European Web Education system-paper代写

该项目侧重于欧洲莱昂纳多·达·芬奇计划支持的Web教育系统的共同框架，该程序具有拼图模型以及在线集成的集线器模型。项目涉及的系统包括在线教育系统，工具集，平台和管理系统。

1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW

1.1 Project Abstract

This project focuses on the common framework for the Web Education Systems supported by the European Leonardo da Vinci program which has the Jigsaw model as well as the Hub model for online integration. The systems involved in the project include the online education systems, the toolsets, the platforms, and management systems.

1.2 Project Objectives

The objective of this project is to enhance the efficiency and provide integration for the online education system through the following:

1) To identify the providers of e-learning in the European Commission and to identify how and for what reasons they had successfully matured as e-learning providers and had passed the stage of being a project and had achieved maturity today.

2) Apply toolsets including the Content Creation Tools, Authoring Tools, and Assessment Tools to develop the learning materials by focusing on the Jigsaw model and the Hub model that supports the online systems and provide different approaches for users.

3) Fully implement the Learning Management System and accompanying systems for educational institutions and administration in order to satisfy multiple publishers and providers.

1.3 Project Beneficiaries & Stakeholders

A.EC users of online-education

Users of online education in European Commission (Now European Union) are expected to benefit from the implementation of the project by receiving cheaper and more convenient education.

B. Member states

Participating European countries can benefit from higher-educated population and also the booming industry of Web Education.

C. Institutions and Practitioners in Europe

Institutions who provide services and systems in E-learning not only benefit from financial incomes but also receives government sponsorship and numerous grants plus supporting technologies for further development.

2.0 PROJECT ACTORS, INPUTS & COMPONENTS

2.1 Participating Organizations

Ÿ   The European Commission

The EC serves as the monitoring and administrative organization who is in charge of the overall project.

Ÿ   Member states and their education department

17 countries participated in the project and implementation was carried out by their education departments.

Ÿ   Providers and institutions

Up to 113 institutions and providers were a part of the project. They are observed and surveyed for outcomes and data.

2.2 Project Financing

This project is financed by the European Commission as a part of the Leonardo da Vinci program. As many institutions became large-scale providers of online education, the cost-effectiveness matters more in the whole system. Specific pricing structure varies within different systems, which creates difficulty for institutions to recognize and compare maintenance and operation costs. |The range of pricing could change within the boundary of 20000 to 50000 euro with recent price increase related to LMS systems (Paulsen & Keegan, 2002).

Despite the economic issue problems, it is identifiable if specific inputs are given. The objective values which include technicians, help desk and support team can be calculated according to the quantity. What is more, additional costs are added to the financial list with tutors or teachers who provide training for the LMS platform. The open source, self-developed system is usually a complete one purchased by some institutions, but they usually hide such cost which could sum up to 100000 Euro and it causes financial problems as such cost increase annually (Paulsen & Keegan, 2002).

2.3 Project Implementation

2.3.1 Responsibility

The project is implemented through building the online education systems and further integration. The European Commission is in charge of overall arrangement and the department of education is responsible for implementation. Institutions and providers need their own financing and carry out eLearning programs according to their own arrangements.

2.3.2 Schedule

The project is based on a schedule of 5 year scope from year 2002 to 2007 with full preparation before the year 2002 on internet penetration on users in Europe.

2.3.3 Project Supervision, Reporting and Monitoring

The project is supervised but staffs from education departments who perform seasonal checkups and annual auditing on the financing. Meanwhile, providers are encouraged yon compete against each other and foreign large scale providers by receiving grants and subsidiaries.

3.0 PROJECT OUTCOMES

3.1 Achievement of Project Development Objectives

1)

During the implementation of the project, hundreds and thousands of experts and practitioners in more than 20 countries have studied about eLearning and researched on institutions and providers in Europe. Reports on individual countries were given as the project outcomes, which include the detailed enterprises, websites, number of courses, average enrollment rates, and the analysis of supply. What is more, case studies on each country which analyze the reasons for success and evaluation were given accordingly.

2)

The Jigsaw model which consists of Content Creation Tools (CCT), Learning Management System (LMS), Student Management System (SMS), and Accounting System (AS) is carried out in most institutions because of its nice fit for the seamless data exchange. Meanwhile, the Hub Model which set the Student Management System as the central system for larger scale online education while other systems also rely on the central SMS system for data exchange (Per Arneberg, 2007). Both approaches were widely used in the institutions according to their own judgment and organization

3)

For course development tools, the content is developed with external tools before publishing and the LMS system itself satisfies the requirements of publishing for the participating states and overall standards.

For student and tutor support tools, many are included in the LMS system, while the advanced channels like pedagogical model, email lists, collaborative technology, and video conference are applied in them.

For administrative systems, the number increased during the project due to the. Growth in demand from training institutions. The model developed steadily and realized successful integration among universities as well.

3.2 Overall Project Rating

From overall perspective, the project is a success due to the realization of all objectives. Within the time frame and the satisfactory outcomes.  Institutions applied the jigsaw model and the hub model according to their own circumstances and fit the users perfectly. Although the market had a great competition because of existing mega providers from other regions, the local institutions were able to establish their own standards and develop the suitable toolset for non-English speaking environment in Europe.

4.0 PROJECT RISKS, CHALLENGES & LESSONS LEARNED

4.1 Risks & Mitigation

Several systems experienced the lack of facilities as well as financing issues because it can be very expensive for providers to develop their own sources. Most part of the systems researched seem to have problems with content creation and content management, students monitoring and assessment tools (Paulsen, Online Education Systems: Definition of Terms, 2002). The way to solve the problem is to purchase the unanimous system and toolsets for many providers and let them have control over the open source programs.

4.2 Challenges & Lessons Learned

4.2.1 Implementation

With the development of the project, most institutions aren’t especially loyal to a certain provider of LMS and plans to change system according to future needs. This becomes an issue of competitiveness, user friendliness, and cost effectiveness because appropriate degree of competitiveness matters much for provider selection (Mark Stansfield, 2009). Open source strategy also impacts the supply and demand on the free market.

Also, during implementation, the overall evaluation shows that the commercial platforms could be a good start but they also contains linguistic issues and lack of adequacy on group targeting and pricing.

4.2.2 Project Monitoring

The project is monitored by the European Commission and its offices of Education for short term and long term observation.  Also, the governments and institution itself monitor the market trend and new technologies required for the project. Users also contribute by giving feedbacks and advices during the process

5.0 PROJECT OPINIONS & CONCLUSIONS

The project is satisfactory considering the high percentage of completion during the limited time. The government has invested the budget while providers actively joined the program and were able to identify the urgent need of internet users. Enough attention and monitoring were put on the project so that all stakeholders can fully implement necessary steps and procedures.

Meanwhile, the dominant US companies on web education providers do not dominate the European market because of a different first language. Despite the fact that many US LMS companies has a large market share globally, the locally developed LMSs in native languages has successfully overruled the American products (Per Arneberg, 2007). This is what makes the project unique and economically beneficial to stakeholders in Europe.

In conclusion, LMS systems alone cannot handle all requests made by institutions regarding E-education. The project needs improvement in many ways despite the fact that the systems can satisfy most of the needs of handling. The tendency to organize the structure of e-Learning applies the Learning Management System dedicated to solving the issues during the learning process (Olsen, 2002). In terms of the administrative aspect, the existing integration of software and management tools allows it to facilitate the system and make it available for future development. In the short term, the project can benefit those users of E learning since they are looking for cheaper and more convenient education without travelling far. The providers can benefit from the income of education contents and better manage their business using the toolsets.

In the long run, the society can benefit from the higher level of education and training on citizens, who are the representatives of purchasing power and producing power. What is more, the EU can hedge against the hegemony of US and Canadian web education institutions and industry by developing this project furtherly into the future.

6.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Mark Stansfield, T. C. (2009). The Identification of Key Issues in the Development of Sustainable e-Learning and Virtual Campus Initiatives. ElectronicJournal of e-Learning, 7, pp. 155 - 164.

Olsen, G.-A. (2002). Stand Ready? Emerging e-learning standards in a pedagogical perspective. Hagen: Zentrales Institut fur Fernstudienforschung.

Paulsen, M. F. (2002). Online Education Systems: Definition of Terms. Hagen: Zentrales Institut fur Fernstudienforschung.

Paulsen, M. F., & Keegan, D. (2002). European Experiences with Learning Management Systems. Hagen: Zentrales Institut fur Fernstudienforschung.

Per Arneberg, D. K. (2007). The Provision of E-learning in the European Union. Norway : NKI Publishing House.

要想成绩好，论文得写好，51due加拿大代写平台为你提供加拿大留学知识，专业辅导，还为你提供专业美国论文代写，加拿大essay代写，paper代写，report代写，需要找加拿大代写的话快来联系我们51due工作客服QQ：800020041吧。