You are here:

E-Learning Literature Review to Investigate Reasons of E-Learning Failures to Meet the Expectancies
PROCEEDINGS

, South East European University, Macedonia

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Quebec City, Canada ISBN 978-1-880094-63-1 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA

Abstract

The aim of the research study was to start from a secondary research and review the overall situation in the field of e-learning, review what are the trends, and state of the art in e-learning field. Literature review is provided on e-learning in general up to date. The objective was to find out the deficiencies in the current state of e-learning as well as conclude what is the source of the recent skepticism in regards to e-learning. Based on analysis of the actual trends in e-learning, solutions, advantages, disadvantages and experiences a number of serious problems have been identified. Further a methodology and recommendations are proposed to improve the situation.

Citation

Fetaji, B. (2007). E-Learning Literature Review to Investigate Reasons of E-Learning Failures to Meet the Expectancies. In T. Bastiaens & S. Carliner (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2007--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 266-275). Quebec City, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved December 19, 2018 from .

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Acosta, M.P., Monguet, J.M. & Rodríguez R. (2003). Analysing the structure of the information hypermedia, In Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference, vol. 2003, Issue 1, 226-229.
  2. Acosta, P., Monguet, J. & Rodriguez, R. (2003). Educational Hypermedia Applications: Design Based on Content Models. In P. Kommers& G. Richards (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2003 (pp. 292-295). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  3. Agarwal, R., Deo, A., & Das, S. (2004) Intelligent agents in E-learning, ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, Volume 29 Issue 2: Publisher: ACM Press AICC FAQ, (N.d) (online) Retrieved March 8, 2007, from http://www.aicc.org/pages/aicc_faq.htm
  4. ANGEL LMS (2006) (online, Retrieved March 17, 2006) from(www.angellearning.com) Aroyo, L., Pokraev, S., & Brussee, R., Preparing SCORM for the Semantic Web: https://doc.telin.nl/dscgi/ds.py/Get/File-33767/_113-ODBASE2003.pdf (visited 28-12-2005)
  5. Bonk, C.J. & Graham, C.R. (2004). Handbook of blended learning: Global Perspectives, local designs. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer Publishing. Britain,. S. And Liber,. O. (2006) “ A Framework for the Pedagogical Evaluation of Virtual Learning Environments” (online) http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/jtap-041.doc Bruner, J.S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge MA: The Belnap Press of Harvard University Press.
  6. Collis, B. (2003). Course redesign for blended learning: modern optics for technical professionals. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Lifelong Learning, 13(1/2), 22-38.
  7. Cross J, & Hamilton, I. (2007) DNA of e-learning (online) Retrieved March 8, 2007, from http://www.internettime.com/Learning/articles/DNA.pdf DCMI, (N.d) (online) Retrieved March 8, 2007, from http://dublincore.org/about/
  8. Driscoll, M.P. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  9. Fetaji, B. (2006). Issues and solutions in authoring e-learning content in SouthEast European University. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2006 (pp. 254-259). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  10. Fetaji, B. (2007). Assessing, measuring and evaluating e-learning indicators. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2007 (pages to be confirmed after publishing). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  11. Fetaji, B., & Fetaji, M. (2007). “ E-learning indicators approach to developing e-learning software solutions” – Accepted and to be published in the proceedings of the IEEE EUROCON 2007 conference, Warsaw, Poland, USA, 09-12 September 2007.
  12. Hanson, P., & Robson, R. (2003). An evaluation framework for course management technology [Electronic version]. Educause Centre for Applied Research, 14(Research bulleting). Retrieved October 12, 2006, from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERB0314.pdf Harmon, J. & Marquez-Zenkov, K. (2003). Perpetual Pedagogy: A Critical Deficiency in Modeling Educational Technology to Pre-and In-Service Teachers. In C. Crawford, D. Willis, R. Carlsen, I. Gibson, K. McFerrin, J. Price& R. Weber (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2003 (pp. 3585-3588). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  13. Harrison, L. & Smith, R. (2003). All I Really Need to Know About E-Content I Learned In Kindergarten: Share and Share Alike. In G. Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning inCorporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2003 (pp. 2004-2006). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  14. Horizon Project (2007); (online) Retrieved April 12, 2007, from http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2007_Horizon_Report.pdf Http://www.adlnet.gov/scorm/20043ED/Documentation.aspx
  15. Malone, P., Schryer, C. & Rossner-Merrill, V. (2000). Combining Instructional Models and Enabling Technologies to Embed Best Practices in Course Instructional Design. In P. Kommers& G. Richards (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2000 (pp. 1685-1686).
  16. Morgan, K.R. (2002). Blended Learning: A Strategic Action Plan for a New Campus. Seminole, FL: University of Central Florida. Muramatsu B, (2007) (online) Retrieved March 8, 2007, from http://www.ieeeltsc.org/about Oliver, R., Harper, B., Reeves, T., Strijker, A. & Westhuizen, D. (2002). Learning management Systems: One Size Fits All?. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2002 (pp. 1498-1499). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  17. Osguthorpe, R.T., & Graham, C.R. (2003). Blended learning systems: Definitions and directions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 227-234.
  18. Piaget, J. (2001). The psychology of intelligence. New York: Routledge.
  19. Putnam, R. & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teachers’ learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4-15.
  20. Schramm, W. (1977). Big media, little media. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Seay. J., (1997) Educational Games; (online) Retrieved April 15, 2007, from http://www.cofc.edu/~seay/cb/simgames.html
  21. Shaw, S. & Hudson, J. (2004). Distributed Content Models--A new innovation in Learning Content Management Systems and Strategies. In G. Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning inCorporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2004 (pp. 1694-1698). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  22. Shaw, S. & Hudson, J. (2004). Distributed Content Models--A new innovation in Learning Content Management Systems and Strategies. In G. Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning inCorporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2004 (pp. 1694-1698). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  23. Smith, G. (2005). Problems with e-learning we can ’ t ignore: One size does not fit all. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2005 (pp. 1506-1511).
  24. Whitehouse, C. (2003). Examining usability issues of e-learning. In P. Kommers& G. Richards (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2003 (pp. 2748-2755).

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.