’s plug-and-play on most platforms and compatible with all

popular presentation apps. Plus, it’s fully rechargeable and boasts a 100-

foot operating range.

Fig. 5 Presentation pointer

Video Conferencing System 1 (Logitech Group Video conferencing for mid

to large-sized meeting rooms: Camera, Speakerphone, Hub, Remote,

Wall/Table Mount, Expansion Mics)

Fig. 6 Video Conferencing System 1



47

Video Conferencing System 2 (Logitech Group Video conferencing for to

small-sized meeting rooms: Optimized for teams of 1 to 6; Everyone can

see and be seen; Full HD 1080p video; 4x digital zoom; 360-degree sound;

Wireless screen-mirror projection in workspace)

Fig. 7 Video Conferencing System 2

Video beams (1. bussiness class, wide screen, flexible display, min 3000

ANSI lumena, max. 10.000 hours, 64" at 1 meter, min. res. WXGA

(1280×800), trapezoidal corr. e.g. BenQ MW632ST DLP; 2. bussines class,

Multipurpose, Full HD (1920×1080), Widescreen Projector e.g. BenQ

MH530 Full HD 1080p; 3. high bussines class, Multipurpose, Full HD

1920×1080, WUXGA 1920 × 1200, Zoom 1:1.6, min. 2500 hours, 5000 ANSI

lumen, trapezoidal corr. e.g. BenQ SU922 projector; 4. Compact class, LED,

battery min. 2 h, mini/compact design, portable, short throw, min. 500

ANSI lumen, e.g. LG Minibeam LED Projector (PH550))

Gimbal stabilizer (DJI Osmo Mobile 3-Axis Handheld Stabilizer for Phone

Camera (drivers for Android & iPhone)

Fig. 8 Gimbal stabilizer



48

Loudspeakers (1. LARGE SCALE, passive: Wharfedale Vardus 400 Black

Wood height 920 mm, 150 W, SPL 1W @ 1M 90 dB, 6Ω; 2. SMALL SCALE,

passive: Wharfedale CRYSTAL 30.3 Black Wood height 365 mm, 60 W, 8Ω;

3. SMALL SCALE, active (for PC) Genius SW-HF2.1 1700)

Audiovideo receiver (130 W per Channel; Bluetooth Audio / Wi-Fi®; 384

kHz/32-bit Hi-Grade DAC; HDMI® 6 In / 1 Out; 4K/60 Hz / HDCP 2.2 / HDR;

Powered Zone 2 and Zone 2 Line Out for Analog/Digital Audio Playback in

Another Room

Fig. 9 Audiovideo receiver

Lan Network: Routers (Router 10 Gbs fiber optics + 25 PORT LAN Allied

Telesis AT-GS924MX-50, Gigabit Ethernet Managed switch with 24 ports

10/100/1000T Mbps, 2 SFP/Copper combo ports, 2 SFP/SFP+ uplink slots,

single fixed AC power supply; WI-FI Router 802.11 ac standard, D-Link DIR-

809, AC750 Dual-Band

Software licencing – TeamViewer 12

LED lighting reflector (max. height 200 cm, two LED reflectors)

Fig. 10 LED lighting reflector



49

Key aspects in design of Lecture room for Remote Access. A LCD projector is used to display the computer screen on a whiteboard. The network camera is placed in the lecture room in a position that allows the operator in the remote laboratory to view any of the attendants. The speakers and the microphone are connected to the network camera, when it is used for transferring of the audio signals. This possibility is covered by Video Conferencing System. Also, each student’s PC is equipped with PC Headphones with microphones and web cameras.

One of possible design solution for IT lecture room is given in the Figure 11.

Fig. 11 Architectural design of IT lecture room

Key aspects in design of Laboratory for Remote Access. Camera is placed inside the laboratory for making video-clips for some manual activities performed



50

at the analytical instrument. Webcam is placed on the monitor of the operator and a wireless headset to allow the operator to hear and talk with the attendants.

Teaching process includes remote access to laboratory instruments. Instruments that are available for remote access by NETCHEM project are listed in the Table 1. Considering the participant institutions in NETCHEM project, each institution participate with instruments that are available for remote access.

List of instruments available for NETCHEM communication is shown in the Table 1.

Table 1. List of instruments available for NETCHEM communication

Institution Instrument

P-01 UN

Thermo HR ESI MS LTQ Orbitrap & HPLC Thermo Accela Thermo ESI MS Advantage & HPLC Thermo Accela Thermo ESI MS Deca & HPLC Thermo Surveyor Agilent GC/MS single quad 6983/MSD 5973 with auto sampler

P-03 UoG

Thermally stimulated current spectrometer (TSC) Thermal gravimetric analysator (TGA) JEOL FT NMR 500 MHz (ECA500) JEOL FT NMR 400 MHz

P-04 BUT GC×GC/TOF MS

P-06 UB Agilent GC-MS (GC 7890B, MSD 5977) WD-XRF Thermo Scientific ARL Performix XRF

P-07 UNS HPLC DAD (Agilent Infinity 1260) GC-MS SHIMADZU Ultra QP-2010 with FID detector

P-08 UNIKG AAS Perkin Elmer 3300 HPLC DAD (SDPM20A) GC-MS (GC6890N, MSD 5975B) UV-VIS Spectrometer Agilent CARRY 300

P-10 UT UV VIS spectrometer Shimadzu

Electrochemical analyzer MEC-12B Jiangsu Jiangfen electrochemical instument inc. AAS GF, NovAA 400 Analytik Jena



51

TOTAL: 20 instruments available



52

4.2 Pedagogical Background

For providing pedagogically correctly performed web-based learning laboratory session it is important to identify the characteristic elements of laboratory training, such as: what is the purpose of remote access, what are main characteristics of the learning group, what is the type of information exchange, what type of interactivity is achieved etc.

There are several different approaches to design the laboratory training. Based on laboratory activity that should be accomplished, laboratory classes can be basically structured in those five types:

Demonstration – to show a piece of equipment and how it works; to demonstrate a concept or theory of instrumental technique,

Exercise – to use a skill or technique accurately; students follow the procedure to obtain the known outcome,

Structured enquiry – to foster deeper approach to instrumental technique by encouraging students to take personal initiative into instrumental analysis (planning, experimental design, choice of parameters, selection of method),

Open-ended enquiry – as above, with more decisions and experimental design considerations resting with the student,

Project – as above but more major pieces of work that simulate real-life research and development.

Those types will have direct impact on creation of scenario for remote access. Here are some basic characteristics needed to be considered in defining type of scenario of NETCHEM Remote access session:

• What is the purpose of remote access?

a. Educational – one side is better skilled than other b. Consultative/research – both sides are of comparable

skills/knowledge c. Needed access to instrument or not

• What are main characteristics of the learning group:

a. What is the knowledge level of group? b. What is the size of the group? c. What is the number of the groups (in parallel)?



53

• What is the type of information exchange?

a. Group is dominantly receptive b. Group is dominantly interactive

• What type of interactivity is achieved?

a. Single monitor/software interaction (A) only with the instrument -Team Viewer, lecture is face-to-face; (B) or just Skype - No-way interaction with the instrument (just audio video connection between participants)

b. Double monitor/software interaction (with the instrument and web conferencing)

Considering all those characteristics different types of NETCHEM Communications

can be set. In the Figure 12 basic interaction during lab training is shown.

Fig. 12 Example of basic type interaction during lab training

Considering the fact that there could be a lot of different scenarios in acomplishing

distance learning, some terms are defined in clerification of this area. In this manner

NETCHEM Communication is defined as event that involves all kinds of internet

interactions (in real time and not in real time) between participants via devices (PCs,

laptops, tablets and mobile phones). Also, Host side of NETCHEM Communication

is defined as PC who invites other users to join the session and finally, Guest side of

NETCHEM Communication is defined as PC who joins the invitation to session.



54

Table 2. Characteristics selected for defining type of NETCHEM communication

Communication sides

host side participant’s/PC of instrument in

laboratory/office

guest side participant’s/PC of instrument in

laboratory/office

Communication software

Team

Viewer

Meeting: Yes/No

Remote control: Yes/No

Meeting and Remote

control simultaneously: Yes/No

Skype Call 1:1 Yes/No

Conference Call Yes/No

Communication hardware

on host side

on guest side

Information exchange type:

1. Educational (one side is

dominantly receptive): Yes/No

Place of Educator participant: host side/guest side

Number of educator(s):

Place of student participant: host side/guest side

Number of student participant(s):

2. Consultative (two sides are equal

in giving-receiving information): Yes/No

Number of host side participant(s):

Number of guest side participant(s):



55

4.2.1 Examples of NETCHEM communications

These are some examples of possible NETCHEM communications. Participants could modify these scenarios according to their needs. In the following text, the scenarios that are presented comrpise of the most usual situations:

Researcher in the lab/teacher in the office

Researcher in the lab/another researcher in another lab

Teacher and students in the classroom/researcher in laboratory

Teacher in the laboratory/other researchers in their laboratories

Researcher in the lab/teacher in the office

Researcher in the lab has a problem with GC-MS method and calls teacher in the

office to help via Skype. Researcher gives ID and Password for TeamViewer and

teacher by remote control teaches researcher how to make a new method.

Communication sides

host side participant’s PC and PC of instrument in laboratory

guest side participant’s PC in office


Team Viewer

Meeting: No

Remote control: Yes

Meeting and Remote control simultaneously:

No

Skype Call 1:1 Yes

Conference Call No


on host side 2 independent PCs (1 PC for instrument + 1 PC for participant)

on guest side 1 PC with 2 monitors




56

1. Educational (one side is dominantly receptive):

Yes

Place of Educator participant: guest side

Number of educator(s): 1

Place of student participant: host side

Number of student participant(s): 1

2. Consultative (two sides are equal in giving-receiving information):

No

Number of host side participant(s): /

Number of guest side participant(s): /

Researcher in the lab/another researcher in another lab

Researcher in the lab has a problem with HPLC-MS and calls via Skype another

researcher in another lab to ask about instrument. By TeamViewer researcher 2

shows how it works in their lab and shows instrument via Skype.

Communication sides

host side participant’s PC in laboratory

guest side participant’s tablet/mobile phone in lab;

PC of instrument in the laboratory


Team

Viewer

Meeting: No

Remote control: Yes

Meeting and Remote

control simultaneously: No

Skype Call 1:1 Yes

Conference Call No


on host side Participant’s PC

on guest side PC of instrument and tablet/mobile phone



dominantly receptive): No

Place of Educator participant: /



57

Number of educator(s): /

Place of student participant: /

Number of student participant(s): /


in giving-receiving information): Yes

Number of host side participant(s): 1

Number of guest side participant(s): 1



58

Teacher and students in the classroom/researcher in laboratory

Teacher wants to show how to make a new method for GC-MS analysis. Teacher

calls researcher in the laboratory via Skype and takes ID and password for remote

control. Also, researcher by using tablet/mobile phone shows to participants in

lecture room important parts of GC-MS instrument that are needed for making

method (type of GC column etc.)

Communication sides

host side Researcher in the laboratory

guest side Lecture room (teacher with students)


Team

Viewer

Meeting: No

Remote control: Yes

Meeting and Remote

control simultaneously: No

Skype Call 1:1 Yes

Conference Call No


on host side participant’s tablet/mobile phone in lab; PC of

instrument in the laboratory

on guest side PC with 2 monitors for teacher and all students



dominantly receptive): No

Place of Educator participant: /

Number of educator(s): /

Place of student participant: /

Number of student participant(s): /


in giving-receiving information): Yes

Number of host side participant(s): 1

Number of guest side participant(s): More than 1



59

Teacher in the laboratory/other researchers in their laboratories

Teacher wants to show to other researchers from different laboratories how some

instrument works. The teacher arranges a meeting via TeamViewer and calls other

researchers by Skype conference call. Teacher explains appropriate topic and gives

remote control to researchers one by one.

Communication sides

host side Teacher in the laboratory

guest side More researchers in their laboratories


Team

Viewer

Meeting: Yes

Remote control: Yes

Meeting and Remote

control simultaneously: Yes

Skype Call 1:1 No

Conference Call Yes


on host side participant’s PC in the lab; PC of instrument in

the laboratory

on guest side PC with 2 monitors for all researchers



dominantly receptive): Yes

Place of Educator participant: Laboratory

Number of educator(s): 1

Place of student participant: Laboratory

Number of student participant(s): More than 1


in giving-receiving information): No

Number of host side participant(s): /

Number of guest side participant(s): /



60

5 CONCLUSION

NETCHEM OER/WARIAL platform is designed to contain and deliver the e-learning materials for MSc/PhD/CPD forms, and set of up-to-date EFSC monitoring reports, suitable for further referencing and research, as well for statistical investigation and data mining. Target groups may benefit on exploiting of existing data and through their own inter-Laboratory or inter-SME contributing to the WEB Database.

Exploitation framework proposes a ready insight into what has been done in this Project, together with WEB tool for the identification and categorization of the diverse stakeholders and recognizing of knowledge, skills and analyses that may be needed or offered in the future.

NETCHEM platform as wider Project output Consortium have a visible impact in moving towards more effective environmental and food safety services, while providing a common framework for constructive and lasting regional and supraregional cooperation of HEIs and SMEs.

The target users of the project outputs and products are Programme and Partner HEIs (students, teachers, researchers), Laboratories of environmental monitoring and food safety, professionals in Enterprises, and wider community users such as: food producers and merchants, EFSC operators and practitioners, NGO consumer associations, food handlers, agricultural workers, health and medicinal workers, nutritionists, public community, policy makers and inspective authorities and others professionals dealing with food emergencies and proper tracing and recall of implicated foods. Specially, HEIs staff is not implied to be engaged only as lecture-designers, since they are considered also as a target group, being given with benefit of the feedback from other stakeholders, and so applying continual education principles on themselves.

Technology Enhanced Learning comprising new ICT methodology is pivot of emphasized collaborative and cohesive components, to be adaptive and widely open to groups and individuals interested in matter.

NETCHEM with video-conferencing, WARIAL networking, Forum consulting and versality of collected Database items, as on-line learning tool and Data resource will contain EU and regional information about EFSC and best practices for EFSC operators, drawing on the knowledge and experience of all partners and including



61

links to other useful websites and contacts. Thus, it will be aimed not only at Consortium purposes, but also at professionals working in the field of environmental and food quality control.

Dissemination of acredited modernized MSc/PhD study programs using Technology Enhanced Learning will ensure wide and prolonged impact of project outputs and will be the start-point for development of similar curricula in distance learning.



62

6 REFERENCES

[1] Forum on the Impact of Open Courseware for Higher Education in Developing Countries, Final report, UNESCO Paris, 1-3 July 2002, (CI-2002/CONF.803/CLD.1)

2 A Basic guide to Open Educational Resources, Neil Butcher (for the Commonwealth of Learning & UNESCO), Published in 2011, 2015 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, France and Commonwealth of Learning, Canada

[3] John Swope, A comparison of five free MOOC platforms for educators, EdTech- classroom, 2014.

4 O. Marchenko, Functional comparison of Open EdX and Moodle platform, Open educational e-environment of modern university, 171.

5 Marija Blagojević, Danijela Milošević, MOOC: EdX vs. Moodle, International conference of Informatic Society and Technology, ICIST 2015, 380 – 384.

[6] Linda R. Phipps, Creating and Teaching a Web-Based, University-Level Introductory Chemistry Course That Incorporates Laboratory Exercises and Active Learning Pedagogies, J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 568−573570

[7] Baran, J.; Currie, R.; Kennepohl, D. Remote Instrumentation for the Teaching Laboratory. J. Chem. Educ. 2004, 81, 1814−1816.

[8] Dietmar Kennepohl and Lawton Shaw, Accessible Elements Teaching Science Online and at a Distance, AU Press, Athabasca University, 2010.

[9] Clara Devis, Learning and Teaching in Laboratories, Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre, 2008

[10] Cooper, M., Colwell, C. & Amaral, T. (2002). Accessibility and usability in complex web based learning applications: lessons from the PEARL project. In M. Driscoll & T. Reeves (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2002--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 1358-1365). Montreal, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved September 28, 2017 from

https://www.learntechlib.org/p/9478/.

https://www.learntechlib.org/p/9478/



63

[11] Tatjana Anđelković, Darko Anđelković, Zoran S. Nikolić, The Impact of E-learning in Chemistry Education, 6th International Conference on e-Learning, eLearning-2015, Belgrade 2015. Proceedings p. 116-120.

(http://extra.ivf.se/cyberlab/)

http://extra.ivf.se/cyberlab/



64

University of Niš The NETCHEM Consortium www.netchem.ac.rs e-mail: [email protected]

This project has been co-funded with

support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of

the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein Copyright©NETCHEM Consortium

http://www.netchem.ac.rs/

mailto:[email protected]

assessment and proposal of procedures for using open

Documents