People learn in different ways.Learning is a complex,  interrelated system of accessing information, getting it into the brain, and processing that information to solve problems or support activities. Understanding learning styles leads to success. Once an individual knows what learning environment works best for him/her and what his/her preferred learning style is, the individual will see how he/she can use the preferred learning style to move information through the learning process and to learn new information more quickly and efficiently, remember new information for a longer period of time, and increase ability to recall the information more quickly and completely for performance, discussion, or test taking.

Mind maps and scorm for course content development

This article presents the mind map approach as one of the learning styles. Mind map is a way of representing information graphically using keywords, links, and key images, allowing a lot more information to be put on a page. Mind map works the way the brain works, which is non linear.

Any idea probably has thousands of links in your mind. Because mind maps are more visual and depict associations between key words, they are much easier to recall than linear notes. Starting from the center of the page rather than top-left corner allows you to work out in all directions. Mind maps are easy to review. Visual quality of mind maps allows you to make key points to stand out easily. Mind map has been used in many fields such as notes, problem solving, planning, and presentations.

Although mind map learning approach is widely accepted, there is still little research on e-learning and teaching using this approach for developing course content. SCORM has become a widely used requirement for e-learning projects. However, there is still a lot of confusion, especially within the instructional design community, regarding what it is and when it should be used. This article presents an experiment in developing course content taking the advantages of one of the most powerful approaches in displaying information visually, in a learning and teaching environment using SCORM standards. The aim of this experiment is to accommodate individual learning styles in an adaptive learning environment that teaches the “C programming language”.

SCORM standard is another aspect this project is using. SCORM nowadays become a widely used requirement for e-learning projects. There is still a lot of confusion, especially within the instructional design community, regarding what it is and when it should be used. SCORM or the Sharable Content Object Reference Model provides a common technical framework for the development of reusable instructional objects for computer and Web-based learning. This paper presents the design and implementation of course content development based on mind map approach using SCORM.

SCORM is a model that describes a standardized way to design and develop learning materials. The greatest advantage of implementing SCORM standard is that it makes it possible to integrate learning objects from different sources in a common environment. SCORM as model describes two main elements a Content Aggregation Model (CAM), which describes the ways in which SCORM materials are organised and packaged so that they can be exchanged between different learning management systems (LMS) and a Run Time Environment (RTE), which provides the means for the learning materials to communicate with the LMS and for the collection of data to track and monitor learners.

CAM in Mind map implementation

The most important thing is how to package together a collection of learning objects, their metadata, and information about how the content is to be delivered to the user.

Developing SCORM Content Package

For developing any content package the following steps should be followed.

1- Define the course root aggregation.

2- Develop a content package which, contain two main principals component must be developed carefully, first all the physical files such as Assets (Assets are any digital objects of media, text, images, sound, web pages or other data can be delivered to a web client), and SCO (SCO is a collection of one or more assets). Second a manifest file, which is a list of all the resources (SCOs and assets), the organisation, sequencing rules, and all of the metadata.

3- Identify the metadata for each SCO and the metadata for the entire content package by indicating the ownership, cost (if any), the technical requirements, and educational purposes.

4- Zip the content package together with the IMS files, which is standard communication specifying data model between LMS and SCO.

5- Test the package in any LMS to ensure it functions the way you had intended.

Mind Map Course Design

The “C programming language” course was developed based on mind map approach as follows:

1 The root aggregation is defined and all the physical files and their links are developed.

2 The course main page is designed based on Mind map approach using only key words and whenever possible images emphasized by color.

3 Starting from the center of the page and moving outwards, making the center a clear and strong visual image.

4 Create the sub-center.

5 Put keywords on lines using lower case and using color and arrows to show links between elements.

The testing tool used in this stage is TestSuite 1.3.3 ST from ADL.

RTE in Mind map implementation

Run time environment describes the LMS responsibility to launch SCOs based requests from the learner and the sequencing rules of the content organization. Therefore, the main requirements in this phase are: to have Application Programme Interface (API), which is a set of functions to achieve the communication between the course content and LMS and facilities to utilise details from manifest file through data model. This data model enables the LMS to track learners’ progress. The steps developed in this phase are as follows:

1. All the physical files in this course have been designed and developed using hyperlink, text, and images such as in. All the course content files have been developed as assets. The nature of the mind map approach requires allowing the learner to jump through the links in the main page. As such, SCOs cannot be implemented due to the following reasons: (1) A SCO is not allowed to contain hyperlinks to other SCOs. (2) A SCO is not allowed to interact with the runtime environment, except through the SCORM API. (3) A SCO is not allowed to create additional windows, unless it can close them reliably when the SCO terminates. (4) A SCO should not contain hyperlinks to resources that May not be available when the SCO is run in different context than the original context [3].
2.The strategy of the course is jumping from section to section through the main page by the links.
3. The manifest file represents the course sequencing and navigation showing the structure of the course organization and all content resources using IMS Simple Sequencing, which is the specification, which describes three models: sequencing definition model, tracking model, and activity state model. Manifest file also represents the navigation model which indicates how the content is presented to the learner by controlling certain user interface devices that the content May wish to provide, such as Continue and Previous.

Because of the nature of the mind map, only the following aspects in  SCORM sequencing definition model and navigation presentation has been implemented:

Sequencing control choice: This indicates that the learner is free to choose any activity in a cluster in any order without restriction, which contains a boolean (True/ False). Therefore False was chosen to prevent the learner from browsing the course through the cluster instead of the map, which is the heart of the mind map approach. • Sequencing control choice exit: This indicates whether a Choice navigation request can target activities that are not descendents of the affected  ctivity, thereby causing the affected activity to terminate. This element contains a Boolean (True/False). The value True indicates that while an activity is active the learner has the ability to trigger Choice navigation requests that targets nondescendent activities. • The Continue and Previous devices have been disabled to enforce the learner to navigate the content object through the map only. The tracking and activity  state model is simply recording progress and have no interest in user preferences or learning styles. Therefore, implementing advanced function such as prerequisite or other pedagogy Hanan Dageez from Libya is a lecturer in Libyan High Institute and university and the head of computer science  department in High Institute. She has a Masters in computer sciences in 1999  from University of Malaya, Malaysia. Currently Hanan is doing her Ph.D research in Education management at University Tun Abdul Razak, Malaysia. concepts are not easy to handle and in some cases, impossible to implement. The course content implementation  This work is part of research work done and Sample RTE 1.3.3 from ADL has been modified and used as LMS to cope with this research. First the course must be uploaded and the prerequisite chapters identified by the administrator from the main menu to choose how many chapters this course contains and then the prerequisite chapters for each chapter will be determined for the course. When a learner logs in into the system and registers for the course the system allows him to view the content by displaying the mind map main page. Through the links the learner reviews the course and by answering the tests and the assessment test tracks progress by recording the chapters he/she have failed to answer their questions correctly. The learner, in this case, has to redo failed chapters with all the prerequisite chapters. Even though the learner quits accidentally and gets back into the module, by clicking on “Learner record”, the list of remaining chapters will appear to remind the learner to finish them for record in  completing the course.

Augmented Reality (AR) is part of the growing research area  of Virtual Reality (VR). The term VR, defined as “a computer generated, interactive, three-dimensional environment in which a person is immersed” (Steve Aukstakalnis, David  Blatner, Stephen P. Roth , 1992). As the field of research is growing, it is important for the researchers to enhance learning and data gathering from the environment and provide new ways to obtain knowledge. One way of achieving this is through the usage of Augmented Reality. The augmented reality system generates combinations of view for the user. In simpler definition, it is actually a combination of the real environment and virtual objects, generated to produce a combined output to the viewer. AR enhances the person's perception of the world.

Augmented Reality in medical training

AR has been used in entertainment, military training, medical, engineering design, robotics and tele-robotics, manufacturing and consumer designs for many years prior to its introduction. Fotis Liarokapis, Panos Petridis, Paul Lister and Martin White (2002) have developed “an interactive e-learning AR environ-ment” called Multimedia Augmented Reality Interface for E-Learning (MARIE) in which users can view and interact with 3D virtual objects aided by online instructors. This system uses the head-mounted display, camera, and computer for visual augmented reality to present 3D multimedia information to the learner regardless of gender or age group.

The usage of AR in medical field increases the efficiency especially in the students training area as there is no more the need to make use of real human or animal body to do analysis and surgery trial (Wenzel D., 2004). The same 3D object can be used to train a number of students instead of using one human body to train a group of students. In addition, AR enables students to learn more and become skilled in the surgery as the 3D image can be recreated and the surgery can be repeated whenever errors are made (Fuhrmann, 2001). AR is capable of creating end result of any actions taken in an artificial body similar to a real body. Students and trainee surgeons get the opportunity to learn from the consequences of each of their actions during surgery through AR.

While virtual reality is being widely explored by the computer scientists, Augmented Reality that improves the human vision and perception is becoming the focus of many researchers around the world. While virtual reality is computer generation of immersible environments based on real world,  Augmented Reality is integration of graphics, text, sound, images and force feedback with real environment.  Augmented reality can be the next wave that will revolutionise teaching and learning through real time interaction. This article discusses the use of AR to augment teaching and learning in classroom by presenting a simple and cost effective AR setup that merges real scenes with virtual scene or objects.

Experimental setup

A topic on recreation of dinosaurs using DNA extracted from amber was selected to this experimental study. Storyboard was created to depict the sequence of extraction of DNA, injection into an egg and recreation of dinosaurs. 3D models were created to be merged with scenes inside classroom for interaction purposes based on the storyboard.

Virtual objects were developed

in the format of 3D using 3DS Max software. The created 3D models of dinosaurs were converted to VRML format. In order for the AR software to recognise the model, a marker was assigned to each model. Each marker had a pattern, which was unique to distinguish the recognition of virtual objects assigned to them. Markers were assigned to the models using the AR software.

The setup
 The setup has three steps as explained below.
 Setup digital video camera and calibrate.

The digital video camera is setup in front of the classroom. The equipment had to be set in front of the classroom in order to connect the laptop to the projector, which is already mounted in front.

Place the marker in the desired environment.

The AR markers were placed in at a location where camera is calibrated to recognise the markers to merge virtual models to augment.

Capture real scene and merge with virtual image.

Markers were placed in different locations of the classroom where the digital camera can be moved to capture the scene and the marker. AR software merged the real scene with virtual objects, which are the 3D models of dinosaurs to form augmented scene which is displayed in the monitor.This is projected on to the screen for the audience in the classroom to view.

This type of AR setting was chosen, as it is cost effective compared to using the head-mounted devices. A video camera was setup to capture the real world scenario. The video camera relayed the real environment captured. It passed through the graphics system using a Firewire card and an IEEE 394 cable connected to the video camera. Alternatively, if there is no Firewire card available, a video-capture card with attached Firewire port is also usable. The scenes were merged using AR Toolkit. A few different versions of AR software were used for these experiments. The augmented result was then projected as the output on the screen.

20 students who attended this experimental study were very excited to see the real time augmented scenes in the classroom. They interacted with markers by moving them to different location within the camera view where the virtual models were recognised. In this case, a projector is connected up from the laptop and the whole class gets to view what is displayed. However, the following limitations were found while using this setup in the classroom.

Low Latency

Low latency is the image registration error caused by system delays. The low latency problem can be solved by predicting the future motion or through careful system design (Azuma et al, 2001). However, this requires a thorough knowledge of the application domain to be incorporated as part of the AR system. In this case the topic for teaching selected must be analysed to create models, which are appropriate to be used with fixed AR setting. This careful planning and designing of the virtual models with the consideration of the real scenes in perspective will provide effective and enhanced learning environment for the students.

Limitation in the degree of movement and interaction

Tracking using markers and fixed camera method is currently limited in providing the degree of freedom of movement to the instructor. Camera has to be moved every time the markers are moved in order to be recognised to display the virtual models. The camera needs to be calibrated to recognise the markers when the markers are moved. Good results were obtained when the markers were fixed on the wall with fixed camera position. However, when the students no more the need to make use of real human or animal body to do analysis and surgery trial (Wenzel D., 2004). The same 3D object can be used to train a number of students instead of using one human body to train a group of students. In addition, AR enables students to learn more and become skilled in the surgery as the 3D image can be recreated and the surgery can be repeated whenever errors are made (Fuhrmann, 2001). AR is capable of creating end result of any actions taken in an artificial body similar to a real body. Students and trainee surgeons get the opportunity to learn from the consequences of each of their actions during surgery through AR.

Experimental setup

A topic on recreation of dinosaurs using DNA extracted from amber was selected to this experimental study. Storyboard was created to depict the sequence of extraction of DNA, injection into an egg and recreation of dinosaurs. 3D models were created to be merged with scenes inside classroom for interaction purposes based on the storyboard.
Virtual objects were developed in the format of 3D using 3DS Max software. The created 3D models of dinosaurs were converted to
VRML format. In order for the AR software to recognise the model, a marker was assigned to each model. Each marker had a pattern, which was unique to distinguish the recognition of virtual objects assigned to them. Markers were assigned to the models using the AR software.

 The setup

 The setup has three steps as explained below.

 Setup digital video camera and calibrate.

 The digital video camera is setup in front of the classroom. The equipment had to be set in front of the classroom in order to connect the laptop to the projector, which is already mounted in front.

 Place the marker in the desired environment.

 The AR markers were placed in at a location where camera is cali.
want to hold the markers to interact, they had to hold the markers still in order to be captured and recognised to generate augmented scene. One way to solve the above problem might be developing teaching material that caters for fixed markers and camera in the classroom.

The virtual models developed as part of Augmented Reality can be used to train students to interact with virtual objects and real scene that allow them to visualise and understand certain topics in the subject taught in classroom better

Key lessons

In conclusion, the AR setup proposed for classroom in this article is feasible, cost effective, easy to setup and maintain. The virtual models  developed can be used to train students to interact with virtual objects and real scene that allow them to visualise and understand certain topics in the subject taught in classroom better.
However, registration of virtual object with real scene is one of the major challenges when a student wants to interact by moving the markers in the classroom. Camera is unable to capture the marker accurately when the marker is moved or the camera is moved. This caused the recalibration of the camera, which made the recognition of the marker to be slow and time consuming. The interaction with virtual models and real scene is limited due to fixed markers and fixed camera position. The image needs to be fixed to still surface in order to get good results. Planning and designing of the teaching material that can take advantage of fixed camera and marker position may solve the problem.
Future work will focus on refined techniques and development of teaching material that can be tested with this AR setup and measurement of the outcome of learning using Augmented Reality. 

Refrences

Fotis Liarokapis, Panos Petridis, Paul Lister, Martin White (2002), “Multimedia Augmented Reality Interface for E-Learning (MARIE)”, World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education 2002 UICEE Vol.1, No.2,173
Wenzel, D., (2004), “Augmented reality in Medical application”, http://www.fabuloz5.de/dirk/avr. pdf#search='augmented%20reality%20in%20 medical%20field'.
Fuhrmann, A. L., (2001), “Virtual reality in medical application”, http://www.bmvit.gv.at/sixcms_upload/media/223/virtual_reality_in_ medical_applications.pdf#search='augmented%20r eality%20in%20medical%20field', Date referred 26 May 2005

While last numbers of colleges Universities and business organisations around the world are adopting e-learning for learners, the website accessibility is becoming of critical importance.  This article is the result of evaluating the web accessibility of the World's Top Ten Universities' home pages with the World Wide Web Consortium's (W3C) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 1.0. The analysia of the source code of the individual home page of each selected university was conducted using “Bobby,” a Web-based analysis tool designed to help determine page features that May be inaccessible for students with disabilities. Based on these evaluations, half of the 2006 World's Top Ten Universities' Home Page or five universities of the 2006 Top Ten Universities did not meet all WCAG 1.0, Conformance criteria. There are three universities of the 2006 World's Top Ten Universities' Home Page that meet WCAG 1.0.

The importance of web accessibility for e-learning is an issue that is gaining incresing attention. There are two main reasons supporting the need of evaluating the 2006 World's Top Ten Universities' Home Page. First is, there is no clear database or collection of e-learning web sites in the global rank. However, the Times Higher Education Supplement has published World University Rankings annually from 2004 to 2006. The third edition was published in October, 2006. The World University Rankings report came from a survey, which focused on many aspects such as research, teaching and international expectations of universities around the world. The second reason is the 2006 World's Top Ten Universities are in countries that declared legislation related to web accessibility. Seven of the 2006 World's Top Ten Universities are in the United State (U.S.) and three universities are in United Kingdom (U.K.). Currently both U.S. and U.K. have policies involving web accessibility.

Using 'Bobby' to evaluate web accessibility

This study focuses on evaluating conformance to accessibility standards based on the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 1.0 by the automated tools, Bobby. The reason for selecting “Bobby” as the only evaluation tool for this study is because Bobby is a free web accessibility testing tool designed to generate reports of accessibility and encourage compliance with existing accessibility guidelines, including Section 508 of the U.S. Rehabilitation Act and the WCAG 1.0. The usefulness of Bobby confirmed that it reduced time for automatic testing of 14 guidelines, which include 65 checkpoints of WCAG 1.0. In addition, Bobby is free from CAST, the Center for Applied Special Technology. Bobby has been recommended for web developers as a first step to ensure accessible Web page design. Bobby might be used only as a tool for checking completion of three levels of conformance, Priority 1 or “A”, Priority 2 or “AA” and Priority 3 “AAA”.

The evaluation has focussed on determining the strong inaccessible features of the selected web sites of World's Top Ten Universities.

Ranking the web accessibility of university websites

The results discussed in this report are based on an evaluation conducted on October 30, 2006.The home pages of selected universities May have changed since that time. The results of the evaluation can be categorised into four groups as is explained in the figure below.

Cambridge University is the only university whose home page reached the Conformance Level “AAA”. Oxford University is the only university whose home page reached the Conformance Level “AA”. There are three universities, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Yale University and Stanford University, whose home pages reached the Conformance Level “A”

The first group is the home page that reached the Conformance Level “AAA”: all Priority 1, 2, and 3 checkpoints were satisfied. Cambridge University is the only university in the first group. The second group was the home page that reached the Conformance Level “AA”: all Priority 1 and 2 checkpoints were satisfied. Oxford University is also the only university in the second group. The third group is the home page that reached the Conformance Level “A”: all Priority 1 checkpoints are satisfied. There are three universities in the third group, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Yale University and Stanford University. The fourth group is the home page that did not reached the Conformance criteria. There are five universities in the fourth group, Harvard University, California Institute of Technology, University of California, Berkeley, Imperial College London and Princeton University.

Common obstacles to web accessibility

Based on the levels of conformance of WCAG 1.0: Priority 1 (A), 2 (AA), and 3 (AAA), the top three mistakes that occurred at each level are discussed below.

The most common mistake for Conformance Level “A” is '1.1 lack of alternative text for all images' on the home pages of both Harvard University and California Institute of Technology. The home page of Princeton University also had similar errors – '12.4: lack of alternative text for all image-type buttons in forms'. The home page of Imperial College London has different points of mistakes regarding the frames: '6.2: each FRAME must reference an HTML file and 12.1: give each frame a title'.

The most common mistake for Conformance Level “AA” includes two checkpoints that are '3.4: use relative sizing and positioning' and '9.3: make sure that event handlers do not require use of a mouse' on the home pages of six universities. The error 3.4: occurred on home pages of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Yale University, Harvard University, California Institute of Technology, University of California, Berkeley and Imperial College London. The error 9.3: occurred on home pages of Yale University, Stanford University, Harvard University, California Institute of Technology, University of California, Berkeley and Princeton University.

The second common mistake for Conformance Level “AA” include two checkpoints that were '12.4: explicitly associated with controls and their labels with the LABEL element using relative sizing and positioning' and '13.1: Do not use the same link phrase more than once when the links point to different URLs.' on the home pages of five universities. The mistake of 13.1 occurred on home pages of five universities: Harvard University, Yale University, Stanford University, University of California, Berkeley and Imperial College London. The mistake of '12.4: explicitly associate form controls and their labels with the LABEL element used relative sizing and positioning' occurred on home pages of five universities: Yale University, Stanford University, California Institute of Technology, University of California, Berkeley and Princeton University.

The third common mistake for Conformance Level “AAA” is '5.5: provide a summary for tables' on the home pages of five universities. The error 5.5: occurred on home pages of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Yale University, Harvard University, California Institute of Technology and Imperial College London.
In this new 21st century, large number of college's universities and business organisation around the world are to adopting e-learning for all learners which included students with disabilities. Thus, the standard for e-learning must consider web accessibility issues. This experimental study assumed that the visitors to all universities web sites are primarily the students including the students with disabilities. It also assumes that the home page of universities should be the representative of the universities' web sites. The results from this study validates that the World's Top Ten Universities' Home Pages analysed by Bobby show that the universities from U.K., the Cambridge University easily earned Conformance “AAA”, Oxford University earned Conformance “AA”. Cambridge University is the only university in 2006 that is ranked at the top in the world by peer review score of 100% (O'Leary, 2006). The other three universities from U.S., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Yale University and Stanford University earned Conformance “A” from the validation.
For future studies, the researcher would like to recommend that the evaluation might gather better result quality by combination of the automatic testing of source codes such as Bobby and conducting usability testing by students with disabilities. The combination of testing approach May bring about a clearer understanding of how people with disabilities interact with the web pages, using assistive technologies. The results of this study indicate that any websites that satisfied check points of Priority 1, 2, and 3 might not be very meaningful or significant. The websites have to become more accessible for anyone, anywhere, at any time.

Suggested resources

For up-to-date information on web accessibility – Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) at http://www.w3.org/WAI/. For universities' web developers interested in employ techniques of design accessible web content can learn from the Quick Tips to Make Accessible Web Sites by Henry & Popolizio (2006). The Quick Tips on a vinyl business-card-sized reference card, in large print, and in Braille are available at no charge, up to 500 cards.