Towards Intelligent E-Learning Systems: Mengchi Liu Dongmei Yu

Educational and Information Technologies (2023) 28:7845–7876
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11479-6
Towards intelligent E-learning systems
Mengchi Liu1 · Dongmei Yu2
Received: 8 July 2022 / Accepted: 16 November 2022 / Published online: 12 December 2022
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2022
Abstract
The prevalence of e-learning systems has made educational resources more acces-
sible, interactive and effective to learners without the geographic and temporal
boundaries. However, as the number of users increases and the volume of data
grows, current e-learning systems face some technical and pedagogical challenges.
This paper provides a comprehensive review on the efforts of applying new infor-
mation and communication technologies to improve e-learning services. We first
systematically investigate current e-learning systems in terms of their classification,
architecture, functions, challenges, and current trends. We then present a general
architecture for big data based e-learning systems to meet the ever-growing demand
for e-learning. We also describe how to use data generated in big data based e-
learning systems to support more flexible and customized course delivery and
personalized learning.
Keywords E-learning system · Big data · Smart learning · Personalized earning
1 Introduction
The fast development of e-learning systems has radically transformed the way in
which learning resources are imparted to students. They make educational resources
more accessible, interactive and effective to learners without the geographic and tem-
poral boundaries. E-learning (Alonso et al., 2005) has been defined as the use of
information and communication technologies to improve the quality of learning by
Dongmei Yu
[email protected]
Mengchi Liu
[email protected]
1 Guangzhou Key Laboratory of Big Data and Intelligent Education School of Computer Science
South China Normal University Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510631, China
2 Shanghai Astronomical Observatory Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, 200030, China
7846 Educational and Information Technologies (2023) 28:7845–7876
enabling access to resources and services, as well as remote exchange and collabora-
tion. Some synonymous terms including open learning, distance learning, web-based
education and online learning have been alternatively used over the past decades. In
general, it is considered as an educational process that enables transfer of knowledge
and skills flexibly to a large number of recipients at various times and locations. The
combination of education and technologies provides a new way for people to learn in
the era of information and communicationtechnology.
However, it has become challenging to provide excellent e-learning services as
modern e-learning applications are increasingly data-intensive due to the following
reasons:
1. the number of learners and courseworks increases dramatically as e-learning
applications get more and more popular, especially during the covid pandemic;
2. different roles generate a huge amount of interactive information when posting
or exchanging messages;
3. the diversity of resources make each type of information isolated;
4. a variety of personal information and sensitive data need related access control
and security policies;
5. the gigantic amounts of data need to be stored and managed properly.
As a result, e-learning systems need to evolve to provide smart services. In this
context, intelligent technologies have been gradually used to collect, preprocess,
analyze, store, and visualize huge amount of data from various learning sources.
They are utilized to eliminate noise and extract valuable information to improve the
effectiveness of e-learning. Also, they enable learning resources to be tailored for
each individual learner according to the contents and learners’ interactive behaviors
(Gamalel-Din, 2010; Kumar et al., 2016; Hu et al., 2020). In other words, precise cus-
tomization and personalization of knowledge or services should be provided to each
individual learner accordingly. Consequently, smart e-learning systems make it possi-
ble for educational organizations to offer improved teaching and learning deliveries,
thus deal with the challenges in current e-learning services.
This paper mainly reviews the studies that apply various technologies to e-learning
systems and hence provide personalized and precise teaching and learning services.
We first systematically investigate the status of current e-learning systems in terms
of their features, classifications, architecture, challenges and trends. Then we present
big data based e-learning systems for more flexible course delivery and personalized
learning, and also show how data can be processed to facilitate learning and teaching.
Finally we discuss the beneficial effects of integrating big data technology with e-
learning systems.
2 E-learning system classiﬁcations
E-learning systems facilitate the planning, management, and delivery of content for
e-Learning. Based on the target users and the cost, we classify current e-learning sys-
tems into two kinds: Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) platforms and Learning
Management Systems (LMSs). Firstly, MOOC platforms are open to a large number
Educational and Information Technologies (2023) 28:7845–7876 7847
of individuals who are intended to learn. Even though some courses are produced
by certain universities, they are not limited to student in post-secondary institutions.
They can be accessed by people regardless of their location, culture, nationality,
and any other criteria. On the other hand, LMSs are usually implemented for post-
secondary institutions. Thus, they are not by default open to the general public, only
a certain group of people can have access to it. Secondly, most MOOCs are free of
cost or cost little so that individuals can afford, while the cost for LMS is higher
based on the number of users and usually borne by post-secondary institutions rather
than individuals.
2.1 Massive open online courses (MOOCs) platforms
MOOCs are online courses open to unlimited participants that are offered by many
universities and institutions on the web. The term was firstly coined in 2008 by Cana-
dian researchers Dave Cormier and Brian Alexander (Goldie, 2016). In fall of 2011,
Stanford University offered the first MOOC course, which was originally registered
by more than 160,000 learners from all over the world, and eventually about 20,000
of them completed it. Then, three significant MOOCs platforms Udacity1 , edX2 , and
Coursera3 were developed in 2012 and used to offer MOOCs for free. Since then,
the number of available MOOCs and MOOC learners increased dramatically, with
more online platforms available. By the end of 2020, about 950 universities around
the world launched 16,300 MOOCs with 180 million MOOC learners (Shah, 2020).
Generally, there are two kinds of MOOCs based on different learning theories:
cMOOCs (the connectivist MOOCs) and xMOOCs (extended MOOCs) (Alonso
et al., 2005). cMOOCs mainly emphasize connection and promote interaction by dig-
ital tools like blogs, learning communities and social media platform. Learners can
also create and generate knowledge by themselves. xMOOCs are based on traditional
university courses by focusing more on the content and deliver knowledge in small
units so that the number of students can be increased significantly. Currently, the
most popular and influential MOOCs providers are Coursera, edX and Udacity.
In addition, various national online platforms have emerged in a number of coun-
tries (Shah, 2021), including FutureLearn in Great Britain4 , XuetangX in China5 ,
France Université Numérique (FUN) in France6 , OpenHPI in German7 , EduOpen in
Italy8 , SWAYAM in India9 , gacco in Japan10 , ThaiMOOC in Thailand11 , the National
1 https://www.udecity.com
2 https://www.edx.org
3 https://www.coursera.org
4 https://www.futurelearn.com
5 https://www.xuetangx.com
6 https://www.fun-mooc.fr
7 https://open.hpi.de
8 https://learn.eduopen.org
9 https://swayam.gov.in
10 https://gacco.org
11 https://thaimooc.org
Open Education Platform (NOEP) in Russia12 , etc. In summary, these MOOCs are
open, participatory and distributed (Baturay, 2015). They have the potential to disrupt
the traditional education due to their easy accessibility and free or low-cost content
delivery, especially considering educational credentials including micro-credentials,
specializations or degrees from accredited institutions (Pickard et al., 2018).
2.2 Learning management systems (LMSs)
LMSs are e-learning systems for hosting, assigning, managing, reporting and eval-
uating e-learning courses. Many postsecondary education institutions adopt LMSs
as critical educational tools to support course management and to foster interaction
among students, teachers and content resources. They are also used to identify train-
ing and learning gaps, implementing a wide range of pedagogical methods to promote
education process. LMSs are generally classified as commercial and non-commercial
systems. Commercial LMSs like WebCT, Blackboard, D2L Brightspace have been
frequently and very successfully used in the past decades. They are basically easy to
deploy and use, and technical support services are provided without additional costs.
However, some non-commercial LMSs such as Moodle13 , Canvas14 , Open edX15 and
Sakai 16 also become popular recently. The open source feature of non-commercial
LMSs makes them attractive since they are easy to obtain, as many are free, espe-
cially those that provide a basic level of service. They also provide more flexible and
scalable architecture to meet users’ needs. Generally, the most successful LMSs in
North America are the Big Four (Hill, 2019): Blackboard, Canvas, D2L Brightspace
and Moodle.
3 Architecture of current E-learning systems
Many conventional frameworks have been used to create and improve e-learning sys-
tem effectiveness. One is based on service-oriented architectures (SOA) that allow
to easily extend the capabilities and functionalities of the system by dynamically
adding services. For example, Fajar et al. (2018) present a SOA system architec-
ture and reference for an e-learning system, which consists of six components: data
layer, resource layer, application layer, business process layer, presentation layer and
governance layer. The data of each layer are treated as the service in the SOA sys-
tem, which makes it more reusable, flexible and accessible to extended tools. This
method allows business and wider society to improve e-learning and offer afford-
able education. Similarly, (González et al., 2009) extend existing e-learning systems
12 https://openedu.ru/university/hse
13 https://moodle.org
14 https://www.instructure.com
15 https://open.edx.org
16 https://www.sakailms.org
to external mobile scenarios based on SOA as well. The architecture ensures the
independence of e-learning systems, mobile applications and external applications,
and provides a reliable data exchange and interoperability between them. Further-
more, (Kappe & Scerbakov, 2017) present an innovative object-oriented architecture
for the implementation of e-learning systems on a single software platform to meet
the requirements of various e-learning scenarios. Abstract data objects (ADOs) that
encapsulate private memory together with some methods are widely used as the main
components of an functional objects like courses, announcements, curriculum and so
on. The implementation shows that this architecture is highly modular since docu-
ments and objects can be created independently but also re-used through a flexible
nesting or containment mechanism.
Recently, the availability of high speed networks, low-cost computers and storage
devices has resulted in the significant advances in the cloud computing technology,
which is the on-demand usage of a network of remote servers hosted on the internet
to store, manage, and process data, rather than on one or more local servers. (Riahi,
2015) reviewed recent cloud-based systems and proposed an e-learning cloud archi-
tecture, which includes hardware resource layer, software resource layer, resources
management layer, service layer and business application layer. They also conclude
several advantages of cloud based e-learning like low cost, improved performance
and compatibility, information security and benefits for both students and students.
Other researches (El Mhouti et al., 2018; Masud & Huang, 2012; Riahi, 2015; Sun
et al., 2015; Chao et al., 2015; Hendradi et al., 2020; Rani et al., 2015) also focus
on combining e-learning systems with cloud computing. There are two advantages
in doing so. Firstly, it is easy to create and maintain, and the investment cost can
be reduced significantly using the pay-as-you-go method. Also, it allows to scale
the services according to the need. (Sun et al., 2015) introduce a cloud-based virtual
learning environment called MLaaS, which aims to provide adaptive micro learn-
ing contents and customized learning route for every single learner. Education data
mining scheme is used to discover features of learning resources and understand
learners’ behaviors. In addition, (Chao et al., 2015) propose a cloud-based ecosys-
tem called CLEM for teachers and learners. Their implementation shows that the
cloud-based platform gathers heterogeneous and distributed devices in a common
pool that makes computational resources more accessible and sharable. Furthermore,
(Jeong et al., 2013) introduce a private-cloud-based e-learning system with six com-
ponents: a private cloud platform, an XML based common file format, an authoring
tool, a content viewer, an inference engine and a security system. By using these
components, it can deliver and share various types of educational resources effec-
tively. However, according to some literatures (El Mhouti et al., 2018; Laisheng &
Zhengxia, 2011), the challenges of cloud-based e-learning system are mainly related
to cloud privacy, security and confidence. At the same time, these concerns also pro-
vide opportunities for e-learning promotion and development in cloud computing
environment.
Based on previous researches, we conclude a general framework for current
e-learning systems in Fig. 1, which basically consists of three logical layers con-
tributing to better teaching and learning effectiveness: presentation layer, e-learning
system layer and data layer.
Fig. 1 A General Framework for E-learning Systems
3.1 The presentation layer
The presentation layer focuses on the human computer interaction by providing

accessible user interface and learning resources to end users. It aims at improving the
usability, accessibility, credibility and the user experience of the learning ecosystems
(Garcı́a-Holgado & Garcı́a-Peñalvo, 2018). Firstly, it provides a unified interface
for all the services or functionalities provided by the lower layers and hide system
complexity from users. Users can utilize this interface to construct and control the
contents of e-learning systems. The feedback from the e-learning system layer is
delivered through this interface. Secondly, due to the prevalence of various mobile
devices (e.g. mobile phones, laptops, tablets and other portable devices), the presen-
tation layer should ensure that e-learning systems support mobile learning paradigm
(Schuck et al., 2017). In other words, e-learning systems are adaptable to distinct
screen sizes, which allows learners to gain any information flexibly. Also, mobile
learning has been proved to be able to improve student participation and engagement
during learning process, while learners have high levels of motivation and satis-
faction (Cheng et al., 2015). It also has a positive influence on learners’ academic
performance (Han & Shin, 2016). Therefore, it is necessary to use proper front-end
techniques such as HTML, XHTML, CSS, and JavaScripts to support mobile learn-
ing, in which presented pages can be rendered properly on a browser to meet the
compatibility requirements of devices.
3.2 The E-learning system layer
The e-learning system layer aims at synthesizing educational resources by way of var-
ious functions such as course enrolment and management, user profile and activities,
teaching or learning assessment and feedback, user communication or collabora-
tion and so forth. It can also be an integration of related components which support
instructional model or learning model (Lu et al., 2015). Users are able to choose the
components to satisfy the different needs for teaching and learning. For most MOOCs
and LMSs, this layer plays an important role between the presentation layer and the
database layer. Learning and teaching information including users profile, learning
resources, teaching and learning activities is collected and passed through e-learning
system layer. It is also a teaching and learning platform that enable each learner to
access specific education resources flexibly.
3.3 The database layer
The database layer hosts data generated by using e-learning systems. It is the criti-
cal place where education data is collected, stored and used. Due to the individual
differences, collecting the massive data and retaining the diversity and dynamic fea-
tures is very important. Additionally, all the collected data need to be stored until
their use. Alternatively, some processed results may be put to use immediately, while
most of them will serve some purposes later on. The main benefit is that it enables
the collected or processed data to be accessed and retrieved easily.
Usually, existing solutions for e-leaning storage mainly rely on relational database,
such as Mysql (Wangmo & Ivanova, 2017) and Oracle (Datta & Bhattacharyya,
2018). Moodle’s database is typically MySQL or Postgres, and can also be Microsoft
SQL Server or Oracle. Sakai and Blackboard can be deployed in a SQL or Oracle
environment as well.
Also, NoSQL databases are increasingly used for large sets of distributed data
due to flexible and scale-out architecture. They work as a complementary technology
for the relational databases system and are suitable for distributed applications with
the demand of high data scalability and availability (Davoudian et al., 2018). For
example, MongoDB is choosed by Open edX for storing large files which are text
files, PDFs, audio/video clips, etc.
Additionally, distributed storage technology is increasingly used to replace tradi-
tional local storage. Some run on top of file systems while others work as standalone
systems. For example, (Zhang et al., 2020) use distributed storage technologies for
experimental education systems. Specifically, the interplanetary file system (IPFS),
an external storage server and external cloud storage are combined for storage man-
agement. Among them, IPFS determines the overall performance of the storage
module and contributes to system reliability and flexibility. Additionally, a file table
is defined to manage each learning content such as documents, video and problem
books in a distributed database. (Kawato et al., 2020) create an e-learning system
by implementing Apache Cassandra, which is an open-source distributed database
system to handle large volumes of data. By combining distributed hash tables (DHT),
which hold information of the connected computer nodes, it is able to share vari-
ous education resources spanning multiple servers. (Otoo-Arthur & van Zyl, 2020)
present a framework on a distributed and parallel computing environment to provide
new value to teaching and learning process.
Moreover, cloud storage as a large scale distributed storage paradigm is also used
to education system, in which learning resources is stored on remote storage sys-
tems. Compared with traditional storage ways, it has many advantages in terms of
scalability, flexibility, safety, ease of use and cost saving. (Sun et al., 2015) deploy
Mobile MOOC learning on the Amazon EC2, and Amazon S3 is considered as the
MOOC learner and course data storage because of its robustness and mature disaster
recovery mechanisms. (Jeong et al., 2013) propose a content-oriented smart educa-
tion system based on a small-scale, private cloud. A common file format based on
XML are defined as a means of representing data and meta - data. The Document
Type Definition (DTD) and the eXtensible Style sheet Language (XSL) are used to
described the schema and styles for the XML document structure seperately, which
enables the same content can be viewed on multiple devices. Furthermore, (Rani
et al., 2015) deployed e-learning system on remote cloud host, where all required
learning resources are stored. They also build a simple MySOL on the cloud host for
authentication of the system. By doing so, an expanded and secure environment is
built to raise e-learning system.
4 Functions of E-learning systems
The functions of e-learning systems depend on its potential usage such as system
scale requirement, organizational objectives, online training strategy and desired ped-
agogical outcomes. (Cavus & Zabadi, 2014) summarize that standard LMSs should
have various tools for e-learning systems. They compare six popular open source
LMSs in terms of video services, discussion forum, file exchange, email, realtime
chat and so forth, and discover that communication tools provided by Moodle and
ATutor are efficient, but it is not easy to obtain information on Claroline and Sakai
due to their complex webpages. Similarly, (Chung et al., 2013) suggest that LMSs
should have five components: transmitting course content, creating a discussion,
evaluating students, evaluating courses and instructors, and creating computer-based
instruction. However, most of the existing e-learning systems do not contain all the
features in a single system. So, we highlight the general function components (Fig. 2)
that most e-learning systems have to support teaching and learning process.
4.1 System administration
This module includes a full range of functions for the management and configuration
of system parameters and attributes in terms of users, courses grades, appear-
ance reports and so forth. It covers components such as user authentication, user
Fig. 2 Functions of E-learning Systems
management, roles and permission management, customizable preferences, log and

report management, calendar and appointment scheduler.
• User management: For e-learning users, email or mobile phone-based self-
registration authentication method is commonly adopted to fulfill user authenti-
cation. Also, a category hierarchy is usually built to organize users from different
organizations. Common operations such as adding, deleting, modifying and
querying related to user management are supported. Normally, there are sev-
eral categories of e-learning users including administrators, instructors, teaching
assistants (TAs) and learners. The administrators set up and configure the system.
The instructors prepare the lessons and access the learners’ progress. TAs assist
instructors with instructional responsibilities. Learners are anyone interested in
learning and being educated in the courses.
• Roles and permissions: E-learning systems usually support several stan-
dard user roles and has the potential to create an unlimited number of additional
roles. Therefore, it is necessary to control users’ access rights only to the infor-
mation they need and to prevent them from accessing information that does not
pertain to them. For example, role based access control (RBAC) is used to con-
trol client access and consents in DidaTec LMSs platform (Laura et al., 2018).
Another example is that the Access Control List (ACL) is used to maintain the
user information and their permissions, while group key is utilized to secure
course materials and to ensure that only approved participants have access to it
(Kanimozhi et al., 2019).
• Customizable preferences: Personalized setting for user profiles and sys-

tem preferences such as privacy, design and layout of the websites is allowed to
enhance users’ experience.
• Log and report management: Event log analysis is displayed through
graphical user interface to assist teaching and learning. Also, analysis reports
are available and exported to help administrators and teachers to make decisions
based on the statistical results.
• Calendar: It displays a consolidated view of all the course-related events by
day, week, or month in the e-learning system. It allows users to view the available
learning programs or courses with specific due dates. Also, the calendar usually
automatically synchronizes with other teaching or learning activities such as syl-
labus, assignments, tests, and grades. In the case that users create, change, or
delete the date of an activity in the LMS, the change will show up in calendar
and vice versa. Finally, systems such as Moodle and Coursera also allow users
to export calendar, so they may be imported into other calendar programs, as a
backup or to create a copy. Conversely, other agendas can also be imported to
calendars in LMSs to facilitate time management in some university (Mei, 2016).
• Appointment scheduler: It helps teachers schedule appointments with their
students. Teachers specify time slots and locations for online or offline activities
and students choose for their attendance.
4.2 Course management
It is a basic but most important component of an e-learning system (Cavus & Zabadi,
2014), which mainly refers to create, organize and deliver various coursework. Most
LMSs allow users to add course material from various sources in different formats
such as text, graphics, audio, video and so forth. Platforms like Moodle, Open edX
allow to use the SCORM (Shareable Content Object Reference Model) standard for
its online courses. The benefit is that it provides a standardized course model that
supports the reusability of learning objects. For example, multiple individual lessons
can be stringed together into a complete course. Participants are also encouraged to
have more interactivity within e-learning systems. With the proper authoring tool,
they can create their own courses and eliminate the need to outsource course develop-
ment. Similarly, (Gamalel-Din, 2010) tailor course materials by drawing multimedia
Learning Objects(LO) from LO repositories, which are composed of small granu-
lar multimedia objects. This idea helps teachers to find the best available assets and
LOs for course design. Students are also able to get tailored learning strategy based
on their abilities and previous knowledge. Basically, the specific functions of course
management are as follows.
• Participants management: It enables an administrator or teacher to easily

enrol, view, filter, edit and delete participants for each course, and also group par-
ticipants or invite learners. It is also a centralized place where teachers are able to
trace student’s attendance, increase student enrollment and avoid high drop-out
rates during the course. By comparing user activity and identifying attendance
trends, regular attendance of all students is recorded and ready for further anal-
ysis. Since student attendance is strongly linked to learning outcome, it is also
necessary for teacher to give a warning to those with poor attendance during
online learning.
• Contents management: Contents are organized in descriptive categories so
that users can easily find their desired resources. Both static contents and inter-
active resources are delivered according to students needs. Some contents might
be made either for a restricted audience or for a wider population, either as a free
offering or as paid courses. Generally, a LMS allows course creators to freely
structure their e-learning offerings in a manner that best fits their purposes and
requirements. Also, instructors can trace the progress of each course and adjust
their pedagogical strategy accordingly.
• Gradebook: It is a central location where teachers can manage grades for
courses and track student activities relative to gradable items. It plays an critical
role in performance monitoring and feedback seeking associated with self-paced
learning practices.
4.3 Exercise and Assessment
This module utilizes some testing and evaluation capabilities to monitor, track and
evaluate the effectiveness of the e-learning process. Most e-learning systems sup-
port learning assessments periodically and some of them even support the teachers
to identify gaps or intervene when necessary. Generally, a broad range of e-learning
assessment methods are considered in terms of learners’ progress and performance.
Some offer built-in auto-graded evaluation tools (Baturay, 2015), such as quizzes,
tests, assignment, group exercises, examinations and surveys so that both instructors
and students can track the learning performance in gradebook easily. Some even have
diagnostic assessments to evaluate the level of knowledge of learners and assign suit-
able level to them. Furthermore, peer assessment (Lynda et al., 2017) is widely used
in MOOC platforms which involves learners in grading and giving feedback from
the work of their peers. It is also recognized as one important feature that affects the
effectiveness of e-learning systems. For example, Coursera has regarded peer review
as a scalable and sustainable way to guide students in assessing each other’s job as
well as providing feedback. Lastly, evaluation reports used to assess e-learning are
generated to query and display data in graphs and charts, allowing users to easily spot
teaching or learning trends or issues. Additionally, this report should reflect the user
performance on both individual and group level from multiple perspectives and moni-
tor if the learners achieve their required objectives. Generally, the following activities
are normally used to perform assessment and feedback.
• Assignment: It allows learners to submit their work online and teachers to grade
and give response. Teachers are allowed to select excellent assignments to share
with all students enrolled in the courses.
• Test and examination: It is necessary to assess course quality and learn-
ing outcomes. Teachers are allowed to create quizzes that are made up of a
wide range of questions derived from a question bank. This enables a question
to be re-used in different quizzes and facilitate the teaching process. Examina-

tions are also conducted online to assess student performance. Furthermore, a
remote proctor or students’ webcam can be used to monitor the student’s activi-
ties and the surroundings during the examination, which is an effective solution
to maintain academic integrity for e-learning examination.
• Survey: It is used to help teachers to gather information from students and
reflect on their own teaching. It is also used to identify certain trends that may
be happening among course participants.
• Workshop: It allows the learners to perform peer assessment activity according
to teacher’s guidance.
Collaboration and communication Effective collaboration and communication help

the transfer, sharing and co-construction of knowledge as well as the sharing of
experiences in teacher-student and peer-to-peer relationships (Chiu & Hew, 2018).
There are various communication tools in existing e-learning systems that encourage
participants to support each other in the learning process.
• Live chat & video: Live chat is an instant messaging application that allows
users to discuss in real time while they participate in the teaching and learning
process. It usually supports features such as real time chat monitor, chat his-
tory, file sharing and so forth. A platform-independent and web-based instant
messaging can be embedded to support convenient communication among users.
The chat tool (Bagarukayo et al., 2014; Carmona et al., 2008) can be integrated
as a synchronous, live communication way to aid interaction and collabora-
tion among e-learning users. It allows students and teachers to interact in
real time, such as conducting group discussions or study sessions effectively.
Live video tools such as Microsoft Teams, Skype, Zoom and Tencent Meet-
ing are increasing used as communication tools for e-learning especially during
COVID-19 pandemic. According to (Alameri et al., 2020), 80.7% of partic-
ipants agree that Moodle, Microsoft teams and Zoom platforms enhance the
communication between teachers and students in higher education. Learners are
easy to concentrate on classes by constructing visual presentations. Most stu-
dents believe Moodle, Microsoft teams and Zoom platforms are critical for them
to handle learning process and they will be an indispensable part for online
learning.
• Forum: It provides space where students and teachers can discuss a specific topic
or a group of topics to exchange their ideas. Three types of forums can be built:
public forum, course forum and class forum. A three-level forum can contribute
significantly to successful collaboration and community building in an online
environment. Forums are usually integrated into the e-learning systems (Kaka-
sevski et al., 2008; Baturay, 2015) . It helps learners to exchange their ideas and
knowledge effectively so that they are not constrained in a passive role but can
instead help each other and engage in active ways. Also, forums allow instructors
to post course-related questions that can be accessed and discussed by learners.
Then the extensions of questions and ideas for interaction are available regard-
less of whether the instructor is available. Furthermore, forums can also be split
into several subforums to provide specific discussions. For example, Coursera
provides a default partition of subforums, which includes study groups, gen-

eral discussions, lectures, assignments, logistics and feedback (Rossi & Gnawali,
2014). The instructors are also allowed to customize the subforums flexibly.
• Email: The traditional email has been widely used by Moodle, Blackboard and
Open edX and other LMSs (Kakasevski et al., 2008; Bagarukayo et al., 2014). It
supports instructors to send email to individual learner or a group of students in
the course without launching a separate email program.
• Notification: It alerts users about events or activities update in the system.
4.4 Others
• E-commerce: E-commerce exists in some e-learning systems especially MOOC

platforms. It provides sophisticated business transaction functionalities such
as payment processing, shopping cart, and customer analytics capabilities. In
MOOC platforms, to complete a course or learning module, users need to pro-
vide their user profiles and make a one-time payment or agree to a monthly
subscription. To earn a degree or a certificate, users also need to pay tuition fees
accordingly. E-commerce integrated LMSs usually allow learners to carry out
all their transactions starting from registration to making the payment through a
single portal, which in turn helps improve user experience.
5 Challenges of E-learning systems
E-learning systems have profoundly changed the traditional methods of teaching and
learning by offering enhanced access to information and interactive resources at all
levels of education. They are a supplementary offer to traditional education and to
some extent have the ability to substitute it. Despite the advantages it offers, there are
still some pedagogical and technical problems that need to be addressed. (Moubayed
et al., 2018) analysize several challenges from different aspects, which includes trans-
mission/delivery, personalization, enabling technologies, collaborative/cooperative
learning facilitation, and evaluation & assessment. (Islam et al., 2015) also dis-
cuss some challenges existing in the success of e-learning, which are mainly related
to technology, learning style, training and management. During the Covid-19 pan-
demic, e-learning faces more challenges as a massive adoption of online education.
(Hamdan et al., 2020) analyze several challenges and obstacles including the lace of
access to ICT tools, the adequate training for teachers using technological devices,
the limited budget for digital devices and poor e-learning environment. (Oryakhail
et al., 2021) investigate barriers that hinder the implementation of e-learning in
Afghanistan Higher Education. Their research shows specific challenges related to
students, lectures, infrastructure and university management.
One major concern for e-learning systems is to use new pedagogy and cogni-
tive approaches to achieve efficient transmission and delivery of e-learning system
resources. Since e-learning is quite different from face-to-face education, the courses
have to be adapted more attractive or interactive for students, which could be a
challenge for teachers who have been used to traditional teaching. E-learning sys-
tems require a different approach to pedagogy instead of simply uploading large
amounts of resources onto the e-learning systems. (Bari et al., 2018) state that there
is no adequate design strategies adapted to the e-learning process and the eval-
uation of its success implementation. (Andersson, 2008; Moubayed et al., 2018)
also discover that some hands-on courses conducted through face-to-face teach-
ing can be difficult to carry out on e-learning systems so that the students cannot
fully grasp the content as they learn from traditional classroom-based training. For
example, practical lessons or laboratory work are difficult to be conducted on e-
learning system (Karjo et al., 2021). Another major concern of e-learning is human
resistance, which refers to lack of motivation for both students and teachers. For
students, the lack of learning motivation and persistence has been research widely.
Since e-learning is self-regulated learning, unmotivated learners may get behind
without adequate supervision and guidance. Some statistics show that there is a
high dropout rate on MOOCs platforms, which means the majority of students who
signed up the course in the beginning could not finish in the end. For example,
The Open University found out that only 6.5% of those enrolled students complete
the course (Jordan, 2014). The number of enrolments decreases over time and is
strongly linked with the duration of the course. As a result, e-learning ends up with
a high dropout rates and low effectiveness. To overcome this hurdle, it’s important
to stimulate the deep motivations that drive the learners to study or induce them to
drop out based on data analysis methods. Also, some kind of useful interventions
like self-regulated learning can be delivered to potentially prevent learners’ dropout
behavior (Min & Nasir, 2020). Based on (Hapsari et al., 2021), the heavy workloads
and more time requirement for teachers have been a challenge affecting the adop-
tion of e-learning. E-learning acceptability is important to the success of e-learning
(Hapsari et al., 2021). If teachers have confidence in e-learning and are willing to
master both technical and conceptual issues, it will be easy to achieve e-learning
success.
Also, with the rapid development of technologies, e-learning systems grow dra-
matically in terms of the services offered and the available contents generated.
Therefore, ensuring that the e-learning system has the means to adapt to the evolving
scalability and robustness needs is particularly crucial. According to (Hapsari et al.,
2021; Oryakhail et al., 2021; Hamdan et al., 2020; Karjo et al., 2021), lack of reli-
able internet connection has been a major barrier among e-learning challenges. Also,
the lack of infrastructure capability is a common problem faced by both teachers and
students in developing countries. If e-learning infrastructure fail to handle requests
from thousands of users simultaneously, the system timeout or latency will definitely
lead to the interruption of e-learning. Thus, we need to consider how to optimize
various hardware or software resources to meet the storage and network require-
ments as well (El Mhouti et al., 2018). Technologies like cloud computing (Riahi,
2015; El Mhouti et al., 2018; Masud & Huang, 2012; Sun et al., 2015; Chao et al.,
2015) have been introduced to provide efficient scalable architecture for e-learning
systems.
Moreover, discovering useful information that can be utilized to help teachers
determine proper pedagogical strategies and achieve better learning outcomes is also
difficult in an e-learning environment (Islam et al., 2015). However, using big data
based statistical and mathematical procedure to identify and extract valuable knowl-
edge from large data source is a feasible solution to solve the problem related to
“information overload” (Brajkovic et al., 2018).
Furthermore, compared with traditional classroom, it is quite difficult for teachers
to track or monitor student progress in e-learning system. AI provides a solution to
this problem (Klašnja-Milićević & Ivanović, 2021). It allows teachers to monitor or
assess student progress timely. If there is a problem with student performance, AI can
be used to alert teachers and assist students based on their strengths and weaknesses.
Lastly, several social challenges faced by e-learning cannot be ignored. Firstly, the
cost for e-learning is an issue. (Hamdan et al., 2020) find financial cost for students
from low-income families might prevent them from online education. Students need
more financial support to purchase computers or stable internet connection services.
Secondly, cyber security and privacy is another social challenge facing e-learning.
For example, live video applications like Zoom and Microsoft Teams have end-to-end
encryption for videos or calls, which ensures the content is encrypted before it’s sent
and decrypted only by the intended recipient. However, for most e-learning systems,
cyber security and privacy is an optional function which might place the systems and
information at risk. Thus, it’s critical to choose the reliable e-learning system and
tighten up the security and privacy of online education.
6 Current trends
Modern e-learning has evolved as a multi-disciplinary process including pedagogy,

psychology, various aspects of computer science and many other fields of engineer-
ing. Both pedagogy and technology factors have been considered in these trends.
Concepts like blended learning, adaptive learning have been introduced to change the
traditional in-class education into competency-based education. Also, the wide use
of e-learning systems has resulted in huge amount of data generated. By applying
data-intensive approaches to educational resources, we can get better understand-
ing of learners, educational settings, and the education results and then improve the
teaching and learning process.
6.1 Blended learning
Blended learning (or hybrid learning) is evolved from the original computer-based
learning environment. It combines the benefits of classroom learning with the advan-
tages of e-learning to ensure an effective learning environment. In other words,
learning activities take place inside and outside the classroom. Especially during the
COVID-19 pandemic, some or even all classroom teaching are replaced with online
teaching (Müller & Mildenberger, 2021; Prahmana et al., 2021) and evaluating the
effectiveness of blended learning have been studied widely. Normally, there are many
education and technology elements that can be incorporated in learning and teach-
ing processes based on different learning purpose. According to (Valiathan, 2002)
and (Prahmana et al., 2021), there are three blended learning models: skill-driven,
attitude-driven and competency-driven.
• Skilled-driven model: It aims at providing students specific knowledge and
skills, while teachers give feedback and guidance.
• Attitude-driven model: It enables learners to gain new attitude and behav-
iors, and interaction and collaboration between learners and teachers plays an
important role.
• Competency-driven model: It aims at transferring learners tacit knowledge
by observing and interacting with experts on the job.
Unlike traditional education where the classroom focus is on the teacher, blended
learning allows the use of digital texts and tools, and the students become the pro-
tagonist of their own learning process, constructing their own knowledge together
with the teachers. This mix between classroom learning and e-learning facilitates the
students to carry out a more direct and flexible learning style that matches students’
diverse needs.
6.2 Adaptive learning
Traditionally, a standard e-learning system does not consider individual differences

of learners and treat all learners equally. However, adaptive learning or personalized
learning aims to tailor massive information to them based on their features, prefer-
ences, background and learning behaviors (Aroyo et al., 2006; Gomede et al., 2021;
Mavroudi et al., 2018). In order to do so, adaptive learning basically utilizes a data-
driven method to identify the students’ needs faster, and therefore enable the delivery
of personalized learning at scale. It also needs differentiated teaching strategies and
smart feedback to build learner skills (Sonwalkar, 2013). For instance, algorithms are
used to evaluate students’ current learning conditions using online tests, thus adapted
modules will be provided to identify their learning gap and improve learning out-
comes. According to (Onah & Sinclair, 2015) , the most common adaptive method for
course development have the following aspects: the adaptive hypermedia informa-
tion retrieval system; adaptive annotation system; adaptive recommendation system;
adaptive web navigation; adaptive feedback. (Oxman et al., 2014) conclude that at
least three components are needed for an adaptive system.
• a content model to structure the provided contents,
• a learner model to understand learners abilities, and
• an instructional model to match the content with learners in a dynamic and
personalized way.
Generally, adaptive learning can support adjustments in faculty role, allow creative
teaching methods, and facilitate learning process in multiple ways.
6.3 Educational data mining (EDM) and learning analytics (LA)
EDM refers to developing technical methods to explore different kinds of educa-

tional datasets for the purpose of better understanding of learners and educational
settings (Mohamad & Tasir, 2013). LA is a closely related endeavor to EDM, and
mainly emphasizes on the process of collecting, measuring, analyzing and reporting
data about learners and their contexts, in order to understand and optimize learning
and the environments in which it takes place (Knobbout & van der Stappen, 2018).
However, there are several differences between them according to (Siemens & Baker,
2012). EDM focuses much more on automated adaptation and discovery, whereas
LA is mainly in support of teachers and learners judgment. Technically, EDM focus
on using typical data mining methods to assist learning process analysis including
commonly used techniques like classification, clustering and association rule mining
(Mavroudi et al., 2018). In addition to these methods, LA may also take advantage of
methods like statistical analysis, Social Network Analysis (SNA) and visualization
tools to enable users to gain an overview of the learning results. They establish an
ecosystem to reshape the existing models of education and provide new solutions to
facilitate the teaching and learning process.
In response to these trends, the focus has been shifted from traditional e-
learning toward smart e-learning by integrating big data technology within e-learning
paradigm (Kumar et al., 2016) or embedding students’ cognitive model and theories
into intelligent learning environments (Gamalel-Din, 2010).
7 Big data based E-learning systems
Generally, technologies like data science and artificial intelligence (AI) are driving
blended learning and adaptive learning effectively. However, combining these tech-
nologies with e-learning is still in the early stages. Where and how to place these
technologies in e-learning need to be exploited to achieve smart blended learning
and adaptive learning. Many researches have been conducted during the past few
years. We present a general architecture of big data based e-learning in Fig. 3. It
combines essential technologies contributing to collect, aggregate, preprocess, ana-
lyze, store and manage big data in e-learning systems. These logical components
Fig. 3 The Architecture of Big Data Based E-learning Systems

perform specific functions to enable readers to understand the lifecycle of transform-

ing the different e-learning data into valuable teaching and learning guidance through
state-of-the-art technologies (Davoudian & Liu, 2020).
Firstly, data in e-learning systems come from different sources with various
formats and different granularity. Generally, there are four types of data sources:
learning resources, user information, user behavior/activities, and collaboration
information. Specifically, learning resource can be audios, videos, slides, texts, pre-
sentations or any other kind of documents or files that are used to create course
content and pedagogical resources. Another data source comes from users’ demo-
graphic information including their gender, age, education, occupation, experiences,
and prior knowledge etc. The third type of data source includes users’ behavior and
interactions with the system (e.g., log in/out activities, visited contents, quizzes, tests,
assignments). The last type of data source comes from the users’ cooperation via
emails, instant communication tools, forums and so on.
Taking into account the heterogeneous and hierarchical nature of data sources,
it becomes essential to determine data structures and formats that reflect an event
(Romero & Ventura, 2013; Otoo-Arthur & van Zyl, 2020). There are three kinds
of data: structured, semi-structured or unstructured. Structured data are organized
through predefined structures and are stored as records in tables with predefined
columns in relational database systems such as MySQL, Oracle, SQL Server and
PostgreSQL. Semistructured data have internal structures but are not organized
through predefined structures. They are represented in CSV, XML, JSON and other
markup languages and are stored in NoSQL stores such as Redis, MongoDB, Cas-
sandra and HBase (Davoudian et al., 2018). Unstructured data have no predefined
structures and are stored as text files, emails, videos, audios, web pages, etc. For
e-learning data analysis, these different types of data need to be considered together.
7.1 Data acquisition
It is the very first step for e-learning data processing. It collects data generated from
distributed information sources with various frequencies, sizes, and formats (Wang
et al., 2018). It is important that the collected data align with the research questions
to be solved in the system. The commonly used open protocols for data acquisition
are Advanced Message Queuing Protocol (AMQP) and Java Message Service(JMS)
(Lyko et al., 2016). The former is an open source standard for asynchronous messag-
ing between applications considering security, reliability, and performance, whereas
the latter allows programs to access system’s messages easily. Regarding common
techniques for data acquisition, several tools can be used to collect and aggregate
multiple datasets effectively based on different data sources. For instance, Apache
Flume can transport large amounts of streaming data such as log files into a central-
ized store like HDFS at a higher speed, or turn it into a producer of Kafka (Landset
et al., 2015). Additionally, Apache Sqoop is designed to transfer batch data between
Apache Hadoop and structured database, and dump structured data into HDFS (Geng
et al., 2019; Dahdouh et al., 2018).
7.2 Data preprocessing
It involves converting original data into an understandable format by using multiple

data mining methods or techniques. The collected data are often incomplete, incon-
sistent, noisy, superfluous and containing errors, which can contribute to incorrect or
misleading data analysis and consequently make data analysis slow and inaccurate.
So it is not directly applicable to start a data mining process. Alternatively, for further
processing and evaluation, the raw data need be converted into correct and helpful
information. Generally, data preprocessing includes the following techniques.
• Data cleaning. It is utilized to discovery missing values, highlight errors, identify
outliers, smooth the noisy data, get rid of duplicates, convert improperly for-
matted or address the inconsistencies in the data to improve data accuracy and
quality.
• Data integration. It is used to combine data with different representations from
multiple sources and also detect and resolve data conflicts.
• Data transformation. It converts the original data from one format to another
by using normalization, aggregation and generalization and includes steps such
as interpretation, pre-translation data quality check, data translation and post-
translation data quality check.
• Data reduction. It is used to reduce the amount of data required for analysis,
through methods such as dimensionality reduction, compression, deduplication,
numerosity reduction and so on.
• Data discretization. It involves the process of partitioning continuous attributes
to several discretized values to prepare datasets well for some mining algorithms
such as decision tree that assume discrete values.
Data analysis
It is utilized to process various types of data and perform proper analyses for teaching
and learning assistance and improvements. Generally, the common analysis methods
can be carried out in realtime, offline and hybrid way. Realtime analysis involves
a continual input, analyze and output of data that need to be processed within a
short period of time. Parallel processing and memory-based processing are two gen-
eral methods for realtime analysis (Wang et al., 2018). Tools like Apache Storm,
Spark, Flink, S4 (da Silva & et al, 2016), Kafka, SAP Hana (Chandio et al., 2015)
are used to deal with realtime data. Offline analysis is utilized to analyze historical
data for the purpose of identifing patterns in the environment without high require-
ment on response time. Most traditional e-learning systems utilized offline analysis
method to handle and analyse the learning data in batch. The typical examples include
components of Hadoop framework. Specifically, Spark and Hadoop MapReduce are
commonly used tools to deal with batch processing. Additonally, a hybrid computa-
tion model can be used to deal with massive data by combing the advantages of both
batch and realtime analysis.
Several representative data analysis techniques are introduced below to analyze

huge data and mining valuable information concealed in the raw data sets.
• Cluster analysis. It involves grouping same or similar records into clusters.
For example, Coursera utilizes t-distributed stochastic neighbour embedding
(t-SNE) algorithm to group courses into categories. This method makes cate-
gorization scheme simpler with less redundant. Clusters can also be developed
in educational information at several distinct grain sizes. Student activities can
be combined to explore behavior patterns (Baker & Inventado, 2014). Simi-
larly, teachers or students can be grouped together to discovery similarities or
differences among them.
• Classification. It is used to classify a value into a specific category in which all
the items have very similar or the same characteristics. Classification has been
commonly utilized in e-learning to predict the performance of learners (Ahmed
& Elaraby, 2014; Baker & Inventado, 2014; Rasheed & Wahid, 2021). For exam-
ple, the possibility of a student to pass the exam (Rustia et al., 2018) or the
students who tend to dropout (Pal, 2012) can be predicted based on students and
behavior characteristics.
• Correlation analysis. Its goal is to find correlations between variables or
attributes. This may be an attempt to determine which variables are most closely
related to a single variable of specific concern (Sachin & Vijay, 2012). For exam-
ple, correlation analysis tools can be used to identify cheat behaviors based on
knowledge test and exercise tasks databases (Teodorov et al., 2011).
• Regression analysis. It is a predictive modelling techinique, which usually uses
statistical method to predict one variable by examining the relationships among a
series of variables. Usually, a variable is identified as the predicted variable and a
set of other variables as the predictors (Angeli et al., 2017). For example, regres-
sion analysis is applied to predict which metrics help explain bad examination
results (Feng et al., 2005) in the smart e-learning system.
7.3 Data storage
Its main objective is to guarantee the efficient storage of raw data, processed data,
analyzied data, and serve data with various types throughout the lifecycle of big
data architecture. Since the data are produced at ever-increasing velocity, they must
be gathered and stored at low price. Distributed file systems (DFS) are commonly
adopted to keep low storage cost and ensure data availability and reliability for data
analytics. The typical file systems include GFS, HDFS, TFS and FastTFS by Taobao,
Microsoft Cosmos, and Facebook Haystack (Chandio et al., 2015). Other alternatives
for distributed data storage are also available that either operate on top of the file stor-
age system or run as standalone devices. Traditional relational databases like Oracle
and Postgres are widely used to store structured data. Techniques including replica-
tion, caching, horizontal or vertical scaling can be used to deal with the huge volume
of data. Non-relational databases known as NoSQL (Not only SQL) stores, are appro-
priate for intelligent applications as they support multiple data structures (Landset
et al., 2015; Davoudian et al., 2018). The types of NoSQL databases usually include
key-value storage like Redis, document storage like MongoDB, column-oriented

storage like HBase and Graph-based storage like Titan, Neo4J and OrientDB.
7.4 Data governance
It refers to a collection of practices and processes about security, integrity, usability

and availability of the data employed in an application. It builds rules and guidelines
for data quality management across the organization, and allocates responsibilities
to each role it defines (Wende & Otto, 2007). It also implements access control and
other data security measures, capture the meta data of datasets to support security
efforts and facilitates end-user data consumption. Generally, data governance usually
includes master data management, meta data management, data quality management,
data lifecycle management, data security and privacy management.
• Master data management. Master data is data most critical to an organization’s

operations and analytics. Master data management is a technology-enabled dis-
cipline which aims to control master data assets and ensure their consistency and
accuracy (Allen & Cervo, 2015). It can help to improve data quality and facilitate
computing in multiple system architectures, platforms and applications.
• Meta data management. Meta data is the information that describes the seman-
tics of other data. It specifically identifies the attributes, properties and tags that
describe and classify information. Meta data management is a critical compo-
nent for data governance practice since data are scattered in various formats and
coming from many sources in the big data environment.
• Data quality management. It plans, uses, organizes and disposes data in a quality-
oriented manner for the purpose of improving decision making and business
services (Weber et al., 2009). It is one of the most significant fields since unquali-
fied data ultimately have enormous adverse effects on data analysis. For example,
if we intend to accurately predict student behavior, high quality data are required
to develop prediction models.
• Data lifecycle management. It refers to decisions that define the definition, pro-
duction, retention and retirement of data (Khatri & Brown, 2010). In other words,
it comprehensively monitors and tracks the life process of data presentation,
which paves the way for policies on sensitive data protection and security control.
• Data security and privacy management. For the learning process, there are
very few researches specifically on data security and privacy, even though both
play a significant role in e-learning. Usually, we need measures to implement
users authentication and privacy protection, exam protection for data integrity,
courseware copyright protection, floor control security for synchronized com-
munication activities (Eibl, 2009) and so forth. For example, student information
that will not be used for analysis purpose should be excluded in data acqui-
sition stage to maintain the confidentiality of individual information. Also,
personal privacy data need to be protected and encrypted during the lifecycle
of data analysis process. Therefore, considering the security and privacy factors
while developing e-learning applications can ensure a reliable, efficient learning
environment for teaching and learning activities.
8 Data application
It refers to the application domain that EDM/LA technologies can be adopted in

e-learning systems. (Fauvel et al., 2018) reviewed innovative AI techniques that
affects MOOCs education. They focused on the researches about student learning
behaviors, engagement, and learning performance by constructing intelligent and per-
sonalized learning tracks. They categorized the research into three areas including
learner modeling, learning experience improvement and learner assessment. Similar,
(Bakhshinategh et al., 2018) reviewed current applications that have been used for
EDM and classified them into multiple groups and subgroups. Generally, the major
goals of EDM are as follows (Vora & Iyer, 2018): (1) providing feedback to sup-
port instructors; (2) detecting student behavior; (3) predicting student’s performance;
(4) recommendations for students; (5) constructing courseware; (6) planning and
scheduling. According to these researches, we review the literatures which focus on
the specific learning/teaching purposes including behavior analysis and prediction,
recommendation system, personalized learning and multidimensional assessment
below.
8.1 Behavior analysis and prediction
With big data analytic techniques, instructors can monitor and analyze various online
activities accurately such as how long the learners take to answer a question or submit an
assignment, how much time they spend in a course, which questions they skip on the
test, which part of knowledge they are interested most and so forth. They could also
discover various factors that influence students performance and predict the future
trends based on these explorations. Additionally, disruptive behaviors include low
engagement, excessive lateness, high dropping out rate, cheating on assignments and
tests, low learning effectiveness, derogatory comments in online discussion or email
can also be found. Since instructors and learners do not have face-to-face interaction,
disruptive student behaviors existing among traditional e-learning education environ-
ment cannot be disclosed immediately. Big data technology can detect and determine
those unacceptable behaviors, while adhering to procedures for reporting disrup-
tive incidents. Then, proper interventions aiming to stop those behaviors or motivate
weaker students can be conducted accordingly to mitigate negative factors in e-
learning environment. Generally, behavior analysis and prediction mainly focuses
on aspects like student learning motivation, engagement, participation, dropout rate,
performance success and so on. Several examples are listed in Table 1.
8.2 Recommendation system
Learners are overwhelmed with the large numbers of learning resources available
online. It is becoming more and more difficult for them to select suitable learning
materials in e-learning environments. Recommendation systems provide an effective
approach to solve this issue by assisting learners to discover appropriate learning
contents and improve learning outcomes (Fauvel et al., 2018). Basically, there are
four strategies commonly used in recommendation system: collaborative filtering
Table 1 Behavior analysis and prediction
Topic Methods Reference
User satisfaction, student motiva- Gamification techniques (Lisitsyna et al., 2015; Urh et al., 2015; Muntean, 2011)
tion and engagement, learning per-
formance
Correlation between students’ Data mining & text mining (He, 2013)
involvement in asking questions
and final performance
Relationship between achievement Clustering (Vaessen et al., 2014)
objectives and help-seeking strate-
gies
Student behavioral structure, pre- Latent Dirichlet Allocation (Seaton & Chuang, 2015)
Educational and Information Technologies (2023) 28:7845–7876
dict possibility to obtain a certifi-

cate
Patterns of similar user behaviors Clustering (Talavera & Gaudioso, 2004)
Students’ learning pace and progress Data clean and analyze (Hadavand & Leek, 2018)
Predict & evaluate low-engagement Classification (Hussain et al., 2018)
Dropout prediction Classification (Liang et al., 2016; Feng et al., 2019; Xing & Du, 2019)
Detect learning style Classification (Rasheed & Wahid, 2021)
7867
Table 2 Recommendation system
Dissimilarity among courses Content-based (Hou et al., 2018)

Relationships between courses Association rules (Dahdouh et al., 2019)
activities
Recommend learning resources Context-based method, sequential (Tarus et al., 2018)
pattern mining, CF algorithms
Distribute tailored learning con- Association rules, content filtering, (Xiao et al., 2018)
tents collaborative filtering
Recommend learning resources Cluster-based hybrid algorithm (Bhaskaran et al., 2021)
(CF), matrix and tensor factorization, content-based (CB) techniques and associa-
tion rule mining (Klašnja-Milićević et al., 2017; Ibrahim et al., 2020). Also, many
researchers adopt a hybrid recommendation approach by combining the advantages
of above-mentioned strategies to promote the quality of recommendations. Some
recommendation system examples are shown in Table 2.
8.3 Personalized learning
It refers to a customized way that adapts to the learners’ personalized requirements in

e-learning systems. Personalized learning is critical since numerous learners with var-
ious background and needs will get involved in e-learning systems. The predefined
procedure of learning resources to be followed by the students in a course cannot
meet all learners’ particular objectives. According to students learning pattern, indi-
vidual preferences, and knowledge states (Jeong et al., 2013), personalized learning
content can be provided to each individual learner accordingly. Learners are able to
reduce the time spent on finding proper contents and get personalized service and
meaningful learning experience. Additionally, it can assist them to access the individ-
ualized sequence of resources produced and adapted to what they need, rather than
following the predefined learning route. Also, the identification of targeted content
can satisfy teaching needs among large, heterogeneous and complicated resources.
Some examples of personalized learning can be found in Table 3.
Table 3 Personalized learning
Produce tailored learning paths AI planning techniques (Garrido et al., 2016)

Recognize learning style and adjust ThoTh Lab platform (Deng et al., 2018)
learning content
Personalized curriculum sequenc- Genetic algorithm (Huang et al., 2007)
ing with matched difficulties
Table 4 Multidimensional assessment
Autonomous assessment of assign- Web-based system (Le Ru et al., 2015)

ments
Evaluate assignment Formative assessments (Klimova, 2015)
Peer assessment Clustering (Lynda et al., 2017)
Learning performance assessment Classification (Cheng et al., 2011)
8.4 Multidimensional assessment
Student learning evaluation and assessment is a key characteristic for e-learning

systems. However, it is a challenging task to conduct self-sustainable or personal-
ized evaluation to suit the learner population. Therefore, various dimensions need
to be adopted to assess the efficiency of e-learning systems. Table 4 provides some
examples for multidimensional assessment.
8.5 Decision making
Decision making is an essential part of e-learning systems. The participants

and related stakeholders need to make appropriate decisions to adjust the teach-
ing/learning method or the program process. According to (Galvis, 2018), many
contextual factors have an influence on an institution’s decisions. Users are able to
establish decision processes that convert education data into actionable insight that
can help improve learning performance (Picciano, 2012). Basically, they identify
problems and spot opportunities for positive change. Consequently, they can draw
precise conclusions and make a better decision by examining and analyzing data con-
secutively. Additionally, e-learning systems provide possibility to improve decision
making capability based on extensive data analysis. Table 5 gives some examples for
decision making.
Table 5 Decision making
Precision teaching interventions Data-driven decision model (Zhu et al., 2016)

Provide knowledge for decision- Knowledge-based data prototype (Abu-Naser et al., 2011)
maker
Decisions for mobile learning Task-interaction model (Fulantelli et al., 2015)
9 Conclusion
E-learning systems have been increasingly used to provide efficient learning ser-
vices, especially after the declaration of the global COVID-19 pandemic by the World
Health Organization in mid-March 2020. A lot of post-secondary institutions have
introduced e-learning systems alongside online courses.
In this paper, we provide comprehensive review on the efforts of applying new
information and communication technologies to improve e-learning services. We
first systematically investigate current e-learning systems in terms of their classi-
fication, architecture, functions, challenges, and current trends. We then present a
general architecture for big data based e-learning systems to meet the ever-growing
demand for e-learning. We also describe how to use data generated in big data based
e-learning systems to support more flexible and customized course delivery and
personalized learning.
Based on the general architecture presented, we have systematically implemented
a novel big data based e-learning system called Weblearn17 that has been used by
several universities in China for e-learning since 2021.
We are now working on data preprocessing, data analysis, and data application
as shown in Fig. 3 in order to provide customized course delivery and personalized
learning.
Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their critical reading
of the article and their valuable feedbacks, which have substantially helped to improve the quality and
accuracy of this article.
Funding This work was partly supported by Guangzhou Key Laboratory of Big Data and Intelligent
Education (No. 2015010009) and National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 61672389)
References
Abu-Naser, S., Al-Masri, A., Sultan, Y. A., & Zaqout, I. (2011). A prototype decision support system for
optimizing the effectiveness of elearning in educational institutions. Int. J. Data Mining Knowledge
Management Process (IJDKP), 1, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.5121/ijdkp.2011.1401.
Ahmed, A. B. E. D., & Elaraby, I. S. (2014). Data mining: A prediction for student’s perfor-
mance using classification method. World Journal Computer Applied Technology, 2(2), 43–47.
https://doi.org/10.13189/wjcat.2014.020203.
Alameri, J., Masadeh, R., Hamadallah, E., Bani, H., & Fakhouri, H. (2020). Students’ perceptions
of e-learning platforms (moodle, microsoft teams and zoom platforms) in the university of jor-
dan education and its relation to self-study and academic achievement during covid-19 pandemic,
vol. 11:13.
Allen, M., & Cervo, D. (2015). Multi-domain master data management: Advanced MDM and data
governance in practice.
Alonso, F., López, G., Manrique, D., & Viñes, J. M. (2005). An instructional model for web-based
e-learning education with a blended learning process approach. British Journal of Educational
Technology, 36(2), 217–235.
Andersson, A. (2008). Seven major challenges for e-learning in developing countries: Case study ebit, sri
lanka. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 4(3), 45–62.
17 http://www.weblearn.cn/
Angeli, C., Howard, S. K., Ma, J., Yang, J., & Kirschner, P.A (2017). Data mining in educational
technology classroom research: Can it make a contribution?. Computers Education, 113, 226–242.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.05.021.
Aroyo, L., Dolog, P., Houben, G.-J., Kravcik, M., Naeve, A., Nilsson, M., & Wild, F. (2006). Inter-
operability in personalized adaptive learning. Journal of Educational Technology Society, 9(2),
4–18.
Bagarukayo, E., Mpangwire, V., & Kalema, B.M. (2014). Integrating a chatting tool into a learning man-
agement system. In 3Rd international conference on informatics engineering and information science
(ICIEIS2014), pp. 271–275.
Baker, R. S., & Inventado, P. S. (2014). Educational data mining and learning analytics. In Learning
analytics, pp. 61–75.
Bakhshinategh, B., Zaiane, O. R., ElAtia, S., & Ipperciel, D (2018). Educational data mining applica-
tions and tasks: A survey of the last 10 years. Education Information Technologies, 23(1), 537–553.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s1063.
Bari, M., Djouab, R., & Hoa, C.P (2018). Elearning current situation and emerging challenges. PEOPLE:
International Journal of Social Sciences, 4, 2. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2018.42.97109.
Baturay, M. H. (2015). An overview of the world of moocs. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sci-
ences, 174, 427–433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.685, International conference on new
horizons in education, INTE 2014, pp. 25–27, June 2014, Paris.
Bhaskaran, S., Marappan, R., & Santhi, B. (2021). Design and analysis of a cluster-based intelligent hybrid
recommendation system for e-learning applications. Mathematics, 9(2), 197.
Brajkovic, E., Rakic, K., & Kraljevic, G. (2018). Application of data mining in e-leaming systems. In
2018 17th international symposium on INFOTEH-JAHORINA, INFOTEH 2018 - proceedings 2018-
Janua(March), pp 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/INFOTEH.2018.8345536.
Carmona, A. B. C., Muñoz, C. M., & Vargas, A.C. (2008). Virtual whiteboard and chat for a learning
management system. In E-learning, pp. 263–270.
Cavus, N., & Zabadi, T. (2014). A comparison of open source learning management systems. In Procedia
- social and behavioral sciences, vol. 143, pp. 521–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.430.
3rd cyprus international conference on educational research, CY-ICER 2014, 30 January–2014, 1
February, Lefkosa, North Cyprus.
Chandio, A. A., Tziritas, N., & Xu, C.-Z. (2015). Big-data processing techniques and their challenges in
transport domain ZTE Communications, vol. 1(010).
Chao, K.-M., James, A. E., Nanos, A. G., Chen, J.-H., Stan, S.-D., Muntean, I., Figliolini, G., Rea, P.,
Bouzgarrou, C. B., Vitliemov, P., & et al (2015). Cloud e-learning for mechatronics: Clem. Future
Generation Computer Systems, 48, 46–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2014.10.033.
Cheng, C.-H., Chen, T.-L., Wei, L.-Y., & Chen, J.-S (2011). A new e-learning achievement evaluation
model based on rbf-nn and similarity filter. Neural Computing and Applications, 20(5), 659–669.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-009-0280-0.
Cheng, P.-H., Yang, Y.-T. C., Chang, S.-H. G., & Kuo, F.-R.R (2015). 5e mobile inquiry learning
approach for enhancing learning motivation and scientific inquiry ability of university students. IEEE
Transactions on Education, 59(2), 147–153. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2015.2467352.
Chiu, T. K., & Hew, T. K. (2018). Factors influencing peer learning and performance in mooc asyn-
chronous online discussion forum. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 34(4),
https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3240.
Chung, C.-H., Pasquini, L. A., & Koh, C.E. (2013). Web-based learning management system considera-
tions for higher education. Learning and Performance Quarterly, 1(4), 24–37.
Seaton, D. T., & Chuang, I. (2015). Probabilistic use cases: Discovering behavioral patterns for predicting
certification. In Proceedings of the second (2015) ACM conference on learning scale. LS ’15, pp. 141–
148. ACM, https://doi.org/10.1145/2724660.2724662.
da Silva, V. A., & et al (2016). Strategies for big data analytics through lambda architectures in volatile
environments. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 49(30), 114–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2016.11.138.
Dahdouh, K., Dakkak, A., Oughdir, L., & Messaoudi, F. (2018). Big data for online learning systems. Edu-
cation and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2783–2800. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9741-3.
Dahdouh, K., Oughdir, L., Dakkak, A., & Ibriz, A. (2019). Building an e-learning recommender system
using association rules techniques and r environment. International Journal of Information Science
and Technology, 3(2), 11–18.
Datta, S., & Bhattacharyya, S. (2018). Simple spirited scalable e-learning system. In 2018
IEEE 5th international congress on information science and technology (CiSt), pp. 368–373.
https://doi.org/10.1109/CIST.2018.8596631.
Davoudian, A., & Liu, M. (2020). Big data systems: A software engineering perspective. ACM Computing
Surveys, 53(5), 110–111039. https://doi.org/10.1145/3408314.
Davoudian, A., Chen, L., & Liu, M. (2018). A survey on nosql stores. ACM Computing Surveys, 51(2),
40–14043. https://doi.org/10.1145/3158661.
Deng, Y., Lu, D., Chung, C.-J., Huang, D., & Zeng, Z. (2018). Personalized learning in a virtual hands-on
lab platform for computer science education. In 2018 IEEE frontiers in education conference (FIE),
pp. 1–8. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2018.8659291.
Eibl, C. J. (2009). Privacy and confidentiality in e-learning systems. In 2009 fourth international con-
ference on internet and web applications and services, pp. 638–642. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIW.
2009.102.
El Mhouti, A., Erradi, M., & Nasseh, A. (2018). Using cloud computing services in e-learning process:
Benefits and challenges. Education and Information Technologies, 23(2), 893–909. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s10639-017-9642-x.
Fajar, A. N., Nurcahyo, A., & Sriratnasari, S.R. (2018). Soa system architecture for inter-
conected modern higher education in indonesia. Procedia Computer Science, 135, 354–360.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2018.08.184. The 3rd international conference on computer science
and computational Intelligence (ICCSCI 2018) : Empowering smart technology in digital era for a
better life.
Fauvel, S., Yu, H., Miao, C., Cui, L., Song, H., Zhang, L., Li, X., & Leung, C. (2018). Artificial intelligence
powered moocs: A brief survey. In 2018 IEEE international conference on agents (ICA), pp. 56–61.
https://doi.org/10.1109/AGENTS.2018.8460059.
Feng, M., Heffernan, N. T., & Koedinger, K.R. (2005). Looking for sources of error in predicting student’s
knowledge. In Educational data mining: Papers from the 2005 AAAI workshop, pp. 54–61.
Feng, W., Tang, J., & Liu, T.X. (2019). Understanding dropouts in moocs. In AAAI 2019.
Fulantelli, G., Taibi, D., & Arrigo, M. (2015). A framework to support educational decision making
in mobile learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 47, 50–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.
05.045.
Galvis, Á. H. (2018). Supporting decision-making processes on blended learning in higher education:
Literature and good practices review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher
Education, 15(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0106-1.
Gamalel-Din, S. A. (2010). Smart e-learning: A greater perspective; from the fourth to the fifth generation
e-learning. Egyptian Informatics Journal, 11(1), 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eij.2010.06.006.
Garcı́a-Holgado, A., & Garcı́a-Peñalvo, F. J. (2018). Human interaction in learning ecosystems based on
open source solutions. In P. Zaphiris, & A. Ioannou (Eds.) Learning and collaboration technologies.
Design, development and technological innovation, pp. 218–232. Springer.
Garrido, A., Morales, L., & Serina, I. (2016). On the use of case-based planning for e-learning personal-
ization. Expert Systems with Applications, 60, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2016.04.030.
Geng, D., Zhang, C., Xia, C., Xia, X., Liu, Q., & Fu, X. (2019). Big data-based improved data acqui-
sition and storage system for designing industrial data platform. IEEE Access, 7, 44574–44582.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2909060.
Goldie, J. G. S. (2016). Connectivism: A knowledge learning theory for the digital age? Medical teacher,
38(10), 1064–1069.
Gomede, E., Barros, R. M. D., & Mendes, L.D.S. (2021). Deep auto encoders to adaptive e-learning
recommender system - sciencedirect. Computers and education: Artificial intelligence.
González, M. C., Garcı́a-Peñalvo, F., Guerrero, M. C., & Forment, M.A. (2009). Back and forth: From
the lms to the mobile device. a soa approach. In Proceedings of the IADIS international conference
mobile learning 2009 (Barcelona, Spain, 26-28 February, 2009), pp. 114–120. IADIS Press, Portugal.
Hadavand, A., & Leek, J. (2018). crsra: A package for cleaning and analyzing coursera research export
data. bioRxiv, pp. 275537, https://doi.org/10.1101/275537.
Hamdan, M., Jaidin, J. H., Fithriyah, M., & Anshari, M. (2020). E-learning in time of covid-19 pandemic:
Challenges & experiences. In 2020 sixth international conference on e-learning (econf), pp. 12–16.
IEEE.
Han, I., & Shin, W. S. (2016). The use of a mobile learning management system and academic achievement
of online students. Computers & Education, 102, 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.
07.003.
Hapsari, I. N., Parhusip, A. R., Wahyu, S., Sutanto, I., Firmansyah, G., & Rosyid, A. (2021). E-learing
service issues and challenges: An exploratory study. In 2021 1st international conference on computer
science and artificial intelligence (ICCSAI), vol. 1, pp. 196–201. IEEE.
He, W. (2013). Examining students’ online interaction in a live video streaming environ-
ment using data mining and text mining. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 90–102.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.020.
Hendradi, P., Abd Ghani, M. K., Mahfuzah, S., Yudatama, U., Prabowo, N. A., & Widyanto, R.A.
(2020). Artificial intelligence influence in education 4.0 to architecture cloud based e-learning system.
International Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 4(1), 30–38.
Hill, P. (2019). State of higher Ed LMS market for US and Canada: 2018 Year-End Edition. https://eliterate.
us/state-higher-ed-lms-market-us-canada-end-2018.
Hou, Y., Zhou, P., Xu, J., & Wu, D.O. (2018). Course recommendation of mooc with big data support: A
contextual online learning approach. In IEEE INFOCOM 2018-IEEE conference on computer commu-
nications workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS), pp. 106–111. https://doi.org/10.1109/INFCOMW.2018.
8406936.
Hu, H., Zhang, G., Gao, W., & Wang, M. (2020). Big data analytics for mooc video watching behavior
based on spark. Neural Computing and Applications, vol. 32, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-018-
03983-z.
Huang, M.-J., Huang, H.-S., & Chen, M.-Y. (2007). Constructing a personalized e-learning system based
on genetic algorithm and case-based reasoning approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 33(3),
551–564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2006.05.019.
Hussain, M., Zhu, W., Zhang, W., & Abidi, S.M.R. (2018). Student engagement predictions in an e-
learning system and their impact on student course assessment scores. Computational Intelligence and
Neuroscience, vol. 2018, https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/6347186.
Ibrahim, T. S., Saleh, A. I., Elgaml, N., & Abdelsalam, M.M. (2020). A fog based recommendation system
for promoting the performance of e-learning environments. Computers & Electrical Engineering, 87,
106791.
Islam, N., Beer, M., & Slack, F. (2015). E-learning challenges faced by academics in higher education.
Journal of Education and Training Studies, 3(5), 102–112. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v3i5.947.
Jeong, J.-S., Kim, M., Yoo, K.-H., & et al (2013). A content oriented smart education system based on
cloud computing. International Journal of Multimedia and Ubiquitous Engineering, 8(6), 313–328.
https://doi.org/10.14257/ijmue.2013.8.6.31.
Jordan, K. (2014). Initial trends in enrolment and completion of massive open online courses.
The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, vol. 15(1),
https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v15i1.1651.
Kakasevski, G., Mihajlov, M., Arsenovski, S., & Chungurski, S. (2008). Evaluating usability in learning
management system moodle. In ITI 2008-30th international conference on information technology
interfaces, pp. 613–618. IEEE, https://doi.org/10.1109/ITI.2008.4588480.
Kanimozhi, S., Kannan, A., Suganya Devi, K., & Selvamani, K. (2019). Secure cloud-based e-learning
system with access control and group key mechanism. Concurrency and computation: Practice and
experience, 4841, https://doi.org/10.1002/cpe.4841.
Kappe, F., & Scerbakov, N. (2017). Object-oriented architecture of a modern learning management sys-
tem. In EDULEARN17 proceedings. 9th international conference on education and new learning
technologies, pp. 4910–4916. https://doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2017.2101.
Karjo, C. H., Andreani, W., Herawati, A., Ying, Y., Yasyfin, A. P., & Marie, K. (2021). Teachers’
challenges and needs in e-learning environment. In 2021 international seminar on application for
technology of information and communication (iSemantic), pp. 405–409. IEEE.
Kawato, T., Higashino, M., Takahashi, K., & Kawamura, T. (2020). Proposal of distributed e-learning
system using idle resources. In 2020 5Th international conference on computer and communication
systems (ICCCS).
Khatri, V., & Brown, C. V. (2010). Designing data governance. Communications of the ACM, 53(1), 148–
152. https://doi.org/10.1145/1629175.1629210.
Klašnja-Milićević, A., & Ivanović, M. (2021). E-learning personalization systems and sustainable
education MDPI.
Klašnja-Milićević, A., Vesin, B., Ivanović, M., Budimac, Z., & Jain, L.C. (2017). Recommender systems
in e-learning environments. In E-learning systems, pp. 51–75.
Klimova, B. (2015). Assessment in smart learning environment – a case study approach. In V. L. Uskov,
R. J. Howlett, & L. C. Jain (Eds.) Smart Education and Smart e-Learning, pp. 15–24. Springer.
Knobbout, J., & van der Stappen, E. (2018). Where is the learning in learning analytics? In V. Pammer-
Schindler, M. Pérez-sanagustı́n, H. Drachsler, R. Elferink, & M. Scheffel (Eds.) Learning, lifelong
technology-enhanced, pp. 88–100. Springer.
Kumar, P., Malali, P., & Noronha, H. (2016). Big data integration for transition from e-learning to smart
learning framework. In 2016 3rd MEC international conference on big data and smart city (ICBDSC),
pp. 1–4. IEEE, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICBDSC.2016.7460379.
Laisheng, X., & Zhengxia, W. (2011). Cloud computing: A new business paradigm for e-learning. In
2011 third international conference on measuring technology and mechatronics automation, vol. 1,
pp. 716–719. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMTMA.2011.181.
Landset, S., Khoshgoftaar, T. M., Richter, A. N., & Hasanin, T. (2015). A survey of open source
tools for machine learning with big data in the hadoop ecosystem. Journal of Big Data, 2(1), 24.
Laura, G., Bogdan, O., Aurelia, C., & Serban, M. (2018). University learning management system based on
office 365. In 2018 17th international conference on information technology based higher education
and training (ITHET),pp. 1–6. IEEE, Olhao, Portugal, https://doi.org/10.1109/ITHET.2018.8424799.
Le Ru, Y., Aron, M., Gerval, J.-P., & Napoleon, T. (2015). Tests generation oriented web-based automatic
assessment of programming assignments. In V. L. Uskov, R. J. Howlett, & L. C. Jain (Eds.) Smart
education and smart e-learning, pp. 117–127. Springer.
Liang, J., Li, C., & Zheng, L. (2016). Machine learning application in moocs: Dropout prediction.
In 2016 11th International conference on computer science & education (ICCSE), pp. 52–57,
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCSE.2016.7581554.
Lisitsyna, L. S., Pershin, A. A., & Kazakov, M.A. (2015). Game mechanics used for achieving better
results of massive online courses. In V. L. Uskov, R. J. Howlett, & L. C. Jain (Eds.) Education, smart
e-learning, smart, pp. 183-192. Springer.
Lu, P., Cong, X., & Zhou, D. (2015). E-learning-oriented software architecture design and case
study. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 10(4), 59–65.
https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v10i4.4698.
Lyko, K., Nitzschke, M., & Ngonga Ngomo, A.-C. (2016). Big data acquisition. In New horizons for a
data-driven economy, pp. 39–61.
Lynda, H., Farida, B.-D., Tassadit, B., & Samia, L. (2017). Peer assessment in moocs based on learners’
profiles clustering. In 2017 8th international conference on information technology (ICIT), pp. 532–
536. IEEE, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICITECH.2017.8080054.
Masud, M. A. H., & Huang, X. (2012). An e-learning system architecture based on cloud computing.
System, 10(11), 255–259.
Mavroudi, A., Giannakos, M., & Krogstie, J. (2018). Supporting adaptive learning pathways through the
use of learning analytics: Developments, challenges and future opportunities. Interactive Learning
Environments, 26(2), 206–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2017.1292531.
Mei, J. (2016). Learning management system calendar reminders and effects on time management and
academic performance. International Research and Review, 6(1), 29–45.
Min, H., & Nasir, M. (2020). Self-regulated learning in a massive open online course: a review of literature.
European Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Education, 1(2), 02007.
Mohamad, S. K., & Tasir, Z. (2013). Educational data mining: A review. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 97, 320–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.240.
Moubayed, A., Injadat, M., Nassif, A. B., Lutfiyya, H., & Shami, A. (2018). E-learning: Challenges
and research opportunities using machine learning & data analytics. IEEE Access, 6, 39117–39138.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2851790.
Muntean, C. I. (2011). Raising engagement in e-learning through gamification. In Proc. 6th international
conference on virtual learning ICVL, vol. 1, pp. 323–329. Romania.
Müller, C., & Mildenberger, T. (2021). Facilitating flexible learning by replacing classroom time with
an online learning environment: A systematic review of blended learning in higher education.
Educational Research Review, 34, 100394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100394.
Onah, D. F., & Sinclair, J. (2015). Massive open online courses: an adaptive learning framework. In 9Th
international technology, education and development conference, pp. 2–4.
Oryakhail, M. S., Saay, S., & Nasery, H. (2021). Challenges in the implementation of e-learning
in afghanistan higher education. In 2021 international conference advancement in data science,
e-learning and information systems (ICADEIS), pp. 1–6. IEEE.
Otoo-Arthur, D., & van Zyl, T. (2020). A scalable heterogeneous big data framework
for e-learning systems. In 2020 international conference on artificial intelligence,
big data, computing and data communication systems (icABCD), pp. 1–15. IEEE,.
https://doi.org/10.1109/icABCD49160.2020.9183863.
Oxman, S., Wong, W., & Innovations, D. (2014). White paper: Adaptive learning systems. Integrated
Education Solutions, pp. 6–7.
Pal, S. (2012). Mining educational data using classification to decrease dropout rate of students.
arXive:1206.3078.
Picciano, A. G. (2012). The evolution of big data and learning analytics in american higher education.
Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(3), 9–20.
Pickard, L., Shah, D., & De Simone, J.J. (2018). Mapping microcredentials across mooc platforms. In 2018
learning with MOOCS (LWMOOCS), pp. 17–21. https://doi.org/10.1109/LWMOOCS.2018.8534617.
Prahmana, R. C. I., Hartanto, D., Kusumaningtyas, D. A., & Ali, R.M. (2021). Muchlas: Community
radio-based blended learning model: A promising learning model in remote area during pandemic era.
Heliyon, 7(7), 07511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07511.
Rani, M., Nayak, R., & Vyas, O.P. (2015). An ontology-based adaptive personalized e-learning
system, assisted by software agents on cloud storage. Knowledge-Based Systems, 90, 33–48.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2015.10.002.
Rasheed, F., & Wahid, A. (2021). Learning style detection in e-learning systems using machine learning
techniques. Expert Systems with Applications (3):114774.
Riahi, G. (2015). E-learning systems based on cloud computing: A review. Procedia Computer Science,
62, 352–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.08.415.
Romero, C., & Ventura, S. (2013). Data mining in education. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining
and Knowledge Discovery, 3(1), 12–27. https://doi.org/10.1002/widm.1075.
Rossi, L. A., & Gnawali, O. (2014). Language independent analysis and classification of dis-
cussion threads in coursera mooc forums. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE 15th interna-
tional conference on information reuse and integration (IEEE IRI 2014), pp. 654–661. IEEE.
https://doi.org/10.1109/IRI.2014.7051952.
Rustia, R. A., Cruz, M. M. A., Burac, M. A. P., & Palaoag, T.D. (2018). Predicting stu-
dent’s board examination performance using classification algorithms. In Proceedings of the
2018 7th international conference on software and computer applications, pp. 233–237. ACM.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3185089.3185101.
Sachin, R. B., & Vijay, M. S. (2012). A survey and future vision of data mining in educational field.
In 2012 second international conference on advanced computing & communication technologies,
pp. 96–100. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCT.2012.14.
Schuck, S., Kearney, M., & Burden, K. (2017). Exploring mobile learning in the third space. Technology,
Pedagogy and Education, 26(2), 121–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2016.1230555.
Shah, D. (2020). By The Numbers: MOOCs in 2020. https://www.classcentral.com/report/
mooc-stats-2020.
Shah, D. (2021). Massive List of MOOC providers around the world, https://www.classcentral.com/report/
mooc-providers-list.
Siemens, G., & Baker, R. S. J. d. (2012). Learning analytics and educational data mining: Towards commu-
nication and collaboration. In Proceedings of the 2Nd international conference on learning analytics
and knowledge. LAK ’12, pp. 252–254. ACM, New York. https://doi.org/10.1145/2330601.2330661.
Sonwalkar, N. (2013). The first adaptive mooc: A case study on pedagogy framework and scal-
able cloud architecture—part i. In MOOCs Forum, vol. 1, pp. 22–29. Mary Ann Liebert.
https://doi.org/10.1089/mooc.2013.0007.
Sun, G., Cui, T., Yong, J., Shen, J., & Chen, S. (2015). Mlaas: a cloud-based system for delivering adaptive
micro learning in mobile mooc learning. IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, 11(2), 292–305.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TSC.2015.2473854.
Talavera, L., & Gaudioso, E. (2004). Mining student data to characterize similar behavior groups in
unstructured collaboration spaces. In Workshop on artificial intelligence in CSCL. 16th European
conference on artificial intelligence, pp. 17–23.
Tarus, J. K., Niu, Z., & Kalui, D. (2018). A hybrid recommender system for e-learning based
on context awareness and sequential pattern mining. Soft Computing, 22(8), 2449–2461.
Teodorov, G., Kir, O., & Zheliazkova, I. (2011). Correlation analysis of educational data mining by means
a postprocessor’s tool.
Urh, M., Vukovic, G., Jereb, E., & Pintar, R. (2015). The model for introduction of gamification
into e-learning in higher education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 388–397.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.154, 7th world conference on educational sciences.
Vaessen, B. E., Prins, F. J., & Jeuring, J. (2014). University students’ achievement goals and
help-seeking strategies in an intelligent tutoring system. Computers & Education, 72, 196–208.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.11.001.
Valiathan, P. (2002). Blended learning models. Learning circuits, 3(8), 50–59.
Vora, D. R., & Iyer, K. (2018). Edm–survey of performance factors and algorithms applied. International
Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(2.6), 93–97. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i2.6.10074.
Wang, Y., Kung, L., & Byrd, T.A. (2018). Big data analytics: Understanding its capabilities and poten-
tial benefits for healthcare organizations. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 126, 3–13.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.12.019.
Wangmo, C., & Ivanova, G. (2017). Analysis and design of e-learning system prototype for life-
long learning in bhutan. Applied Researches in Technics, Technologies and Education, vol. 5,
https://doi.org/10.15547/artte.2017.04.007.
Weber, K., Otto, B., & Österle, H. (2009). One size does not fit all—a contingency
approach to data governance. Journal of Data and Information Quality (JDIQ), 1(1), 4.
https://doi.org/10.1145/1515693.1515696.
Wende, K., & Otto, B. (2007). A contingency approach to data governance. In M. A. Robert, R. O’Hare,
M. L. Markus, & B. Klein (Eds.) Proceedings of 12th international conference on information quality,
Cambridge, pp. 163–176. https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/213308/.
Xiao, J., Wang, M., Jiang, B., & Li, J. (2018). A personalized recommendation system with combinational
algorithm for online learning. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 9(3), 667–
677. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-017-0466-8.
Xing, W., & Du, D. (2019). Dropout prediction in moocs: Using deep learning for per-
sonalized intervention. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(3), 547–570.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633118757015.
Zhang, H., Zhang, J., Yin, X., Zhou, K., & Pan, Z. (2020). Cloud-to-end rendering and storage management
for virtual reality in experimental education. Virtual Reality & Intelligent Hardware, 2(4), 368–380.
Zhu, Z.-T., Yu, M.-H., & Riezebos, P. (2016). A research framework of smart education. Smart Learning
Environments, 3(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-016-0026-2.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published
maps and institutional affiliations.
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under
a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and
applicable law.

Towards Intelligent E-Learning Systems: Mengchi Liu Dongmei Yu

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Towards Intelligent E-Learning Systems: Mengchi Liu Dongmei Yu

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Towards Intelligent E-Learning Systems: Mengchi Liu Dongmei Yu

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Educational and Information Technologies (2023) 28:7845–7876

Towards intelligent E-learning systems

Mengchi Liu1 · Dongmei Yu2

Keywords E-learning system · Big data · Smart learning · Personalized earning

2 E-learning system classiﬁcations

2.1 Massive open online courses (MOOCs) platforms

2.2 Learning management systems (LMSs)

3 Architecture of current E-learning systems

Fig. 1 A General Framework for E-learning Systems

3.1 The presentation layer

The presentation layer focuses on the human computer interaction by providing

3.2 The E-learning system layer

3.3 The database layer

4 Functions of E-learning systems

4.1 System administration

Fig. 2 Functions of E-learning Systems

management, roles and permission management, customizable preferences, log and

• Customizable preferences: Personalized setting for user profiles and sys-

4.2 Course management

• Participants management: It enables an administrator or teacher to easily

4.3 Exercise and Assessment

to be re-used in different quizzes and facilitate the teaching process. Examina-

Collaboration and communication Effective collaboration and communication help

provides a default partition of subforums, which includes study groups, gen-

• E-commerce: E-commerce exists in some e-learning systems especially MOOC

5 Challenges of E-learning systems

Modern e-learning has evolved as a multi-disciplinary process including pedagogy,

6.1 Blended learning

6.2 Adaptive learning

Traditionally, a standard e-learning system does not consider individual differences

6.3 Educational data mining (EDM) and learning analytics (LA)

EDM refers to developing technical methods to explore different kinds of educa-

7 Big data based E-learning systems

Fig. 3 The Architecture of Big Data Based E-learning Systems

perform specific functions to enable readers to understand the lifecycle of transform-

7.1 Data acquisition

7.2 Data preprocessing

It involves converting original data into an understandable format by using multiple

Several representative data analysis techniques are introduced below to analyze

7.3 Data storage

key-value storage like Redis, document storage like MongoDB, column-oriented

7.4 Data governance

It refers to a collection of practices and processes about security, integrity, usability

• Master data management. Master data is data most critical to an organization’s

It refers to the application domain that EDM/LA technologies can be adopted in

8.1 Behavior analysis and prediction

8.2 Recommendation system

Topic Methods Reference

dict possibility to obtain a certifi-

Table 2 Recommendation system

Topic Methods Reference

Dissimilarity among courses Content-based (Hou et al., 2018)

8.3 Personalized learning

It refers to a customized way that adapts to the learners’ personalized requirements in

Table 3 Personalized learning

Topic Methods Reference

Produce tailored learning paths AI planning techniques (Garrido et al., 2016)

Table 4 Multidimensional assessment