Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad

Department of Computer Science

Proposed Topic:OLIVE 2.0: A Comparative Study of Existing Olive Model and

Web 2.0

Talat SaeedRoll No. AD716762

Reg. No. 98-FID-0772MS(CS)/09 AIOU

Proposed Supervisor:

Dr. Nazir A. SangiVice Chancellor,

Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad.

INTRODUCTION

e-Learning is information, instruction, education, training, communication, collaboration

and knowledge sharing (Tom Kelly,2000) and comprise all kind of electronic learning and

teaching (Wikipedia).Rapid technological innovation demands the change in our education

system because technological innovation provides number of opportunities to meet the

needs of effective learning (Richard Noss ,2008). Use of multimedia technology also making

education more engaging, enjoyable and more effective with extraordinary benefits

(Gerald,Wolfgang,Lars 2008). Learning Management Systems (LMS) are the integral part of

an e-Learning system and provide course information and learning contents used by

academic and training organizations.

Open Learning Institute of Virtual Education (OLIVE) is a teaching and learning management

system that allows teacher and students to interact in a virtual classroom by enabling web-

based management and delivery of courses used by Allama Iqbal Open University (AIOU).

AIOU, Islamabad, Pakistan is the name of repute in of distance learning education in Asia.

Currently AIOU provide an electronic framework for delivery of course syllabus, schedules,

presentations, text-based discussions, chat, online digital resources, assignment grading,

quizzes and test that are accessible from anywhere at any time.

e-Learning also referred to a as Electronic Learning. Electronic Learning encompasses

learning at all levels, both formal an informal, from simple tutoring to the delivery of whole

courses with intentional use of networked information and communications technology (ICT)

in teaching and learning.ICT refers to a diverse set of tools and resources used to

communicate, create, store and manage information. With introduction of ICT into

education, new ways have been opened such as online learning, online tutors, interactive

whiteboards and many others. (Nyarko et al. 2010). But Vladimir Kinelev Director of the

UNESCO Institute for Information Technologies in Education (IITE) comments as “ICTs have

not eliminated the most pressing problems that education systems face”. The problem, he

says, is that “attempts to improve education through the use of ICTs suffer from the absence

of sound education paradigms that could support genuine renewal.” However, the new

technologies are certainly quite different from earlier media.

The web has become an increasingly important part of our everyday life making a profound

impact on the people communication. It is a part of the human nature to seek staying in

touch with friends and being able to share the latest news and experiences. Today, there are

new communication channels that allow us to send messages (email, instant messaging or

texting, etc), blog about our daily activities, find new associates based on common interests

via social bookmarking and share mementos via photo and video sharing services.

Furthermore, anonymity and the capability to communicate with others without a personal

contact have made it more appealing to many users. As a result, by empowering the users to

create shareable content, Web 2.0 applications helped advance the bottom-to-top

information creation paradigm. (Kurkovsky, et al. 2008)

Web 2.0, the second phase in the Web's evolution, is also called the wisdom Web, people-

centric Web, participative Web, and read/write Web. Web 2.0 harnesses the Web in a more

interactive and collaborative manner, emphasizing peers' social interaction and collective

intelligence, and presents new opportunities for leveraging the Web and engaging its users

more effectively. Within the last two to three years, Web 2.0, ignited by successful Web 2.0

based social applications such as MySpace, Flickr, and YouTube, has been forging new

applications that were previously unimaginable (Murugesan, . 2007)

Modern information technologies have changed education methodologies dramatically.

Especially, Web 2.0 provides knowledge sharing, communicating, collaborative creation tools

which have greatly improved learning activities Compares to Web 1.0 kind of e-Learning

environment which emphasizes simplex publication and broadcasting which already been

used in formal learning, the lecturers and learners can focuses much more on informal

learning during Web 2.0 age.(Hsiao-Ya; Shi-Zong n; Chieh-Chung 2009)

Integration and use of Web 2.0 Technologies with existing OLIVE can improve collaboration,

participation and interaction. Therefore I propose a new model of OLIVE 2.0 which will

improve education and student learning through the use of web 2.0.

Theoretical Framework

“We’ve been waiting a long time for computers to dramatically change education, but for

the most part, that promise remains unfulfilled. Unlike in the business world, where the

computer quickly became a fixture on every desk and transformed both day-to-day tasks

and the business landscape as a whole, computers have not transformed the goals of

educators, or even the methods used to achieve those goals. There are a lot of reasons that

this is so — legal, financial, and cultural — but I believe that the bottom line is that there

hasn’t been a computer application that so universally changes things that we stop seeing

computers as an add-on, and start seeing them as integral to the full educational process.

The spreadsheet, the word processor, and email served this seminal role in the business

world; it’s hard to imagine doing business without them. But take the computer out of most

schools and classrooms, and the instruction wouldn’t change much. Admittedly, traditional

software tools on computers can be very helpful in the educational setting — it is easier to

correct drafts written in a word processor — but they aren’t at the core of the educational

process, transforming the process of teaching and learning. Intuitively, though, we have felt

that the computer would bring real change, and the fact that it hasn’t has puzzled many of

us. The advent of the Internet, however, and in particular what we are calling “Web 2.0,” has

so significantly changed our relationship to information and our own personal learning

opportunities outside of formal education, that we’re beginning to see a set of software

tools emerge that are profoundly altering both learning processes and outcomes. These

tools allow us to see the start of a radical evolution in education that will bring such

dramatic changes that we’ll soon be at a point where we won’t be able to imagine education

without them.” (Hsiao-Ya; Shi-Zong n; Chieh-Chung 2009)

“Now e-Learning platforms have not lived up to our expectations for achieving pedagogical

objectives. The reason is that only part of the pedagogical process was being transferred to

the virtual world such platforms served mainly as material delivery channels. Most students

find them boring and un-motivating thus losing interest in their e-Learning sessions fairly

soon. Learning is a social activity involving communication, community formation,

information exchange and resource sharing between teachers and students and it is

imperative that these aspects are transferred to the virtual classroom. Traditional e-Learning

platforms failed to address these aspects, creating an environment not conductive to

learning. Students felt in isolation, cut-off from the rest of the class and unable to

communicate and share resources information and experiences with the rest of the

group.”(Mavromoustakos, S.; Papanikolaou, K.2010)

“Constructivism (Reconstructed) a known learning theory, shows that in the process of

learning there are two major stages. The first stage is intra personal learning – the

reconstruction of new knowledge inside the existing knowledge structures of the learner.

The second stage is interpersonal learning – the interaction between the learner and others

(teacher, peers, and friends) that generates new knowledge inside each learner and inside

the overall group. It has been claimed that this method comes more into play in Web 2.0

since two of its major principles suit the basic methods of constructivism, The principle of

the user as producer of content and not only as its consumer can be matched to the

principle of personal learning, whereas the principle of crowd power and sharing can be

matched to collaborative/peer/social learning.”(Gallula, D.; Frank, A.J.; 2009)

“Constructivism theory emphasizes the active role of learners in the entire learning process.

Therefore, the basic assumption is that human learning is based on the learner’s existed

experiences to self construct his own knowledge. In order to help learners reconcile their

knowledge, lecturers have to change their role from knowledge delivering into a supervisor

or advisor of learning process.

Constructivism believes:

a) Knowledge is actively constructed by individuals but not passively absorbed or

accepted;

b) Knowledge is the reasoning and utilizing process of learner

experiences but not memorize;

c) Knowledge is constructed the mutual influence of socialization based on different

social culture

Since web-based application has moved to web 2.0, it is easy to realize the concept of

learner-centered’ in constructivism. The education value could be seen as activities enhance

learner understands of a topic instead of increase directly the exam grades.

Collaborative Learning

Collaborative learning is an extension of constructivism, which encourages people to

cooperate to achieve the common goal of learning activities. Learners can achieve greater

improvements during the collaborative process by supporting each other or exchange

valuable information. Thus, collaborative learning suggests organizing learners into

collaborative groups to solve problems and achieve learning tasks with social interactions.

Collaborative learning can also represent as peer collaboration, coordinated learning and

collective learning.

Society stands for a group of individuals with common culture, region, and interactions.

Interaction is the fundamental behavior of a society, which can be achieved by language,

symbols, gestures or any other common forms. Society members build up their relationships

by interactions in order to influence the whole community. Interactions can be coordination,

competition, conflict, and swaps”(Hsiao-Ya; Shi-Zong n; Chieh-Chung 2009)

“In e-Learning context, providing effective interaction is an important issue. Many

researchers have emphasized the necessity of different interaction, such as student to

teacher, student to student, student to the content and so on. Current e-Learning

continue to put a heavy emphasis on content delivery and technology. Most e-Learning

content today is designed, authored, delivered, and managed via centralized learning

management systems without focusing on the social aspects of learning. This requires a

change in focus from technology-driven to people-driven models of learning. The new

learning model should be characterized by the combination of formal and informal

learning within a social context.” (Liyong Wan .2010)

OLIVE 2.0 may develop higher level skills in learner and improve problem solving capabilities

by using technology properly.

OLIVE 2.0 improve personal and group learning.

OLIVE 2.0 will provide effective interactions between:

Learner-Learner,

Learner-Educator

Learner-Content.

OLIVE 2.0 increase the learner and educator satisfaction level.

OLIVE 2.0 support formal and Informal Learning.

Literature Survey

Electronic learning (e-Learning ) is a term for all types of technology-enhanced learning

(TEL), where technology is used to support the learning process and pedagogy

empowered by digital technology (Wikipedia). A guiding principle for e-Learning

should always be driven by pedagogical consideration and not the demands of

technologies themselves.

According to the explanation of Wikipedia, the term "Web 2.0" is commonly associated

with web applications that facilitate interactive information sharing, interoperability

user-centered design, and collaboration on the World Wide Web.

Web 2.0 is defined as the collective set of Internet based tools such as wikis, blogs, web

based applications, social networking sites and so on. The use of Web 2.0 is a new era in

the practice of e-Learning . Web 2.0 provides collaborative, user-centric content

production and interactive content access environment and now these concepts are

opening new doors for more effective learning and have the potential to overcome

many of the limitations of traditional learning models. (Liyong Wan .2010)

There are two forms of learning modes in web 2.0.

informal learning

social learning

Informal learning: With informal learning people become proficient in finding and

trying new applications on the web, understanding the role of blogs, wikis, podcasts,

tags in learning, participating and learning in an online community.

Social learning: Social learning refers to learning from groups with social interaction

by using web 2.0 technologies and depends on group dynamics.

Web 2.0 Characteristics:

• Web 2.0 permits the building of virtual applications, drawing data and

functionality from a number of different sources as appropriate.

• Web 2.0 is participative

• Web 2.0 applications work for the user, and are able to locate and assemble

content that meets our needs as users.

• Web 2.0 applications are modular, with developers and users able to pick and

choose from a set of interoperating components in order to build something that

meets their needs.

• Web 2.0 is about communication and facilitating community.

Web 2.0 core technologies:

Blogs:

The word blog is shortened from the word "Webblog". It is a frequent,

chronological publication of personal thoughts and Web links.

Blogs in e-Learning :

Teachers can use blogs as an easy way to produce dynamic learning

environments without previous knowledge of html.

Students can use blogs as an alternative digital portfolio or as a learning log

Wikis:

Wiki is a piece of server software that allows users to freely create and edit Web

page content using any Web browser.

Wikis in e-Learning :

Teacher can use Wiki to distribute the updated information to students/learner

RSS:

RSS (Rich Site Summary) is a format for delivering regularly changing web

content.

RSS in e-Learning :

We can use RSS to construct a distributed learning resource network. The

distributed learning resource network can realize personalized learning, lower

the cost of publication and management and shield rubbish information and

manage the local content easily. The syndicated content can decrease the time

for searching for the useful learning content.

SNS:

A SNS (social network service) is an online community that specially focused on

connecting people. SNS allows a user to create and maintain an online network

of friends or business association for social and professional reasons.

SNS in e-Learning :

Social networks can also be viewed as pedagogical tools that stem from their

affordances of information discovery and sharing, attracting and supporting

networks of people and facilitating connections between them, engaging users

in informal learning and creative, expressive forms of behavior and identity

seeking, while developing a range of digital illiteracies.

Mashups

Combining data from multiple sources to create a new application, tool or

service typically mashups have been about data visualization, such as overlaying

geo-tagged photos over online maps.

Mashup in e-Learning :

Mashup can integrate all kinds of learning tools and application into a

combination. (Liyong Wan .2010)

Collaborative editing

“Collaborative editing now is always used in business space. Web tools are used

collaboratively to design, construct and distribute some digital product Sites may allow

users scattered across large distances to collaborate in making a single entity such as a

film. We can also apply it into e-Learning context. By centralizing documents on a

shared web server, a group of students may edit those learning materials rather than

hold many individual copies.”( Judith B. Harris, Punya Mishra, Matthew J. Koehler.2007)

J.B. Harris, P.Mishra, M.J. Koehler present a Technological Pedagogical and Content

Knowledge (TPACK) model (as shown in Figure 1). The TPACK approach emphasizes

the importance of the intersections between:

Technological Knowledge,

Pedagogical Knowledge

Content Knowledge

and proposes that effective integration of technology into the curriculum requires a

sensitive understanding of the dynamic relationship between all three components.

Figure:1

“The focus was strongly set on technological, practical and pedagogical aspects but

there are relevant reports about failures in embedding innovations in educational

institutions. The institutional lack of strategies to cope with international students

and new technologies as well as supporting for future online developments clearly

appeared in recent studies. Competition in the market of Higher Education has

pushed universities towards the adoption of sophisticated organizational practices

to ensure effectiveness. These new institutional models require changing

traditional functions and roles, as online education does not usually fit into the

existing university structure” (Casanovas, 2010).

Today web2.0 easy to use applications increase the social networking, collaborative

authoring and sharing. Most of the popular and visited websites are due to their low

entry barrier, their user friendly interface and their easy participation. E.g.

Editing a wiki page,

tagging a friend in a picture,

uploading a movie,

book marking an interesting blog,

subscribing to news feeds,

are all part of this new realm of the Read-Write" Web 2.0. (Sandy at. el .2009)

The terms “e-Learning 2.0” also refer to the application of social software in education.

“They account for a shift from traditional LMS mediums used to store course material

and conduct mandatory discussions, to lifelong learning platforms where different

knowledge resources such as course material, blogs, podcasts, and archives of

unplanned discussions are aggregated, shared and augmented in a bottom-up approach

for future exploitation.” Since e-Learning 2.0 is still in its early phases and a previous

study also reveals that students often use social software for sharing media files with

their friends, but rarely for educational purposes. Another study shows that email is the

still the most popular medium adopted in formal learning instead of wikis and blogs.

Therefore new learning models and fine tuned tools are needed for social software to be

adopted in education.(Sandy at. el .2009)

(Hatziapostolou ,Paraskakis,.2010) A Learning Management Systems (LMS) constitutes

such an environment. An LMS could be perceived as a student’s desktop and thus, it

would be more effective if the feedback was delivered on the desktop of the student.

However, opens source LMSs like Moodle and Claroline, do not seem to include an

efficient, build-in functionality for providing formative feedback Effective and high

quality feedback has been identified as an integral part of the learning process

(Ramsden, 2003; Black, 1998]. Extensive research, not only underpins the importance

of feedback in enhancing achievement levels, but also emphasises the obligation of

academic institutions to effectively integrate feedback in the learning experience

(Yorke, 2003). While feedback can be provided to students at various contexts (e.g. class

discussions, teacher’s answers to questions), the formal feedback process commences

with the production of student work as a result of a formative assessment. This section

explains the quality characteristics of feedback given on formative assessment, reviews

various methods of communicating formative feedback to students and discusses the

support for feedback in learning management systems.

Lectures are also an “efficient and economical way of conveying complex information to

large student groups in an enthusiastic and engaging way. They can provide a good

structure and introduction to complex topics, with current information put into an

appropriate context for the students. They can tailor make the material for the students

needs.” Lectures can be used to provoke thought and deepen understanding and

develop independent learning. (Folley, D. 2010)

Video podasting (vodcast) “improves learner cognition through better integration of

visual and textural materials found in paper based manuals improves learner efficiency

through reduced information redundancy and a less abstract representation of the steps

needed for effective software operation it encourages a more flexible approach to

learning. It offers a new element of learner independence and control improves student

motivation by directly engaging with contemporary students’ expectations about the

benefits of mobile technologies for their learning” (Folley, D. 2010)

Though delivery styles of lectures changed over the years and its still changing but its

span can be extended by using ‘active learning’ strategies and encouraging students to

engage more interactively with lecture material, with the lecturer and each other in the

lecture theatre. “We should also remember the lecture does not happen in isolation and

different learning styles necessitate varying delivery and assessment methods and

academics need to try and address these by presenting their material in as many

different formats as possible. Since individual needs differ, there is no reason why a

single learning or teaching technique will work equally well for everyone” (Folley, D.

2010)

A Learning Management System (commonly abbreviated as LMS) is a software

application for the administration, documentation, tracking, and reporting of training

programs, classroom and online events, e-Learning programs, and training content.

(Wikipedia) A LMS could be perceived as a student’s desktop and thus, it would be more

effective if the feedback was delivered on the desktop of the student because effective

and high quality feedback is the integral part of learning process.(Hatziapostolou,

Paraskakis .2010)

“A robust LMS should be able to do the following:

• centralize and automate administration

• use self-service and self-guided services

• assemble and deliver learning content rapidly

• consolidate training initiatives on a scalable web-based platform

• support portability and standards

• personalize content and enable knowledge reuse.” (Ryann K. Ellis. 2009)

“The connectivist theory claims that it is important not only to transfer information and

create information resources, but also to create such an environment which will foster

integration of information into students’ knowledge networks. This process is

supported by the Web 2.0 tools for interaction among students and interaction student

– teacher such as chat, blog, forum and wiki. The teacher then together with the

students evaluates the quality of the work submitted but also controls the students’

activity and their interaction, since the minimal number of comments on other students’

work is given in advance. The training therefore does not only function on the level

teacher – student, but also on the level student – student and naturally also on the level

of individual study from the recommended literature. The teacher’s role in an e-learning

course is predominantly the role of a guide or a moderator.”(Jančařík,Jančaříková,2010)

Problem Statement Since the core concept of Web 2.0 based learning design is the knowledge but

use of its tools in education is a common problem.

Existing OLIVE Model using simple text based limited interaction between the

student and teacher.

There is no social and group learning in existing OLIVE model.

Existing OLIVE does not support only informal learning.

Based on the OLIVE model analysis and literature review, I proposed integration

of web 2.0 tools with existing OLIVE Model as a result with new model of OLIVE

2.0. In my research period, I will investigate suitable web 2.0 tools can be used

for students as well as teachers and then check the performance of OLIVE 2.0 vs

existing OLIVE model.

Objectives of the Proposed Research

OLIVE 2.0 may develop higher level skills in learner and improve problem solving capabilities

by using technology properly.

Since web 2.0 social software tools are very successful therefore OLIVE 2.0 motivates

students to use it frequently and can actively participate in learning activity as well

group task.

OLIVE 2.0 improve individual and group learning.

OLIVE 2.0 will provide effective interactions between:

Learner-Learner,

Learner-Educator

Learner-Content.

OLIVE 2.0 increase the learner and educator satisfaction level.

OLIVE 2.0 support formal and Informal Learning.

Hypothesis

Proposed OLIVE 2.0 will improve individual and group learning.

Proposed OLIVE 2.0 will provide ease of use and usefulness.

Proposed OLIVE 2.0 will provide effective interactions between:

Learner-Learner

Learner-Educator

Learner-Content.

OLIVE 2.0 increase the learner and educator satisfaction level.

Delimitations of the Proposed Research

OLIVE is a teaching and learning management system that allows teacher and students to

interact in a virtual classroom by enabling web-based management and delivery of courses

used by Allama Iqbal Open University (AIOU). And new model OLIVE 2.0 will replace the

existing model at AIOU.

Research Methodology

I will use different methods to evaluate the usability and usefulness of OLIVE 2.0.

By using quantitative method student logs will be used for evaluation for checking their

participation levels throughout the semester and analyzing them.

By using qualitative a Licker scale questionnaire will also be used to collect the feedback

from the students for evaluation of their satisfaction level, usefulness of tools, interaction

feed back and their recommendation.

Significance of the Proposed Research

OLIVE 2.0 may develop higher level skills in learner and improve problem solving capabilities

by using technology properly.

Since web 2.0 social software tools are very successful therefore OLIVE 2.0 motivates

students to use it frequently and can actively participate in learning activity as well

group task.

ReferencesCasanovas, I (2010) “Exploring the Current Theoretical Background about Adoption until Institutionalization of Online Education in Universities: Needs for Further Research” Electronic Journal of e-Learning Volume 8 Issue 2 2010, (pp73 - 84), available online at www.ejel.org

El Helou, S.; Gillet, D.; Salzmann, C.; Chiu Man Yu; , "A Study of the Acceptability of a Web 2.0 Application by Higher-Education Students Undertaking Collaborative Laboratory Activities," Advances in Computer-Human Interactions, 2009. ACHI '09. Second International Conferences on , vol., no., pp.117-125, 1-7 Feb. 2009doi: 10.1109/ACHI.2009.52URL: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4782501&isnumber=4782475

Folley, D. (2010) “The Lecture is Dead Long Live the e-Lecture” Electronic Journal of e-Learning Volume 8 Issue 2 2010, (pp93 100), available online at www.ejel.org

Gallula, D.; Frank, A.J.; , "Enriching the E-Learning Experience in the Framework of Web 2.0 Using Usability 2.0," Computing in the Global Information Technology, 2009. ICCGI '09. Fourth International Multi-Conference on , vol., no., pp.229-234, 23-29 Aug. 2009doi: 10.1109/ICCGI.2009.41URL: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5280149&isnumber=5279742Gerald Friedland, Wolfgang Hurst, Lars Knipping (2008), Educational Multimedia, IEEE multimedia July-September 2008.

Hatziapostolou, T and Paraskakis, I. (2010) “Enhancing the Impact of Formative Feedback on Student Learning through an Online Feedback System” Electronic Journal of e-Learning Volume 8 Issue 2 2010, (pp111 - 122), available online at www.ejel.org

Hsiao-Ya Chiu; Shi-Zong Wen; Chieh-Chung Sheng(2009); “Apply Web 2.0 tools to constructive collaboration learning: A case study in MIS course” Fifth International Joint Conference on INC, IMS and IDC, 2009. NCM '09. Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/NCM.2009.210 Publication Year: 2009 , Page(s): 1638 - 1643

Jančařík, A and Jančaříková, K. (2010) “Wiki Tools in the Preparation and Support of e-Learning Courses” Electronic Journal of e-Learning Volume 8 Issue 2 2010, (pp123 - 132), available online at www.ejel.org

Judith B. Harris, Punya Mishra, Matthew J. Koehler(2007) “Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge:Curriculum-based Technology Integration Reframed”

Kurkovsky, S.; Strimple, D.; Nuzzi, E.; Verdecchia, K.; , "Convergence of Web 2.0 and SOA: Taking Advantage of Web Services to Implement a Multimodal Social Networking System," Computational Science and Engineering Workshops, 2008. CSEWORKSHOPS '08. 11th IEEE International Conference on , vol., no., pp.227-232, 16-18 July 2008doi: 10.1109/CSEW.2008.15URL: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4625066&isnumber=4625019

Liyong Wan; , "Application of web 2.0 technologies in e-Learning context," Networking and Digital Society (ICNDS), 2010 2nd International Conference on , vol.1, no., pp.437-440, 30-31 May 2010doi: 10.1109/ICNDS.2010.5479229URL: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5479229&isnumber=5479128

Mavromoustakos, S.; Papanikolaou, K.; , "E-Learning engineering in the Web 2.0 era," Education Technology and Computer (ICETC), 2010 2nd International Conference on , vol.3, no., pp.V3-534-V3-538, 22-24 June 2010doi: 10.1109/ICETC.2010.5529483URL: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5529483&isnumber=5529481

Murugesan, S.; , "Understanding Web 2.0," IT Professional , vol.9, no.4, pp.34-41, July-Aug. 2007doi: 10.1109/MITP.2007.78URL: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4287373&isnumber=4287363

Nazir A. Sangi (2009) Access Strategy for Blended E-Learning : An AIOU Case Study, Journal of the Research Center for Educational Technology (RCET) P-75 to 91Vol. 5, No. 2, summer 2009

Nyarko, Michael; Ventura, Neco; , "E-Learning : Virtual classrooms as an added learning platform," Computational Technologies in Electrical and Electronics Engineering (SIBIRCON), 2010 IEEE Region 8 International Conference on , vol., no., pp.426-431, 11-15 July 2010doi: 10.1109/SIBIRCON.2010.5555116URL: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5555116&isnumber=5555004

Richard Noss (Oct,2008)Education 2.0? Designing the web for teaching and learning, Teaching and Learning Research Programme,( TLRP), Institute of Education, University of London.

Ryann K. Ellis. 2009 Learning Circuits’ “Field Guide to Learning Management Systems” ,American Society for Training & Development (ASTD).P2 2009

Tom Kelly,2000, DELTA FORCE At Cisco, three business units joined forces to keep information flowing and strategic skills sharp in preparation for the upturn. Cisco System

Michael Massoth, Roman Korn (2008) The IP Multimedia Subsystem with an e-Learning Management System and integrated Video Conferencing, iiWAS2008, November 24-26 2008, Linz, Austria. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Information Integration and Web-based Applications & Services Linz,

Austria WORKSHOP SESSION: iiWAS 2008 workshops: ERPAS 2008: Multimedia applications Pages: 655-658   Year of Publication: 2008 ISBN:978-1-60558-349-5

Vyortkina, D. & Tracy, H. (2008). UEL E-Learning Staff Development Portfolio: Current Outline and Future Possibilities. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2008 (pp. 3570-3573). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/28880.