Advances in E-learning-Experiences and Methodologies

E-Learning Value and Student Experiences
motivation (Tastle et al., 2005) and the required
special training is also needed.
The cases presented support the notion that
although students are satisfied with e-learning in a
course currently taken, they might not have formed
a sufficiently positive attitude towards e-learning
in general and therefore cannot recommend it to
others with confidence. Therefore, studying student
perceptions and satisfaction with e-learning
will need to continue, as also evidenced by works
such as Flynn et al. (2005), Hisham, et al. (2004),
Hunt et al.(2002), Ndubisi (2006), Selim (2005),
and Wells et al.(2005).
With the observed increase in the range of
user interfaces, physical devices and supporting
infrastructure driven by new and emerging information
and communication technologies (Blinco
et al., 2004), further research is needed in the area
of blended models such as blending content from
different sources such as multimedia (Verhaart
& Kinshuk, 2004), blending content with learning
processes (Britain, 2004; Buzzetto-More &
Pinhey, 2006), and blending delivery platforms as,
for example, the use of mobile networks (Petrova,
2007) which will help create a more satisfactory
and fulfilling e-learning environment. Finally,
further research will help identify and conceptualise
advanced blended learning models.
reFerences
Barker, K. (2002). Canadian recommended
e-learning guidelines. CACE. Retrieved October
19, 2007, http://www.futured.com/pdf/
CanREGs%20Eng.pdf
Berman, S. H., & Pape, E. (2001). A consumer’s
guide to online courses. School Administrator,
58(9), 14.
Blinco, K., Mason, J., McLean, N., & Wilson,
S. (2004, July 19). Trends and issues in e-learning
infrastructure development. A White paper
for alt-i-lab 2004, prepared on behalf of DEST
(Australia) and JISC-CETIS (UK) (Version 2).
Retrieved October 19, 2007, from http://www.
jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/Altilab04-infrastructureV2.pdf
Brahm, C., & Kleiner, B. H. (1996). Advantages
and disadvantages of group decision-making
approaches. Team Performance Management,
2(1), 30-35.
Britain, S. (2004, May). A review of learning
design: Concept, specifications and tools. JISC.
Retrieved October 19, 2007, from http://www.jisc.
ac.uk/uploaded_documents/ACF1ABB.doc
Burr, L., & Spennemann, D. H. R. (2004). Patterns
of user behaviour in university online forums.
International Journal of Instructional Technology
and Distance Learning, 1(10), 11-28.
Buzzetto-More, N. A., & Pinhey, K. (2006). Guidelines
and standards for the development of fully
online learning objects. Interdisciplinary Journal
of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 2, 95-104.
Cashion, J., & Palmieri, P. (2000). Quality in
online learning: Learners views. Retrieved October
19, 2007, from http://flexiblelearning.net.
au/nw2000/talkback/p14-3.htm
Cavanaugh, C. (2002). Distance education quality:
The resources-practices-results cycle and
the standards. Retrieved October 19, 2007, from
http://www.unf.edu/~caavanau/2569.htm
Council for Higher Education Accreditation.
(2002). International quality review. Retrieved
October 19, 2007, from http://www.chea.org/international/inter_summary02.html
Davies, M. (2001). Adaptive AHP: A review of
marketing applications with extensions. European
Journal of Marketing, 35(7), 872-893.
Distance Education and Training Council. (2002).
DETC accreditation overview. Retrieved October
19, 2007, from http://www.detc.org/content/free-
Publications.html