IEEE MULTIDISCIPLINARY ENGINEERING EDUCATION MAGAZINE, VOL. 3, NO.
4, DECEMBER 2008
Blended eLearning Approach for Traditional
Palestinian Universities
Jamil A. Itmazi, Member, IEEE and Mahmoud J. Tmeizeh
Abstract— eLearning is a new tool which has the potential to
enhance and support the traditional learning system and
already it is becoming an integral part of the learning tools
used by every educational organization; specifically, the
Blended eLearning approach (BeLA) has real potential to
combine the best of traditional approach face-to-face (f2f) and
eLearning in campus-based universities.Adopting BeLA in
Traditional Palestinian Universities (TPUs) can solve partially
some unique critical situations, which appeared as a result of
the Israeli occupation as well as the weakness of the
governmental financial support. In this paper, we provide a
brief introduction of eLearning, focusing on blended
approach, summarizing the experiences of eLearning
initiative at TPUs, illustrating potential benefits of adopting
BeLA to these universities, mentioning the necessity process to
this adoption and explain the required steps to develop
eCourses.
Index Terms— Blended eLearning, Blended Learning,
eLearning, eLearning at Palestinian Universities.
I. INTRODUCTION
The learning process needs techniques and tools to
present the knowledge (from different resources), interact
with it and share it with others. In this context, eLearning is
becoming an important tool to support the learning system
to achieve its goals. eLearning became hot topic in the
1990's after the spread of the Internet. Although it has a
relative short history, it is becoming an important part of the
learning. The majority of the universities adopted some
kinds of eLearning within its learning system.
The term eLearning is relatively new and is still contested,
upon the European Commission’s definition, it is “the use
of new multimedia technologies and the Internet to improve
the quality of learning by facilitating access to resources and
services as well as remote exchanges and collaboration"
[1:2]. However, the definition of eLearning used in this
paper refers to any learning that could be realized in a
computer connected generally with an Internet/Intranet
network.
The importance of eLearning in the traditional university
environment does not mean that it will replace completely
the traditional learning mode. In other words, “eLearning is
Jamil Itmazi is with Palestine Polytechnic University, IT Center of
Excellence, Jabal Abu Romman, P.O.B. 198, Hebron-West Bank,
Palestine, (jamil@ppu.edu).
Mahmnoud Tmeizeh is with Southern Hebron Directorate of Education
in Palestinian ministry of education and high education, AlFoar Cross,
Dora Palestine, (mjat68@yahoo.com).
Publisher Identification number 1558-7908 -062008-05
1558-7908 © 2008 IEEE Education Society Students Activities Committee (EdSocSAC)
http://www.ieee.org/edsocsac
156
not intended to replace f2f classroom training but it can be
used to enhance the traditional training” [2].
A. Models of Elearning
There are two models of eLearning; synchronously and
asynchronously:
• Synchronous eLearning: means that all students and
instructor are logged on at the same time and communicate
directly and virtually with each other, “where all the
students must be in the classroom at a certain time for the
class to start. Synchronous eLearning events include live
web-casts, chat rooms, application sharing, and whiteboard
sessions [3].
• Asynchronous eLearning: In this model, the
communication between participants does not occur
simultaneously. Where “the learning content or courseware
is served from a Web server and delivered on demand to
the learner's workstation, Learners can thus take courses at
own pace. Courseware is normally available to learners 24
hours per day, 7 days per week”, [4]. Examples of this
model includes; taking a self-paced course, posting
messages to a discussion group. Some times it called
"distributed learning” and it receives more attention
because of its lower cost of development, reusable
components, and convenience to the learner.
TPUs can use mainly the Asynchronous eLearning and
some tools of Synchronous eLearning (e.g. chat, instant
messages …etc.), because they are very hard to adopt the
pure synchronous eLearning; due to the following reasons:
- Students rarely have compatible schedules to permit real
time sessions.
- The synchronous technologies are still too expensive.
- The majority of students do not have fast Internet, most
of them use telephone dial-up which can not use the
synchronous tools effectively.
B. Types of Elearning Approaches:
There are three types:
• Enhanced approach: the eLearning solutions used to
support, facilitate and enhance the f2f learning by using
web-based technology, e.g. Course management systems.
Even if this approach can reduce some academic seat time
(f2f), the reduction must be no more than 24% [5], the
majority of the offered eCourses in TPUs are of this kind.
• Blended approach: this kind mixes traditional f2f and
online learning, consequently, substantial portion of
content is delivered online; typically this approach can
reduce 25 to 74% of f2f meetings.
• Online approach: it uses the virtual learning (VL), which
can be realized without any need to f2f meeting, however,
IEEE MULTIDISCIPLINARY ENGINEERING EDUCATION MAGAZINE, VOL. 3, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2008
this approach could have some f2f meeting, e.g. for
exams, but more than 75% of the course content is
delivered online.
II. BLENDED LEARNING
Blended Learning is the combination of multiple
approaches to learning. It is “learning that is facilitated by
the effective combination of different modes of delivery,
models of teaching and styles of learning, and founded on
transparent communication amongst all parties involved
with a course” [6:12]. For the majority of its application,
Blended Learning is a “hybrid of traditional f2f and online
learning so that instruction occurs both in the classroom and
online, and where the online component becomes a natural
extension of traditional classroom learning” [7].
For this paper, Blended eLearning (BeL) will be used
which refers to an approach that mixes both; traditional
learning and eLearning. See figure No. 1.
Figure 1: Blended eLearning.
A. Benefits of Blended Elearning
BeLA has real potential to combine the best of traditional
approach (f2f) and eLearning in campus-based universities;
the major advantages are flexibility and reduction of time
and cost. Here is a list of the main benefits of adopted BeL
from the perspective of learner and university:
1. BeL can enhance the quality of teaching in aspects of
instructors’ performance [8].
2. Increase learning impact by focusing the f2f portion of
the course on skill practice and application.
3. Reduce academic seat time from 25-74% as well as
travel.
4. Reduce the total cost to the universities and learner by
reducing the cost of travel, lodging and meals, cost of
production and distribution the course materials, cost of
Office-building fees and instructor's salaries [9:35].
5. Reduce time by reducing the presence and travel.
6. Learners may access the course activities and materials
whenever and wherever they are until the f2f meeting.
7. More learners based training view.
8. Self-pacing: learners may study at their own pace and
speed, so it increases satisfaction and reduces stress,
also they can skip understood activities or materials and
jump to new issues.
9. Powerful student-tracking and immediate feedback
systems.
10. Improve performance [10], provide stronger
understanding and increase retention of the subject by
using eLearning tools, e.g. multimedia, quizzes…etc
1558-7908 © 2008 IEEE Education Society Students Activities Committee (EdSocSAC)
http://www.ieee.org/edsocsac
157
and the ability to retry / replay training parts over and
over in order to understand it.
11. Option to select learning materials from increased
quantity of courses offered online which the learner need
and interested in.
12. Easy management large groups of students.
III. ELEARNING AT PALESTINIAN UNIVERSITIES:
We are going to summarize the experiences of the main
TPUs on offering some of its courses of academic programs
by eLearning; however, we will not discuss all their
experiences in eLearning; e.g. electronic exams, school
virtual labs, multimedia production …etc. Also, we will not
evaluate those experiences or presenting statistic about the
offered courses:
1. Al-Quds University (QU), <www.alquds.edu>:
eLearning activities supervised by Said Khoury IT Center
of Excellence, it uses the eLearning solution to facilitate
course delivery through Web technology and to solve
problems of the lack of hosting course material, QU uses the
open source platform (MOODLE) to offer some of its
courses, see <http://eclass.alquds.edu/>.
The QU offered eCourses are supported ones, and we do
not find any evidence of using BeLA and VL approach.
2. Palestine Polytechnic University (PPU), <www.ppu.edu>.
PPU has an eLearning Unit for managing eLearning
activities, it uses eLearning solution to support its courses by
using a customized version of the open source platform
(MOODLE), see <http://elearning.ppu.edu/>.
In the past, PPU used Online Syllabus as a web based
application realized by PPU to support the course content and
to attract student.
The PPU offered eCourses are supported ones, while
BeLA and VL approach have not used yet.
3. Islamic University of Gaza (IUG), <www.iugaza.edu.ps>.
IUG has an eLearning Center for managing eLearning
activities. A Web Course Tools (WebCT) has been used as a
course management system to support and facilitate using
information technology and modern communication in the
educational process. Recently, IUG is added the open source
platform (MOODLE) as additional platform for eLearning
activities. See <www.iugaza.edu.ps/elearning/>.
IUG offered two courses as online course (via virtual
mode); First Aid Course and Holy Quran Course as
mandatory courses of IUG requirement courses [11]. But we
do not find any evidence of using BeLA.
4. Birzeit University (BZU), <www.birzeit.edu>.
BZU uses eLearning solution to support its courses by
using the open source platform (MOODLE), which offered
some eCourses. See <http://moodle.birzeit.edu/>.
The BZU offered eCourses are supported courses and there
is no evidence of using BeLA and VL approach.
5. An-Najah National University (NNU), <www.najah.edu/>.
eLearning activities supervised by eLearning Committee
(from Computer center, Computer Engineering Department,
IT College), it uses a local platform (On-line Course
Container and Digital Contents) to provide shell for the
learning content and to facilitate student and instructor
communications. See <www.najah.edu/occ>
IEEE MULTIDISCIPLINARY ENGINEERING EDUCATION MAGAZINE, VOL. 3, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2008
The NNU offered eCourses are supported courses and we
do not find any evidence of using BeLA and VL approach.
6. Bethlehem University (BU), <www.bethlehem.edu>
BU using the open source platform (MOODLE) to offer
some of its courses as supported courses. See
<http://moodle.bethlehem.edu/ >.
Nowadays, (while writing these paper), Institute for
Community Partnership (ICP) at BU announce about an
Online Professional Diploma Programs as the first diplomas
in Palestine to offer courses using blended learning; “Small-
Scale Business Administration”, “E-Business”, and “Project
Management”. See <http://eclass.icp.bethlehem.edu/ >. It is
wroth mentioning that these programs are non-academic
programs.
7. Hebron University (HU), <www.hebron.edu/>
8. Arab American University, Jenin (AAUJ),
<www.aauj.edu>
9. Al-Azhar University of Gaza, <www.alazhar.edu.ps>
The last three universities have plans and may have
projects of adopting some kinds of eLearning, but they do
not publish any evidence at their Web sites about any
eLearning initiatives.
10. Al-Quds Open University (QOU), <www.qou.edu>
QOU has two related projects; Avicenna virtual Campus
project, <http://pleiad.qou.edu> which aim to produce on-
line courses and it has already offered at this project some
eCourses related to its open courses. It has also Academic
Portal <www.qou.edu> which allows students and tutors to
communicate and exchange materials.
Because this paper focuses on traditional university, the
QOU is not involved in the discussion, however, QOU can
benefits from BeLA.
IV. BLENDED ELEARNING AT PALESTINIAN
UNIVERSITIES
It has been obvious that there is no any evidence about
any use of BeLA at the academic programs in TPUs to offer
some eCourses. On the following, we will discuss the
abilities of TPUs’ students to receive eCourses via BeLA as
well as the opportunity of TPUs to benefit from adopting
such approach and to resolve some of their critical problems.
A. The Abilities of TPUs’ Students
Upon a new survey (a questioner realized under the
supervision of the author of this paper and answered from
1100 students at PPU), we can notice the following:
- 97% of the students have PC in their home with usage
average of 12 hours per week.
- 92% of the students can use Internet.
- 69% of the students have Internet in their home with
usage average of 6.5 hours per week.
- 35% of the students participate at least in one eCourse
(enhanced approach) and 84% like to have one eCourse
or more.
This sample is useful to all students of TPUs due to the
similarity between them. Still, every university wants to
adopt BeLA needs to present some free PC labs, where the
students, can access their eCourses in the university
1558-7908 © 2008 IEEE Education Society Students Activities Committee (EdSocSAC)
http://www.ieee.org/edsocsac
158
eLearning site to solve the problem of the 31% students
whom have not Internet in their home.
B. Why Blended Elearning:
TPUs can benefit from adopting BeL like other
universities in the world; furthermore, it suffers from critical
situations which make some of its problems are unique, due
to the political questions, which raised from the Israeli
occupation as well as the weakness of the governmental
financial support.
We will list some critical problems which could be
resolved partially by adopting BeLA:
1. Lack of funding: all Palestinian Universities suffer from
the financial resources because of the weakness of the
governmental financial support. While the main resources is
from students fees, it is well known that the majority of
Palestinian citizens are below poverty level (Poverty Rate is
72%-74%) and approximately half of them are Unemployed
(unemployment Rate are 44%-74%), therefore, the TPUs can
not increase the students fees [12].
Cost savings is a goal for higher educational institutions.
There is strong evidence of the potential of blended learning
to reduce cost [13]. A three-year program realized by The
Center for Academic Transformation at Rensselaer
Polytechnic Institute was designed to support universities in
redesigning their instructional approaches, using technology
to achieve cost savings and quality enhancements at 30
institutions across the U.S. The results show that all thirty
institutions reduced their costs for the courses involved by
about 40% on average (with a range of 20 %- 84%), [14, 15],
another researchers estimate the reduction up to 50% [8:79,
16:1686].
2. Capacity limitation: Most of TPUs suffer from limited sites
available for new students; moreover, while some of them
reach its capacities, others have overload!. These problems
are raised from insufficient financial resources and some
TPUs do not have building license (especially C areas which
are under direct occupation). According to the statistics of
Palestinian Ministry of Education and Higher Education for
the academic year 2005/2006, there were 150274 registered
students in high education institutes and there were 17301
graduated students. In the same academic year, there were
more than 40,000 successful students at Al- Tawjihi (the
general secondary examination) [17].
In the BeLA teachers and students are requested to attend
simultaneously a classroom (f2f) during 25% to 75% of the
total academic time [18:21, 19, 20:19]. Adopting BeL can
help the diverse needs of a growing student population by
reducing the seat-time courses.
In general, as explained above, every course offered by
BeLA will reduce 50% of the seat time in medium (the ratio
for the academic time of PeL vary from 25% up to 75%), so
if any university offers 10% of its courses via BeLA, it will
be able to increase its capacity up to 15% without any change
in its building, classrooms and labs.
3. Movement restrictions: Our country suffers hardly from a
unique problem all over the world: movement restrictions,
“Movement within and in and out of the West Bank is
controlled by numerous checkpoints, roadblocks,
earthmounds and gates. These manned and unmanned
physical barriers combined with the Barrier and complex
permit regime, restrict the movement of around 2.4 million
IEEE MULTIDISCIPLINARY ENGINEERING EDUCATION MAGAZINE, VOL. 3, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2008
Palestinians to basic services, jobs, places of worship and
even to their families in the West Bank.” [21], which impact
the students’ movement from/to their universities; we can
mention some of those restrictions:
• Palestinians can not move between the Gaza Strip and the
West Bank.
• Almost, it is impossible for Palestinians to move from
West Bank to Jerusalem (permit from the Israeli
Authorities needed [21:4].
• There are many movement restrictions between our cities
as well as the movement in the same city (e.g. Hebron).
The number of physical obstacles (roadblocks and
checkpoints) restricting Palestinian movement throughout
the West Bank reached 537, [22].
• Curfew: During the second Intifada, the Israeli army re-
occupied the A areas of the West Bank, placed the
Palestinian civilian population under curfew and closure
for extended periods of time, on average 390,000 civilians
under curfew in November 2002 – April 2003, [23:1].
Many students lose lectures due to this terrible situations,
the BeLA can help them in the following:
- Review the learning contents via the eCourses.
- Contacts their teachers.
- Submit their assignments, reports and homework.
V. NECESSITY OF STRATEGY PLAN
Any Palestinian University wants to adopt BeLA needs to
realize a strategy plan, which will provide a clear starting
point for the activities, priorities and policies needed to
ensure BeL, is effectively and appropriately embedded in its
educational processes. It defines the new eLearning
program goals and it explains the steps which will achieve
those goals, as well as the eLearning requirements and
needs, which are necessary to implement successful
eLearning solutions, and an estimate budget of the BeL
adopting and embedding processes.
The strategy plan of adopting BeLA has the following
outlines:
• Scope and vision.
• Objectives of the new approach.
• Technology: determining the model of eLearning and the
suitable eLearning platform (CMS).
• Content: explaining the following:
- Sources of content, e.g. building or buying the content.
- Criteria and priorities of the developed courses.
- Team members of authoring.
- Processes of developing eCourse.
- Methods for evaluation.
• Administration and support: explaining the administration
and supporting process needed.
• Estimated budget: explaining the direct costs of program
development and the indirect costs associated with course
delivery and maintenance, as well as the added value or
the expected decreasing.
• Action steps, illustrating how the objectives outlined in
the strategy are to be achieved.
• Work plan: giving the time table of plan implementation.
1558-7908 © 2008 IEEE Education Society Students Activities Committee (EdSocSAC)
http://www.ieee.org/edsocsac
159
VI. ELEARNING PLATAFORM:
There are some concepts similar to eLearning platform
(some of them with a small difference), e.g. LCMS (Learning
content management system), LMS/CMS (Learning/ Course
Management System), Learning Portal. We will use the
abbreviation LMS to represent those concepts. The LMS is
an eLearning platform which is considered as an important
part of eLearning solutions from the university’s viewpoint
[24]. see figure No. 2.
Figure 2: LMS within eLearning.
More specifically, LMS is the software that automates the
administration of training events. “All LMSs manage the log-
in of registered users, manage course catalogs, track learner
activities and results, and provide reports to management. An
LMS may include additional functions such as: authoring of
content, management of classroom training, learner
collaboration tools (chat, discussion groups, etc.)”, [25].
The market of LMS is increasing very fast, and there are
more than 70 vendors [26]; some of LMSs are commercial
Software, while others are free Open-Source Software (OSS).
The following list shows some LMSs:
• Commercial LMS: e.g. WebCT <www.WebCT.com> and
eCollege <www.ecollege.com>.
• Open-Source LMS: e.g. MOODLE <http://MOODLE.org>
and ILIAS <www.ilias.de>.
Open source software is becoming an interesting sector of
the entire software landscape; it spread out and in
competition with other proprietary (commercial) software. In
short, OSS is software that you can freely access, use, share,
modify, and redistribute the Source Code.
OS-LMS is very suitable to the universities learning sector
due to:
1. OSS is a good solution to control their software and
format it upon their need.
2. The cost of using licence is almost nothing.
3. OSS licence permits any change, modification and
improvement of the LMS´s without any pay.
4. Some big organizations adopted OSS, e.g. NASA's
Center switched from Oracle to MySQL.
A. Adopting OSS Platform for TPUs
Due to the lake of financial resources of all palestinian
universities, the OSS platform is a good solution to realize
BeLA. Currently, many of these universities adopt OS-LMS
(MOODLE). Consequently, we recommend the TPUs to use
OS-LMS especially MOODLE.
B. Why MOODLE
We recommend the TPUs to use OS-LMS MOODLE,
<http://moodle.org/> due to the flowing:
1. MOODLE is OSS.
IEEE MULTIDISCIPLINARY ENGINEERING EDUCATION MAGAZINE, VOL. 3, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2008 160

Figure 3: a first page of MOODLE (of PPU)

2. MOODLE is fully support Arabic language beside
another 75 languages.
3. According to comprehensive survey [27], MOODLE is
the most recommended OSS.
4. More than 25,708 sites use it in 175 countries.
A brief list of some of its features:
1. Suitable for 100% online classes as well as
supplementing f2f learning.
2. Simple, lightweight, efficient, compatible, low-tech
browser interface.
3. Easy to install on almost any platform that supports
PHP. Requires only one database.
4. Course listing shows descriptions for every course on
the server, including accessibility to guests.
5. Courses can be categorised (allows a choice of 3 course
formats) and can be searched.
6. Emphasis on strong security throughout. Forms are all
checked, data validated, cookies encrypted etc.
7. Most text entry areas can be edited using an embedded
WYSIWYG HTML editor.
VII. BLENDED ECOURSE DEVELOPMENT STEPS:
We propose the following eCourse development steps
framework, see figure No. 4.
MOODLE is a free LMS/CMS, OSS package designed
using sound pedagogical principles to help educators create
effective online learning communities up to a 50,000-student
University, and it includes activity modules such as forums,
resources, journals, quizzes…etc. It runs without
modification on UNIX, Linux, Windows, and many
databases (e.g. MySQL). See figure No. 3.
1. Selecting the involved course which will be developed.
2. Naming the course lecturer/s.
3. Presenting the materials content: the chosen course
lecturer presents all the materials content of the target
course such as: books, documents, manuals and digital
materials.
4. Determining the eCourse contents by the lecturer.
5. Explaining how the contents will be displayed: the
lecturer with cooperation of pedagogical expert
determines how the contents will be displayed, the tools
which will be used and the suitable content format, e.g.
using PDF, Presentation, Text, HTTB, WIKI,
XML…etc.
6. Deciding the multimedia activities: the lecturer with
cooperation of pedagogical expert decides which parts
and activities need to be designed as multimedia.
7. Deciding the course activities: the lecturer with
cooperation of pedagogical expert decides the suitable
course activities, e.g. assignments, homework, chats,
glossaries, quizzes and resources.

1558-7908 © 2008 IEEE Education Society Students Activities Committee (EdSocSAC)

http://www.ieee.org/edsocsac
IEEE MULTIDISCIPLINARY ENGINEERING EDUCATION MAGAZINE, VOL. 3, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2008 161

Figure 4: Framework of eCourse development steps

8. Developing and designing: the lecturer develops the
selected contents and activities and the multimedia
technician designs the multimedia then put all in the
target eCourse.
9. Evaluating: the Quality Unit insures that the eCourse
fits its quality assurance procedures.
10. Updating: the lecture with cooperation with the
programmer makes the final modification upon the
evaluation notes.
11. Allowing the eCourse accessing.
plan to adopt such approach and explains the needed steps to
develop eCourse by this approach.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I would like to thank Palestine Polytechnic University and
especially it’s IT Center of excellence for providing support
and material related to educational research.
REFERENCES

VIII. CONCLUSION
The need for eLearning, especially Blended eLearning for
the universities is increasing. Consequently, after reviewing
the eLearning initiatives at traditional palestinian
universities which have to explore the benefits of Blended
eLearning and to use it for solving some of their critical
problems.
This research tries to help the administrations of
palestinian universities to adopt a new approach of
eLearning; the Blended Approach by illustrating its benefits,
explaining how it could resolve partially the lack of funding,
capacity limitation and movement restrictions problems.
This paper also highlights the necessity to realize a strategy
[1] eLAP - eLearning Action Plan .(2001). Designing tomorrow’s
education, Communication from the Commission to the Council
and the European Parliament, Brussels, 28 Mar.ch, COM (2001)
172. http://europa.eu.int/eur-
lex/en/com/cnc/2001/com2001_0172en01.pdf
[2] APO. (2003). Multimedia and eLearning: a new direction for
productivity promotion and enhancement. Asian Productivity
Organization. Tokyo. ©APO. ISBN: 92-833-2344-0.
[3] Kapp, K. M., Latham, W. F and Ford-Latham, N. F. (2001).
“Integrated learning for ERP success: a learning requirements
planning approach”, Contributor Carol A Ptak, CRC Press, pg. 368,
ISBN: 1574442961.
[4] Fallon. C. and Brown. S. (2003). “e-Learning Standards: A Guide
to Purchasing, Developing, and Deploying Standards-Conformant
E-Learning”. CRC Press, pg. 252. ISBN: 1574443453.

1558-7908 © 2008 IEEE Education Society Students Activities Committee (EdSocSAC)

http://www.ieee.org/edsocsac
IEEE MULTIDISCIPLINARY ENGINEERING EDUCATION MAGAZINE, VOL. 3, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2008 162

[5] Kaminskaya, E. (2006). Teaching With Technology: A Case Study [24] Itmazi, J. A. Gea, M. M. Paderewski, P. and Gutiérrez, F.L. (2005).
Of Online Faculty Development at The University Of Central A Comparison and evaluation OF Open source learning managment
Florida”, International Research and Exchanges Board, University systems, In Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference-
of Central Florida. Applied Computing 2005, Algarve, Portugal,. February 22nd-25th.
[6] Heinze, A. and Procter, C. (2004). Reflections on the use of blended [25] BRANDON-HALL, (2003). “Site of BRANDON-HALL.COM”,
learning. Proceedings of Education in a Changing Environment, “ELearning Glossary of Terms”.
University of Salford, Education Development Unit. www.brandonhall.com/public/pdfs/glossary.pdf
[7] Collis, B., and Moonen, J. (2001). Flexible learning in a digital [26] Wilson, D. (2002). The future of learning management, learning
world: Experiences and expectations. London: Kogan Page. technologies© Principal Media Ltd. Online:
[8] Mantyla, K. (2001). Blending E-Learning: The Power is in the Mix, www.learningtechnologies.co.uk/magazine/article_full.cfm?articlei
Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training & Development, d=19&issueid=5&section=1
ISBN 1562863010. [27] Itmazi J. Gea M. (2005). Survey: Comparison and Evaluation
[9] Itmazi, J. A. (2005). “Sistema flexible de gestión del elearning para Studies of Learning Management Systems.
soportar el aprendizaje en las universidades tradicionales y abiertas”. MICROLEARNING2005: Learning & Working in New Media
Doctorate Thesis. Pg 351. ISBN: 8433835289. Granada University, Environments, International Conference.
Spain. Sep. http://hera.ugr.es/tesisugr/15508584.pdf http://www.microlearning.org/index.php?itemid=44&catid=1
[10] Rossett. A. and Frazee, R. (2006). “Blended Learning
Opportunities”, Special Report, American Management Association.
www.amanet.org/blended/pdf/WhitePaper_BlendLearn.pdf
[11] Elaydi, H. and Hammad, R. (2006). E-Learning at Islamic
University of Gaza, International Conference on Computer Theory
and Applications - ICCTA 2006, 5-7 Sep., Alexandria, Egypt.
[12] WB (2006). The world bank, A Quarterly Publication of the West Jamil Itmazi is Director of eLearning and a Permanent Lecturer in the IT
Bank and Gaza Office, "West Bank and Gaza Update", The world Center of Excellence at Palestine Polytechnic University, Hebron -
bank Group, sep., P10. Palestine. He received his PhD degree from Granada University, Spain,
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWESTBANKGAZA/Resour 2005, in eLearning software development.
ces/UpdateSept06Eng.pdf Dr. Itmazi has been researching at eLearning systems, learning
Management Systems, Recommendation Systems and Open-Source
[13] Graham, C. R., Allen, S., and Ure, D. (2003). Blended learning
environments: A review of the research literature. Unpublished Systems as well as participating in a range of IT-related projects. He is
manuscript, Provo, UT. retained as an expert and a consultant in learning technology projects.
Previously, he was the manager of the ISSRA Education Center and a tutor
[14] PCR. (2003). Program in Course Redesign (PCR). The National at the Palestinian Ministry Of Education and High Education.
Center for Academic Transformation. Saratoga Springs, NY 12866,
USA. www.center.rpi.edu/PCR.htm
Mahmnoud Tmeizeh is an English Supervisor at Southern Hebron
[15] Carol A. T. (2003). Improving Learning and Reducing Costs: New Directorate of Education in Palestinian ministry of education and high
Models for Online Learning, Troy, New York: National Center for education and a Part Time Lecturer in Hebron University, Palestine
Academic Transformation. Polytechnic University and Al-Quds Open University, Hebron - Palestine.
www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0352.pdf He is preparing his final stage of PhD degree in Educational Technology at
[16] Kölmel B. and Würtz G. (2005). “The Need for Context-based Institute of Arab Research & Studies, Egypt.
Assistance and Multimodal Access to eLearning”. In “Innovation Mr. Tmeizeh has been researching at eLearning pedagogy, Educational
and the Knowledge Economy: Issues, Applications, Case Studies”, Technology, Learning theories and using multimedia in Education.
Paul Cunningham and Miriam Cunningham (Eds), IOS Press., Previously, he was the Principal of Deir Samit Secondary School and a
ISBN: 1586035630 tutor at the Palestinian Ministry Of Education and High Education.
[17] MOHE. (2006). Palestinian Ministry of Education and Higher
Education, Palestinian Higher Education Statistics,
www.mohe.gov.ps/stats/index.html
[18] Francesc, P. (2003). Proyecto campus digital. Informe de
consultoría. Montevideo: UdelaR. Mimeo.
www.fing.edu.uy/redin/ConsultoriaPedro.pdf
[19] Welch, R. (2007). Blended Learning Compliance Obstacles and
Solutions, CPE Conference, National Association of State Boards
of Accountancy, Mar.12-14,
www.nasba.org/nasbaweb/NASBAWeb.nsf/wpmtsd?openform&co
nference=2007%20CPE%20Conference
[20] Kaplún, G. (2006). Learning and teaching in the internet age.
Distance learning and new technologies for vocational training,
Trazos de la Formación, ISBN 92-9088-216-6.
[21] OCHA. (2007). UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian
Affairs - the Occupied Palestinian Territory, “Barrier and
Checkpoints”, April.
www.ochaopt.org/documents/Closure%20Apr07_2.pdf
[22] OCHA. (2007). UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian
Affairs - the occupied Palestinian territory, “The Humanitarian
Monitor”, report no. 10, Feb.
www.ochaopt.org/documents/oPt_Humanitarian_Monitor_Feb_07.
pdf
[23] UN. (2003). UNITED NATIONS - Occupied Palestinian Territory,
“Mid-Year Review”, New York and Geneva, May.
http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/85255db800470aa485255d8b
004e349a/1ad2ab1d4695e7ff85256d3a004c46d8/$FILE/Review.pd
f

1558-7908 © 2008 IEEE Education Society Students Activities Committee (EdSocSAC)

http://www.ieee.org/edsocsac