Information System Development to Educational Demands - Assignment Example

Implementing an Information System Development Approach to Translate Educational demands into E-Learning 2007 Abstract In order to implement an Information System Development (ISD) for e-learning, pedagogical issues as well as system development issues should be incorporated. Through E-learning, different stakeholders – learners, teachers and administrators – interact. Hence, the social situations determine the type of learning processes that are aimed at, and it is essential to develop a socio-technical approach to ISD for e-learning. A socio-technical framework for ISD, like Multiview/ Web Information System Development Model is found to be an effective ISD approach since it incorporates the social situation (pedagogical theories), the technical change agents (developers) and the individuals (instructors/ courseware authors). Further, the social situations are not static but follow a dynamic evolutionary pattern since knowledge acquisition, feedback and evaluation follow a spiral chain, necessitating a Learning Content Management Cycle (LCMC) that undergoes a conceptualization, implementation and dialogue process between the developers and courseware authors. However, there are limitations to the extent that socio-technical ISD can be used to translate learning theories to e-learning since the users are heterogeneous and feedback may not be sufficient to develop the application to meet all user requirements. It may be possible to translate behavioral theories of learning to e-learning since this focuses on the instructor but the possibilities of translating constructionist and collaborative theories are limited. Keywords: Information System, Development, Multiview, Internet application, e-learning, learning theory, constructionist, behaviorist, collaborative learning Introduction The new approach to Information System Development (ISD) aims to incorporate socio-technical approaches so that there is a fit between people and technology. The traditional approach to Information System development was concerned with the technological side since it was used by a small group of technical people. As the technology has now grown to be more pervasive, a more user-centered approach becomes inevitable. The advent of the Internet and the World Wide Web has fastened this process of socialization of Information Technology. Typically, most Information Systems (IS) that graduated from the traditional to the Internet age have concentrated on the user interface, particularly the look and feel aspects (Vidgen, 2002). For deriving the greatest advantage from the Internet, however, applications need to go beyond graphics-based hypermedia and database-driven IS and involve the stakeholders (users) into the development process. In order to achieve a high usability, the ISD needs to be functional in its approach to the problem and its solution; screen design and dialogues should be sufficiently user-friendly; and the application must have cognitive qualities in providing feedback and understanding so that there is true interaction between user and technology (Wiryana, n.d). This paper aims to develop a framework for ISD in order to implement a system of translating learning theories into e-learning. In the web-enabled teaching environment, teachers play an important role in deciding on what students learn through the traditional and technology-based learning activities. Even while assuming a strong correlation of learning theories in which there is a strong interaction between teachers and learners, teachers play a crucial role in developing and monitoring the cognitive aptitude of learners, probing into their knowledge and reasoning and provoking participation (Akpinar & Simsek, 2007). Hence, the teachers decide on the learning objects that are used in the learning process. As the learning environment makes a transition from the traditional structure to e-learning, the role of the teachers changes from the classroom lecturer to courseware developer (in the case of one-way transmission of knowledge) and course facilitator (in the case of participatory learning). Teachers can also collaborate to develop learning objects like courseware, task-based learning activities and performance evaluation. Thus, the ISD that is required for e-learning is quite distinct from the traditional technology-driven ISD like information engineering and structured system engineering and design method (Vidgen, 2002). The development of the Object Oriented (OO) paradigm that led to the Unified Modelling technique (UMT) is based on the socio-technical approach. Perhaps, the emerging system development that is socially situated is applicable to e-learning like no other application. The learning theories that are chosen are historically and socially relevant and the ISD that translates these social contexts to the actual application should hence be considered thus. In order to develop an ISD for e-learning, we identify the pre-internet Multiview framework for ISD, developed by Avison et al (1990), is chosen as the socio-technical basis. Further, the emerging version for Multiview in the context of web development is the Web IS Development Methodology (WISDM) developed by Vidgen (2002). Together, these two models provide an ISD framework for enabling job satisfaction for the users (in this case the courseware authors or teachers) of the application (here e-learning). In the first section of the paper, I will discuss the various approaches to e-Learning and the lack of a proper ISD in the field. Thereafter, I will analyze the social situation in terms of learning theories and alternate ISD approaches that have been postulated for e-learning. Finally, I will develop the Multiview/ WISDM approach for e-learning, its significance in translating learning theories into e-learning, the contribution of this model in enabling an effective application and the its limitations. Approaches to e-Learning E-learning has become a convenient tool for both educators and learners. Since this education process is independent of time and location, teachers can manage, modify and change online courses according to requirements while learners may collaborate by being active participants in the process. E-learning is often used synonymous with non-network based learning (computer-based learning) or network-based learning (web learning, Internet learning, online learning) and so on (Hadjerjouitt, 2007). Within network based learning, internet-based learning is wider than the realm of web-learning, the latter being dependent on HTMLs, URLs and browsers while the former uses these as well as file transfers, e-mails, etc. The concept of e-learning is all-encompassing, involving network-based, non network-based and perhaps also face-to-face learning, thus comprising of both the traditional technology-driven learning process as well as that through the process of socialization. Mayes and Fowles (1999) categorized the type of courseware that may be applicable to each stage of e-learning: 1) primary courseware when the subject matter is presented to the learner, 2) secondary courseware that supports that tasks through software tools and 3) tertiary courseware when previous learners produce learning materials thus collaborating with new learners. Hence, usability of education software may be analyzed on the basis of the work contexts that they address since learning is not an activity per se that can be supported directly. To Mayes and Fowles (1999) is a by-product of understanding and best achieved through the performance of various tasks. The effectiveness of e-learning is crucially dependent on an appropriate ISD that meets the requirements of the educational demands as also on the learning theory on which it is based. However, most e-learning modules are developed without sufficient analysis of pedagogical requirements and human learning objectives. Although many approaches incorporate a combination of learning theories, there is no theory that derives an approach from individual learning theories. Besides, there have been limited attempts to translate learning theories into e-learning using an ISD approach, which results in poor design, analysis and implementation (Kay and Knack, 2005). Other researchers have found that education software that do not collaborate with the users, that is teachers, are often not used to full potential (Oliver et al, 2002, Recker et al, 2005). McNaught et al (2003) concluded from a review of projects that “Knowing about resources and having access to them are important, but knowing what to do with them in order to facilitate learning provides another set of complex challenges” (quoted in, Akpinar & Simsek, 2007). A proper e-learning approach should be constructed by using ISD systematically so that teachers can effectively use it to impart knowledge as well as develop task-based activities for learners. Learning Theories Human learning theories pertain to the ways that we undergo the process of learning. The main human learning theories are 1) the behaviorist theory, 2) cognitive/ constructivist theory and 2) the collaborative theory. In behaviorist theory, the learning process is based on the environment and the learner has to take one step at a time to gather knowledge. Here, the teacher is the key to the learning process and the learner is not an active participant. In constructivism, the teacher’s role is to facilitate the process of construction of ideas by formulating and streamlining the knowledge gained by the learner. As Omrod (2003) defines constructivist learning, “ learning involves constructing one’s own knowledge from one’s own experience”. Constructivism lays down a set of principles that guide teachers to collaborate with the learners’ construction of knowledge from their experience. The constructivist theory was originally developed by Jean Piaget (1950), who postulated that the play approach to learning facilitated the learners’ cognitive development. Piaget said that the learners construct knowledge through assimilation, by which learners gather knowledge about the environment and respond through an inner mechanism, and accumulation, by which she fits in the new experience with that already assimilated. The radical constructivist theories, as forwarded by von Glasersfeld (1990), develops the idea: “Coming to know is a process of dynamic adaptation towards viable interpretations of experience. The knower does not necessarily construct knowledge of a "real" world”. Thus, although the learner learns from experience, it is not possible to know all aspects of reality. So, when the reality clashes with the acquired knowledge, the learner changes tract on her knowledge acquisition. The radical or social constructivist theories, or the collaborative learning theories, forwarded by Vygotsky (e.g., 1978), Cobb (1994) and Salomon and Perkins (1998), on the other hand, believe that learners’ knowledge is ultimately constructed by social units, like the family or any other unit that she interacts with. Socially-mediated learning process then is most fruitful. Beyond social interaction, cultural influences like religion, race, language and customs also play a role in the learning process. Models for translating learning theories to e-learning Alternate models have used different learning theories to approach e-learning. In Laurillard’s (2002) conversational framework that develops the constructionist view that learning is enabled through discussion, adaptation, interaction and reflection between teachers and learners, the only technology that can achieve this process is “multimedia tutorial simulation”. Hence, although it is the learner who experiences the discovery of knowledge, it is the teacher who exerts the scaffolding control. Further, different media forms have different levels of affordability and learning experience. For example, the narrative media describes the subject matter through text or images, interactive media, through search engines, multiple choices, etc., responds to what the learner does, adaptive media is changed by the learner’s actions (simulations, etc.), communicative media facilitates communication between groups of learners (email, discussion forum, etc.) and the productive media allows the learner to produce worksheets, text documents, etc. Since interaction between learners and learning object is key to the effectiveness of the model, user-friendliness and development of the technology in accordance to the learning theory becomes crucial. Salmon (2002) uses the constructionist theory to develop the e-Tivities model through five stages – access to motivation, online socialization, information exchange, knowledge construction and development; the CSALT Networked Learning model uses the collaborative of social constructionist theory (Goodyear, 2001). Thus, most e-learning approaches are based on the constructionist theory in which there is interaction between the learner and the instructor. Krauss and Ally (2005) combines behaviorism, cognitive theory and constructivism to develop learning objects; Cohrane (2005) develops a participatory approach through a series of feedback and revision of the development process; McDonald (2005) developed a collaborative approach involving subject specialists, technology exporters and researchers in a sequence of developing paper-based modules, electronic modules and an interactive online module; Varlamis and Apostolakis (2006) developed a life-cycle process involving design, production, deployment and assessment; and Salas and Ellis (2006) developed learning objects in higher education by splitting the objects into discrete objects. However, none of these approaches distinctively has a systematic approach to developing the IS through the collaboration between teachers, or course authors, and program developers. The Research problem: Finding an appropriate ISD approach for e-learning Information technology can be used quite differently to translate the alternate learning theories into an e-learning module. A module that transmits instruction from the teacher to the student is rooted in the behaviorist model; a module that is based on task-based activities translate the constructionist theory; and e-learning with collaborative learning, dialogue and interaction between the teacher and the student translates the social constructionist or the collaborative theory. On the basis of this categorization, Roberts (2003) has adapted Mayes and Fowlers’ (1999) classification of courseware: 1) in the conceptualization phase, the primary courseware consisting of subject information is developed, 2) in the construction phase, secondary courseware with task-based activities are developed and 3) in the dialogue phase, the tertiary courseware that enables group collaboration are developed. For an effective translation of the education needs, e-learning needs to evolve through continuous update, change and refinement of modules on the basis of the educational requirements and the environmental and social changes. This becomes all the more crucial because the number of learners grows and become more and more heterogeneous, the information technology infrastructure and the aptness of even the learning theories change. However, a traditional ISD approach is not capable of dealing with the evolutionary needs since the social process is not incorporated in this. Even the typical web-based development like those used for e-commerce is not applicable to the development process of e-learning since there is no way to incorporate learning theories in this. The sequential model in ISD, known as the waterfall, is applicable in managerial system development since it incorporates the evolution of the system from the beginning to the end, becomes inapplicable since the linear model does not allow for feedback and changes (Hadjerlouitt, 2007). This model, revising the prototype on the basis of feedback till it is refined to the utmost may be most suitable among the accepted development models but even this fails when e-learning requirements evolve continuously and it becomes difficult to estimate when the requirements will finally end. Hence, Hadjerlouitt (2007) advocates a modified evolutionary process model that allows for change and continuous evolution, reuse of learning objects so that developers do not need to develop the objects when new courses are designed, the teaching and learning environment is captured and has a phase that assesses the translation of learning theories. In e-learning, the scope of the system undergoes continuous change on the basis of the environment consisting of learners, teachers, learning theory, information technology and the institutional setting. The systems requirements may be arrived at by consultations with course authors through structured interviews, questionnaire surveys, etc. Then, the developers design the requirement specifications by a rigorous use of Unified Modelling Language (UML). The architecture design would involve the conceptualization of the modules, construction of courseware, dialogue, learning assessments and courseware evaluation. The User Interface design is crucial for the human-computer interaction in e-learning. The implementation of the model would involve the various elements of e-learning like text, graphics, audio, learner assessment modules, etc. The application can be implemented by using standard programming languages like Java or specialized Learning Management Systems (LMS). After the delivery and use of the application, it must be evaluated on the basis of the learning theories and undergo another round of evaluation. The relevant research problem is to find an appropriate ISD approach in accordance with the modified evolutionary model that would facilitate interaction between software developers and courseware authors to construct learning objects that effectively translate the learning theories into e-learning. The Multiview Framework for ISD The multiview framework for ISD originated as a result of structured programming and analysis approach of the engineering discipline (Vidgen 2002). The object-oriented approach that led to the UML typically emphasizes on the design and technicalities of the application, without sufficiently taking into consideration the social scenario. On the other hand, the functionalist approach to the social order and objectivism emphasizes that there are social theories need to be incorporated in the ISD. The Multiview model is based on the stucturation theory by Giddens (1984) that postulates that structure and agency are in duality rather than independent entities. Human actors and interpretative schema link the situation (learning theories in the case of e-learning) and the agent (developer). The Multiview framework, constituting the general framework, local methodology and methods/ techniques, is the result of collaboration between change agents (developers) the problem situation (e-learning) and users (teachers or courseware authors). In the Multiview framwork, the ISD matrix has two categories – socio (comprising the individual and the organization) and technical (the processes that are required) – as well as the analysis (what is required) and design (how to undertake the project). Although the problem solving requires an interdisciplinary approach, there are three broad perspectives of developing the socio-technical parameters: the technical (T) analysis perspective, the organizational or societal (O) perspective and the personal or individual (P) perspective. The developer is able to develop the T perspective that can be converted into action only if the O and P perspectives are complete. Thus, in the Multiview framework, an emerging ISD methodology that incorporates a socio-technical approach is applicable only when there is free interaction between developers (change agents), methods (technical) and situation (social order, the users). In Multiview, the Soft System Methodology (SSM) for organizational analysis, which is particularly relevant when there is a complex system of heterogeneous stakeholder interests, is the main element of organizational analysis. The SSM is the entire set of relationships that an organization has with its stakeholders. Since the Multiview framework aims at value creation, SSM creates benefits or losses for the user. In the SSM, the definition of the organization undergoes change. From the traditional organization, which is an autonomous entity able to control the environment through competition and evolve strategy as objectives in a hierarchical power structure, the organization in this emerging framework is considered as a web of relations among the stakeholders in an environment that is in a state of chaos and change, benefits from collective action, collaboration and strategy of solidarity in a decentralized and empowerment scenario (Vidgen 2002). In the SSM, social entities aim to manage relations, interpret the environment through a process of thinking and understanding. The standard Multiview framework is relevant for a pre-Internet scenario. In the web-based ISD methodology (WISDM) based on Multiview, the strategy is no longer abstract but tangible; visible and relates to goals, like real-time interaction between teachers and developers; the typical user is drawn from the social organization and not necessarily an individual; and user satisfaction is the main aim of the framework. The development focus is no longer the internal data and architecture as in the basic Multiview framework but the web site as a visual artefact. Hence, graphic design skills rather than prosaic design skills become important. Human-computer interface becomes a critical link between the socio and technical aspects of the ISD. The WISDM framework proceeds with the interaction of the change agents (developers) and situation (e-learning) and evolves as an outcome of action between users and developers rather than through a pre-conceived process of ISD as in the traditional models that do not incorporate socio-economic parameters. Significance of the Multiview/WISDM Framework A Learning Content Management System (LMCS) may be developed for e-learning in the Multiview/WISDM framework that incorporates the social organization (the pedagogical environment - O), the change agents (developers - T) and the individuals (courseware authors). The LCMC needs to be split into three phases: the conceptualization phase (when traditional tools like spreadsheets, word processors, painting tools, HTML editors, video editors, etc are used), the construction phase (when developers construct the application) and the dialogue phase (when developers interact with users on the learning environment requirements). The LCMC enables different users at various geographies to access and reuse content (Akpinar & Huseyin, 2007). The aim of the framework is to develop a model in which user satisfaction of courseware construction is high, alternate learning theories are translated into the application and the learning cycle undergoes an evolutionary path in which learning requirements as well as technological changes are accounted for. The typical method for specifying the technical requirements of the application is through UML that describes the functionality of subject matter, modules, registration number, modules for task-based activities and performance evaluation through grades, etc. The classic Multiview model rests on the aim to bring about user expectations and satisfaction. Hence, the first phase of the ISD involves the conceptualization of the application involving conversion of data provided by user groups. In the evolutionary model, it is assumed that the learning objects undergo considerable changes over time hence after the implementation of the prototype, it may be necessary to enter the next set of data. So, the project conceptualization requires that the data updates do not meet with resistance from the users. The primary users of the Multiview/WISDM are the courseware authors. It is often the case that teachers are forced to use multimedia or other learning technologies simply because they are there. Teachers then learn the programs and incorporate into course delivery without really considering the effectiveness of the technology to translate the learning theory aimed at. Learning technologies are not a means to reach out to new learners, as is most often the case, but to improve the learning quality. In this framework that we are proposing, the developers should concentrate on the screen design that reflects learning attributes, content factors and processing requirements while the conceptualization of the application should emanate from the courseware authors. Hence, teachers are no longer passive receptors of learning technology but active participant in the ISD. Various learning outcomes have been found to be dependent on the design aspects hence the domains of the developer and the user are not mutually exclusive. For example, some prerequisites of well designed screens are that they should stimulate the desire to read through attractive use of text, fonts and graphics. Learning is strong when graphics highlight the text, thereby resulting in higher recall. On the other hand, excessive use of graphics may turn out to be tiresome and interrupt the flow of information. The use of audio and video, when applied judiciously, may enhance the learning cycle. From the user perspective, the task of authoring must be simple so that a teacher or a domain expert without extensive computer knowledge must be able to use it. Kay and Knack (2005) found from a survey of pre-service teachers that they are good at story telling but weak in developing learning objects since they are inhibited by technological complexities like Flash. Hence, to make the framework, the usability at the teacher level is the maximum when there are sufficient controls available at the instructional level and the authoring system is structured so as to enable the authors to take key decisions in the conceptualization of online courseware. Hence, it is suggested that software templates for authoring tools are provided to make it more user-friendly. Instructional software templates increase the effectiveness of the development process and compensate for the lack of developmental expertise. However, such templates have little efficacy in providing input for the actual development process. Does the Multiview framework incorporate the learning theories? The conceptualization phase is the most crucial one for the designing of the e-learning application in accordance with the learning theory objectives. At this stage, the learners’ existing knowledge, subject matter and the learning theory is analyzed and presented in a data flow diagram. In the behaviorist scheme, the conceptualization phase consists of the instruction modules through the subject matter. These consist of main user classes like courseware evaluation (structured questionnaire), course information (name, credit, semester, objectives, etc), course units (topics, study material), prerequisites (grades, knowledge, skills), learning assessment (regular and supplementary examinations) and assignment (compulsory and optional along with feedback). In the constructionist scheme, the model is developed through task-based activities like case studies, interactive software and project work. Learning assessments would depend on case studies and project assessment. Courseware would then be evaluated through structured questionnaires and interviews. For collaborative approach, the conceptualization phase would incorporate facilities for dialogues, like students asking questions and giving feedback, collaborate with other students and discuss project work. The main user classes in this approach would be courseware evaluation, project work, learning assessment, collaborative activity using online discussion forum like chat, email, messages, etc. and prerequisites. A good pedagogical environment is one in which the learning environment is seamless in the method adopted. Hence, the conceptualization phase should detail the intended learning outcome and the methods of achieving the aims. However, typically learning approaches are usually a combination of learning as behavior, learning as cognitive knowledge and learning as social practice or situational. Hence, no curriculum can address a pedagogical theory in a one-to-one basis. The emphasis on constructionist task-based learning outcomes is perhaps a reaction of the development of the multimedia and hypermedia, which were instructor-based learning methods through which information could be transmitted from teachers to students. Activity theories, on the other hand, focused on the learner, individual or a group of collaborative students. The learners’ relationship with each other and with the change agents are not direct but through a set of tools, which could be physical in terms of networks, books and software, or cognitive in terms of memory, language and concepts (Mayes and Frietas, 1999). Hence, in this framework, the development of the activity-based pedagogical learning outcome would depend on conceptualization of the tools. The relationship between the user groups – the learners and the teachers – may be in the form of ‘scaffolding’ (Mayes and Frietas, 1999). The teachers, the scaffolders, have the main responsibility of the learning outcome but the learning group also plays its role. Learning and teaching can each be viewed as an activity by itself and e-learning as a simulated activity system in which participants are made to undertake the activity assigned. Limitations Authoring systems are particularly popular because of the object-oriented (OO) visualization and courseware development that is the key to the multiview framework. However, when the system has too much of hidden flows and control systems, novice users find it difficult to use. There are commercial software tools that require little aimed programming capabilities of novice users. Most users are domain experts with former instruction experience but little experience in multimedia or courseware development tools. For them, the authoring tools that require knowledge of data structuring, navigation structure and application of interactive design is difficult to grasp. Further, the problem is enhanced by Internet technology and its constant evolution. Even courseware authors who have sufficient computational knowledge have problems with applying pedagogical theories to develop learning objects (Akpinar & Huseyin, 2007). Although the multiview/WISDM model may be effective in translating the behaviorist learning theory (which is a straight-forward instructor-based model undergoing little evolution) and the constructionist theory (incorporating learner focus into the model at the conceptualization stage), it would have limited effectiveness to translate collaborative learning theory (which undergoes continuous evolution requiring constant change in design and analysis that would be beyond the domain of the courseware authors. Conclusion In terms of system development, the e-learning application is an independent creation and cannot be manufacturing by engineering set parameters. A rigorous development process involving designing, analysis and implementation should be conceptualized. All the stakeholders, including learners, teachers and administrators need to be involved in this process. However, the most critical users are the teachers, or the courseware authors, who need to collaborate with the developers. It should follow a modified evolutionary process since the learning process is continuous hence the ISD should be iterative and incremental. The Multiview/ WSIDM framework is applicable to the entire life cycle of the development process, through analysis, design, implementation, testing, evaluation and evolution. The e-learning process should be constructed with a convenient language and the generic parameters like teaching processes, curriculum and coursework. Unified Modeling Language is applicable since it is based on the Object-oriented approach. The framework analyses the three pedagogical views of learning – behaviorist, constructionist and collaborative. The Multiview evolutionary learning cycle allows for a dynamic process of conceptualization, construction and dialogue with sufficient time at each stage. The e-learning evolutionary model can be rigorously designed in the Multiview framework since the organizational analysis through SSM allows for the heterogeneity of the stakeholders. However, the requirement of computational knowledge on the part of the courseware authors make it difficult for an effective translation of learning theories into e-learning. The approach for ISD aims to develop learning objects in accordance to pedagogical theories and increase the usability of the courseware development tools. This is essentially a socio-technical approach in which users and developers collaborate. Since alternate learning theories are not mutually exclusive, it is not possible to develop an ISD framework for individual learning theories. Works Cited Akpinar, Y and Huseyin, S (2007). “Pre-Service Teachers’ Learning Object Development: A Case Study in K-12 Setting”. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects. Volume 3 Avison, D.E, and Wood-Harper, A.T (1990). Multiview: An Exploration in Information System Development, MacGraw Hill- Maidenland. Cobb, P. (1994). “Where is the mind? Constructivist and Sociocultural Perspectives on Mathematical Development”. Educational Researcher, 23(7) Cohrane (2005). “Interactive QuickTime: Developing and evaluating multimedia learning objects to enhance both face-to-face and distance e-learning environments. ”. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects. Volume 1 Giddens, A (1984). The Constitution of Society. Polity Press. Cambridge, MA Goodyear, (2001). Effective networked learning in higher education: Notes and Guidelines. Retrieved from http://www.csalt.lancs.ac.uk/jisc/guidelines_final.doc. Hadjerouitt, S (2007). “Applying a System Development Approach to Translate Educational Requirements into E-Learning”. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, vol 3 Oliver, R, Harper, B, Hedberg, J, Wills, S and Agostinho, S (2002). “Formalising the description of the learning designs”. In A. Goody, J Herrington & M. Northcote (ed.) Quality Conversations: Research and Development in Higher Education. 25, 496-504. ACT: HERDSA Ormrod, J. E. (2003). Educational Psychology: Developing Learners, Fourth Edition. Piaget, J. (1950). The Psychology of Intelligence. New York: Routledge Kay, R and Knack, L (2005). “Developing learning objects for secondary school students: A multi-component model”. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 1. Krauss and Ally (2005). “A study of the design and evaluation of learning objects and implications for content development”. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, vol 1 Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking University Teaching. A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies. London: Routledge McDonald, C.J, Stodel, E, Thompson, T, Muirhead, B, Hinton, C, Carson, B et al (2005). Addressing the learning contradiction: A collaborative approach for developing a conceptual framework learning object. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, vol 1 Macnaught, C, Burd, A, Whitehear, Km Prescott, J and Browning, G (2003). “It takes more than meta data stories to success: Understanding barriers to reuse computer facilitated learning resources”. Australian Journal of Educational Technology. 19(1). Mayes, T and de Frietas, S (2002). “Review of e-learning theories, frameworks and models”. Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/Stage%202%20Learning%20Models%20(Version%201).pdf Roberts (2003). Teaching using the web: Conceptions and approaches from a phenomenographic perspective. Instructional Science. Vol 31 Recker, M, Dorward, J, Dawson, D, Mao, X, Liu, Y, Palmer, B (2005). “Teaching, designing and sharing: A context for learning objects”. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects. Vol 1 Salas and Ellis (2006). The development and implementation of learning objects in a higher education setting. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects. Vol 2 Salmon, C (2002). E-Titivites: The key to active online learning. London: Kogan, Page Salomon, G. and Perkins, D (1998). “Individual and Social Aspects of Learning”. In: P. Pearson and A. Iran-Nejad (Eds) Review of Research in Education 23, pp 1-24, American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC. Varlamis, A and Apostolakis, I (2006). Present and future standards for e-learning technologies. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects. Vol 2 Vidgen, R (2002). “Constructing a Web Information System Development Methodology”. Information Systems Journal, 12 Vidgen, R and Madsen, S (2003). “Exploring the socio-technical Dimensions of Information System Development: Use Cases and Job Satisfaction”. Retrieved from http://csrc.lse.ac.uk/asp/aspecis/20030168.pdf Von Glasersfeld, E. (1978). “An exposition of constructivism: Why some like it radical. In R.B. Vygotsky, L. S. Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978 Wiryana, I. M (n.d). “Information System Development: An Interdiscipline Approach”. Retrieved from http://nakula.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de/~made/artikel/paper_issm/ Read More