A Framework On Collaborative Learning Activities To Actively Engage Students In Learning Management System

Learning management system is an electronic learning platform to deliver, monitor and manage learning. However, past research showed less engagement among students in building knowledge because often times the students are treated as mere technology users. In addition, many instructors do not fully...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Main Author:	Mohd Azlim, Mastura
Format:	Thesis
Language:	English English
Published:	2016
Subjects:	L Education (General) LB Theory and practice of education
Online Access:	http://eprints.utem.edu.my/id/eprint/18566/1/A%20Framework%20On%20Collaborative%20Learning%20Activities%20To%20Actively%20Engage%20Students%20In%20Learning%20Management%20System%2024%20Pages.pdf http://eprints.utem.edu.my/id/eprint/18566/2/A%20Framework%20On%20Collaborative%20Learning%20Activities%20To%20Actively%20Engage%20Students%20In%20Learning%20Management%20System.pdf
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

id	my-utem-ep.18566
record_format	uketd_dc
institution	Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka
collection	UTeM Repository
language	English English
advisor	Hussin, Burairah
topic	L Education (General) LB Theory and practice of education
spellingShingle	L Education (General) LB Theory and practice of education Mohd Azlim, Mastura A Framework On Collaborative Learning Activities To Actively Engage Students In Learning Management System
description	Learning management system is an electronic learning platform to deliver, monitor and manage learning. However, past research showed less engagement among students in building knowledge because often times the students are treated as mere technology users. In addition, many instructors do not fully utilise the tools provided in the learning management system (LMS) and have use it only to upload notes and announcement. The purpose of this study is to introduce the implementation framework named Collaborative Learning Activities Framework (CLAF) into LMS that can help the instructors to fully utilise the tools in LMS by constructing collaborative learning activities. This framework also aims to increase students’ engagement in the learning activities provided. This study involves 119 students and 30 lecturers from Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka (UTeM), Melaka. The separate pre-post engagement research design was implemented to assess the effectiveness of the framework in increasing students’ engagement. These students were divided into three classes and their engagement is assessed for comparison between LMS learning environment without CLAF. This study implemented questionnaires, semistructured interview, structured observation rubric and pre-post engagement questionnaire. The study found that students show higher active engagement in the LMS with CLAF as compared to the LMS without CLAF. The assessment of the engagement is made based the elements of Engagement Theory. In addition, a training session has been conducted together with instructors to expose them to CLAF. After that, they were asked to answer questionnaires regarding their motivation towards the framework. The instructors showed good motivation to apply the framework but have requested for the design of the framework to be more interactive. The main findings of this study found that the CLAF design which is infused with Engagement Theory can improve instructors’ motivation to utilise the tools in LMS and engage students actively in online collaborative learning activities. The study also found that CLAF is able to helps instructor constructing collaborative learning activities more efficient. This study has contributed in constructing research instruments based on Engagement Theory.
format	Thesis
qualification_name	Doctor of Philosophy (PhD.)
qualification_level	Doctorate
author	Mohd Azlim, Mastura
author_facet	Mohd Azlim, Mastura
author_sort	Mohd Azlim, Mastura
title	A Framework On Collaborative Learning Activities To Actively Engage Students In Learning Management System
title_short	A Framework On Collaborative Learning Activities To Actively Engage Students In Learning Management System
title_full	A Framework On Collaborative Learning Activities To Actively Engage Students In Learning Management System
title_fullStr	A Framework On Collaborative Learning Activities To Actively Engage Students In Learning Management System
title_full_unstemmed	A Framework On Collaborative Learning Activities To Actively Engage Students In Learning Management System
title_sort	framework on collaborative learning activities to actively engage students in learning management system
granting_institution	Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka
granting_department	Faculty of Information and Communication Technology
publishDate	2016
url	http://eprints.utem.edu.my/id/eprint/18566/1/A%20Framework%20On%20Collaborative%20Learning%20Activities%20To%20Actively%20Engage%20Students%20In%20Learning%20Management%20System%2024%20Pages.pdf http://eprints.utem.edu.my/id/eprint/18566/2/A%20Framework%20On%20Collaborative%20Learning%20Activities%20To%20Actively%20Engage%20Students%20In%20Learning%20Management%20System.pdf
_version_	1747833936647553024
spelling	my-utem-ep.185662021-10-10T16:35:14Z A Framework On Collaborative Learning Activities To Actively Engage Students In Learning Management System 2016 Mohd Azlim, Mastura L Education (General) LB Theory and practice of education Learning management system is an electronic learning platform to deliver, monitor and manage learning. However, past research showed less engagement among students in building knowledge because often times the students are treated as mere technology users. In addition, many instructors do not fully utilise the tools provided in the learning management system (LMS) and have use it only to upload notes and announcement. The purpose of this study is to introduce the implementation framework named Collaborative Learning Activities Framework (CLAF) into LMS that can help the instructors to fully utilise the tools in LMS by constructing collaborative learning activities. This framework also aims to increase students’ engagement in the learning activities provided. This study involves 119 students and 30 lecturers from Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka (UTeM), Melaka. The separate pre-post engagement research design was implemented to assess the effectiveness of the framework in increasing students’ engagement. These students were divided into three classes and their engagement is assessed for comparison between LMS learning environment without CLAF. This study implemented questionnaires, semistructured interview, structured observation rubric and pre-post engagement questionnaire. The study found that students show higher active engagement in the LMS with CLAF as compared to the LMS without CLAF. The assessment of the engagement is made based the elements of Engagement Theory. In addition, a training session has been conducted together with instructors to expose them to CLAF. After that, they were asked to answer questionnaires regarding their motivation towards the framework. The instructors showed good motivation to apply the framework but have requested for the design of the framework to be more interactive. The main findings of this study found that the CLAF design which is infused with Engagement Theory can improve instructors’ motivation to utilise the tools in LMS and engage students actively in online collaborative learning activities. The study also found that CLAF is able to helps instructor constructing collaborative learning activities more efficient. This study has contributed in constructing research instruments based on Engagement Theory. UTeM 2016 Thesis http://eprints.utem.edu.my/id/eprint/18566/ http://eprints.utem.edu.my/id/eprint/18566/1/A%20Framework%20On%20Collaborative%20Learning%20Activities%20To%20Actively%20Engage%20Students%20In%20Learning%20Management%20System%2024%20Pages.pdf text en public http://eprints.utem.edu.my/id/eprint/18566/2/A%20Framework%20On%20Collaborative%20Learning%20Activities%20To%20Actively%20Engage%20Students%20In%20Learning%20Management%20System.pdf text en validuser https://plh.utem.edu.my/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=100368 phd doctoral Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka Faculty of Information and Communication Technology Hussin, Burairah 1. A.Rahman, K., Ghazali, S. A. M. and Ismail, M. N. (2010). The Effectiveness of Learning Management System (LMS) Case Study at Open University Malaysia (OUM), Kota Bharu Campus. Journal of Emerging Trends in Computing and Information Science, 2(2), pp. 73– 79. 2. Abdul Rasid, J., Shamsudin, O. and Sufiza, I. (2013). Interaksi Lisan dalam Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Bahasa Melayu. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Melayu, 3(Mei), pp. 42–51. 3. Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Bures, E. M., Borokhovski, E. and Tamim, R. M. (2011). Interaction in Distance Education and Online Learning: Using Evidence and Theory to Improve Practice. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 23(2-3), pp. 82–103. 4. Acosta-tello, E. (2014). Tools for Engaging Online Learners : Increasing Student Involvement in Online Classes. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 4. 5. Akoh, B. (2012). Changing Paradigms for E-learning Pedagogy: Social Networking Technologies for Teaching and Learning in Canadian Post-Secondary Institutions. Umanitoba.Ca, pp. 1–25. 6. Al-Ansari, A., Al-Harbi, F., AbdelAziz, W., AbdelSalam, M., El Tantawi, M. M. and ElRefae, I. (2016). Factors Affecting Student Participation in Extra-Curricular Activities: A Comparison Between Two Middle Eastern Dental Schools. The Saudi Dental Journal, 28(1), pp. 36–43. 7. Al-Harbi, K. A.-S. (2011). e-Learning in the Saudi tertiary education: Potential and challenges. Applied Computing and Informatics, 9(1), pp. 31–46. 8. Ali, G., A.Haolader, F. and Muhammad, K. (2013). The Role of ICT to Make Teaching- Learning Effective in Higher Institutions of Learning in Uganda. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 2(8), pp. 4061–4073. 9. Al-Khatib, H. (2004). How Has Pedagogy Changed in a Digital Age? ICT Supported Learning : Dialogic Forums in Project Work. European Journal of Open, Distance and ELearning, pp. 1–5. 10. Amdan, M. K. (2005). Strategi Pengajaran Pembelajaran, Kaedah Pelaksanaan serta Cabaran dalam Pelaksanaan. Kolej Komuniti Mas Gading. 11. An, H. and Kim, B. (2008). Teacher Perspectives on Online Collaborative Learning : Factors Perceived as Facilitating and Impeding Successful Online Group Work. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8(1), pp. 65–83. 12. Ananta, I. G. P. (2004). Using an Adaptive Web-based Learning Environment to Develop Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge. University of Wollongong. 13. Anderson, T. (2012). Learning Technology Through Three Generations of Technology Enhanced Distance Education Pedagogy. Revista Mexicana de Bachillerato a Distancia, pp. 1–14. 14. Angelaki, C. and Mavroidis, I. (2013). Communication and Social Presence: The Impact on Adult Learners’ Emotions in Distance Learning. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 16(1), pp. 78–93. 15. Angelino, L. and Natvig, D. (2009). A Model for Engagement of the Online Learner. The Journal of Educators Online, 6(1), pp. 1-19. 16. Antwi, V. (2013). Interactive Teaching of Mechanics in a Ghanaian University Context. 17. Arevalo, C. R. A. (2013). Implementation of Online Collaborative Learning using Wiki. Eleventh LACCEI Latin American and Caribbean Conference for Engineering and Technology, pp. 1–10. 18. Arnett, T. (2013). Two Types of Online Learning. [on-line] Available at: http://www.christenseninstitute.org [Accessed on 20 April 2013] 19. Azlim, M., Husain, K., Hussin, B. and Maksom, Z. (2014). Utilization of Learning Management System in Higher Education Institution in Enhancing Teaching and Learning Process. Journal of Human Capital Development, 7(1), pp. 99-110. 20. Bacow, L. S., Bowen, W. G., Guthrie, K. M., Lack, K. A. and Long, M. P. (2012). Barriers to Adoption of Online Learning Systems in US Higher Education. New York: NY: Ithaka S+ R. 21. Baharom, S. S. (2013). Designing Mobile Learning Activities in The Malayian HE Context: A Social Constructivist Approach. University of Salford. 22. Bailey, G. D. and Becker, J. (1993). Computer-Based Integrated Learning System. New Jersy: Educational Technology Publications, Inc. 23. Bakar, N. (2008). Makmal Maya Kimia Berasaskan Pendekatan Kognitisme, Konstructivisme dan Kontekstual (VLAB-CHEM). Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. 24. Bakar, N. and Zaman, B. H. (2008). Virtual laboratory for chemistry based on the constructivism-cognitivism-contextual approach (VLab-Chem). Information Technology, 2008. ITSim 2008. International Symposium IEEE, 1, pp. 1–8. 25. Bakar, N., and Zaman, H. B. (2006). Development and Design of 3D Virtual Laboratory for Chemistry Subject based on Constructivism-Cognitivism-Contextual Approach. Innovations in 3D Geo Information Systems, pp. 567–588. 26. Bakar, N. and Zaman, H. B. (2010). Pengujian Makmal Maya Kimia Berasaskan Pendekatan Kognitivisme, Konstruktivisme dan Konteksual (VLab-Chem): Konstruk Keberkesanan. Jurnal Teknologi Maklumat & Multimedia, 8, pp. 35–49. 27. Baker, D. L. (2011). Designing and Orchestrating Online Discussions. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(3), pp. 401–411. 28. Baker, R. S. J. D. and Rossi, L. M. (2012). Assessing the Disengaged Behaviors of Learners. Design Recommendations for Adaptive Intelligent Tutoring Systems Learner Modeling, 1, pp. 155–165. 29. Bart, M. (2012). Online Student Engagement Tools and Strategies. [on-line] Available at: http://www.facultyfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/images/FF-Online-Student-Engagement-Report.pdf [Accessed on 4 May 2014] 30. Berking, P. and Gallagher, S. (2013). Choosing a Learning Management System. [on-line] Available at: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ [Accessed on 28 June 2013] 31. Bhowmik, M., Roy, B. B. and Banerjee, J. (2013). Role of Pedagogy in Effective Teaching. Basic Research Journal of Education Research and Review, 2(1), pp. 1–5. 32. Blackburn, M. and Stroud, J. (2015). Voices from “The Other Side”—using Personal Response Systems to Support Student Engagement. Smart Learning, pp. 199. 33. Boelryk, A. (2009). Managing the Learning Environment. Pedagoggles: Exploring Teaching Practice, 1(6), pp. 1–3. 34. Borich, G. D. (2011). Effective Teaching Methods: Research-based Practice. Austin: Pearson Education Inc. 35. Borwarnginn, P. and Tate, A. (2014). An Investigation into Students’ Perceptions and Lecturers' Perceptions of a Virtual Learning Environment. EDULEARN14 Proceedings, pp. 1548–1554. 36. Boudourides, M. A. (2003). Constructivism, Educations, Science, and Technology. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 29, pp. 1–6. 37. Brindley, J. E., Walti, C. and Blaschke, L. M. (2009). Creating Effective Collaborative Learning Groups in an Online Environment. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(3), pp. 1–18. 38. Burns, M., Pierson, E. and Reddy, S. (2014). Working Together : How Teachers Teach and Students Learn in Collaborative Learning Environments. International Journal of Instruction, 7(1), pp. 17-32. 39. Caballé, S., Daradoumis, T., Xhafa, F. and Juan, A. (2011). Providing Effective Feedback, Monitoring and Evaluation to Online Collaborative Learning Discussions. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(4), pp. 1372–1381. 40. Caire, G., Gotta, D. and Banzi, M. (2008). WADE: A Software Platform to Develop Mission Critical Applications Exploiting Agents and Workflows. 7th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems: Industrial Track (AAMAS ’08) pp. 29–36. 41. Campbell, L., Matthews, D. and Lempinen-Leedy, N. (2015). Wake up Information Literacy Instruction: Ideas for Student Engagement. Journal of Library Administration, 5(7), pp. 577–586. 42. Canders, M. F. (2016). Safety as Pedagogy: Using Learning Management Systems to Imprint Essential Safety Concepts in Aviation Students. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, pp. 216–220. 43. Caner, H. A. and Tertemiz, N. (Isık). (2015). Beliefs, Attitudes and Classroom Management: A Study on Prospective Teachers. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186, pp. 155–160. 44. Capdeferro, N. and Romero, M. (2012). Are Online Learners Frustrated with Collaborative Learning Experiences ? The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(2), pp. 44. 45. Caporarello, L., and Sarchioni, G. (2014). E-Learning: The Recipe for Success. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 10(1), pp. 117–128. 46. Career and Technical Education. (2008). Classroom Best Practices : Cooperative Learning. [on-line] Available at http://cte.unt.edu/ [Accessed on 3 July 2014] 47. Casey, G. and Evans, T. (2011). Designing for Learning : Online Social Networks as a 48. Classroom Environment. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(7), pp. 1-26. 49. CDC eLearning Workgroup. (2013). A Guide for Creating Quality Electronic Learning. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 50. Center for Technology in Education. (2010). Synchronous vs . Asynchronous Distance Learning Activities. [on-line] Available at http://olms.cte.jhu.edu/olms2/data/ck/sites/193 /files/Synchronous vs Asynchronous Learning Activities.pdf [Accessed on 2 April 2014] 51. Chang, K. E. (2009). Learning Principles and Approached. [on-line] Available at: http://en.ntnu.edu.tw/ [Accessed on 30 May 2013] 52. Chapnick, A. (2007). Creating a Class Participation Rubric. United State of America: Bowling Green State University. 53. Chatti, M. A. (2010). The 3P Learning Model. Educational Technology & Society, 13(4), pp. 74–85. 54. Chen, P.-S. D., Lambert, A. D. and Guidry, K. R. (2010). Engaging online learners: The impact of Web-based learning technology on college student engagement. Computers & Education, 54(4), pp. 1222–1232. 55. Chen, Y., Jr, H. T. L., Ross, M. T. and Zhao, Q. (2012). Factors Motivating the Adoption of e-Learning Technologies. Journal of E-Learning & Higher Education, 2012, pp. 1-17. 56. Cheng, Y. M. and Chen, P. F. (2012). Autonomous Pedagogical Agents to E-learning in Elementary School. Journal of Information Hiding and Multimedia Signal Processing, 3(4), pp. 370–380. 57. Chetty, D. (2012). Challenges and Prospects: ICT-Enhanced Teaching and Learning in the College of Human Sciences (UNISA). ODL12 Conference Papers. 58. Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-Constructive-Interactive: A Conceptual Framework for Differentiating Learning Activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1), pp. 73–105. 59. Chiba, S. (1998). Javassist—A Reflection-based Programming Wizard for Java. Proceedings of OOPSLA’98 Workshop on Reflective Programming in C++ and Java, pp. 174. 60. Chiong, R. and Jovanovic, J. (2012). Collaborative Learning in Online Study Groups: An Evolutionary Game Theory Perspective. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 11(1998), pp. 81–101. 61. Choo, K. A., Eshaq, A. R. M., Samsudin, K. A. and Guru, B. K. (2009). An evaluation of a Constructivist Online Collaborative Learning Activity: A Case Study on Geometry. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(1), pp. 15-25. 62. Christie, M. and Garrote, R. J. (2011). Lecturer engagement in the use of interactive tools in learning management systems . A Swedish case study. Proceedings ascilite 2011 Hobart: Concise Paper, pp. 234–238. 63. Chrysoula, I. (2009). Communication Between Tutors – Students in DL. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, pp. 1–13. 64. Chu, S. K. and Kennedy, D. M. (2011). Using Online Collaborative Tools for Groups to Co-construct Knowledge. Online Information Review, 35, pp. 581–597. 65. Cieniewicz, J. (2007). Participation Blues from the Student Perspective. United States of America: Bowling Green State University. 66. Coates, H. (2005). Leveraging LMSs to Enhance Campus-Based Student Engagement. Research in Brief, 1, pp. 66–68. 67. Concordia University. (2009). Which is Best: Teacher-Centered or Student-Centered Education? [on-line] Available at: http://education.cu-portland.edu/blog/classroomresources/ which-is-best-teacher-centered-or-student-centered-education/ [Accessed on 21 January 2014] 68. Conole, G., Galley, R. and Culver, J. (2011). Frameworks for Understanding the Nature of Interactions, Networking, and Community in a Social Networking Site for Academic Practice. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), pp. 119–138. 69. Cooper, P. A. (1993). Paradigm Shifts in Designed Instruction: From Behaviorism to Cognitivism to Constructivism. Educational Technology, May, pp. 12-19 70. Cooperstein, S. E., and Kocevar-Weidinger, E. (2004). Beyond active learning: a constructivist approach to learning. Reference Services Review, 32(2), pp. 141–148. 71. Corich, S., Kinshuk and Hunt, L. M. (2004). Using Discussion Forums to Support Collaboration. Third Pan Commonwealth Forum on Open Learning. Dunedin. 72. Cotton, K. (1998). Monitoring Student Learning in the Classroom. School mprovement Research Series, pp. 1-15. 73. Dabbagh, N., Benson, A. D., Denham, A., Joseph, R., Al-Freih, M., Zgheib, Fake, H. and Guo, Z. (2015). Evolution of Learning Technologies: Past, Present, and Future. Learning Technologies and Globalization, pp. 1–7. 74. Davis, B., Carmean, C. and Wagner, E. D. (2009). The Evolution of the LMS : From Management to Learning. Santa Rosa: Sage Road Solutions. 75. Davis, C. and Wilcock, E. (2003). Teaching Materials using Case Studies. The UK Centre for Materials Education. [on-line] Available at: http://wwwnew1. heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/subjects/materials/Teaching-Materialscasestudies. pdf [Accessed on 3 June 2013] 76. Dawam, S. R. M., Ahmad, K. A., Jusoff, K., Tajuddian, T., Elias, S. J. and Mansor, S. W. (2009). The Use of ICT in Public and Private Institutions of Higher. Computer and Information Science, 2(4), pp. 122–128. 77. Dawley, L. (2007). The Tools for Successful Online Teaching. Information Science Publishing. 78. Deakin Crick, R. and Goldspink, C. (2014). Learner Dispositions, Self-Theories and Student Engagement. British Journal of Educational Studies, 62(1), pp. 1–17. 79. DeLozier, S. J. and Rhodes, M. G. (2016). Flipped Classrooms: A Review of Key Ideas and Recommendations for Practice. Educational Psychology Review, pp. 1–11. 80. Department of Education Training and the Arts. (2008). eLearning for Smart Classrooms eLearning. [on-line] Available at: http://education.qld.gov.au/ [Accessed on 18 December 2012] 81. Dhanapal, S., Tabitha, K. and Ling, W. (2013). A Study to Investigate How Six Thinking Hats Enhance the Learning of Environmental Studies. Journal of Research & Method in Education, 1(6), pp. 20–29. 82. Díaz, F. J., Schiavoni, M. A., Osorio, M. A., Amadeo, A. P. and Charnelli, M. E. (2015). Integrating a Learning Management System with a Student Assignments Digital Repository: A Case Study. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life Long Learning, 25(2). 83. Division of Learning and Teaching Services. (2011). Learning Approaches, Principles and Theories. [on-line] Available at: http://www.csu.edu.au/ [Accessed on 14 December 2012] 84. Dooley, T. P. and Wang, J. (2015). Higher Education and Performance: Examining At- Risk Populations in an Online Environment. e-mentor, pp. 84–90. 85. Du, Z., Fu, X., Zhao, C., Liu, Q. and Liu, T. (2013). Interactive and Collaborative ELearning Platform with Integrated Social Software and Learning Management System. Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Information Technology and Software Engineering, 212, pp. 11–19. 86. Dunaway, M. K. (2011). Connectivism: Learning Theory and Pedagogical Practice for Networked Information Landscapes. Emerald Reference Services Review, 39(4), pp. 675– 685. 87. Dyson, B., Vickers, K., Turtle, J., Cowan, S. and Tassone, A. (2015). Evaluating the Use of Facebook to Increase Student Engagement and Understanding in Lecture-Based Classes. Higher Education, 69(2), pp. 303–313. 88. Dyson, L. E., Litchfield, A., Lawrence, E., Raban, R. and Leijdekkers, P. (2009). Advancing the m-learning research agenda for active, experiential learning: Four case studies. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25, pp. 250–267. 89. Dzakaria, H. (2012). Illuminating the Importance of Learning Interaction to Open Distance Learning (ODL) Success: A Qualitative Perspectives of Adult Learners in Perlis, Malaysia. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, pp. 1–9. 90. Ebbinghaus, L. (1998). Overview of Learning Theories. Learning Theories, pp. 6–14. 91. Edwards, M., Perry, B., Janzen, K. and Menzies, C. (2012). Using the Artistic Pedagogical Technology of Photovoice to Promote Interaction in the Online Post-Secondary Classroom : The Students ’ Perspective. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 10(1), pp. 32– 43. 92. Eligar, V. and Banakar, R. M. (2016). Facilitating Competency and Skill Development through Video Assignment. Journal of Engineering Education Transformation, 29(3). 93. Embi, M. A. (2011). e-Learning in Malaysian Higher Education Institutions: Status, Trends and Challenges. Malaysia: Department of Higher Education. 94. Embi, M. A. and Adun, M. N. (2010). e-Pembelajaran di IPTA Malaysia. Bangi: Pusat Pembangunan Akademik, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. 95. Emelyanova, N. and Voronina, E. (2014). Introducing a Learning Management System at a Russian University : Students ’ and Teachers ’ Perceptions. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(1), pp. 272–289. 96. Engels, M. C., Colpin, H., Leeuwen, K. Van, Bijttebier, P., Noortgate, W. Van Den, Claes, S., and Verschueren, K. (2016). Behavioral Engagement, Peer Status, and Teacher–Student Relationships in Adolescence: A Longitudinal Study on Reciprocal Influences. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 97. Erwin, J. C. (2010). The Classroom of Choice : Managing the Learning Environment. San Pedro: Quality Educational Programs, Inc. 98. Esichaikul, V. and Bechter, C. (2010). Catering for Different Learning Styles in e- Learning. Learning and Instruction in the Digital Age, pp. 361–374. 99. European Schoolnet. (2013). The Teacher Effect on the Use of ICT in the Classroom. [online] Available at: http://www.eun.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=158e6686-f9f9-42c3-aa8d-f281c9ee43f0&groupId=43887 [Accessed on 23 October 2012] 100. Everett, D. R. (2014). Adding Value : Online Student Engagement. 2014 Proceedings of the Information Systems Educators Conference, pp. 1–11. 101. Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Stegman, K. and Wecker, C. (2013). Toward a script theory of guidance in computer-supported collaborative learning. Educational Psychologist, 48(1),pp. 56–66. 102. Fong, M. W. L. and Sims, R. (2010). e-WIL in Student Education. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 6. 103. Fransen, J., Kirschner, P. A. and Erkens, G. (2011). Mediating Team Effectiveness in the Context of Collaborative Learning: The Importance of Team and Task Awareness. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), pp. 1–22. 104. Garrett, T. (2008). Student-Centered and Teacher-Centered Classroom Management: A Case Study of Three Elementary Teachers. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 43(1), pp.34–47. 105. Gautreau, C. (2011). Motivational Factors Affecting the Integration of a Learning Management System by Faculty. The Journal of Educators Online, 8(1), pp. 1–25. 106. Gawande, V. and Gawande, S. (2012). Tools for Effective eLearning. Special Issue of the International Journal of the Computer, the Internet and Management, 19(2), pp. 1-6. 107. Gedera, D. S. P. (2014). Mediational Engagement in E-Learning: An Activity Theory Analysis. The University of Waikato. 108. Glynn, G. (2012). What Is the Role of Technology in Pedagogy. [on-line] Available at: http://pharmacy.creighton.edu/aacp [ Accessed on 16 July 2013] 109. Griffin, D. K. (2010). A Survey of Bahamian and Jamaican Teachers ’ Level of Motivation and Job Satisfaction. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 16, pp. 57–77. 110. Guajardo, J. (2011). Teacher Motivation : Theoretical Framework, Situation Analysis of Save the Children Country Offices, and Recommended Strategies. United States of America: SC Country Office. 111. Guàrdia, L., Maina, M. and Sangrà, A. (2013). MOOC Design Principles. A Pedagogical Approach from the Learner’s Perspective. eLearning Papers, 33, pp. 1–6. 112. Güngören, Ö. C. (2013). Authentic Learning in Multimedia. The Online Journal of Distance Education and E-Learning, 1(3), pp. 14–19. 113. Hadjerrouit, S. (2013). A Framework for Assessing the Pedagogical Effectiveness of Wiki-Based Collaborative Writing : Results and Implications. Interdisciplinary Journal of ELearning and Learning Objects, 9, pp. 29-49. 114. Hameed, S. B. S. (2012). Emergence of Mobile Pedagogical Agent to Support Virtual Collaborative Learning. Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka. 115. Hardy, D. and Robinson, R. (2002). The University of Texas System TeleCampus : A Statewide Model for Collaboration. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 2(2), pp. 1-17. 116. Haselberger, D. and Motschnig, R. (2011). Students ’ perceptions on experiential learning in a person-centered atmosphere. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 7(September), pp. 63–74. 117. Hasfarina, A. (2012). Tahap, Amalan dan Masalah Pengurusan Bilik Darjah Guru-Guru Sekolah Menengah Daerah Segamat, Johor. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. 118. Hemabala, J. and Suresh, E. S. . (2012). The Frame Work Design of Mobile Learning Management System. International Journal of Computer and Information Technology,1(2), pp. 179–184. 119. Henderson, K. S., James, W. and McCuaig, I. (2001). Indirect Instruction. [on-line] Available at: http://www.spiritsd.ca/curr_content/onlineteach/instructionalstrategies/ indirectinstruction/indirect.htm [Accessed on 16 June 2014] 120. Hennessy, S., Onguko, B., Harrison, D., Kiforo, E., Namalefe, S. and Naseem, A. (2010). Developing the Use of Information and Communication Technology to Enhance Teaching and Learning in East African Schools : Review of the Literature. Centre for Commonwealth Education 121. Herrell, A. L. and Jordan, M. (2015). 50 strategies for Teaching English Language Learners. Pearson. 122. Herrman, J. W. (2016). Creative Teaching Strategies for the Nurse Educator. FA Davis. 123. Hetzel, J. and Stranske, T. (2007). The IQ, EQ, AQ dan SQ Elements of Effective Pedagogy. CSE, 10(3), pp. 6–9. 124. Hew, K. F. and Cheung, W. S. (2012). Students ’ use of Asynchronous Voice Discussion in a Blended-Learning Environment : A study of Two Undergraduate Classes. The Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 10(4), pp. 360–367. 125. Hobley, J. (2015). Vocational Pedagogies: The Science of Teaching or The Teaching of Science? Journal of Education and Training Studies, 3(2), pp. 16–19. 126. Hodges, C. and Grant, M. (2015). Theories to Support You: Purposeful Use of Learning Management System Features. Global Learn 2015, pp. 481–486. 127. Hooper, A., Park, S. J. and Gerondis, G. (2011). Promoting Student Participation and Collaborative Learning in a Large INFO 101 class : Student Perceptions of PeerWise Web 2.0 Technology. Proceedings of Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia International Conference, pp. 1-12. 128. Horswell, E. (2009). The Tools of the Trade. E-Learning Uncovered: From Concept to Execution, pp. 61–88. 129. Hrastinski, S. (2009). A Theory of Online Learning as Online Participation. Computers &Education, 52(1), pp. 78-82 130. Huang, H. W., Wu, C. W. and Chen, N. S. (2012). The effectiveness of using procedural scaffoldings in a paper-plus-smartphone collaborative learning context. Computers and Education, 59(2), pp. 250–259. 131. Hue, L. T. and Jalil, H. A. (2013). Attitudes Towards ICT Integration into Curriculum and Usage among University Lecturers in Vietnam. International Journal of Instruction, 6(2), pp. 53-66. 132. Hung, M.-L. (2016). Teacher Readiness for Online Learning: Scale Development and Teacher Perceptions. Computers & Education, 94, pp. 120–133. 133. Hunzer, K. M. and Mcfarland, J. (2011). Collaborative Learning and Writing : Essays on Using Small Groups in Teaching English and Composition. United States of America: McFarland Publishing. 134. Idris, A. R. and Salleh, N. A. (2010). Pendekatan Pengajaran yang Digunakan oleh Guru Sekolah Menengah di Daerah Johor Bahru dalam Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Matematik. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. 135. Ilyas, A. I. (2016). Interactive Tutoring in Blended Studies : Hindrances and Solutions. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 5(1), pp. 2–3. 136. Impedovo, D., Pirlo, G. and Stasolla, E. (2011). Integrated Virtual Environments for Collaborative Real-Time Activities : the Co.S.M.O.S. Prototype. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 7(2), pp. 59–68. 137. Indiana University. (2015). NSSE Annual Results 2015. [on-line] Available at: http://nsse.indiana.edu/html/annual_results.cfm [Accessed on 12 March 2015] 138. Institusi Pengajian Tinggi. (2011). Dasar e-Pembelajaran Negara. [on-line] Available at:http://www.mohe.gov.my/portal/ [Accessed on 9 February 2015] 139. Intratat, C. (2007). Attractive Factors for E-learners. Global Perspectives, Local Initiatives, pp. 85–96. 140. IPG Kampus Ipoh. (2009). Strategi Pengajaran. Ipoh. [on-line] Available at: http://ipgipoh.info/main/ [Accessed on 10 July 2013] 141. Iqbal, A., Kankaanranta, M. and Neittaanmäki, P. (2010). Engaging learners through virtual worlds. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), pp. 3198–3205. 142. Jackson, K. (2010). What Value Assessment Rubrics in Shaping Students ’ Engagement in Asynchronous Online Discussions ? Proceedings Ascilite Sydney 2010, pp. 454–458. 143. Jahng, N. and Bullen, M. (2012). Exploring Group Forming Strategies by Examining Partipation Behaviours during Whole Class Discessions. European Journal of Open,Distance and E-Learning, pp. 1–10. 144. Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A. and Kanselaar, G. (2012). Task-Related and Social Regulation During Online Collaborative Learning. Metacognition and Learning, 7(1), pp.25–43. 145. Janzen, K. J., Perry, B. and Edwards, M. (2011). Aligning the Quantum Perspective of Learning to Instructional Design : Exploring the Seven Definitive Questions. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(7), pp. 56–73. 146. Jeffrey, L. M., Milne, J., Suddaby, G. and Higgins, A. (2009). Strategies for Engaging Learners in a Blended Environment. [on-line] Available at: www.akoaotearoa.ac.nz/blended-approaches- learner-engagement [Accessed on 2 January 2014] 147. Jeremić, Z., Jovanovi, J., Gašević, D. and Hatala, M. (2009). Project-Based Collaborative Learning Environment with Context-Aware Educational Services. Learning in the Synergy of Multiple Disciplines, pp. 441–446. 148. Jonassen, D. (1999). Designing Constructivist Learning Environments, pp. 215–228. Pennslvania State University. 149. Jonassen, D. H., Hernandez-serrano, J., and Choi, I. (2000). Intergrating Constructivism and Learning Technologies. Integrated and Holistic Perspectives on Learning, Instruction and Technology, pp. 103–128. 150. Kakbra, J. F. and. Sidqi H. M. (2013). Measuring the Impact of ICT and E-learning on Higher Education System With Redesigning and Adapting MOODLE System in Kurdistan 151. Region Government, KRG-Iraq. Proceedings of the 2nd e-learning Regional Conference,pp. 25–27. 152. Kalinga, E. A. (2008). Development of an Interactive e-Learning Management System (e-LMS) for Tanzanian Secondary Schools. Sweden: Blekinge Institute of Technology. 153. Kanninen, E. (2008). Learning Styles and e-Learning. Tampere University of Technology. 154. Karadaǧ, M., Saritaş, S. and Erginer, E. (2009). Using the “Six Thinking Hats” Model of Learning in A Surgical Nursing Class: Sharing the Experience and Student Opinions. Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 26(3), pp. 59–69. 155. Karakirik, E. and Durmus, S. (1997). A Framework for Designing Computer Assisted Constructivist Learning Activities. Fourth International Educational Technologies Conference, pp. 1–4. 156. Karim, M. F. (2013). Pembelajaran Entrepreneurship Melalui Online Berdasarkan Connectivism. Seminar Nasional FISIP-UT 2013, pp. 279. 157. Kearsley, G., and Schneiderman, B. (1999). Engagement theory: A framework for technology-based learning and teaching. Educational Technology, 38(5), pp. 20–23. 158. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2014). Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia:Laporan Tahunan 2014. [on-line] Available at: http://www.moe.gov.my/my/Pelan-Pembangunan-Pendidikan-Malaysia-Laporan-Tahunan-2014 [Accessed on 18 September2015] 159. Khoo, E. G. L. (2010). Developing an Online Learning Community : A Strategy for Improving Lecturer and Student Learning Experiences. University of Waikato. 160. King, E. M. (2013). Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games: A Potential Model of CSCL@Work. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning at the Workplace, CSCL@Work, Part III, pp. 205–224. 161. Kintakaningrum, T. M. (2012). A Study of Consequences on Individual and Group Learning Performance using a Web-Based and Mobile Supported Learning Management System. Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka. 162. Kivunja, C. (2015). Exploring the Pedagogical Meaning and Implications of the 4Cs “Super Skills” for the 21 st Century through Bruner’s 5E Lenses of Knowledge 163. Construction to Improve Pedagogies of the New Learning Paradigm. Creative Education, 6(2), pp. 224–239. 164. Knight, D. D. (2007). Assessing Class Participation: One Useful Strategy. USA. 165. König, J. and Kramer, C. (2016). Teacher Professional Knowledge and Classroom Management: On The Relation of General Pedagogical Knowledge (GPK) and Classroom Management Expertise (CME). ZDM, pp. 1–13. 166. Konsky, B. R. von, Martin, R., Bolt, S., Broadley, T. and Ostashewski, N. (2014). Transforming Higher Education and Student Engagement through Collaborative Review to Inform Educational Design. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(6). 167. Kop, R., Fournier, H. and Mak, J. S. F. (2011). A Pedagogy of Abundance or a Pedagogy to Support Human Beings ? Participant Support on Massive Open Online Courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(7), pp. 74–93. 168. Kozloff, M. A., LaNunziata, L. and Cowardin, J. (1999). Direct Instruction in Education. [on-line] Available at: http://www.beteronderwijsnederland.nl/files/active/0/Kozloff%20e.a.%20DI.pdf [Accessed on 1 December 2012] 169. Kuboni, O. (2013). The Preferred Learning Modes of Online Graduate Students. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(3), pp. 228–250. 170. Kulage, K. M. and Larson, E. L. (2016). Implementation and Outcomes of a Faculty-Based, Peer Review Manuscript Writing Workshop. Journal of Professional Nursing. 171. Kuo, Y., Walker, A. E., Belland, B. R. and Schroder, K. E. E. (2013). A Predictive Study of Student Satisfaction in Online Education Programs. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(1), pp. 16-39. 172. Kuosa, K., Distante, D., Tervakari, A., Cerulo, L., Fernandez, A., Koro, J. and Kailanto, M.(2016). Interactive Visualization Tools to Improve Learning and Teaching in Online Learning Environments. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies (IJDET), 14(1), pp. 1-7. 173. Laker, J. A., Harper, R. and Fried, J. (2016). Supporting and Enhancing Learning on Campus: Effective Pedagogy In and Outside The Classroom. Taylor & Francis Group Learning and Teaching Centre. (2012). Strategies for Cooperative and Collaborative Learning in Large Lecture Groups. Australian Catholic University 174. Lee, K., Tsai, P.-S., Chai, C. S. and Koh, J. H. L. (2014). Students’ Perceptions of Self-Directed Learning and Collaborative Learning with and without Technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(5), pp. 425–437. 175. Leman, P. J., Skipper, Y., Watling, D. and Rutland, A. (2016). Conceptual Change In Science Is Facilitated Through Peer Collaboration forBoys but Not for Girls. Child Development, 87(1), pp. 176–183. 176. Lewis, B. (2015). Programming Collaborative Learning. Collaborative Learning in Media Education. England: Informing Science. 177. Lieve, V. den B., Malin, C. and Barbara, G. (2010). Learning, Innovation and ICT. European Commission. 178. Lin, Y.-S. (2011). Fostering Creativity through Education – A Conceptual Framework of Creative Pedagogy. Creative Education 2(3), pp. 149-155. 179. Lindgrena, R., Tschollb, M., Wangc, S. and Johnsond, E. (2016). Enhancing Learning and Engagement through Embodied Interaction within a Mixed Reality Simulation. Computers & Education, 95, pp. 174-187. 180. Little-wiles, J. M., Hundley, S. P. and Koehler, A. (2010). Work in Progress – Maximizing Student Engagement in a Learning Management System. Learning, pp. 26–27. 181. Luchoomun, D., Mcluckie, J. and Wesel, M. Van. (2010). Collaborative e-Learning : e-Portfolios for Assessment , Teaching and Learning, 8(1), pp. 21–30. 182. Lyashenko, M. S. (2016). Implementation of Web-Based Technologies into Teaching and Learning Practices in the University. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 6(3), pp. 243-246 183. Lynch, M. (2015). Curriculum , Pedagogy , Assessment and Reporting Policy for Reception – Year 10, Australia: Department for Education and Child Development 184. Ma, A. W. W. (2013). Evaluating How the Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Community Fosters Critical Reflective Practices. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 9, pp. 1-25 185. Macdonald, J. and Twining, P. (2002). Assessing Activity-Based Learning for a Networked Course. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(5), pp. 603–618. 186. Macpherson, A. (2007). Cooperative Learning Group Activities for College Courses: A Guide for instructors. Kwantlen University College 187. Mahdizadeh, H. (2007). Student Collaboration and Learning: Knowledge Construction and Participation in an Asynchronous Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Environment in Higher Education. Wageningen University. 188. Mai, N., Yeen-Ju, H. T. and Ludin, N. (2016). Enhancing Malaysian Students’ Learning with Interactive Multimedia and the Web: The MILE Project. 7th International Conference on University Learning and Teaching (InCULT 2014) Proceedings, pp. 361–373.. 189. Maier, H. R. and Rowan, T. S. C. (2007). Increasing student engagement with graduate attributes. Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 13(1), pp. 21–29. 190. Maina, M. F. and González, I. G. (2016). Articulating Personal Pedagogies Through Learning Ecologies. The Future of Ubiquitous Learning: Learning Designs for Emerging Pedagogies, pp. 73–94. 191. Makrakis, V. and Kostoulas-Makrakis, N. (2012). Course Curricular Design and Development of the M.SC. Programme in the Field of ICT in Education for Sustainable Development. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 14(2), pp. 5–39. 192. Maloshonok, N. (2014). Vygotsky ’ s Theory : Lessons for Student Engagement Research. SERU International Research Conference, pp. 1-13. 193. Manny-Ikan, E., Tikochinski, T. B. and Bashan, Z. (2013). Does Use of ICT-Based Teaching Encourage Innovative Interactions in the Classroom ? Presentation of the CLI-O : Class Learning Interactions – Observation Tool. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 9, pp. 219–232. 194. Marcum, J. W. (2012). Out with Motivation, in with Engagement. National Productivity Review, 18(4), pp. 43–46. 195. Mavroudi, A. and Hadzilacos, T. (2013). Learning Needs Analysis of Collaborative EClasses in Semi-Formal Settings : The REVIT Example. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(5), pp. 239. 196. Mbodila, M., Jones, T., and Muhandji, K. (2013). Integration of ICT in Education : Key Challenges. International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, 3(11), pp. 515–520. 197. McLaughlin, J. E., Griffin, L. M., Esserman, D. A., Davidson, C. A., Glatt, D. M., Roth, M. T., Gharkholonarehe, N. and Mumper, R. J. (2013). Pharmacy Student Engagement, Performance, and Perception in a Flipped Satellite Classroom. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, pp. 77. 198. Medeiros, F., Gomes, A., Amorim, R. and Medeiros, G. (2013). Redesigning Collaboration Tools to Enhance Social Presence in Online Learning Environments. Collaboration and Technology, pp. 175–191. 199. Meishar-Tal, H., Kurtz, G. and Pieterse, E. (2012). Facebook Groups as LMS : A Case Study. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(4), pp.33-48. 200. Mergel, B. (1998). Instructional Design and Learning Theory. [on-line] Available at:http://etad.usask.ca/802papers/mergel/brenda.htm [Accessed on 1 November 2012] 201. Michelini, M., Santi, L. and Stefanel, A. (2013). E-learning in Teacher Professional Development in Innovation and Formative Guidance On Modern Physics : The Case of IDIFO Master ’ s Programs. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 9(5), pp. 43-75. 202. Middleton, A. (2016). Reconsidering the Role of Recorded Audio as a Rich , Flexible and Engaging Learning Space. Research in Learning Technology, 24, pp. 1–13. 203. Mihai, P. (2013). Students’ Attitudes Towards Technology-Enabled Learning: A Change in Learning Patterns? The Case of A Master's Course in Political Science. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 16(1), pp. 27–35. 204. Miliszewska, I. and Horwood, J. (2004). Engagement Theory : A Framework for Supporting Cultural Differences in Transnational Education. Higher Education Research and Journal, pp. 1-9. 205. Mödritscher, F. (2007). Implementation and Evaluation of Pedagogical Strategies in Adaptive E-Learning Environments. Doctoral Study at the Graz University of Technology. 206. Moeller, B. and Reitzer, T. (2011). Integrating Technology with Student-Centered Learning. Education Development Center, Inc. (EDC). Quincy. 207. Mohamad, S. N. M. (2014). Model for Online Teaching Tools Based on Interpersonal, Visual and Verbal Intelligence. Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka. 208. Mohamad Said, M. N. H., Forret, M. and Eames, C. (2013). Online Collaborative Learning in Tertiary ICT Education: Constraints and Suggestions for Improvement. Proceedings - 2013 International Conference on Informatics and Creative Multimedia, ICICM 2013, pp.153–158. 209. Mohamed Azmi, H., Zeehan, S. I., Fahad, S., Maryam, F., and Hisham, A. (2012). Assessment of Student Perceptions Towards E-Learning Management System (E-LMS) In A Malaysian Pharmacy School: A Descriptive Study. Malaysian Journal of Public Health Medicine 2012, 12(1), pp. 14–20. 210. Mongan, H. (2004). Teaching Strategies: Direct Instruction. [on-line] Available at http://www.d.umn.edu/~hrallis/courses/3204fa04/planning/instr_strats.htm [Accessed on 23 June 2014] 211. Moodle. (2015). Installing Moodle. [on-line] Available at: https://docs.moodle.org/29/en/Installing_Moodle [Accessed on 2 January 2016] 212. Moore, D. W. (2007). Direct Instruction : Targeted Strategies for Student Success. [online] Available at: http://www.insideng.com/profdev/guides/Moore_Instruction.pdf [Accessed on 12 July 2014] 213. Mortensen, K. and Hazel, S. (2011). Initiating Round Robins in the L2 Classroom - Preliminary Observations. Research on Youth and Language, 5(1), pp. 55–70. 214. Most, S. K., Ferreira, G., Williams, J. and Herman, C. (2012). Using Creative Multimedia in Teaching and Learning ICTs: A Case Study. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, (2008), pp. 1–11. 215. Mtebe, J. S. (2015). Learning Management System Success: Increasing Learning Management System Usage in Higher Education in Sub-Saharan Africa. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 11(2), pp. 51-64 216. Mubuuke, A. G., Louw, A. J. N. and Schalkwyk, S. Van. (2016). Utilizing Students ’ Experiences and Opinions of Feedback During Problem Based Learning Tutorials to Develop a Facilitator Feedback Guide : an Exploratory Qualitative Study. BMC Medical Education, pp. 1–7. 217. Muianga, X., Klomsri, T., Tedre, M. and Mutimucuio, I. (2015). From Teacher Centered to Student Centered Learning: Developing Modern ICT Supported Learning in Eduardo Mondlane University, Mozambique, 1, pp. 1689–1699. 218. Murugaiah, P. and Thang, S. M. (2010). Development of Interactive and Reflective Learning among Malaysian Online Distant Learners : An ESL Instructor’s Experience. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11(3), pp. 21–41. 219. Naaj, M. A., Nachouki, M. and Ankit, A. (2012). Evaluating Student Satisfaction with Blended Learning in a Gender-Segregated Environment. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 11, pp. 185-200. 220. Nagel, L. (2007). The Dynamics of Learner Participation in a Virtual Learning Environment. University of Pretoria. 221. Nah, E. A., Lim, T. H. and Yih, B. (2012). Enhancing Student-Centered Learning through usage of Television Commercials via Wiki. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 67(11), pp. 144–155. 222. Ncube, A. C. and Tshabalala, T. (2014). An Investigation into the Challenges Faced by Secondary School Teachers in Integrating Internet into the Teaching and Learning Process in Zimbabwe : a Case Study of Harare Province. Nova Journal of humanities and Social Sciences, 2(4), pp. 1–16. 223. Niramitranon, J., Sharples, M. and Greenhalgh, C. (2010). Orchestrating Learning in a One-to-One Technology Classroom. 2010 6th IEEE International Conference on Wireless, Mobile, and Ubiquitous Technologies in Education, pp. 96–103. 224. Nishtar, F. and Rahman, A. A. (2006). A Framework for Implementation of a Web-Based Learning Management System. Proceeding of the Postgraduate Annual Research Seminar 2006, pp. 234–236. 225. North, C. (2014). A New Pedagogy Is Emerging And Online Learning Is A Key Contributing Factor. [on-line] Available at: http://contactnorth.ca/trendsdirections/evolving-pedagogy-0/new-pedagogy-emergingand-online-learning-keycontributing [Accessed on 3 March 2015] 226. Northcut, T. B., Heller, N. R. and Kumaria, S. (2016). Utilizing Cognitive-Behavioral Interventions in Psychodynamic Practice. Inside Out and Outside In: Psychodynamic Clinical Theory and Psychopathology in Contemporary Multicultural Contexts, pp. 220. 227. Northeastern University. (2013). Online versus Traditional Nursing Programs. [on-line] Available at: http://onlinenursing.neu.edu/blog/online-versus-traditional-nursing-programspart-2/ [Accessed on 21 May 2014] 228. Notari, M. and Schneider, D. K. (2004). Scripting Strategies in Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Environments. Switzerland: Tecfa Education and Technologies. 229. Nyambane, C. O. and Nzuki, D. (2014). Factors Influencing ICT Integration in Teaching-A literature Review. International Journal of Education and Research, 2(3), pp. 1–18. 230. O’Bannon, B. (2012, September). Instructional Methods. [on-line] Available at: http://edtech2.tennessee.edu/projects/bobannon/in_strategies.html [Accessed on 4 January 2014] 231. Office of Academic Affairs. (2014). The Five Dimensions in Practice: Sample Indicators of Engagement. Saint Louis University. 232. Ozcan, D. and Genc, Z. (2016). Pedagogical Formation Education via Distance Education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(2), pp. 347–360. 233. Palloff, R. M. and Pratt, K. (2005). Learning Together in Community: Collaboration Online. 20th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learning, pp. 1–5. 234. Papić, A. and Stričević, I. (2012). Integration of Academic Libraries’ e-Services into Learning Management System: Students' Perception. Management, Knowledge and Learning International COnference 2012, pp. 239–246. 235. Park, C., Kier, C. and Jugdev, K. (2011). Debate as a Teaching Strategy in Online Education : A Case Study. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 37(3), pp. 1-17 236. Park, J. (2015). ClassPrep: A Peer Review System for Class Preparation. British Journal of Educational Technology. 237. Parker, J., Maor, D. and Herrington, J. (2013). Authentic Online Learning: Aligning Learner Needs, Pedagogy and Technology. Issues in Educational Research, 23(227), pp.227–241. 238. Parsons, J. and Taylor, L. (2011). Student Engagement : What Do We Know and What Should We Do? University of Alberta. 239. Paul, R. B. and Byrd, D. M. (2010). Methods For Effective Teaching: Meeting the Needs of All Students (5th ed.). United States of America: Pearson Educastion, Inc. 240. Pearson Education. (2010). Teaching Strategies for Indirect Instruction. [on-line] Available at: http://wps.prenhall.com/chet_borich_effective_6/48/12538/3209831.cw/-/3209833/index.html [Accessed on 9 February 2013] 241. Peer, K. S. (2007). Engagement Theory in Action: An Investigation of Athletic Training Program Directors. Athletic Training Education Journal, 2, pp. 49–55. 242. Penny, K. I. (2011). Factors that Influence Student E-learning Participation in a UK Higher Education Institution. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 7, pp.81–95. 243. Perera, G. I. U. S. (2013). An Evaluation of User Support Strategies for Managed Learning in a Multi User Virtual Environment. University of St Andrews. 244. Petrina, S. (2009). Instructional Methods and Learning Styles. Curriculum and Instruction For Technology Teachers, pp. 125–153. 245. Pianta, R. C., Hamre, B. K. and Allen, J. P. (2012). Teacher-Student Relationships and Engagement: Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Improving the Capacity of Classroom Interactions. Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, pp. 21–44. 246. Prata, D. N. (2015). The Role of a Help Requester in Collaborative Learning. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 6(11), pp. 859–862. 247. Price, S. and Pontual Falcão, T. (2011). Where the Attention is: Discovery Learning in Novel Tangible Environments. Interacting with Computers, 23(5), pp. 499–512. 248. Prince, M. J. and Felder, R. M. (2006). Inductive Teaching and Learning Methods: Definitions, Comparisons, and Research Bases. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), pp. 123–138. 249. Pusat Pembangunan Kurikulum. (2001). Pembelajaran Secara Konstruktivisme. Malaysia: Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. 250. Québec Education Program. (2015). Pedagogical Flexibility , Adaptations and Modifications for Special Needs Students. Québec 251. Queirós, R., Leal, J. P. and Paiva, J. (2015). Integrating Rich Learning Applications in LMS. State-of-the-Art and Future Directions of Smart Learning, pp. 381–386. 252. Rabbany, R., Elatia, S., Takaffoli, M. and Zaïane, O. R. (2013). Collaborative Learning of Students in Online Discussion Forums : A Social Network Analysis Perspective. Educational Data Mining: Applications and Trends, pp. 1–30. 253. Raihan, M. A. and Han, S. L. (2013). Designing Adaptive Web-based e-Learning Environment for Converging-type Learners in Engineering Institutions of Bangladesh. International Journal of Emerging Science and Engineering, 1(4), pp. 6–10. 254. Raman, A. and Don, Y. (2013). Preservice Teachers’ Acceptance of Learning Management Software: An Application of the UTAUT2 Model. International Education Studies, 6(7), pp. 157–164. 255. Ramon, G. J. (2012). Barriers to a Wider Implementation of LMS in Higher Education : A Swedish Case Study, 2006-2011. Multimedia Systems. 256. Ravenscroft, A. (2011). Dialogue and Connectivism: New Approach to Understanding and Promoting Dialogue-Rich Networked Learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), pp. 139–160. 257. Razali, S. N., Shahbodin, F., Bakar, N., Hussin, H. and Ahmad, M. H. (2014). Perceptions towards the Usage of Collaborative Learning in Teaching and Learning Processes at Malaysia Polytechnic. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Education and Research, 1(2), pp. 42-45. 258. Reading, C. (2005). Recognising and Measuring Engagement in ICT-rich Learning Environments. Australian Council for Computers in Education. 259. Reed, C. (2007). Action Research: A Strategy for Instructional Improvement. Teaching and Learning, 4(2). 260. Renken, M., Peffer, M., Otrel-Cass, K., Girault, I. and Chiocarriello, A. (2016). Considerations for Integrating Simulations in the Science Classroom. In Simulations as Scaffolds in Science Education, pp. 29–34. 261. Rimor, R., Rosen, Y. and Naser, K. (2010). Complexity of Social Interactions in Collaborative Learning : The Case of Online Database Environment. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 6, pp. 355-365 262. Rooij, S. W. V. and Zirkle, K. (2016). Balancing Pedagogy, Student Readiness and Accessibility: A Case Study in Collaborative Online Course Development. The Internet and Higher Education, 28, 1–7. 263. Rosner, B., Glynn, R. J. and Lee, M.-L. T. (2006). The Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test for Paired Comparisons of CLustered Data. Journal of the International Biometric Society, 62(1). 264. Rourke, L. and Anderson, T. (2002). Systems to Support Case Study Learning at a Distance, 3(2), pp. 1-13. 265. Rubin, I. M. (1970). Managing The Learning Process: An Experiment in Education. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 266. Saeed, F. A. (2013). Comparing and Evaluating Open Source E-learning Platforms. International Journal of Soft Computing and Engineering, 3(3), 244–249. 267. Salam, S. and Bakar, N. (2010). e-Pembelajaran@UTeM. e-Pembelajaran di IPTA Malaysia. Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi Malaysia. 268. Sammel, A., Weir, K. and Klopper, C. (2014). The Pedagogical Implications of Implementing New Technologies to Enhance Student Engagement and Learning Outcomes. Creative Education, 5, pp. 104–113. 269. Saskatchewan Education. (1991). Instructional Approaches: A Framework for Professional Practice. [on-line] Available at: http://www.education.gov.sk.ca/ Instructional-Approaches [Accessed on 3 February 2013] 270. Saskatoon Public Schools. (2009). Instructional Strategies Online. [on-line] Available at: http://schools.spsd.sk.ca/curriculum/instructionalstrategies/ [Accessed on 14 January 2013] 271. Sawant, S. P. and Rizvi, S. (2015). Study of Passive Didactic Teacher Centered Approach and an Active Student Centered Approach in Teaching Anatomy. International Journal of Anatomy and Research, 3(3), pp. 1192–1197. 272. Schellenbach-zell, J. and Gräsel, C. (2010). Teacher Motivation for Participating in School Innovations – Supporting Factors. Journal for Educational Research Online, 2(2), pp. 34–54. 273. Schieb, L. J. and Karabenick, S. A. (2011). Teacher Motivation and Professional Development: A Guide to Resources. Math and Science Partnership — Motivation Assessment Program. National Science Foundation: University of Michigan 274. Schneble, J. (2011). The LMS Evolution: Revolutionizing Form and Function. [on-line] Available at: http://www.cedma-europe.org/newsletter%20articles/TrainingOutsourcing/The%20 LMS%20Evolution%20-%20Revolutionizing%20Form%20and%20Function%20(Apr%2011).pdf [Accessed on 4 March 2014] 275. Schoening, A. (2005). Collaborative Learning. [on-line] Available at: https://nursing.creighton.edu/ [Accessed on 12 May 2013] 276. Schopieray, S. E. (2006). Understanding Faculty Motivation To Teach Online Courses: A Case Study of Faculty at a College Of Education. Michigan State University 277. Schreurs, J. and Al-huneidi, A. (2012). Design of Learner-Centered constructivism based Learning Process. Proceedings of the Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information System, pp. 1159–1164. 278. Shahbodin, S. N. R. F., Bakar, N., Hussin, H., Ahmad, M. H. and Sulaiman, N. (2013). Incorporating Learning Management System with Social Network Sites to Support Online Collaborative Learning: Preliminary Analysis. Advances in Visual Informatics, pp. 549–557. 279. Sharples, M., Mcandrew, P., Weller, M., Ferguson, R., Fitzgerald, E. and Hirst, T. (2013). Innovating Pedagogy Policy Makers. Milton Keynes: The Open University 280. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism : A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning (ITDL), pp. 1–8. 281. Silberman, M. (2010). Active Learning: 101 Strategies to Teach Any Subject. Pearson Education Inc. 282. Simon Fraser University. (2012). Principles and Needs to Inform the Determination of a LMS at SFU. Canada: Simon Fraser University 283. Song, H., Kim, J. and Luo, W. (2016). Teacher–Student Relationship in Online Classes: A Role of Teacher Self-Disclosure. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, pp. 436–443. 284. Soto, V. J. (2013). Which Instructional Design Models are Educators Using to Design Virtual World Instruction ? MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(3), pp.364–375. 285. Soylu, F. (2008). Designing Online Learning Communities : Lessons from Ekşisözlük. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, pp. 1–10. 286. Star, J. R., Caronongan, P., Foegen, A., Furgeson, J., Keating, B., Larson, M. R., Lyskawa, 287. J., McCallum, W. G., Porath, J. and Zbiek, R. M. (2015). Teaching Strategies for 288. Improving Algebra Knowledge in Middle and High School Students. United States of America: The Institute of Education Sciences 289. Stone, B. B. (2012). Flip Your Classroom to Increase Active Learning and Student Engagement. 28th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning, pp. 1–5. 290. Sträfling, N., Fleischer, I., Polzer, C., Leutner, D. and Krämer, N. C. (2010). Teaching Learning Strategies with a Pedagogical Agent. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 22(2), pp. 73-83 291. Surgenor, P. (2010). Teaching Toolkit: How Students Learn 4. Dublin: UCD Teaching and Learning. 292. Swan, K., Shen, J. and Hiltz, S. R. (2006). Assessment and Collaboration in Online Learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 10(1), pp. 45–62. 293. Syahza, A. (2008). Model-model Pembelajaran. Riau: Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan. 294. Tamuri, A. H., Abdul Ghani, K., Mokhtar, R., Rashed, Z. N., Mustakim, M. A. and 295. Rashed, Z. N. A. (2012). Penilaian Pelaksanaan Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Kurikulum Pendidikan Islam Bahagian Pendidikan Islam (JAIS) di Sekolah-Sekolah Rendah Agama Negeri Selangor. Jurnal Penyelidikan Pendidikan Dan Pengajian Islam, 1, pp. 1–35. 296. Tate, M. and Hoshek, D. (2009). A Model for the Effective Management of Re-Usable Learning Objects ( RLOs ): Lessons from a Case Study. Interdisciplinary Journal of ELearning and Learning Objects, 5, pp. 51-72. 297. Taylor, L. and Parsons, J. (2011). Improving Student Engagement. Current Issues in Education, 14(1). 298. Thomas, C. and Shipp, J. (2009). Effective Practice in Learning and Teaching – A Focus on Pedagogy. United Kingdom: Department for Children, Education, Lifelong Learning and Skills Effective. 299. Thoms, B. P. (2015). Online Learning Community Software to Support Success in Project Teams. Global Journal of Information Technology, 5(2), pp. 71–86. 300. Toprak, E. and Genc-Kumtepe, E. (2014). Cross-Cultural Communication and Collaboration: Case of an International E-Learning Project. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 17(1), pp. 134–146. 301. Toshalis, E. and Nakkula, M. J. (2012). Motivation, Engagement and Student Voice. Boston: Students at the Center Series. 302. Tschofen, C. and Mackness, J. (2012). Connectivism and Dimensions of Individual Experience. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(1), pp. 124–143. 303. Turner, D. (2016). Utilizing LMS Tools to Help with Student Assessment. E-Learning, EEducation, and Online Training, pp. 208–216. 304. University of the Science. (2014). Student Participation - Active Learning. [on-line] Available at: http://www.usciences.edu/teaching/tips/spal.shtml#promoting [Accessed on 30 November 2015] 305. Vasant, S. and Mehta, B. (2015). A Case Study: Embedding ICT for Effective Classroom Teaching & Learning. Emerging ICT for Bridging the Future-Proceedings of the 49th Annual Convention of the Computer Society of India (CSI), pp. 541–547. 306. Venter, P., van Rensburg, M. J. and Davis, A. (2012). Drivers of Learning Management System Use in a South African Open and Distance Learning Institution. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28, pp. 183–198. 307. Vukovac, D. P. and Oreški, D. (2012). Active And Collaborative Learning at The University Blended Learning Course. Fifth International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation. 308. Wallet, P. (2014). ICT in Education in Asia: A Comparative Analysis of ICT Integration and e-readiness in Schools Across Asia. Canada: UNESCO 309. Wang, F. and Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-Based Research and Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments. ETR&D, 53(4), pp. 5–23. 310. Wang, S. (2011). Promoting Student ’ s Online Engagement with Communication Tools. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 4(1), pp. 81–90. 311. Waters, H. (2011). Teacher vs Learner Centered Instruction. Harriet Waters. [on-line] Available at: http://www.psychology.sunysb.edu/hwaters-/psy327/slide sets/327Set12a_Teacher Instruct.pdf [Accessed on 13 June 2014] 312. Watson, W. R. (2007). An Argument for Clarity: What are Learning Management System, What are They Not and What Should They Become? TechTrends, 51(2), pp. 28–34. 313. Weaver, D., Spratt, C. and Nair, C. S. (2008). Academic and Student Use of a Learning Management System : Implications For Quality. Australasian Journal of Education Technology, 24(1), pp. 30–41. 314. Wei, L. T. (2011). Cognitive Style and the Effects of Visual Cues in Algorithm Visualization. Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka. 315. Weimer, M. (2007). Tips for Encouraging Student Participation in Classroom Discussions. United States of America: Faculty Focus. 316. West, D. M. (2013). Mobile Learning: Transforming Education, Engaging Students, and Improving Outcomes. Brookings: Center for Technology Innovation. 317. White, B. and Larusson, J. A. (2010). Seeing , Thinking , Doing: Strategic Directives for Learning Management Systems. World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, pp. 1279–1288. 318. Whitefield, T. (2012). Pedagogy In The Evolving Tech Environment – What Has Changed? International Conference on Information Communication Technologies in Education 2012. 319. Willey, K., Meng, Q. and Gardner, A. (2015). Insights from using a Subject Specific Facebook Group for Student Engagement and Learning. Research in Engineering Education Symposium. 320. Wilson, D. and Allen, D. (2011). Success Rates of Online Versus Traditional College Students. Research in Higher Education Journal, 14, pp. 1–9. 321. Winer, L. (2016). What are the Best Ways to Teach Case Studies? Proceedings of the 1979 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference, pp. 174–177. 322. Wishart, C. and Guy, R. (2009). Analyzing Responses , Moves , and Roles in Online Discussions Grading Rubrics for Online Discussions. Interdisciplinary Journal of ELearning and Learning Objects, 5, pp. 129-144. 323. Witte, S., Graham, J., Grysko, E., Bistrican, S. and Piotrowski, A. (2013). Everu Voice Counts: Partnering Literature and LiveScribe. Florida State University Libraries Faculty: Faculty Publication. 324. Wyse, S. (2012). Active Learning Activities. [on-line] Available at: http://cte.uwaterloo.ca/teaching_resources/tips/active_learning_activities.html [Accessed on 12 January 2014] 325. Yee, R. C. S. (2011). Perceptions of Online Learning in an Australian University: Malaysian Students’ Perspectives. Multimedia University. 326. You, J. W. (2016). Identifying Significant Indicators Using LMS Data to Predict Course Achievement in Online Learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 29, pp. 23–30. 327. Zakaria, N., Jamal, A., Bisht, S. and Koppel, C. (2013). Embedding a Learning Management System into an Undergraduate Medical Informatics Course in Saudi Arabia: Lessons Learned. Medicine 2.0, 2(2), pp. 13–13. 328. Zanzali, N. A. A. and Aziz, N. B. K. (2010). Penggunaan ICT dalam Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Matematik di Kalangan Guru-Guru Pelatih UTM. Eprints UTM, pp. 1–9. 329. Zhang, Q. and Wu, F. (2015). Study on Teacher–Student Interaction in Flipped Classroom Based on Video Annotation Learning Platform. State-of-the-Art and Future Directions of Smart Learning, pp. 257–261. 330. Zheng, L. and Huang, R. (2016). The Effects of Sentiments and Co-Regulation on Group Performance in Computer Supported Collaborative Learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 28, pp. 59–67. 331. Zhu, C. (2012). Student Satisfaction , Performance , and Knowledge Construction in Online. Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), pp. 127–136. 332. Zyad, H. (2016). Integrating Computers in the Classroom : Barriers and Teachers ’ Attitudes. International Journal of Instruction, 9(1).

A Framework On Collaborative Learning Activities To Actively Engage Students In Learning Management System

Similar Items