The Development of Online Project Based Collaborative Learning ...

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 (2015) 1803 – 1812

World Conference on Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship

The Development of Online Project Based Collaborative Learning using ADDIE Model Razali Sharifah Nadiyaha*, Shahbodin Faaizaha a

Department of Interactive Media, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka,Hang Tuah Jaya, 76100 Durian Tunggal, Melaka, Malaysia

Abstract In the 21st century, educators are utilising emerging technologies to develop not only knowledge of graduates, but also their soft skills in order to enhance competencies parallel with employer’s requirements. Collaborative learning has been proven in promoting soft skills development. However, the feedback from employers is the opposite. It shows that collaboration does not happen naturally in a group. In previous studies, researchers have identified factors and elements needed to develop effective collaborative online learning and proposed an Online Collaborative Project based Collaborative Learning (OPBCL) model. In this study, based on OPBCL model, a prototype is designed using the ADDIE model. To carry out the study, the prototype needs to work properly. Therefore, Alpha, Beta, and User Acceptance Testing (UAT) must be conducted. This study also will show the process of testing to ensure the functionality of a prototype when running the actual study. The results are expected to show that the prototype is ready to be tested in the actual study. It is hope that this study will give much significance to other researchers regarding the importance of conducting UAT of the prototypes developed prior to the research study. © 2015 2015 The byby Elsevier Ltd.Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license © TheAuthors. Authors.Published Published Elsevier (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of Istanbul University. Peer-review under responsibility of Istanbul Univeristy.

Keywords: Online Collaborative Learning (OCL); ADDIE; User Acceptance Testing (UAT)

*

Corresponding author. Tel.: +90-537-4423991; fax: +. +90-0258-377 82 91 E-mail address: [email protected]

1877-0428 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of Istanbul Univeristy. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.392

1804

Razali Sharifah Nadiyah and Shahbodin Faaizah / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 (2015) 1803 – 1812

1.

Introduction

In the 21st century, educators are utilising emerging technologies to develop not only knowledge of graduates, but also their soft skills in order to enhance their competences that meets employers’ requirements. Technology can be used to encourage learning process, support communication setting, assess learning activities, manage resources and create learning materials (Che Ku Nuraini, Faaizah, & Naim, 2014). Although technology is seen as an important enabler for improving student-learning outcomes; to get the greatest value from technology, best practices of learning design are required. Collaborative learning has been proven in promotes soft skills development (E. Ahmad, Jailani, & Aina Aishikin, 2011; Sancho et. al, 2011). Previous work result (Sharifah Nadiyah et. al, 2014) indicated that most of the lecturers at Malaysian Polytechnic had implemented Collaborative Learning approach, however the feedback from employers that students lack the soft skills (Greenberg & Nilssen, 2014; Juen, Pang, & Vitales, 2010). This shows that collaboration does not happen naturally in a group. 2.

Literature Review and Hypotheses

Interest in collaborative learning has become the latest trend in education towards active learning; where students actively engage in building their knowledge through discovery, discussions, and expert guidance. Collaborative learning is a learning approach, which leads to the theory of constructivism (Vygotsky, 1978), has been used as a learning strategy practiced worldwide for many years (Ashton Hay, 2006). Many published reports have outlined the advantages of collaborative learning - suggesting that it improves academic performance, promotes soft skills development (i.e., communications, collaboration, problem-solving, and critical thinking skills), and increases satisfaction in the learning experience (Kabilan, Adlina, & Embi, 2011; Lee & Lim, 2012; Nurbiha, Zaidatun, & Jamalludin, 2012; Zhu, 2012). According to (Johnson, & Johnson, 1989), learning tends to be most effective when students are in the position to work collaboratively in expressing their thoughts, discussing and challenging ideas with others, and working together towards a group solution to a given problem. Research has shown that undergraduates improve their academic performance by interacting with their peers (Chen, 2011). Today, the benefits of collaborative learning are widely acknowledged. As previously discussed, even though collaborative learning is widely implemented in the process of teaching and learning, but graduates still lack the soft skills that are demanded by employers. According to (Chiong & Jovanovic, 2012), to establish and maintain active collaboration is a challenging task, due to the lack (or low participation) of other group members to participate actively in their group work. Educators cannot assume that each member makes an equal contribution to a group work and thus give equal marks to all members (Wang, 2010). Therefore, lecturers should give marks based on student’s individual contribution, to encourage students to participate actively within their group’s work activity (Swan, Shen, & Hiltz, 2006). Previous education research has provided the same evidence on how to increase willingness to work collaboratively (Li et. al, 2011); whereby lecturers had to apply certain instruments to record and monitor student discussions and assess student contributions from these discussions. Most educational institutions currently adopt Learning Management Systems (LMS), such as from open sources, like Moodle and Sakai, or from commercial sources, like Blackboard, in order to centralize content, learning, and assessment activities, in one learning environment (Carlos et al., 2013; Coates, H., James, R. and Baldwin, 2005). LMS provide educators and students with a facility to improve and manage both teaching and learning processes (García-Peñalvo, J., Conde, Alier, & Casany, 2011). They also provide a web platform, whereby many pedagogical activities can be performed. Students can use LMS features, such as discussion boards or forums, to facilitate communication and collaborative work, in this learning environment. However, the communication features of LMS are poorly utilized in most institutions, and are primarily being used for course content features, such as lecture notes and presentation slides. Marijana, Aleksandra, & Aleksandar (2011) have reported that the frequency of using the LMS provided by the educational institution is very low and has become unpopular among educators. In a research conducted by (Afendi, Mohamed Amin, & Abdul Halim, 2011) on Malaysia HEIs, the authors reported that

Razali Sharifah Nadiyah and Shahbodin Faaizah / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 (2015) 1803 – 1812

1805

the reason why HEIs still using LMS in teaching is because of the course content facilities. Due to the incapability and limitations of LMS, such as in networking and communications (Ishan Sudeera & Tham, 2011), lecturers used other applications as a replacement for a built-in discussion forum in LMS (Hern’ndez et. al, 2012). Therefore, (Embi, 2011) recommended to integrated LMS with SNSs function due to lack of communication in LMS. However, several studies showed that Social Network Sites (SNS) enable interaction, collaboration, resource sharing, active participation, and critical thinking in educational activities (Ajjan, H., Hartshorne, 2008; Chen, 2011; Mason, 2006; Selwyn, 2007), but simply cannot be successful in meeting the students’ needs. It can only be use as a supplement in teaching and learning processes. Therefore, the authors propose to integrate Learning Management System (LMS) with Facebook functions as a tool to record and monitor student discussions and evaluate their contributions. The purposed of this study is to design and develop OPBCL based on proposed model which have been discuss in previous researchers work (Sharifah Nadiyah et.al, 2014a). 3.

3.1.

Materials and Methods

Research Goal

This study aim to develop Online Project Based Collaborative Learning based on proposed model and evaluate the prototype to make sure the prototype is fully functioning before the real test take place. User Acceptance Testing (UAT) using adapts and modified questionnaire was conducted. Hence, the development of OPBCL is based on the ADDIE model will described in the following section. 3.2.

OPBCL Development

The ADDIE model is most framework used by instructional designer (Morrison, 2010). It has flexible guideline that help the instructional designers in building an effective support tools in five (5) phases called Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation and Evaluation. Among the improvements made on this model is the rapid prototyping (Y. Ahmad, 2013). It allows feedback based on continuous assessment throughout creating materials. In order to achieve the aim, the Online Project Based Collaborative Learning (OPBCL) was designed and developed based on ADDIE model. The first phase called analysis phase, defining the learning theory. In this study, two theory had been used, namely constructivism and collaborative learning theory. The factor and element for effective online collaborative learning have also been determined in this phase. The factors which have been determined in previous research work (Sharifah Nadiyah et. al 2014b) were learning environment, learning design and learning interaction. Hence, the learning outcome, learning material and learning assessment must be defined based on Malaysian Polytechnic Curriculum. Data according to current LMS, SNSs and collaborative learning approach were gathered based on student and lecturer preferences. Before moving to the next phases, a formative evaluation held with three subject Matter Expert (SME) to make sure the analysis data is parallel with Malaysia Polytechnic Curriculum. Researchers design a project based collaborative instructional design in the design phase, based on learning approach preferences, The instructional design was adapted and modified from Ellis and Hafner (2009). System interface has been design based on analysis phase’s data. Then, get the feedback again from six subject Matter Expert (SME) and three System Design Expert (SDE) in formative evaluation and redesign (if needed) to ensure data validity based on researchers interpretation. Once the design phase is completed, a draft was created using Moodle platform in the development phase. Then, Facebook Comment Plugin is installed to integrate it with LMS. Facebook plugin which was created earlier by (Fulton, 2010) connects Moodle with Facebook using Stream Box. It allow user to log in into Moodle through Facebook account. Then when Facebook discontinue the Stream Box function, (Sopu, 2013) modified the code by replacing the Stream Box function with Comment Box function. Towards completion of the prototype, six SME, three SDE and six students are been given with formative evaluation form to gain their feedback and make final

1806

Razali Sharifah Nadiyah and Shahbodin Faaizah / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 (2015) 1803 – 1812

revisions to the product based on user recommendation. In the implementation phase, the prototype, which has been design and developed, was implemented. All respondents is will be guided throughout the registration process and trained to use the prototype. The training materials were distributed among the respondents. All respondent are required to follow instructions given in using the prototype to test its functions. Final summative evaluation based on user acceptance will determine the successfulness of the prototype with a proper learning outcome. This feedback is greatly important to ensure the prototype functionality and readiness for real study. All five phase that involved in this study were summarized in the following Fig. 1.

Fig. 1: OPBCL development model (adapted and modified Morrison, 2010)

3.3.

Sample and Data Collection

User Acceptance Testing (UAT) is a testing procedure to ensure the develop prototype is fully functioning and the user expectation are met in line with the curriculum. The primary UAT phases consist of Alpha and Beta testing. In the Alpha testing, six lecturers from Politeknik Ibrahim Sultan, Politeknik Merlimau Melaka and Kolej Komuniti Masjid Tanah, Melaka were involved to test an early version of the prototype. Meanwhile, Beta testing was conducted among six lecturers from Politeknik Ibrahim Sultan Politeknik Merlimau Melaka and Kolej Komuniti Masjid Tanah, Melaka and six students from Politeknik Merlimau, Melaka. To validate the prototype, a questionnaire adopted and modified from Lorenzo, Alarcón and Constantinides (2014), Ali (2011), Lau (2011) and Selim (2007) are distributed personally to users. Participants for validation stage were from Politeknik Ibrahim Sultan. Data obtained from 32 questionnaires were analysed through the SPSS 19 statistical packet program.

Razali Sharifah Nadiyah and Shahbodin Faaizah / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 (2015) 1803 – 1812

4.

1807

Findings

This section presents the findings based on the focus of this study, which is to validate the OPBCL to find out whether the prototype developed meets user expectation and parallel with Malaysian Polytechnic Curriculum. 4.1

OPBCL Design Interface

This section showed the final OPBCL system interfaces. Considering respondents feedback, the final system interfaces were showed on table 1 below. Table 1: OPBCL Design Interface Login Interface

Main Menu Interface

Course Interface

Subject Interface

Topic Interface

Forum Interface

1808

Razali Sharifah Nadiyah and Shahbodin Faaizah / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 (2015) 1803 – 1812

4.2

OPBCL Testing

This section reported on the Alpha, Beta and User Acceptance Testing findings. The Alpha and Beta testing have been evaluated in formative form; meanwhile User Acceptance Testing has been evaluated in summative form. 4.2.1

Alpha Testing

Alpha testing must be done to ensure the quality of the prototype before proceed to next stage, Beta testing (Oladimeji, 2007). Alpha testing is done by internal employee of the organization, in this study, is the subject matter expert (SME), and done at developer’s site. In this testing, a general impression of project based learning (Q1) and the integration of Learning management System with Facebook can facilitate Online Project Collaborative Learning (Q2) were asked. The feedback and report displayed on table 2 below. Table 2: Alpha Testing Result Tester 1

Feedback Q1: Student can improve their communication skills. Q2: Yes.

2

Q1: Provide more student centred learning. Q2: Yes.

3

Q1: Good in term of student centred learning implementation. Q2: Can facilitate learning better because most of student active using Facebook.

4

Q1: Good in order to increase student performance.

5

Q1: It is good to adapt project technique in teaching and learning process.

6

Q1: Good technique in order to enhanced student skills.

Q2: It can facilitate teaching and learning process with student and can used from anywhere.

Q2: It can encourage student to communicate.

Q2: It can make student easy to communicate among each other.

4.2.2

Beta Testing

Compared to Alpha testing, Beta testing is not only focusing on the prototype quality but ensuring the prototype is ready for real time users (Jones & Richey, 2000). Beta testing is performed by users who are not organization’s employee. In this study, six lecturers and six students were involved in this stage. Several questions had been asked in Beta testing stage, which were: (Q1) Did you have a pleasant experience running the system? (Q2) Did you find the instructions and messages given on the computer screen helpful? If not, explain. (Q3) Were you confused about any aspect of the system? If so, please explain. (Q4) Did the system "crash" when you tested it? (Q5) Would you like to make any improvements to the system? If so, describe them and (Q6) Feel free to comment the entire interface based on on text, colour and layout. Feedbacks from respondent were summarized in table 3 below.

Razali Sharifah Nadiyah and Shahbodin Faaizah / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 (2015) 1803 – 1812

1809

Table 3: Beta Testing Result Respondent Lecturer 1

Lecturer 2

Lecturer 3

Lecturer 4

Lecturer 5

Lecturer 6

Student 1 Student 2

Student 3

Student 4 Student 5 Student 6

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

Comment Text is suitable for undergraduates students Colour is suitable for undergraduates students (less is better) Login interface layout – change the username and password location to the right Attractive Main Menu Interface (using Picture not boring word) Well learning design interface All instructions are clear enough for student to use the system Using graphic on Main Menu interface is more interesting and straightforward. The difficulty parts of the facts are clear. Overall, text, colour and layout are appropriate to the undergraduate students. The interfaces are interesting and clear. Maybe can add student group list to help student find their group easier. The instructions on the screen help for user find the icon that want to access on the system. The message have good notified for user and remind continuously use the system. Have standard text. Colour is good. Layout is good. The instruction written is clear and easy to understand. It can be hang because of the IT infrastructure in campus. Text is good. Colour is good. Layout is good. The system is clear, easy and pleasant for teaching and learning. The instruction and screen message are helpful. No confusing, system is clear and easy to understand It can be hang because of the infrastructure problem (WiFi). Interfaces are design clear and easy to understand and user friendly. The approach is well design. Layout is well organized. The learning instruction is clear and easy to understand. Facilitate the teaching and learning process. Do not highlight the section, make student confused on it. Prefer layout from the right because that where people attract to look first. The text and colour used is bored. Highlight and used interesting colour for topic. I cannot see any pop up message error. The login part is confusing Need to have popup message to notify error Create a login step or manual to guide user how to login. The learning instruction font is too small. Background colour is plain. Colour is not interesting and add more relevant picture. Highlight the keywords

In this stage, the actual respondent is supposed to be system’s user. However, looking at the results obtained show that students are more focused towards an attractive interface, such as the use of colour and picture. Feedback did not reflect so much on are the functionality of the system. Therefore, the researchers have to get some feedback from the lecturers. It's also similar to the recommendations by Larusdottir, Bjarnadottir and Gulliksen (2010) in which they involve the participation of users and customers in beta testing procedure to determine whether or not a component or system satisfies the user or customer needs.

1810

Razali Sharifah Nadiyah and Shahbodin Faaizah / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 (2015) 1803 – 1812

4.2.3

User Acceptance Testing

After getting the feedback from Beta testing, the prototype has been re-modified. A User Acceptance Testing was carried out to secure accuracy and consistency. The testing is performed by students from Politeknik Ibrahim Sultan at user’s site. Alpha was obtained for each construct and reported. In general, a common used threshold value for acceptable reliability is 0.70 (Park, 2009). All measures fulfill the suggested levels with composite reliability ranges from 0.742 to 0.951. Overall, the Alpha value is 0.935. Table 4 shows the result of reliability test with mean and standard deviation for each element. The results indicated that the prototype is ready to be tested in the actual study. Table 4: User Acceptance Testing Result Construct Usability

Accessibility

Stability

Content

5.

Element

Mean

SD

U1

5.09

0.588

U2

5.13

0.660

U3

5.28

0.581

U4

5.06

0.840

U5

4.66

1.181

U6

4.84

0.767

A1

4.97

1.204

A2

4.97

0.695

A3

5.06

0.669

S1

4.78

0.870

S2

4.78

0.870

S3

4.91

0.928

C1

4.88

0.871

C2

4.88

0.793

Process

P1

4.94

0.669

P2

4.91

0.734

Screen Design

SD1

5.19

0.644

SD2

5.13

0.833

SD3

5.16

0.767

Alpha 0.823

0.742

0.842

0.951

0.782

0.874

Conclusion

ADDIE model is widely used by educators in instructional design worldwide. According to Ngussa (2014), any effective learning must be properly planned. If the development of prototype was carried all complete and correctly steps, it can bring success than failure (Gökkaya & Güner, 2014). During User Acceptance Testing, system functions were tested by the user to ensure the requirements are met. Errors in requirements specifications have been identified as a major contributor to software project failures. It is important to evaluate the prototype acceptability based on user acceptance test during system development (Davis & Venkatesh, 2004). It is hoped that this study will give emphasis to other researchers about the importance of conducting User Acceptance Testing to ensure the functionality of the prototypes developed before the actual research. Previous section has evaluated the developed prototype. The results showed positive feedback, the prototype is working properly and ready to be used in Project Based Collaborative Learning (OPBCL).

Razali Sharifah Nadiyah and Shahbodin Faaizah / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 (2015) 1803 – 1812

1811

Acknowledgement

Sharifah Nadiyah Razali would like to acknowledge the ¿nancial support of Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka (UTeM) and the Ministry of Higher Education of Malaysia for her PhD study.

References Afendi, H., Mohamed Amin, E., & Abdul Halim, S. (2011). Learning Management Systems in Malaysian Higher Education Institutions (pp. 29– 50). Ahmad, E., Jailani, M. Y., & Aina Aishikin, M. A. (2011). Developing soft skill in Advanced Technology Training Centre ( ADTEC ): an analysis of comparison. Elixir Social Studies, 39, 4895–4904. Ahmad, Y. (2013). Instructional Design and Motivation in Computer-Based Learning Environment. IOSR Journal of Computer Engineering (IOSRJCE), 8(3), 9–12. Ajjan, H., Hartshorne, R. (2008). Investigating faculty decisions to adopt Web 2.0 technologies: theory and empirical tests. (pp. 71–80). Ali, H. (2011). A comparison of cooperative learning and traditional lecture methods in the project management department of a tertiary level institution in Trinidad and Tobago. The Caribbean Teaching Scholar, 1(1), 49–64. Ashton-Hay, S. (2006). Constructivism and powerful learning environments: create your own! 9th International English Language Teaching Convention. Carlos, A.-H., Miguel L., B.-L., Eduardo, G.-S., Juan I., A.-P., Guillermo, E.-G., & Adolfo, R.-C. (2013). Enhancing Learning Environments by Integrating External Applications. Bulletin of the IEEE Technical Committee on Learning Technology, 15(1), 21–24. Che Ku Nuraini, C. K. M., Faaizah, S., & Naim, C. P. (2014). Personalized Learning Environment ( PLE ) Experience in the 21st Century. 4th World Congress on Information and Communication Technology. Chen, Y. (2011). Learning styles and adopting Facebook technology. Technology Management in the Energy Smart World (PICMET) (pp. 1–9). Chiong, R., & Jovanovic, J. (2012). Collaborative Learning in Online Study Groups: An Evolutionary Game Theory Perspective. Journal of Information Technology Education: …, 11, 81–101. Coates, H., James, R. & Baldwin, G. (2005). A critical examination of the effects of learning management systems on university teaching and learning,. Tertiary Education and Management, 11(1):19-36, 2005., 11(1), 19–36. Davis, F. D., & Venkatesh, V. (2004). Toward Preprototype User Acceptance Testing of New Information Systemsௗ: Implications for Software Project Management. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 51(1), 31–46. Ellis, T. J., & Hafner, W. (2009). Building a framework to support project-based collaborative learning experiences in an asynchronous learning network. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 4(1), 167–190. Embi, M. A. (2011). e-learning in Malaysian Higher Educationࣟ: Status, Trends and Challeges. Department of Higher Education Ministry of Higher Education 2011. Fulton, A. (2010). Moodle Plugin - Facebook Connect. Retrieved from https://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=142036 García-Peñalvo, J., F., Conde, M. Á., Alier, M., & Casany, M. J. (2011). Opening learning management systems to personal learning environments. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 17(9), 1222–1240. Greenberg, A. D., & Nilssen, A. H. (2014). The Role of Education in Building Soft Skills. Gökkaya, Z., & Güner, N. (2014). ADDIE Model in Adult Educationௗ: Instructional Design Sample of E-Learning. 5th International FutureLearning Conference on Innovations in Learning for the Future (Vol. 53). Hern’ndez, R., Amado-Salvatierra, H. R., Guetl, C., & Smadi, M. (2012). Facebook for CSCL, Latin-American Experience for Professors. 2012 IEEE 12th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (pp. 327–328). Ieee. Ishan Sudeera, A., & Tham, C. Y. (2011). Implementation of Facebook Study Groups as Supplements for Learning Management Systems ( LMS ) in Adult ODL Environments. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal,, 7(1), 1–11. Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. Jones, T. S., & Richey, R. C. (2000). Rapid Prototyping Methodology in Actionௗ: A Developmental Study. ETR&D, 48(2), 63–80. Juen, J. W. Y., Pang, V., & Vitales, J. W. (2010). OBE Curriculum Implementation Process in Politeknik Kota Kinabalu: A Possible Evaluation Framework. Prosiding Seminar Transformasi Pendidikan Teknikal (pp. 172–181). Kabilan, M. K., Adlina, W. F. W., & Embi, M. A. (2011). Online Collaboration of English Language Teachers for Meaningful Professional Development Experiences. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 10(4), 94–115. Larusdottir, M. K., Bjarnadottir, E. R., & Gulliksen, J. (2010). The Focus on Usability in Testing Practices in Industry. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, 332, 98–109. Lau, A. S. M. (2011). Hospital-based nurses’ perceptions of the adoption of Web 2.0 tools for knowledge sharing, learning, social interaction and the production of collective intelligence. Journal of medical Internet research, 13(4), e92. Lee, H.-J., & Lim, C. (2012). Peer Evaluation in Blended Team Project-Based Learning; What Do Students Find Important? Educational Technology & Society, 15(4), 214–224. Li, C., Dong, Z., Untch, R., Chasteen, M., & Reale, N. (2011). Peerspace-an online collaborative learning environment for computer science students. 2011 11th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) (pp. 409–411). Lorenzo-Romero, C., Alarcón-del-Amo, M.-C., & Constantinides, E. (2014). Determinants of Use of Social Media Tools in Retailing Sector. Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research, 9(1), 9–10. Marijana, D.-Z., Aleksandra, B. L., & Aleksandar, R. M. (2011). Fostering engineering e-learning courses with social network services. 19th IEEE Telecommunications Forum (TELFOR) (pp. 122–125). Mason, R. (2006). Learning technologies for adult continuing education. Studies in Continuing Education, 28(2), 121–133. Morrison, G. R. (2010). Designing Effective Instruction (6th Editio.). John Wiley & Sons.

1812

Razali Sharifah Nadiyah and Shahbodin Faaizah / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 (2015) 1803 – 1812 Ngussa, B. M. (2014). Application of ADDIE Model of Instruction in Teaching-Learning Transaction among Teachers of Mara Conference Adventist Secondary Schools , Tanzania. Journal of Education and Practice, 5(25), 1–11. Nurbiha, A. S., Zaidatun, T., & Jamalludin, H. (2012). A Theoretical Framework for Assessing Students’ Cognitive Engagement through Computer-supported Collaborative Learning. International Journal of Machine Learning and Computing, 2(5), 654–657. Oladimeji, P. (2007). Levels of Testing. Park, S. Y. (2009). An Analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model in Understanding University Students ’ Behavioral Intention to Use eLearning. Educational Technology & Society, 12(3), 150–162. Sancho, P., Torrente, J., Marchiori, E. J., & Fernández-Manjón, B. (2011). Enhancing moodle to support problem based learning. The Nucleo experience. IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 1177–1182). Selim, H. M. (2007). Critical success factors for e-learning acceptanceௗ: ConWrmatory factor models. Computers & Education, 49, 396–413. Selwyn, N. (2007). “ Screw Blackboard ... do it on Facebookௗ!”: an investigation of students ’ educational use of Facebook. Poke 1.0 - Facebook social research symposium’ (pp. 1–23). Sharifah Nadiyah, R., Faaizah, S., Hanipah, H., & Norasiken, B. (2014a). Online Collaborative Learning Elements to Propose An Online Project Based Collaborative Learning Model. International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Applied Bussiness (ICETAB). Sharifah Nadiyah, R., Faaizah, S., Hanipah, H., & Norasiken, B. (2014b). Factors That Affecting The Effective Online Collaborative Learning Environment. 4th World Congress on Information and Communication Technology (pp. 293– 302). Sharifah Nadiyah, R., Faaizah, S., Hanipah, H., Norasiken, B., & Mohd Hafiez, A. (2014). Perceptions towards the Usage of Collaborative Learning in Teaching and Learning Processes at. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Education and Research– IJMER, 1(2), 42 – 45. Sopu, T. (2013). New Facebook Module Development. Retrieved from https://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=142036#p620344 Swan, K., Shen, J., & Hiltz, S. (2006). Assessment and collaboration in online learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning …, 45–62. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge (Massachusetts): Harvard University Press. Wang, Q. (2010). Using online shared workspaces to support group collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1270–1276. Zhu, C. (2012). Student Satisfaction , Performance , and Knowledge Construction in Online. Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), 127–136.