IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 52, NO.

1, FEBRUARY 2009 19
A Blended Learning Approach to Course
Design and Implementation
Natasa Hoic-Bozic, Member, IEEE, Vedran Mornar, Member, IEEE, and Ivica Boticki, Student Member, IEEE
AbstractBlended learning has become an increasingly popular
form of e-learning, and is particularly suitable to the process
of transitioning towards e-learning from traditional forms of
learning and teaching. This paper describes the use of the blended
e-learning model, which is based on a mixture of collabora-
tive learning, problem-based learning (PBL) and independent
learning, in a course Teaching Methods in Information Science,
given at the University of Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia. This model
is realized as a combination of a face-to-face environment and
online learning, using a proprietary learning management system
(LMS) named adaptive hypermedia courseware (AHyCo). AHyCo
is based on adaptive hypermedia and in addition to supporting
learning and testing, introduces completely new constructivist and
cognitivist elements to education. By supporting collaborative and
project-oriented activities AHyCo promotes students motivation
for learning and establishes learning as an active and interactive
process. This paper describes both the technology for, and the
methodological approach to, course design and development which
is aimed at supporting the evolution from traditional teaching to
active learning, and raising interest in the topics of e-learning and
Web courseware development among IT students. A survey con-
ducted in the end of the course showed that students were satised
with the pedagogical approach, and their academic achievements
were also better than expected. Particularly important is that
the dropout rate was greatly diminished, which could be related
to students satisfaction with the support they received from the
instructor and the system.
Index TermsBlended learning, collaborative learning,
e-learning, learning management system (LMS), problem-based
learning (PBL).
I. INTRODUCTION
T
HE advent of the modern knowledge society requires
changes in educational processes, new forms of education
and training, and new skills. Merely altering the subject matter
taught would be inadequate to bring about these changes;
fundamental shifts in teaching methodology are essential. Al-
though these changes are necessary at every level of education,
they are particularly important at the university level.
The traditional approach to education, where the transfer of
knowledge is achieved mostly by lecturing, has a number of
shortcomings, in particular because the students are not moti-
vated enough to acquire knowledge actively [1]. The role of an
Manuscript received May 20, 2007; revised November 27, 2007. Current ver-
sion published February 4, 2009.
N. Hoic-Bozic is with the Department of Information Science, University of
Rijeka, HR-51000 Rijeka, Croatia (e-mail: [email protected]).
V. Mornar and I. Botcki are with the Department of Applied Computing, Fac-
ulty of Electrical Engineering and Computing, University of Zagreb, HR-10000
Zagreb, Croatia.
Color versions of one or more of the gures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TE.2007.914945
instructor must be redened so as to accomplish a shift in ped-
agogy from an instructor-centered to a learner-centered envi-
ronment. The educational system should engender an interest
in independent learning, and prepare the students for lifelong
learning, which is a necessary skill for successful participation
in the knowledge society [2].
Information and communication technology (ICT) is an in-
dispensable part of modern education, especially because of
the opportunities this technology offers to accomplish the new
teaching paradigm. ICT has been used for teaching and learning
since the inception of this eld [3].
Over a 40-year period, ICT-supported education has been
given various names and has appeared in different forms
and different applications. The most accepted term today is
e-learning, emphasizing that technology in education should be
complemented with appropriate pedagogical methods, forms
and principles, and particularly with those that encourage active
learning [4].
There are various denitions of e-learning as a method of
furthering the educational process through the use of ICT. A
vital point in making these denitions is not to emphasize the
technology to a degree that disregards the importance of high-
quality learning and teaching [1], [5][8].
Thus, according to [8], e-learning is dened as the use of
new multimedia technologies and the Internet to improve the
quality of learning by facilitating access to resources and ser-
vices as well as remote exchanges and collaboration. This def-
inition underlines an important aspect of e-learning: the use of
the computer as a medium for communication, research and in-
formation gathering, as well as a learning tool [9], [10]. The de-
nition also abandons the obsolete paradigm in which e-learning
is seen as computer-centered learning with students sitting in
front of a computer reading World Wide Web (WWW) course-
ware.
E-learning, as a form of education, exists at several levels: as
a completely independent form, but also as an integral part or an
extension of classical education. ICT could be introduced as
an aid to classical teaching, as a blended (hybrid, mixed-mode)
learning combining the classical teaching in classroom with
teaching assisted by the technology, or as completely online
learning where students learn independently, mostly over the
Internet (WWW) and without the need to be physically present
within the learning environment [6].
Although online learning has many apparent advantages, in-
cluding 24/7 delivery, personalization, interactivity, immediate
feedback, and online assessment [11], one of the major prob-
lems is poor retentiona high student dropout rate. Retention
is dened as continued student participation in a course until
completion. The low retention, or high dropout rate, has always
been the major problem in educational systems, but is notably
0018-9359/$25.00 2008 IEEE
20 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 52, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2009
present in online forms of e-learning [12], [13]. This issue is the
principal reason why todays forms of e-learning are more ori-
ented towards communication, collaboration, and interactivity
in both face-to-face (f2f) and virtual environments, overcoming
the drawbacks of early versions of e-learning which used ICT
primarily to improve the distribution of learning content.
The research results at Croatian institutions of higher edu-
cation have also shown that students satisfaction with online
courses increase only in the presence of both quality online ma-
terials, and well-prepared tutors leading the course in a collab-
orative environment [14], [16].
Blended learning (BL) is becoming an increasingly popular
form of e-learning, particularly suitable for use in the process
of transition from traditional forms of learning and teaching to-
wards e-learning [5], [15], [16]. In this model of teaching and
learning, signicant amounts of f2f elements are replaced by
technology-mediated teaching. Therefore, fewer f2f class ses-
sions are held nowadays because ICT is increasingly being used
to deliver course materials and to facilitate learning. According
to [5], the most efcient teaching model is a blended approach,
which combines self-paced learning, live e-learning, and f2f
classroom learning.
In this paper, a way of teaching courses using an e-learning
model based on BL, as a combination of independent learning,
online discussions, and problem-based learning (PBL), is de-
scribed. This model uses both an f2f environment and an online
environment using a learning management system (LMS). The
educational activities and technology used will be described, to-
gether with the results of the evaluation.
As with many study programs in the eld of computing,
the main objective of this initiative is to sustain the evolu-
tion from traditional teaching to active learning [17][19]. In
computing education, practical activities are as important as
theoretical ones. Moreover, it is particularly important that
students of computing are familiarized with different aspects of
e-learning, since computing is a eld where lifelong learning
is indispensable. Another goal of this approach is to raise the
level of interest in the topics of e-learning and Web courseware
development among IT students.
This paper describes a LMS named adaptive hypermedia
courseware (AHyCo), based on adaptive hypermedia, as well as
a methodological approach for its use. Although the develop-
ment of a proprietary LMS might appear unorthodox, in 2000,
when work on AHyCo was commenced, Web-based adaptive
systems were extremely rare. Furthermore, when continuous
assessment was introduced during the educational reforms
initiated by the Bologna process [20], having the source code
at hand conferred the practical advantage of being able to add
numerous advanced features.
The rst version of AHyCo only supported interaction be-
tween students and subject matter content to the extent of using
adaptive hypermedia and online tests [21]. The newest version
of the AHyCo LMS is intended to integrate various collaborative
and group-oriented interactive modules to enhance its educa-
tional capabilities [22]. Student interaction is supported through
an asynchronous communication forum. Automatic creation of
groups based on various criteria, intergroup peer-evaluation, and
le sharing functionality between students across groups, was
introduced. Tools for course management and for the automated
grading of programming assignments were also implemented.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: Section II
describes the basic pedagogical aspects as foundations for the
educational model, Section III explains the course design and
development, Section IV introduces AHyCo LMS, Section V
presents the evaluation results, and nally Section VI presents
conclusions and some future plans.
II. PEDAGOGICAL FOUNDATION
A. Blended Learning
Blended learning is learning based on various combinations
of classical f2f lectures, learning over the Internet, and learning
supported by other technologies, aimed at creating the most
efcient learning environment. Blended learning also incor-
porates other elements such as online and traditional learning
environments, technology and media for learning content
delivery, different teaching and learning methods (both online
and traditional), group and individual learning activities, and
synchronous and asynchronous interactions. The aim is to
choose a mixture that will highly motivate the students, and
assist them in successfully mastering the course [5], [15], [23].
From this variety of BL education two fundamental ap-
proaches can be singled-out: the program-ow model and the
core-and-spoke model [23].
The program-ow model is composed of steps, which are ex-
ecuted by the student in a well-dened linear sequence. As a
nal step, an exercise or a test is included to assess the results
of learning. This model is particularly appropriate during the
transition from f2f to the BL model [15]. The development of
the model usually begins by replacing some live events with
e-learning activities, completed by students on their own.
In the core-and-spoke model, the designer develops a single
primary approach and then delivers the content, interactive ele-
ments, resources, and tests as additional modules. Each module
or element (the spoke) can be either mandatory or optional, and
extends the primary approach (the core). The sequence in which
these elements are encountered is not dened.
B. Theories of Learning
Different theories or approaches to learning, notwithstanding
their different viewpoints, complement each other and may even
overlap. Learning systems should be made up of elements of
behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism [24].
The behaviorist school observes how learning is affected by
the behavior of the instructor and by other external factors. Stu-
dents require approval and support, which should be provided
as soon as possible, and learning is an incremental rather than a
single-step process, and is strengthened by repeated success.
The cognitivist school perceives learning as a mental process.
Here, learning is an active process of transforming experience
into organized concepts, with an emphasis on the individual dif-
ferences in ability and motivation between students. The stress
is on how individuals perceive, interpret, store and memorize
information.
The constructivist school recognizes the learning as an ac-
tive process of constructing meaning. Students do not memo-
rize what was said by the instructor. Instead, they construct they
own versions of the learning matter. Students should be helped
to construct their own meaning of knowledge, enabling them to
HOIC-BOZIC et al.: BLENDED LEARNING APPROACH TO COURSE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION 21
reect upon, discuss and exchange ideas with their colleagues
and instructors.
High-quality learning environments in general, and espe-
cially high-quality online learning environments, should be
based on multiple theories of learning [7], [25]. Nevertheless,
one should note that constructivism is the most widely accepted
model of learning in education today [26], emphasizing the
student-centered model, and active learning. Learning will be
successful and comprehensive if students are actively involved
in the learning process and if this process is taking place in a
collaborative learning environment [18].
C. Collaborative Work
A collaborative learning environment plays a very important
role in knowledge building, sharing, and distribution, since col-
laboration among learners has a signicant impact on learning
outcomes [17], [27], [28].
Collaborative learning is an approach to learning in which
students of different abilities and interests work together
in small groups in order to solve a problem or complete a
project. This approach involves group activities, and active
participation, interaction and communication on the part of
both students and instructors [13]. The instructor organizes a
class into groups and assigns specic tasks or projects to each
group. The members of a group are focused on completing a
task. Each group member must participate, and is responsible
for the successful completion of the group assignment. Before
the group work starts, the instructor should present students
with their assignments and responsibilities, the regulations for
group work and the rules for the evaluation of assignments.
Group work is organized into several stages: the initial stage of
forming groups, the distribution of group tasks or assignments,
autonomous group work on assignments, the presentation of
results to the instructor and the other groups, and the evaluation
of group work and assignment results.
The critical point at the start of group work concerns the for-
mation of these groups. Groups can be formed according to var-
ious criteria. Some instructors let students independently choose
with whom they want to work; others prefer to assign students
randomly to groups so as to maximize their heterogeneity. How-
ever, many instructors prefer to form the groups by taking into
account students prior achievements or knowledge, and their
levels of preparation, work habits, and gender [29]. Very often,
homogenous groups are formed, by placing well-prepared stu-
dents in groups with other well-prepared students.
During the group work on assignments, members support
each other, manage their group activities and focus on their
tasks. The instructorfacilitator can provide tools and tech-
niques for the tasks, should afrm their good work, and must
stay in the background when not needed. The crucial part in
this stage is a well-established communication between group
members [13].
The last stage of learning is evaluation, which includes stu-
dents reection on their task as well as a task completion check.
This evaluation allows students to reect on their own problem
solving-process: what did and what did not work well in the
group and how could the group learning process be improved?
The main problem with group work is that it is time-con-
suming. ICT can be used to minimize this disadvantage, and
to facilitate collaborative learning. In particular, computer-me-
diated communication (CMC) gives students an opportunity to
work on collaborative projects in an online learning environ-
ment [30][32]. Instructors do need to pay special attention to
students engaged in online collaborative learning because of the
physical and psychological separation between them [13]. This
monitoring can best be accomplished by using various forms of
asynchronous CMC.
D. Problem-Based Learning (PBL)
Practical work is of crucial importance for all information
science courses. Students will learn and understand the subject
matter better if they actively participate in some projects, and
as a result PBL is widely accepted in this eld. Problem-based
learning is dened as a process of teaching that uses concrete
problems to motivate students and that has a focus on student-
centered activities. Instead of the emphasis being on teaching,
greater signicance is given to the learning process [33]. Here,
the instructors act more as facilitators than as a primary source
of knowledge.
Students frequently collaborate in small groups or teams to
clarify and dene the nature of problems and attempt to estab-
lish the procedures to solve them. Examples of successful ap-
plication of PBL in ICT can be found in [34][36].
III. COURSE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT
A. Academic Context
The course Teaching Methods in Information Science was
designed for senior students in the undergraduate program in a
Mathematics and Information Science major at the Department
of Information Science, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Univer-
sity of Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia. The academic year in Croatia
consists of a winter and a summer term, and this is a two-term
course.
This course enables future elementary and high school
teachers to apply various teaching and learning approaches to
Information Science lessons. They are also introduced to the
exploitation of ICT in education and to the basics of instruc-
tional design with emphasis on Web courseware development.
Due to a lack of qualied computing graduates, graduates of
Mathematics and Information Science programs frequently nd
jobs as computing professionals in the region. Moreover, be-
cause Croatia is a non-English speaking country, which recog-
nizes the need for lifelong learning, these graduates are often
engaged in courseware production. Thus, it is important to edu-
cate them to be professionals familiar with IT in programming,
databases, multimedia systems, or computer networks. In addi-
tion, they should be well versed in pedagogical principles and
instructional design, since an instructional designer must be ex-
pert both in technological means and in pedagogical methods.
Being a senior-year course, the number of students enrolled
per term is between 1025. For PBL and group work, a low
student-instructor ratio is a prerequisite for the strategy to be
successful.
Originally a classical f2f approach was applied, with stu-
dents developing their projects independently, partially in class
and partially as homework. Since 20042005, a new BL model
has been introduced, with various activities based on all three
learning paradigms, with an emphasis on PBL and group work.
22 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 52, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2009
Fig. 1. Activities followed during the course.
It is important to note that those students had never before been
introduced to any LMS, so the course had a double role: stu-
dents were learning about e-learning with the aid of e-learning
and were able to try out in practice everything heard or read in
the lectures.
B. Learning Objectives and Content
The overall objective is to improve students progress in their
study of ICT by improving teaching methods and support ser-
vices, with special attention being given to collaborative work
in groups and PBL.
On completion of this course, students should be able to
identify various types of ICT (with emphasis on Internet
and hypermediaWWW) and approaches to using them
in education;
explain what e-learning is and distinguish between dif-
ferent types of e-learning (ICT as teaching aid, blended or
mix-mode, distance learning);
analyze approaches to using ICT and types of e-learning;
identify various types of CMC and online tests in educa-
tion, reect on their characteristics for use in education and
implement some basic types Evaluate the existing WWW
courseware and use it in teaching;
plan, prepare, develop, and use WWW courseware;
apply good Web design and good courseware design when
developing the Web courseware.
The course Teaching Methods in Information Science con-
sists of the following topics:
1) hypermedia and adaptive hypermedia;
2) ICT in education (Internet, WWW in education, CMC in
education, online testing);
3) e-learning (BL, distance learning);
4) Web design;
5) Web-based courseware (planning, designing, developing,
and evaluating courseware).
C. Approach to Blended Learning and Learning Activities
The course Teaching Methods in Information Science was
prepared according to the sequential (program ow) model of
BL [23], largely because this model is particularly appropriate
in transition from standard f2f teaching to a model which intro-
duces online learning [15]. Some tasks, previously performed
in class (lectures, seminars, discussions), were substituted with
e-learning activities where students independently use LMS or
communicate over forums in groups.
The course commences with a two-hour kickoff f2f lecture
where the learners have the opportunity to meet each other and
the tutor. This f2f introductory session is dedicated to the pre-
sentation of the learning objectives, discussing the most sig-
nicant knowledge and tasks to be learned, and describing all
learning activities
An introduction to the LMS system AHyCo follows because
AHyCo is the rst LMS the students will have encountered. In
spite of the fact that in some BL approaches [37] online content
is used in preparation for the f2f learning, this course introduces
the opposite approach: rst, two topics are presented in an f2f
environment, followed by online learning. This sequence over-
comes the lack of student experience in e-learning, giving them
an opportunity to adjust to the new paradigm of learning, and to
familiarize themselves with AHyCos tools.
All course activities were performed in a predened sequence
according to the announced schedule. The main activities for the
course were performed mostly in the online environment. The
actual schedule is shown in Fig. 1.
1) Online Presentation and Testing Using AHyCo System:
The two short initial course topics are presented in the f2f
environment. The three more elaborate remaining topics are
presented through AHyCo: e-learning, Web design, and hyper-
media Web courseware development. The number of online
topics will increase in time, until all content is offered online.
AHyCo modules are composed of several lectures and online
tests for self-evaluation, linked with prerequisite relationships,
which govern the progression through the knowledge space.
Each module ends with a test, the results of which are recorded
and count towards the nal grade.
2) Students Seminar Papers: Students are individually re-
quired to write short papers (essays) on aspects of the course
content. These papers are then uploaded, and are evaluated by
the instructor using AHyCos online grading subsystem. Some
of the papers are presented and discussed in AHyCos forum. In
the academic year 20052006, typical seminar topics included
an analysis of an online course or an analysis of the design of a
website, chosen by the students.
3) Online Discussions: Students are expected to post mes-
sages regularly in the forum (Fig. 2) and to comment on and
generate ideas with other students and instructors. Topics of dis-
cussions are linked with the concepts introduced in the courses
modules. Online discussions are moderated by instructors, who
HOIC-BOZIC et al.: BLENDED LEARNING APPROACH TO COURSE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION 23
Fig. 2. The forum topics page.
decide whether a discussion should be private (available to a
group of students) or public (available to all students regardless
of the groups in which they belong).
Each student should contribute to the discussion with their
own ideas, thoughts and answers, in response to questions that
are posted by the instructor or a demonstrator to launch the dis-
cussion. Students should also comment on other students mes-
sages. Within a topic, students can initiate their own discussions.
All contributions are graded.
4) Students Group Project: Development of WWW Course-
ware: Students are also expected to develop a hypermedia
e-learning Web application or WWW courseware, with various
multimedia elements, online tests and communication tools.
The domain of the courseware is selected independently and
the subject content is collected from classical literature or from
the Internet. The majority of the topics come from computing,
but other areas, like math and science, are also allowed.
This courseware is developed within the groups, each con-
sisting of 35 members. The groups are not self-forming but
are determined with assistance of AHyCos group forming sub-
system. This subsystem helps in creating homogenous groups
according to the various individuals success on the previous
online tests.
The development begins by lling in the courseware analysis
form and by building and presenting the storyboard. This anal-
ysis consists of a short description of the project, educational
goals and target users. The storyboard graphically and textually
presents all the information which will be shown on course-
ware screens, elaborating upon the initial idea and describing
all application components and their interconnections. The sto-
ryboard must be presented to the instructor in advance. After the
storyboard is approved, the courseware must exactly follow the
ideas presented in the analysis and storyboard.
The courseware must include a front page with a table of con-
tents, a help function, an index, a dictionary, communication via
Web forms, quizzes (at least one with 10 multiple-choice ques-
tions), a clickable application map, references, links, and multi-
media elements like graphics, sound, Flash animation and video.
Chapters must be organized into at least two levels of hierarchy.
Students are expected to study and implement additional ele-
ments like a forum, a search function, original quiz ideas, addi-
tional multimedia, and PHP, Java or JavaScript code. Completed
courseware is uploaded to the Web server.
Students and the instructor communicate predominantly by
e-mail or over forums, but, when required, all students meet the
instructor in class. Group members also communicate with each
other both online and f2f. Every group is required to publish bi-
weekly reports about recent advances and tasks performed. This
process enables the instructor to diagnose possible problems and
to help students in nding a remedy.
5) Courseware Reection: Each group of students presents
their WWW courseware and a brief summary of the courseware
development process f2f in class. Each member of the group
produces a brief written summary about his/her role within the
group and experiences in the project. One student analyzes the
courseware and describes what he/she learned from developing
it. Each group evaluates the other groups courseware according
to a dened set of criteria. Courseware is evaluated both by in-
structor and students fromthe other groups (peer-evaluated), but
currently only the instructors grade is taken into account.
D. Approaches to Teaching and Learning
In the context of the course a combination of all three learning
paradigms (cognitivism, behaviorism, and constructivism) was
used [24].
Several years ago the prevailing paradigm was behaviorism.
AHyCo was only applied in the educational process by using
online courseware and online testing. To promote learning, the
lessons were sequenced according to the adaptive hypermedia
design rules. Online tests were used for three purposes: for self-
evaluation, for updating the student model in order to accom-
plish adaptive navigation and for grading students knowledge.
Important elements of a courseware are learning objectives set
by instructors. In that way, students knowin advance what to ex-
pect they will get from the course, where they are in the process
of learning and what to do next.
By the cognitivist paradigm, students individual differences
are catered to, and their motivation for learning is promoted.
24 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 52, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2009
Students choose the topic and design for the WWW course-
ware and when, where, and for how long they will study each
module. They can express their opinions in discussions in the
forum. Greater intrinsic motivation for the students is achieved
because they can choose the topic for the WWW courseware
and reect on their work. Extrinsic motivation is accomplished
because each activity is awarded by certain number of points,
which are then collected towards their nal grade. In order to
enhance learning, lessons include various multimedia elements
such as audio, graphics, animations, and video. The content is
organized according to the cognitivist strategies for good pre-
sentation design: there are small amounts of content (lessons)
within a module, there is a map of the lessons within the module,
there are ve to nine items per screen, etc. An important element
of the cognitivist approach is that students apply, analyze, syn-
thesize, and evaluate examples in order to produce their seminar
papers and courseware.
Constructivism perceives learning as an active process.
Activities allow students to contextualize the concepts studied,
either by placing them in a practical situation, or by making real
WWW courseware. Students have an opportunity to choose the
topic and to make their own courseware and to interact with
the group. They construct their own knowledge by learning
from AHyCos online modules, discussing online with other
students and the instructor and reecting upon seminars. Col-
laborative and cooperative learning are encouraged by having
the students working in groups. Students have control over the
learning process because they are allowed to make a decision
on the courseware topics and the process of the courseware
creation. In addition, they can choose when, where and for how
long they will read each AHyCo module before taking online
tests and participating in discussions in the forum. They also
have an opportunity to reect on their work by participating
in a courseware reection activity and preparing presentations
about their work. According to constructivism, learning should
be interactive to promote higher-level learning and social pres-
ence. In the context of the course, students interact [38] online
with instructors, other students and the subject content through
the AHyCo system.
E. Grading
Students can earn points fromthe several mandatory elements
that count towards their nal grade. The project (Web course-
ware and reection on the courseware) contributes 40 points:
online tests (20), seminar papers/essays (15), forum discussions
(15), and the oral exam (10). Final grades are expressed ac-
cording to the Croatian grade scale: failed (1), satisfactory (2),
good (3), very good (4), and excellent (5). Students with less
than 60 points fail and have the choice of repeating some assign-
ments, or retaking the course in the next academic year. The best
grade, excellent (5), is given to the students who collect more
than 90 points.
Points for Web courseware are given based on several criteria:
quality of analysis and storyboard;
implementation and quality of all mandatory multimedia
and courseware elements;
quality of the content (subject matter presented in
courseware);
quality of design: graphical, interface, and navigation
design;
implementation of some optional multimedia and course-
ware elements.
A portion of the points for the Web courseware is awarded
for individual courseware reection. According to the quality of
a students participation in the development of the courseware
and his/her analysis of the whole process, the number of points
for students within the same group may be different. For ex-
ample, a student who implemented an additional element (e.g.,
programmed new navigational elements in JavaScript or Java)
gets more points than others from the same group who did not
implement additional elements.
Online tests contribute up to 20 points. These tests are an-
nounced in advance and are held in a controlled classroom en-
vironment. Every seminar and every formal forum discussion
on a topic given by the instructor is graded with up to 5 points.
As a rule, a more elaborate oral exam is held for those students
who missed some of the class components. For those who were
continually involved in all forms of work, an informal interview
to conrm the given grade is held.
F. Selection of Technology
The classes are held in a computer classroom equipped with
an LCD projector and 14 PC computers connected to the In-
ternet. The students may use another computer classroomfor in-
dependent work and all of themhave their own PCs with modem
or DSL Internet connection at home. All students have accounts
with e-mail addresses and they can publish their Web pages on
the main faculty server. The online part of the class is carried
out using AHyCo LMS, described in the next section.
IV. AHYCO AS AN ADAPTIVE WEB-BASED LMS
A proprietary Web-based LMS AHyCo was chosen for the
course. This LMS was developed at the Faculty of Electrical
Engineering and Computing (FER), University of Zagreb,
Zagreb, Croatia, in collaboration with the Faculty of Arts and
Sciences, University of Rijeka, within the context of several
research projects. The theoretical background of AHyCo and
implementation of adaptive navigation are described in [21]
and [39].
In the development of the AHyCo system, Microsofts
ASP.NET technology and the Microsoft SQL Server 2000
database, together with a middle-tier component for communi-
cation between the Web application and database, were used.
As a result, to use AHyCo, only a Web browser is required,
which makes it easily accessible to all users.
As with other standard LMS, AHyCo has several groups of
tools, which are used by students and/or instructors. The most
important group of tools is that for content authoring and de-
livering learning content to students. The other sets of tools are
for student assessment, collaboration support with student group
management, and class management.
A. Content Authoring
The process of authoring hypermedia courseware using
AHyCo includes the development of learning materials
(lessons and tests), adaptation rules and other content such as
student discussion groups and forum themes. AHyCos au-
thoring environment consists of a standalone tool for graphical
linkage of lessons and tests within a module, as well as for
HOIC-BOZIC et al.: BLENDED LEARNING APPROACH TO COURSE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION 25
Fig. 3. A page showing the content of a lesson.
linkage of modules within a course. More about the authoring
environment can be found in [39].
B. Delivering Learning ContentAHyCo Learning
Environment
To use AHyCos learning environment, a student must rst
log on. After authorization, the student has to choose the subject
s/he wishes to learn, or a course. The course consists of modules
and each module contains several lessons and tests.
For the selected module, a Web page containing the lesson is
generated. This lesson is chosen in accordance to the adaptation
rules and the data stored in the student model corresponding
to the students previous knowledge. This function is the part
of AHyCo LMS where its adaptive hypermedia characteristics
could be seen as a way of supporting adaptive navigation [40].
The upper part of the page in Fig. 3 represents the content
of a lesson. At the bottom of the page hyperlinks to the fol-
lowing lessons or tests are automatically offered by the system.
The suggested hyperlinks are automatically generated before
the page is shown and are annotated with various colors cor-
responding to the concept types. For example, green indicates
the main or highly recommended concepts. Red indicates con-
cepts that are not recommended for the student based upon to
the data in their student model. Nevertheless, students are al-
lowed to navigate freely within a module, and to disregard the
recommendations given by the system. But navigation between
modules is limited, so a student can continue to the next module
only after the previous one has been completed, as determined
by the successful completion of the associated tests.
C. Student Assessment
The tests in AHyCo are not only used for students self-eval-
uation (formative assessment) and their grading (summative as-
sessment), but also for updating the student model in order to
accomplish the adaptive navigational support.
AHyCo offers tests with multiple-choice questions (Fig. 4)
and problem-based questions with essay-type and programming
assignments (Fig. 5). A test consists of several questions which
are linked to a lesson and which carry a particular weight used in
grading. The test questions and the sequence of possible answers
for each question are generated randomly and are presented on
the tests own Web format. Astudent selects an answer and nav-
igates through the test pages by using the common Web inter-
face elements (hyperlinks and buttons). After the test has been
submitted for grading, the student receives a detailed report on
the results. For all the questions the correct answers are shown,
together with links to the appropriate lessons.
The next type of online test contains problem-based ques-
tions. There are two types of such questions: essay-type as-
signments and programming assignments. AHyCos automated
grading of programming assignments supports several program-
ming languages (C, C++, C#, SQL). The feature can be extended
with other languages (with external compilers). Astudent writes
and uploads the source code of a computer program, which is
then graded automatically by the system, according to the output
obtained by running the program against predened test cases.
D. Collaboration Support and Communication
Collaboration and communication support in AHyCo in-
cludes several tools: asynchronous communication using a
forum, adaptive group formation, a le sharing module, and
group-to-group grading and evaluation.
26 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 52, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2009
Fig. 4. A multiple-choice/single-answer question.
Fig. 5. A programming assignment.
AHyCos communication module provides a multi-threaded
forum for asynchronous CMC. This forum is integrated into the
LMS, allowing students to share information and experience
with other students and instructors. The discussions are either
public, or private between the group members.
AHyCos forum allows the students to create their own dis-
cussions or post messages to the current theme. One student
posts a question or an opinion and the others read it and attach
replies. This process is continuous, and the sequence of posts (or
a thread) can go on for an indenite period. A record of the in-
HOIC-BOZIC et al.: BLENDED LEARNING APPROACH TO COURSE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION 27
Fig. 6. Group formation parameters.
teraction is kept in a database and can be reused if the instructor
would like to evaluate students contributions to the discussions.
One of the most important tasks an instructor has to undertake
at the start of group work is the division of students into groups.
AHyCo accomplishes this task with a tool for group formation.
This tool takes students results on selected tests, the required
knowledge levels for a course and discussion activity statistics
as input data for the group creation process. An instructor can
decide on group formation parameters by using a Web-based
interface for adaptive group formation (Fig. 6). Groups can be
homogenous (students with similar knowledge are grouped to-
gether) or heterogeneous (a group consists of students with var-
ious knowledge levels). The output is a newly created set of
groups. After the groups have been created and stored in the
system, students are enrolled in themand the groups themselves
are assigned to a course.
A le-sharing module enables easy exchange of binary les
between students in a group. This module is used in combina-
tion with private discussions in forums. During the semester,
students are required to create reports and various les that are
related to their group projects. Instructors benet fromthis since
they have constant access to information on group activity. This
information enables them to encourage inactive groups (ones
which do not promptly carry out their tasks). The instructor can
also upload some public les for the whole class.
When students are grouped, and assigned a project, the results
of their work can be evaluated by their colleagues and/or by their
instructors against a predened set of criteria. This assessment
is made through the interface for group grading and evaluation.
Every criterion is weighted and nal scores are available to any
student at any time so s/he can be informed of her/his groups
success. Criteria are dependant on the kind of group project.
Fig. 7 shows the criteria by which a project (Web courseware
created by students) is graded. Usually the instructor determines
a set of criteria together with their weights through the AHyCos
authoring module.
E. Class Management and Other Tools
AHyCo LMS consists of the tools used for class manage-
ment and for student administration and progress tracking. In
addition to standard LMS tools, tools necessary for continuous
assessment were implemented. Continuous assessment was in-
troduced during the reformof the study initiated by the Bologna
process [20], with elaborate grading schemes through which stu-
dents collect points for lecture attendance, homework, computer
generated and optical mark recognition (OMR) tests, midterm
exams, and nal exams. For exams, which can be composed of
multiple choice/single answer questions, students ll our OMR
forms which are later processed with Remark Ofce software
[42]. Results and scanned forms are imported into AHyCo, stu-
dents are notied of the results by e-mail and are able to check
the results over the Internet. Results of other exams, which have
to be manually graded, are entered into AHyCo by hand. Data on
class attendance is automatically collected from the contactless
smartcard readers installed in classrooms. AHyCo also contains
the tool for giving anonymous student surveys online.
V. EVALUATION
At the end of the course an evaluation of the students was
conducted. The purpose of the evaluation was twofold: rst, to
nd out to what extent the students were accepting the learning
model based on the BL paradigm which combined independent
learning, online discussions and PBL; and second, to discover
students attitude towards AHyCos learning environment. The
28 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 52, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2009
Fig. 7. Interface with the given set of criteria for evaluating students WWW courseware.
BL approach using AHyCo was assessed with students both for-
mally and informally through discussions. The new approach to
this course has been applied for two academic years, with a total
participation of about 30 students.
A questionnaire on the effectiveness and quality of AHyCo
as a teaching resource, and on the level of students acceptance
of AhyCo, was given. Drawing upon the experience of similar
studies [14], and our own experience [39], [41], a list of state-
ments, which formed the core of the questionnaire, was pre-
pared. The students were asked to express their opinion on the
15 Likert scale, checking 5 if they strongly agree, 4 if they
agree, 3 if they neither agree nor disagree, 2 if they disagree,
and 1 if they strongly disagree with the statement.
The students were asked not only to rate the statements, but
also to give answers to some questions, as well as comments and
suggestions about AHyCo. The survey was anonymous and was
conducted using the AHyCo surveying subsystem. The number
of respondents to the questionnaire was small (15 of 19 stu-
dents). Due of the small number of participants in the research,
the results are not statistically signicant, but helped the authors
in deciding how to focus the future research efforts and how to
continue the development of AHyCo LMS and its strategy for
collaborative learning.
A. Questionnaire Results and Student Comments
The survey results are encouraging. According to the ques-
tionnaire results, students accepted the new way of online col-
laborative learning with AHyCo quite well. The most interesting
statements from the 2005 survey are presented in Table I. Very
similar results were obtained the following year.
Despite the fact that the students were generally satised with
the use of AHyCo and with collaborative learning, they did not
think that they had learned more in comparison with learning in
TABLE I
QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS
HOIC-BOZIC et al.: BLENDED LEARNING APPROACH TO COURSE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION 29
a traditional manner. They spent more time learning than they
would have with the traditional lecturing method because the
new presentation methods and collaborative work require more
personal responsibility and concentration on learning.
The results have shown that students consider the forum
(46%) and AHyCos modules (36%) to be the most usable
components of the system. Ninety-one percent of students
considered that they learned the most from the collaborative
work on courseware development. The rest preferred learning
from AHyCos modules rather then focusing on seminar papers
or discussions. The percentage of students who felt they did
not miss out on any educational aspect included in traditional
teaching was 72.73%. About 18% of students could not decide
about this question and the rest wanted more f2f lecturing and
more live contact with the instructor and their colleagues.
If they could choose between the new way of learning using
AHyCo and traditional lecturing, about 90% of students would
prefer AHyCo. The percentage of students who would like to
use AHyCo for other courses was 36.6%. This relatively low
percentage could be explained by the fact that students enroll
in eight courses at once, and might feel that another course
conducted in a similar manner would be time-consuming for
them.
At the end of the questionnaire, students were encouraged
to give positive and negative comments. AHyCos advantages,
emphasized by the students, included
the freedom to access tasks and forum at any time;
the guided forum;
the opportunity to learn at ones own pace and following
ones own inclination;
the opportunity to communicate with the instructor in a
more efcient manner (if a question is answered on the
forum, everyone can read the answer);
the opportunity to self-evaluate ones knowledge before the
ofcial test;
the opportunity to view and evaluate the assignments;
the equally distributed modules for learning and access to
the subject matter at any time;
the participation in the group work as completely new ex-
perience;
the practical work on the courseware.
When asked if there was something they would change, some
students stated that this way of learning requires too much time
and that the instructor required excessive participation on the
forum, which, in their opinion, should not be mandatory. In
general, they were very satised with the course, considering
that personal contact was maintained and that the instructor was
available and cooperative.
B. Academic Results
A course is considered successful not only if the average
grades are good, but if the pass rate is high as well. In both aca-
demic years, all students passed the exam at the rst attempt on
the rst exam session in July. The students average mark was
quite high: 3.68 in 20042005 and 3.7 in 20052006; on the
scale from 1 (failed) to 5 (excellent).
In comparison, in 20032004, two students out of 13 failed
the course and the other 11 completed the course within two
years after the lectures nished, with an average grade of 3.18.
Face-to-face lectures prevailed at that time, with help of AHyCo
LMS only for learning and testing. There was no collabora-
tive work, group work or discussion groups and only a limited
amount of courseware was produced as a seminar.
In conclusion, the new model of BL was successful, probably
because it requires continuous active participation during the
academic year and more personal responsibility and concen-
tration in learning. This approach to learning reduces the time
needed for preparing the exam, ensures deep-level learning,
contributes to more success in the exam and enhances the
courses student retention.
VI. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK
This paper describes the use of the blended e-learning model,
based on a mixture of independent learning, online discussions
and PBL, in a course Teaching Methods in Information Sci-
ence. This model is realized as a combination of f2f environ-
ment and online learning via a LMS. Educational activities, use
of technology, and nal results are illustrated.
The results give reason for satisfaction: not only were the stu-
dents in favor of this approach to learning, but their academic
achievements were improved, compared to the previous offer-
ings of the course when the teaching was conducted in a clas-
sical manner. It is particularly important that the dropout rate
was greatly diminished, which could be related to students sat-
isfaction with the support received from the instructor and the
system.
These results encourage the authors to continue with the de-
velopment of AHyCo. The new generation of LMSs will focus
not only on learning content creation, delivery, and assessment,
but will try to include constructivist and collaborative learning
and teaching methods as well. This new approach is expected
to increase student motivation for learning and lead to better re-
sults. The research will be continued in two directions: the ped-
agogical model will continuously be improved at the Faculty of
Arts and Sciences with the support of the Faculty of Electrical
Engineering and Computing, which is where the technical de-
velopment of AHyCo will continue.
The approach to blended-learning described in this paper may
be adapted and employed in a variety of courses from a range
of disciplines. All or only a few of the activities can be com-
bined. A general recommendation would be to introduce PBL
in teamwork, starting with projects of low complexity. The BL
approach will be incorporated into other information science
courses at the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Also, the model de-
scribed will be modied for courses at the Faculty of Electrical
Engineering and Computing where the student/instructor ratio
is far greater.
Regarding future plans for AHyCos development, the sub-
system for group work and CMC is currently in place. An in-
ternal messaging system as another form of asynchronous com-
munication is being developed, which will give students an op-
portunity to communicate individually without pressure. White-
board and chat will be implemented as forms of asynchronous
CMC.
With respect to AHyCo tools for collaboration support and
communication, special attention was given to the development
of the module which divides students into groups because it is
imperative that this rst step in collaborative work be done prop-
erly. This module will be enhanced by introducing new group
30 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 52, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2009
creation algorithms, which will be based on the degree of forum
use.
Another research direction will lead to better support for the
monitoring of student progress. Currently, this monitoring is
based on tabular reports and graphs. Introduction of intelligent
mechanisms that enhance the monitoring process, and that pro-
pose actions in the event of a problem, is planned. There are also
plans to extend AHyCo by adding m-learning support.
REFERENCES
[1] T. Bates, Managing Technological Change: Strategies for College and
University Leaders. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2000.
[2] E-learning Strategy of University of Rijeka, 20062010 (in Croatian),
(Oct. 2006), Nov. 2007 [Online]. Available: http://www.uniri.hr/hr/
propisi_i_dokumenti/Strategija_uvodjenja_e-ucenja_UNIRI.pdf
[3] C. McCormack and D. Jones, Building a Web-Based Education
System. New York: Wiley, 1997.
[4] D. Del Corso, E. Ovcin, and G. Morrone, An instructor friendly en-
vironment to foster learner-centered customization in the development
of interactive educational packages, IEEE Trans. Educ., vol. 48, no. 4,
pp. 574579, Nov. 2005.
[5] F. Alonso et al., Instructional model for e-learning with a blended
learning process approach, Br. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 36, no. 2, pp.
217235, Mar. 2005.
[6] M. Bullen, , B. L. Pasian and G. A. Woodill, Eds., When worlds
collide: Project management and the collegial culture, in Plan to
Learn: Case Studies in e-Learning Project Management. Toronto,
ON, Canada: CeLEA, 2006.
[7] S. Mishra, Adesign framework for online learning environments, Br.
J. Educ. Technol., vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 493496, Sep. 2002.
[8] Communication from the Commission to the Council and the Euro-
pean Parliament: The e-Learning Action Plan, European Commission,
(Mar. 2001), Nov. 2007 [Online]. Available: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/
LexUriServ/site/en/com/2001/com2001_0172en01.pdf
[9] F. Dohmen, Internationalising eLearning, presented at the eLearning
Conf.: Towards a Learning Society, Brussels, Belgium, 2005.
[10] P. Baumgarthner, Communication and interactions in eLearning, in
Proc. eLearning Conf.: Towards a Learning Society, Brussels, Bel-
gium, 2005, pp. 120130.
[11] D. Birchall, How to make the most of eLearning for work, in Proc.
eLearning Conf: Towards a Learning Society, Brussels, Belgium, 2005,
pp. 5358.
[12] Z. L. Berge and H. Yi-Ping, A model for sustainable student re-
tention: A holistic perspective on the student dropout problem with
special attention to e-learning, DEOSNEWS, vol. 13, no. 5, May 2004
[Online]. Available: http://www.ed.psu.edu/acsde/deos/deosnews/de-
osnews13_5.pdf
[13] E. R. Kemery, , A. Aggarwal, Ed., Developing On-Line Collabora-
tion, in Web-Based Learning and Teaching TechnologiesOpportu-
nities and Challenges. Hershey, PA: Idea Group, 2000, pp. 226244.
[14] S. Priscan et al., Results of the CARNet programme educational
projects, in Proc. Institute of Translation and Interpreting Conf.,
Cavtat, Croatia, 2003, pp. 267273.
[15] K. Thorne, Blended Learning. London, U.K.: Kogan Page, 2003.
[16] G. Bubas and D. Kermek, The prospects for blended learning in
Croatian academic institutions, in Proc. CARNet Users Conf., Zagreb,
Croatia, 2004, CD-ROM.
[17] D. Gillet, A. V. Nguyen Ngoc, and Y. Rekik, Collaborative web-based
experimentation in exible engineering education, IEEETrans. Educ.,
vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 696704, Nov. 2005.
[18] S. Bermejo, Cooperative electronic learning in virtual laboratories
through forums, IEEE Trans. Educ., vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 140149, Feb.
2005.
[19] F. Buenda and J. Cano, WebgeneOS: A generative and web-based
learning architecture to teach operating systems in undergraduate
courses, IEEE Trans. Educ., vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 464473, Nov. 2006.
[20] Implementation of the Bologna Process at Croatian Universities, 2004
[Online]. Available: http://public.mzos.hr/Default.aspx?sec=2520
[21] N. Hoic-Bozic and V. Mornar, AHyCo: A web-based adaptive hyper-
media courseware system, J. Comput. Inf. Technol.CIT, vol. 13, no.
3, pp. 165176, Sep. 2005.
[22] N. Hoic-Bozic, V. Mornar, and I. Boticki, Collaborative learning in
AHyCo online learning system, in Proc. Institute of Translation and
Interpreting Conf., Cavtat, Croatia, 2005, pp. 247252.
[23] J. Bersin, The Blended Learning Handbook. New York: Wiley, 2004.
[24] M. Ally, , T. Anderson and F. Elloumi, Eds., Foundations of Educa-
tional Theory for Online Learning, in Theory and Practice of Online
learning. Athabasca, AB, Canada: Athabasca Univ., 2004, pp. 329.
[25] S. D. Johnson and S. R. Aragon, , T. M. Egan and S. A. Lynham,
Eds., An instructional strategy framework for online learning envi-
ronments, in Proceedings of the Academy for Human Resource De-
velopment. Bowling Green, OH: Academy for Human Resource De-
velopment, 2002, pp. 10221029.
[26] V. N. Morphew, Web-based learning and instruction: A constructivist
approach, in Distance Learning Technologies: Issues, Trends, and Op-
portunities, L. Lau, Ed. Hershey, PA: Idea Group, 2000, pp. 115.
[27] Z. Berge and M. Collins, Introduction, in Computer Mediated Com-
munication and the Online Classroom. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press,
1995, pp. 110.
[28] M. S. Khine and A. Lourdusamy, Blended learning approach in
instructor education: Combining face-to-face instruction, multimedia
viewing and online discussion, Br. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 34, no. 5,
pp. 671675, Nov. 2003.
[29] B. Gross-Davis, Tools for Teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass,
1993.
[30] M. Driscol, Web-Based Training: Tactics and Techniques for Designing
Adult Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer, 1998.
[31] W. Horton, Designing Web-Based Training. New York: Wiley, 2000.
[32] R. M. Purcell-Robertson, Interactive Distance Learning, in Distance
Learning Technologies: Issues, Trends, and Opportunities, L. Lau,
Ed. Hershey, PA: Idea Group, 2000, pp. 1621.
[33] D. Boud and G. Feletti, The Challenge of Problem Based Learning.
London, U.K.: Kogan Page, 2001.
[34] N. Linge and D. Parsons, Problem-based learning as an effective tool
for teaching computer network design, IEEE Trans. Educ., vol. 49, no.
1, pp. 510, Feb. 2006.
[35] R. J. Costa, M. Honkala, and A. Lehtovuori, Applying the problem-
based learning approach to teach elementary circuit analysis, IEEE
Trans. Educ., vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 4148, Feb. 2007.
[36] J. Macias-Guarasa et al., A project-based learning approach to design
electronic systems curricula, IEEE Trans. Educ., vol. 49, no. 3, pp.
389397, Aug. 2006.
[37] J. A. Day and J. D. Foley, Evaluating a web lecture intervention in
a humanComputer interaction course, IEEE Trans. Educ., vol. 49,
no. 4, pp. 420431, Nov. 2006.
[38] M. G. Moore, Three types of interaction, Amer. J. Dist. Educ., vol.
3, no. 2, pp. 16, 1989.
[39] N. Hoic-Bozic and V. Mornar, Authoring of Adaptive Hypermedia
Courseware Using AHyCo System, in Advances in Web-Based Edu-
cation: Personalized Learning Environments, G. D. Magoulas and S.
Y. Chen, Eds. Hershey, PA: Idea Group, 2005, pp. 253276.
[40] P. Brusilovsky, Methods and techniques of adaptive hypermedia,
User Model. User-Adapt. Interact., vol. 6, no. 23, pp. 87129, 1996.
[41] N. Hoic-Bozic, J. Ledic, and J. Mezak, Evaluating the use of world
wide web courseware in student instructors education: A case from
Croatia, in Proc. Society for Information Technology and Instructor
Education, San Diego, CA, 2000, pp. 18941899.
[42] Remark Ofce OMR Software. [Online]. Available: http://www.
gravic.com/remark/ofceomr
Natasa Hoic-Bozic (M05) received the B.S. degree in mathematics and in-
formation science from the University of Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia, in 1990, the
M.S. degree in computer and information science from the University of Ljubl-
jana, Ljubljana, Slovenia, in 1997, and the Ph.D. degree in computing from the
Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing (FER), University of Zagreb,
Zagreb, Croatia, in 2002.
She is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of Information Sci-
ence, University of Rijeka. Her main research interests include adaptive hyper-
media, multimedia systems, and educational technologies, focusing on blended
learning approaches.
Vedran Mornar (M07) received the B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in com-
puting from the Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing (FER), Uni-
versity of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia, in 1981, 1985, and 1990, respectively.
He is currently a Full Professor of computer science and Dean at FER. His
professional interest is in the application of operational research in real world
information systems, database design, development, and implementation.
Ivica Boticki (S06) received the B.S. degree in computing from the University
of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia, in 2004.
He has been a Research Assistant in programming at the University of Zagreb
since 2004. His main areas of research are information systems, programming
languages, e-learning, blended learning, and m-learning.