State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning

Abstract

Distance learning experiments have been launched since 2010 in several Moroccan universities as part of an experimental approach. It, therefore, seems that a strategy must be put in place to give this choice of education its place in training and grant it the means necessary to achieve these objectives. The objective of this chapter has presented an overview, on free and proprietary e-learning platforms, on their functional architectures, as well as the types of e-learning devices that can create from platforms e-learning, and to deduce the state of the art of the e-learning provisions of Moroccan universities and to compare them with the e-learning provisions of European and American universities.

Full text

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
Chapter 1
1
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4021-3.ch001
INTRODUCTION
E-learning is a fast and efficient way of providing and sharing knowledge
with learners in different parts of the world.
According to (Liu, 2010; Karim and Goodwin, 2013), it is defined as the
following: “E-learning uses the Internet or other digital content for learning
and education activities, that takes full advantage of modern educational
State-of-the-Art E-Learning
Platforms Intended for
Teaching and Learning
ABSTRACT
Distance learning experiments have been launched since 2010 in several
Moroccan universities as part of an experimental approach. It, therefore, seems
that a strategy must be put in place to give this choice of education its place
in training and grant it the means necessary to achieve these objectives. The
objective of this chapter has presented an overview, on free and proprietary
e-learning platforms, on their functional architectures, as well as the types of
e-learning devices that can create from platforms e-learning, and to deduce
the state of the art of the e-learning provisions of Moroccan universities and
to compare them with the e-learning provisions of European and American
universities.

2
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
technology to provide a new mechanism for communication and learning
environment rich in resources to achieve a new way of learning.”
Since the mid-2000s, the Moroccan academic world has experienced an
expansion in the use of e-learning as in other spaces for the dissemination
of knowledge in general. Besides, to enrich dissemination support (sounds,
images, animations, through a website or a PowerPoint presentation), e-learning
offers many interesting teaching possibilities. The development of the use
of e-learning in academic and professional education is at the heart of many
projects of educational actors. The evolution of teacher training needs, to
meet educational requirements, the provisional management of skills, the
need to maintain one’s level of competence throughout one’s active life, and
the development of practices for recognizing experience acquired modify
substantially the modalities of teaching. E-learning seems to provide answers
to these expectations. If access to information or knowledge was generally
possible through face-to-face (classical learning), e-learning could break this
hegemony of being in a class with a trainer. E-learning provides solutions
in the context of continuing education without claiming to be exhaustive.
Among these solutions, distance training is considered an alternative for the
current situation of initial and continuing training.
The culture of e-learning in the practice of students and teachers is already
installed. However, e-learning cannot be used for their new status and to
replace old pedagogical tools, but rather to be planned as a more global
approach to training manager reconstitution. It is this technology offered by
distance learning e-learning platforms, which gives meaning to proximity
management. It thus makes it possible to replace face-to-face training, to
bring the learner closer to his teacher while ensuring a better understanding
of the training and support for the possible mobility of educational actors.
In the 20th century, there was an international movement in favor
of e-learning integration in higher education. This movement has been
operationalized due to the variety of the educational offer by universities,
which most have opted to diversify knowledge dissemination means (sounds,
images, animations ... etc.) to meet the needs of their target public. If access
to knowledge was previously conditioned by the physical presence in the
classroom, technology enables its learners to exceed this condition of
presence and be opened towards other learning modalities today. We can say
that e-learning provides solutions in the context of distance learning without
claiming to represent the solution to all educational dysfunctions. Among
these solutions, distance learning seems to be the challenge ahead to face the
new training requirements in the digital era.

3
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
In the case of our study, the e-learning solutions that interest us are free
e-learning platforms, because their costs, their states of development, their
directions, and used technologies rendered them very close to the axis of
this research.
If e-learning has many advantages in training, it cannot be said that its
use sometimes poses certain problems.
Among these problems, we can point out the reluctance of teachers towards
this new approach to academic and professional training. The change in habits
indeed requires time to settle in. Bringing people to adapt to the journeys of
change requires taking up this problem of integrating e-learning into training
by university teachers.
Distance learning experiments have been launched since 2010 in several
Moroccan universities as part of an experimental approach. It, therefore, seems
to us that a strategy must be put in place to give this choice of education its
place in training and grant it the means necessary to achieve these objectives.
E-LEARNING
For several years, information and communication technologies (ICT) have
been not only a new tool, a new medium, but also a means of opening up
resources from around the world. ICT can be considered the result of the
convergence of three technologies: IT, telecommunications, and audiovisual,
these three fields are associated with the connected computer. The Internet
has made this convergence a reality today.
We are thus faced with a new mode of communication which, by the
quantity of information which it makes available and the variety of its sources,
poses problems with considerable educational stakes in parallel to the certain
advantages which it provides at all levels.
We hear about distance learning, online training, e-learning, distance
education, ... It’s a whole multitude of terms with similar apparent meaning,
but which refers to different aspects of new educational technology to the
fashion, and that should be distinguished.
1. Definitions
The most possible and most current distance learning is currently based on
the Internet. For this, the term E-learning is increasingly used to include any

4
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
open and distance learning using information and communication technologies.
We adopt this term as moreover in the rest of this book.
• E-learning: This means “electronic education”; it is a discipline where
teaching theory and computer network technologies are combined
to allow learners to complete their courses via a computer network
(Internet or Intranet) (O’Neil, 2001).
• Distance learning: A more general concept in the sense that the means
used to communicate between learners and trainers are not specified.
Traditional correspondence training, communication by telephone,
fax, etc. can be part of distance learning. We will note the linguistic
nuance between the terms “teaching” and “training”, the first evokes
a longer duration and the compulsory sanction by a diploma while the
second can mean a simple improvement of knowledge as is the case
for training staff of companies. We also speak of ODL for open and
distance learning; the opening is made to a large audience. The most
used opening tool today remains the Web.
• Tele-education or tele-training: The use of telecommunication means
it is more important in this case (telephone, fax, Internet…
• E-learning platform: is software that supports the conduct of distance
learning. This type of software brings together the tools necessary for
the three main users - teacher, student, administrator - of a system,
which aims at the remote consultation of educational contents, the
individualization of learning, and tele-tutoring (OVAREP, 2000).
These systems aim to put online comprehensive lessons where the
student can prepare his contrives, his license, his baccalaureate ... via
these platforms.
2. Typologies of e-Learning Systems
Moving from the implementation of “face-to-face” training to the development
of e-learning requires cultural, organizational, and educational changes. The
relationships between trainees, content, and trainers are disrupted, making
this development delicate.
In fact, according to the needs of each learning situation (target audience,
type of training, area of training, etc.), we should end up with multiple systems
articulating in varying proportions remote working time, time of self-study
work, and face-to-face working times to adapt to the educational process
and approach. Several categorizations have been proposed for e-learning

5
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
systems ranging from the most global to the most detailed. The most general
classification offers two categories (O’Neil, 2001):
• Synchronous systems define a “virtual classroom” where
communication between distance learning players is in real-time using
sound, video, or chat
• Asynchronous systems where the student is not necessarily online
with the teacher, he can work in offline mode and communicate at
scheduled times or on-demand. The necessary and most used mode of
communication in this kind of system is electronic mail.
• Training with tutored and synchronized self-learning: This type of
training combines remote work at a given time and face-to-face work.
The system combines self-learning at a distance (a tool and its concepts
for example) with a common “reformulation” and an appropriation in
the classroom. Self-learning is based on different activities based on
documents of different natures (reading, guided handling, exercises)
described in a standardized guide sheet for the whole training, all
available for download from the training site. This self-learning takes
place over a day identified in the timetable of the trainees containing
compulsory contacts with the trainers by sending documents, replies
to questionnaires or productions. Trainers and tutors, present remotely,
can be reached during this period at any time by various means
(telephone, messaging, etc.) to resolve any difficulties.
• Training with tutored and desynchronized self-learning: In this type of
training is found all the principles of the previous type. The difference
lies in the desynchronization of the distance. In this case, the work to
be done remotely takes place within a given period with a deadline.
Contact with trainers and tutors still exists, but the answers to the
questions are not immediate.
• Self-training: This system is based on tools integrating the entire
learning process, from initiation to assessment without resorting to
face-to-face. It is necessarily desynchronized and the use of the tutor
is limited since the tool should in principle guide the learner as well as
possible.
• Cooperative production: The distancing of trainees, if it individualizes
their training, isolates them at the same time. However, group work
remains a learning system, which must continue within the framework
of these new methods. The setting up, for example, of cooperative
productions by precise specifications, generates a dialogue and a

6
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
confrontation between the different members of a group thus restoring
the interactivity between them. The trainers follow the progress of the
work by observing the development of production and reacting to it.
All of the players are therefore involved in the work. This modality
probably requires the greatest inventiveness on the part of the trainers.
• Alternating training tutored the use of remote communication tools
to help develop learning by action, at the place of action, and by the
specificity of the work-study program. Organized around work to
be carried out in establishments, based on theoretical contributions
in face-to-face or online and the use of an electronic logbook. Each
trainee has a referent trainer-tutor who follows the progress of the work
through this logbook and the delivery of the requested productions.
The tutor can be asked by the trainee any questions he has about his
work.
• Autonomous work: The concept of autonomy naturally exists in the
different types of situations listed above. However, it is possible to
identify forms of work that do not require the presence of trainees at
the training site. For example, the reading, document, and information
gathering phases, clearly identified in the training systems and the
schedule are not subject to face-to-face. They thus allow trainees to
broaden their research possibilities by using personal, local, academic
resources, whether documentary, material, or human.
3. E-learning Platforms
The development of an e-learning platform poses the constraints relating to
the development of websites but also presents certain specificities coming
from its use for learning. The main considerations are:
• On the technical level: They relate mainly to computer and
communication hardware and software such as the hardware and
operating system of platform users and at the server level, multimedia
tools, Internet connection (type, speed, etc.), download and messaging
tools…
• On the pedagogical level: They consist of taking into account the
distance of the teacher and possibly the pedagogical place on the one
hand and the individuality of the training on the other hand, and define
the pedagogical contents and the standard courses so that the platform

7
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
has interest and motivation. It is also within this framework that we
define the modules, lessons, and envisaged courses.
• On the administrative level: They relate to the management of learners’
schooling (registration, transcript of marks, etc.), the management of
trainers (recruitment, remuneration, etc.), assignment of learners to
groups, assignment of trainers to groups, etc.
• Modeling Considerations: This is the engineering of e-learning
systems. At this level, models are chosen for the acquisition and
representation of knowledge as well as the design of interfaces to
facilitate interoperability with other systems related to the platform,
the reusability of modules, adapting to changes in the platform
environment…
The structure of an e-learning platform essentially comprises three actors:
the learner, the teacher, and the administrator of the platform. The role of a
teacher can be subdivided into teacher-designer, teacher-trainer (or teacher-
tutor), teacher-corrector, etc. We also find the administrator of educational
materials and administrator of schooling as a subdivision for the role of
administrator. Each role is assigned specific modules for its management.
The main features of a platform are:
• Creation of courses, tests, and standard courses,
• Management of educational documents (indexing, classification,
updates, etc.),
• Management of a cooperative workspace between learners and/or
teachers,
• Monitoring of the learner’s learning and evaluation,
• Management of the learner’s education,
• Provision of work tools to the learner (specific editors, download tools,
T.P simulation tools, etc.).
• Making available to the various actors’ communications tools and
the procedures for their management (forums, messaging, chat,
videoconferencing, etc.).
There are a large number of distance learning platforms on the international
market, around more than 600 including around forty under free licenses.
Among the platforms under a free license (or GPL license), we can cite
Claroline, Ganesha, and Moodle, etc.

8
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
There are also proprietary licensed platforms such as e-doceo, myTeacher,
Blackboard…
4. Standardization in the e-Learning Field
Standardization work in the field of educational technologies is mainly linked
to the work of the following organizations: IEEE, IMS, and ARIADNE, ADL,
AICC, and W3C. Two features are subject to standardization:
• Importing and integrating external educational resources into a
platform,
• The reuse of courses and materials from one platform to another.
We will note the difference with general standardization work on Internet
technologies (carried out by W3C) because this work will have an essential
impact on the standardization of educational technologies; this is the case
for standards and protocols such as:
• XML, a general standard for structuring and exchanging documents on
the Web,
• WebDav, collaborative creation protocol for Web pages,
• SMIL, the standard for structuring multimedia documents,
• CSS, standard defining style sheets for HTML documents.
Likewise, the .Net strategy launched by Microsoft in July 2000, which
consists of using a set of a protocol called SOAP (Simple Object Access
Protocol) which defines how applications can communicate on a network,
will influence the standardization processes of educational technologies.
Standardization in the field of educational technologies has been coordinated
since 1998 by the IEEE LTSC. This Committee for the development of
standards in the field of educational technologies has established an action
program aimed at promoting standards, good practices, and practical guides
facilitating the development, maintenance, and interoperability of computer
applications relating to education and training.
The LTSC has set up a structure, which includes 20 working groups
interested in different themes such as:
• architecture and vocabulary,

9
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
• Questions of interest to learners (learner model, task model,
identification of learners, etc.),
• Questions relating to the content (interoperability languages, internal
course organization model, etc.),
• Signage and documentation of educational objects (materials, courses,
etc.),
• Management platforms and systems.
Among the educational technology standardization projects, we can cite:
4.1 Instructional Management Systems
IMS, which is supported by the Educause group (of American origin) and
which brings together a large number of companies in the IT sector, the
multimedia training sector, the training organizations, and educational
institutions, companies in general, and administrations (more than 160). IMS
was launched in 1994 and aims to develop standards in the following areas:
• Description of educational materials (cataloged as metadata) to make
possible publication and research on the Web (and on any information
system),
• Interoperability of these materials,
• Interoperability of platforms with materials and general information
systems of educational establishments for exchanging information,
• Recording of information on students (diplomas, skills, etc.),
• Exchange data between administration systems.
IMS has led to the LOM standard. Figure 1 shows the main specifications
proposed by this standard.
There are adaptations of the LOM such as LOMFR proposed in 2006 by
the CN36 group of AFNOR. LOMFR slightly modifies the LOM specification
by notably adding four elements to the general category:
• Resource reference date (date of a particular event on the resource:
modification, publication, etc.),
• Type of documentary (text, dynamic resource, etc.),
• Induced activity (briefly describes the activity that will use the resource:
creating, leading, self-training, etc.),

10
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
• Validation of acquired knowledge (allows you to express the quantity
of teaching or credit unit obtained after having reached educational
objectives).
LOMFR induces the concept of validation of acquired knowledge to inform
the result of the use of the resource, but we do not know the criteria of the
evaluation method to obtain this result.
4.2 Shareable Course Object Reference Model
SCORM is also a standard developed at the initiative of the United States
Department of Defense. It is part of the spectrum of IMS work. SCORM
tries to solve three problems:
• Transferring a course, including student information, from one platform
to another.
• The creation of “granular” materials used in different courses,
Figure 1. The hierarchical structure of the LOM (Jarraud and De La Passardière,
2004)

11
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
• Computerized research (in databases, on the Internet) of training
materials and documents.
The means envisaged are the standardization of the description of the
materials and the standardization of the exchange functionalities on the
networks of these materials. In October 2000, the following were defined
within the framework of SCORM:
• Specifications to represent the structure of a course,
• Specifications relating to the launch of applications supporting these
courses,
• “Meta-data”, document description items.
The techniques used are those of XML standardization (insertion of labels
in documents).
Today, various platforms such as Moodle, Claroline, etc. run SCORM-type
resources in the form of packages. Content is packaged to make educational
resources available to the learner, LMS, and content creators. It is a standard
means (per IMS specifications) for structuring and exchanging educational
content between different systems and tools, i.e. it allows the transfer of
educational content between the LMSs, the development tools, and the
content bases.
The Content Package is represented by a compressed file in ZIP format,
consisting of two main components (see Figure 2):
• A file in XML format describing the structure of the content and
the association of the content with the resources. This file is called
imsmanifest.xml and is located at the root of the package.
• The physical files constituting the Content Package.
4.3 Instructional Management Systems – Learning Design
We can also cite the IMS-LD specification, resulting from the work of the
Open University of the Netherlands on educational modeling languages
called EML, which is a metalanguage for describing pedagogical models or
scenarios (accompanied by resources and services required to achieve one
or more learning objectives).

12
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
4.4 Instructional Management Systems –
Question and Test Interoperability
The QTI specification of IMS allows us to represent the data structure
of a question (item) and a test (assessment), as well as the corresponding
results particularly, attracted our attention given the interest of this thesis for
evaluation. However, as shown in Figure 3 which shows the main elements of
version v2.1, this specification is based on tests and therefore questionnaires
and does not deal with open questions.
4.5 Synthesis
Standardization in the field of educational technologies and the Internet
has an obvious effect on the engineering of learning systems. Indeed, the
possibility of interoperability and the existence of a metadata bank will lighten
the development of this kind of system and will facilitate their updating
to adapt them to new parameters. Only, these standards must cover all the
functionalities of learning and a uniform level of granularity that can meet
the expectations of each designer. Their use by using adequate software
tools will accelerate the production of courses with possible questionnaires.
However, if we want to work on the knowledge of a teaching field with more
dynamic and more “intelligent” processes as is the case of the evaluation
of the learner progression in the learning of a field when there are open
Figure 2. Conceptual diagram of a package [37]

13
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
questions (without predefined answers) or the appropriate generation of
content, we quickly notice the limitations of these standards. This is mainly
because the standards cannot model the semantics of a domain, which would
allow automatic processing of the represented components, which are in the
majority of the cases educational resources.
FREE AND PROPRIETARY E-LEARNING PLATFORMS
Proprietary e-learning platforms are developed for the commercial activity of
selling a distance-learning product (e.g. Captera, Training Industry, eLearning
Industry, Coursera ...
Free e-learning platforms are offered in open code and are based on the
philosophy of “free software” defined by the “Free software Foundation”
which considers free software available in the form of source code, freely
reusable and modifiable (see figure 4). However, free software does not mean
free because professionalism and the quality of services require the expertise
and costs associated with this quality.
Proprietary e-learning platforms have certain differences from free
e-learning platforms. The first important difference concerns the educational
approach.
Figure 3. Different roles of IMS QTI components (Née Dahmani, 2010)

14
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
1. Social Constructivism Pedagogical Paradigm
Traditional teaching is often criticized for being too centered on the teacher,
therefore for being unidirectional since the student has only a passive role,
which consists of capturing information and memorizing it while the teacher
is considered the expert who transmits knowledge.
In contrast, social constructivism, which is a sociological theory of
knowledge developed by Berger and Luckhman (Benyounes, 2009), places
the student and not the teacher, at the center of the learning process. And
stipulates that knowledge must be built collectively between the teacher, the
student, the group of courses, the professionals and specialists in learning, the
social environment such as the family and the community (hence the name
of social constructivism). The learning links are therefore bidirectional and
multidirectional as illustrated in Figure 5.
As a result, even if the knowledge is personal, it is carried out in a social
framework, which brings benefits in the sense that the information comes
not only from what one thinks but also from social interactions with many
other social workers (see Figure 6).
The imbalance is a disturbing element, which requires an effort of
understanding to pass to a higher level of knowledge.
Figure 4. Principle of Open Source

15
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
In this new paradigm, educational contents are no longer at the center of
the learning process, what matters is the richness of social interactions that
allow knowledge sharing as illustrated in figure 6.
This modern learning philosophy is, therefore, more than a form of distance
learning because it not only motivates students. This latter, who now plays
an active role by transmitting their knowledge, but also allows the teacher
to have personalized contacts adapted to the needs of each student and to
animate the discussions and the activities to achieve the common objectives
of the class. Technologically, Open Source learning platforms allow this
kind of pedagogical approach, as evidenced by the approach of Martin
Dougamias, designer of Moodle, which is based on this social constructivist
pedagogy, which places the user, and not the platform, at the learning center.
Figure 5. Learning in society: socio-constructivism (Guité, 2011; Benyounes, 2009)
Figure 6. The Social constructivist model (Benyounes, 2009)

16
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
The PLUME university team, which has set up a platform in France inspired
by this learning philosophy, even asserts about traditional platforms that
more than 70% of systems fail due to poor needs analysis, but also due to
the wear and tear that users experience when faced with the virtuality of
the platform. All these seven exchanges on the Web must be supported by
exchanges between humans and not between humans and platforms, because
of weariness, discouragement then failure (Dossou and al., 2007).
The emphasis on social interactions explains why Moodle now benefits
from a large international community of members, an annual conference
of users who are no longer just professional developers but also ordinary
users, documentation online developed in wiki media and translated into 85
languages around the world, and finally interactive multimedia services to
better understand the pedagogy of the platform.
2. IT Environment
Among the technological and functional advantages of open source platforms,
which differentiate them from proprietary platforms, we can cite the following
aspects:
2.1 Standardization, Normalization, and Interoperability
An important aspect of functionality is that of interoperability, which is very
limited in proprietary environments when it is a fundamental requirement
for developers of free and open-source software. Compliance with standards
guarantees good interoperability with other software. Since the sources are
open, there is no point in using incompatible protocols or non-standard file
formats. The standardization of data also makes it possible to reuse it by
other software in a reliable manner and at a lower cost.
As a result, standardization not only ensures an improvement in the
educational efficiency of software products but also a better economic
efficiency of investments in online training. In his study on the standardization
of online training, Simard (Simard, 2002) presents the main attributes of this
standardization, which have been grouped in Table 1. These attributes are
considered by the author as advantages because they are not found, or only
partially, in environments that do not conform, or hardly conform, to norms
(jury recognition) or standards (de facto recognition only).

17
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
We will not discuss in the brief how-to standardize e-learning because it
is a vast and very complex subject that does not fit into the objectives of our
research which were defined when the brief was introduced.
If we go from generic standards relating to all aspects of software quality
(eg ISO 9126 (ISO/IEC 9126-1, 2001; ISO/IEC 9126-2, 2003; ISO/IEC 9126-
3, 2003; ISO/IEC 9126-4, 2004) to specific standards relating to a particular
aspect such as interoperability with its standards like SCORM and IMS specific
to e-learning. We can cite a study carried out for Sun Micro-System and in
which the authors’ Collier and Robson (Collier and Robby, 2002) describe
well the advantages of interoperability standards for all stakeholders.
For the software system purchaser, the main advantage is the non-
dependence on the manufacturers of these systems. For the latter and their
designers, the work and therefore the cost of designing interfaces is reduced
because it is no longer necessary to develop interfaces specific to each software
product, as in the proprietary approach. As a result, the manufacturer achieves
significant economies of scale when demand increases. Finally, for the user,
interoperability standards allow them to access and share the contents of a
wide variety of educational resources.
2.2 Efficiency, Reliability, and Reusability
The availability of source codes allows users not only to consult them but
also to modify them. Consequently, experienced developers can resolve errors
located in code quickly. This ensures free software better efficiency compared
to proprietary software whose design flaws are not quickly modified because
Table 1. Benefits of standardizing e-learning
Criteria Description
Accessibility Enable research, identification, access, and delivery of online training content and
components in a distributed manner.
interoperability Allow the use of content and components developed by an organization on a given platform
by other organizations on other platforms;
Reusability Allow the reuse of contents and components for different purposes, in different applications,
in different products, in different contexts, and different modes of access.
Durability Allow the contents and components to face technological changes without the need for
reengineering or redevelopment.
Maintainability The ability to support the constant evolution of pedagogical content at a low cost.
Adaptability Allow tailor-made modulation of contents and components
(Simard, 2002)

18
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
their publishers often have the habit of not fixing these flaws until the release
of a new version of their software. Besides, this efficiency is also accompanied
by good reliability because, as the popular jargon says about free software:
“With enough eyes to watch, bugs can no longer hide” (Benyounes, 2009).
Free software development is a process to which a large community
of developers and publishers, spread across the world, contributes. This
development process is effective because it allows, therefore, considering
several technical solutions, the best of which are selected by a natural
selection process. The development process is not only effective but it is also
profitable because the reuse of the code is an important source of saving time
and therefore money.
For all these advantages, free software is often considered free or is bought
at a relatively modest price compared to the high purchase costs of proprietary
software such as Captera, Training Industry, eLearning Industry, Coursera…
However, free software publishers generally offer service contracts associated
with their products to give professional guarantees to their customers who
have the freedom to subscribe or not according to the needs and the IT
resource management policy of each of them. Free software is therefore not
free software. However, the relatively low acquisition costs, thanks to the
availability of source code for a very large number of users, and less dependence
on suppliers are added to reduce operating costs thanks to the adoption of
interoperability standards and the sharing of reusable educational objects.
3. Functional Architecture
Functional architecture refers to the general structure of “the degree to which
a product or system provides functions that meet the expressed and implicit
needs when used under specified conditions” (ISO/IEC 25010, 2011). This
structure follows a set of strategic decisions taken during the design of all
or part of the IT system, through the exercise of a technical and industrial
discipline in the IT sector, also called architecture, and for which the manager
is an IT architect.
We will first present the basic architecture of the platform and then that
of its two main components.

19
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
3.1 Basic Architecture
Open Source platforms are based on open and distance learning, which
combines modern communication supports for the professor (telephony,
videoconferencing, electronic mail, discussion forum, chat ...).
Figure 7 summarizes all the elements of a distance-training system:
• The architecture center represents the learning platform, which offers a
library of courses and various educational resources on the web
• Communication tools are adapted to learning activities, for example:
• In synchronous mode (real-time), teachers and students can
communicate by chat, application sharing, or videoconference;
• In asynchronous mode, tools such as messaging, blogs, or forums are
used for deferred exchanges.
• The second category of tools concerns management and administration
tools such as:
• Registration and monitoring of students.
• Managing their files (notes)
• Their educational path
Figure 7. The external architecture of online training (Benyounes, 2009)

20
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
• Course design (content)
• Course management
• Survey tools
• Etc.
3.2 The Architecture of the Components
The platforms revolve around two complementary systems (see Figure 8):
• An LMS is often referred to as a “distance learning platform”.
• Learning Content Management System or LCMS
3.2.1 Learning Content Management System
LCMS is a software system focused only on learning content, as the name
suggests. More specifically, its main features are as follows (see Figure 9):
• Content creation: this is the primary function of LCMS. The courses
constructed with reusable educational objects are then validated for
publication.
• Storage of content in a central database. Content distribution: LCMS
finally ensures the dissemination of educational content to students
either on the Internet or on a private local network.
Figure 8. The architecture of a platform (Colace and al., 2003; Benyounes, 2009)

21
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
3.2.2 Learning Management System
The LMS is software-comprising services intended to help teachers in the
management of their lessons. It offers services that allow content management,
in particular for creation, import, and export. The set of tools represents the
set of services that manage teaching processes and interactions between users
such as access control service, synchronous and asynchronous communication
tools, and a service for managing user groups.
More specifically, its services relate to many features such as:
• Management of educational content (creation, import, export).
• The individual path through the training modules.
• The availability of sharing tools.
• Distribution of communication tools.
• Registration of students and management of their files (monitoring and
results).
• Distribution of online courses and other educational resources.
Figure 10 illustrates the general principle of the operation of an LMS by
presenting the main functionalities associated with the main contributors,
namely:
• The designers create educational content.
• Teachers who manage educational content.
• Students taking the training.
• The administrator configures the platform.
Figure 9. LCMS functional architecture

22
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
Figure 10. LMS architecture

23
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
4. Teaching-learning Systems
It is a coherent whole made up of resources (material and human), strategies,
methods, and actors interacting in a given context to achieve a goal “(Lebrun,
2005). He specifies that: “The learning system aims to allow someone to
learn something with the technological tool.
We propose to integrate the role of the teacher in the learning system.
Research in CEHL studies the means of assisting the learner and to those
who favor this learning (teacher, trainer, tutor, peers, etc.).
In national and international research in EIAH, there are already many types
of personalized systems from LMSs or LCMSs such as Moodle, Claroline,
ATutor, and Sakai… where the courses are online and open. These systems
are developed within the framework of DE, face-to-face training, and open
training. They are called Virtual Campuses. Online University. Virtual
Universities… namely:
• MOOC (Massive Open Online Course),
• PLE (Personal Learning Environment),
• VLE (Virtual Learning Environment),
• C3MS (Community, Content, & Collaboration Management Systems).
4.1 Massive Open Online Course
Massive Open Online Course. MOOCs are open online courses that bring
together a large number of students. They have not failed to interest many
economic and political actors who see in them a successor to e-learning or
distance learning systems to train a large number of people.
Table 2. Comparison between cMOOCs and xMOOCs
Comparison of MOOCs cMOOCs xMOOCs
Learning outcomes
Develop digital, social, and intellectual
skills associated with the web. “Choose
an answer”
Acquire knowledge. “Find an answer”
Thematic
Open and forward-looking, knowledge is
to be built through experience, the debate
of ideas, analysis, model identification ...
Elementary or at least thematic where
knowledge is formalized, stable,
delimited introductory course
Pedagogical model
Connectivist approach, building your
learning by sharing and discussing with
others
Traditional approach: well-structured
course, the material provided, work and
tests, reassuring
Target audience Learners with digital skills prerequisites Larger audience, learners with fewer
digital skills

24
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
The MOOC movement was created to provide access to high-quality
education in remote corners of the United States and the world. (Sonwalkar,
2013) MOOCs are at such an early stage of development that there is not
yet an agreed or preferred way to describe their approach (Porter, 2015).
The latter is a model of educational provision, which is, to varying degrees:
• Massive. The course can accommodate, in principle, an unlimited
number of participants, sometimes tens of thousands.
• Open. The course is open to all Internet users, regardless of origin,
level of study, without institutional affiliation necessary, generally free
of charge.
• Online. Comments, evaluations, conferences, Tutoring, and follow-up
are carried out remotely without the obligation of presenting,
• Course. There are training programs structured around a set of learning
objectives in a defined field of study. An expert or a group of experts
in a particular field creates the outline of the course and facilitates a
series of interactive readings and discussion forums on a given theme.
Two types of MOOCs are now commonly discussed. The first is based
on the connectivism theory of learning, which promotes informal learning
networks, those students co-construct the course with the teaching team. The
latter is known as cMOOC. The second builds on a cohesive and organized
set of resources, known as xMOOC is more traditional, content-based, and
much more like traditional educational models. Depending on the content,
xMOOC is more likely to have one or more speakers, usually by broadcasting
conferences via YouTube-style videos, with tasks and discussions online via
proprietary software. This organization allows the university to integrate the
MOOC into existing programs. Deadlines for completing tasks and a form of
continuous online assessment allow course administrators to assign brands
and credits. Online participants who are not interested in obtaining credits
may or may not participate as they wish.
4.2 Personal Learning Environment
PLE is a system, a set of tools, or an ecosystem, which helps learners to build
and organize their learning. Personal learning is learning in which the learner
controls his learning process, his environment, the resources he has access
to, and the people with whom he interacts.

25
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
Personal learning environments as an idea that first integrates “pressures
and movements” such as lifelong learning, informal learning, learning styles,
new approaches to assessment, cognitive tools. Also, the PLEs are inspired
by the success of new “sticky” technologies in ubiquitous computing and
social software (Attwell, 2007).
There is no consensus on the definition of a personal learning environment.
Broadly speaking, Graham presents it as “a new approach to the use of
technologies to learn” (Roland, 2013). According to Nicolas Roland, a
researcher in education science, it is “an ecosystem of people and tools that
the individual mobilizes, and organizes within the framework of knowledge-
building activities” (Attwell, 2007). This means a centralized learning
environment, unlike the LMSs. Some authors (Terry Anderson, Ron Lubensky,
and Mark van Harmelen) highlight the digital aspect of the system (software,
applications, web service) while others (Clive Shepherd ...) add physical
resources (family, friends, books, magazine, newspaper, television ... In
the different definitions, the same objective of a PLE appears: to build and
manage your learning, to take charge. The trainer Marc Dennery summarizes
the PLE as the set of tools and methods available to the learner allowing him
to achieve his learning objectives” (Dennery, 2013).
4.3 Virtual Learning Environment
A Virtual Learning Environment in educational technology is a web-based
platform for the digital aspects of study courses, usually in educational
institutions. VLEs generally allow participants to be organized into cohorts,
groups, and roles, resources, activities, and interactions in a course structure
provide the different stages of the evaluation report on participation; and
have a certain level of integration with other institutional systems (Britain
and Liber, 1999; Weller, 2007).
For those who edit them, VLEs can have a de facto role as a design
architecture and design (Masterman, 2013). Almost all higher education
institutions in the English-speaking world have adopted VLEs.
Here are the main components required for a virtual learning environment
or an online education program to take place:
• Content management - creation, storage, access, and use of learning
resources.
• Mapping and planning of the study program – course planning,
evaluation, and personalization of the learning experience.

26
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
• Learner engagement and administration – managing access to learner
information and resources and monitoring progress and success.
• Communication and collaboration - emails, reviews, chat, wikis, blogs.
4.4 Community, Content, and Collaboration
Management Systems
C3MS, that is to say, a software based on the Web, which makes it possible
to manage a community, the collaboration between the members and the
contents. C3MS can refer to an existing portal that includes several generally
simple modules or to a portal (i.e. the toolbox) necessary to install and
configure the portal.
Simple Internet technologies (web pages, forums, email, FTP, etc.) have
been successful in education because they have responded to the basic needs
for information exchange, communication, and collaboration necessary for
constructivist scenarios.
In addition to being simple, yet powerful, the Internet allows the user
(teachers) to have control over it. While simple web technology allows for
creative scenarios, it has four drawbacks:
• Maintaining static websites (including student pages) takes time,
• Simple discussion systems, like forums or mailing lists, don’t do very
good knowledge management,
• More sophisticated scenarios are poorly supported,
• Moreover, there is no glue to put all these elements together.
Community websites face very similar problems and seem to have found
at least a partial answer. Over the past two years, an impressive number of
what the authors represent C3MS have cropped up in existence.
Inspired by personal weblogs (also called blogs, increasingly popular
journaling systems), Slashdot-like weblog/information systems, simple
content management systems, and various popular groupware applications,
they offer a modular system for setting up interactive community websites.
Besides, most of these systems provide documented extension mechanisms
allowing third parties to contribute modules with additional functionality.
C3MS systems are a form of web portals. A portal brings together a
variety of useful information, and communication resources into a single
web page (Looney and Lyman, 2000). A portal is, therefore, a collection of

27
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
objects (information bricks) and services (operation on these bricks) that can
be accessed from the portal page (Web).
COMPARISON OF UNIVERSITY
TEACHING-LEARNING SYSTEMS
To justify such a study, a set of factors mentioned below seems to be
determinants:
• Media news implementing the meteoric enthusiasm of young people
for social media;
• Data on the generalization of ICT in Higher Education (E-Sup)
program;
• Needs of students and teachers to integrate ICT into learning and
university practices;
• Following the CNPN project, the start of the 2014-2015 academic year
must bring with it, among other things, an innovative distance-training
system.
Our question today is to know where we stand with this training innovation
perspective. To support our research around this subject, two tracks seem to
us for the moment essential to investigate:
• What about the technologies and arrangements, put in place to make
this distance-learning system?
• What choice of multimedia educational engineering adopted for such
a system?
Following these two lines of investigation immediately leads us to question
the status of this study in national universities is international. We are trying
to assess the level of university dispositions as part of this study.
We can consider that the evaluation generally consists of comparing
the object evaluated with a reference model to deduce conclusions from it
(Huart and al., 2008). Of course, the “reference model” can be virtual and
envisaged as a combination of recommendations adapted to the field of the
object to be evaluated. What can be assessed in a distance-learning context?
The assessment must be based on formal and explicit criteria. What are the
dimensions of evaluation to favor? Many evaluation criteria can be used for

28
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
the evaluation of digital documents and in the context of learning; we can
add some that are more specific. There are usually three main evaluation
dimensions of interactive systems (Senach, 1993), namely utility, usability,
and aesthetics.
Tricot (Tricot and al., 2003) adds acceptability to these three dimensions
(positive or negative feeling about the product, “intention” of use depending
on many parameters: motivation, affects, culture, values). From the work of
Senach and Tricot, as well as that of ISO 25010 (ISO/IEC 25010, 2011) and
the various discussions which comfort them (Ouadoud and al., 2016), we are
interested in utility and usability.
Table 3 identifies e-learning platforms implemented in growth
establishments, which we have assessed their utility and usability. In Table 4,
we followed a detailed evaluation grid, of e-learning systems at the national
level versus e-learning systems at the international level, referring to the two
evaluation dimensions chosen, namely: utility and usability.
1. Moodle-Based e-Learning System
The Moodle platform has topped the list of platforms used as an e-learning
system in universities, notably the Moroccan (Cadi Ayyad, Ibn Zohr, Ibn
Tofail…) and French (Paris I, Paris VIII…) universities. Moodle has a
very good degree of utility and usability. The platform can accommodate
thousands of learners, teachers, and tutors (+10000 accounts, +30 course
materials completely scripted and divided into educational activities, Fully
remote management of IT module lessons). It is one of the most widely used
free platforms in the world, with its large French-speaking and international
community, its clear, well-structured, useful documentation, its numerous
discussion forums focused on all the issues generated by the complexity of
training in the distance. The Moodle platform is based on the creation of
communities of learners around content and educational activities. Moodle
favors human exchanges, builds communities of practice, and promotes mutual
aid and support between learners as well as between teachers and tutors.

29
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
Table 3. Identification of e-learning platforms of promising establishments
Identification
Promising
ESTABLISHMENT
Moroccan Universities French Universities American Universities
Cadi Ayyad Ibn Tofail Ibn Zohr Paris I Paris VIII Harvard Duke
Platform used Moodle Moodle Moodle Moodle Moodle edX Coursera
Platform type LMS / LCMS /
VLE
LMS / LCMS
/ VLE
LMS / LCMS /
VLE
LMS / LCMS /
VLE LMS / LCMS / VLE MOOC MOOC
The educational model of
the platform
social
constructivism
social
constructivism
social
constructivism
social
constructivism social constructivism
Classic: Lessons,
exercises, and test of
acquired knowledge
Classic: Lessons,
exercises, and test of
acquired knowledge
Platform license Open source
(GPL)
Open source
(GPL)
Open source
(GPL)
Open source
(GPL) Open source (GPL) Open source Commercial
Technology used PHP (5.4.4+) PHP (5.4.4+) PHP (5.4.4+) PHP (5.4.4+) PHP (5.4.4+) - -
Language used French, English,
and Arabic
French, English,
and Spanish
French, English,
Arabic, and
Spanish
French, and
English
French, English,
Arabic, and Spanish English English
Platform website http://moodle.org http://moodle.
org http://moodle.org http://moodle.org http://moodle.org www.edx.org https://www.coursera.
org
Institution website http://learn.uca.
ma/
http://ead.uit.
ac.ma/
http://www.cvm.
ac.ma/
https://cours.
univ-paris1.fr/
https://moodle.univ-
paris8.fr
https://online-
learning.harvard.edu/
https://www.coursera.
org/duke

30
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
In table 4, we see that:
• The Cadi Ayyad University of Marrakech. As shown, the University’s
e-learning platform is based on Moodle’s LMS support. The CAU of
Marrakech is in line with the distance learning system and seems to be
ahead of other Moroccan universities in such a system. However, the
university uses only a few features of the Moodle platform. For that, it
is necessary to set up the system, which will be integrated as well as
possible into the learning ecosystem of the university, the system must:
◦Present a university strategy in terms of ICTE or distance learning,
◦Give the justification for the transition to distance learning,
◦Have courses available in electronic format,
Table 4. Evaluation grid for teaching and learning devices at national and
international level
Promising Establishment Evaluation
Criteria
Moroccan Universities French
Universities
American
Universities
Cadi
Ayyad
Ibn
Tofail
Ibn
Zohr
Paris
I
Paris
VIII Harvard Duke
The establishment already offers DL ☑ ☒ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑
The establishment has a regularly updated
website ☑ ☑ ☒ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑
The system presents a strategy of the
establishment in terms of ICTE and/or DL or a
section dedicated to this (these) theme (s)
☒ ☒ ☑ ☑ ☒ ☑ ☑
The Utility of the Device
Target audience specify and justify ☑ ☑ ☒ ☑ ☑ ☒ ☑
The rationale for switching to distance
learning ☒ ☒ ☑ ☒ ☒ ☒ ☒
Learning based on an existing face-to-face
diploma ☑ ☑ ☒ ☑ ☑ ☒ ☒
Availability of courses in electronic format ☒ ☒ ☑ ☒ ☒ ☑ ☑
Explicit educational choices (tutoring in
particular) ☒ ☒ ☒ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑
Functional capacity of the device ☑ ☑ ☒ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑
The Usability of the Device
Ease of learning ☒ ☑ ☒ ☒ ☒ ☑ ☑
Ease of use ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑
Quality of documentation ☒ ☒ ☒ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑
Quality of course descriptions ☒ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑

31
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
◦Have the educational choices explained, tutoring in particular,
◦Keep the ease of learning,
◦Ensure the quality of documentation,
◦Ensure the quality of the course descriptions.
However, we cannot deeply judge or evaluate this training at this time
since access is limited to registered students of the UCA. An attempt is made
to access and evaluate this distance-learning platform.
• The Ibn Zohr University of Kenitra. The IZU subscribes to the Moodle
platform and uses its services, but it seems that university teachers use
it to diversify course materials. However, the university uses only a
few features of the Moodle platform. For that, it is necessary to set up
a system that will be integrated as well as possible into the learning
ecosystem of the university, the system must:
◦Be updated daily,
◦Have a target audience specified and justified,
◦Have training based on an existing face-to-face diploma,
◦Have the educational choices explained, tutoring in particular,
◦Have functional capacity,
◦Keep the ease of learning,
◦Ensure the quality of documentation.
As mentioned in the system, a restriction of visits to online courses does
not leave us for the moment to make technical and pedagogical analyses on
this platform.
• The Ibn Tofail University of Agadir. The ITU likewise uses Moodle’s
services and seems to generalize this experience in almost all disciplines
of the dies taught. However, the university uses only a few features of
the Moodle platform. For that, it is necessary to set up a system that
will be integrated as well as possible into the learning ecosystem of the
university, the system must:
◦Present a university strategy in terms of ICTE or distance learning,
◦Give the justification for the transition to distance learning,
◦Have courses available in electronic format,
◦Have the educational choices explained, tutoring in particular,
◦Ensure the quality of documentation.

32
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
Access on an anonymous basis is not authorized and registration seems
impossible, which does not leave the possibility for the moment to study
and deeply evaluate the technical and educational elements in this system.
• Paris I University of Paris likewise uses the services of Moodle and
seems to generalize this experience almost on all the disciplines of the
dies taught. However, the university uses almost the majority of the
functionality of the Moodle platform. For that, it is necessary to set up
a system that will be integrated as well as possible into the learning
ecosystem of the university, the system must:
◦Give the justification for the transition to distance learning,
◦Have courses available in electronic format,
◦Keep the ease of learning.
However, we cannot deeply judge or evaluate this training at this time since
access is limited to students enrolled at the University of Paris I. An attempt
is made to access and evaluate this distance-learning platform.
• Paris VIII University of Saint-Denis also uses the services of Moodle
and seems to generalize this experience almost on all the disciplines
of the dies taught. However, the university uses almost the majority of
the functionality of the Moodle platform. For that, it is necessary to set
up a system that will be integrated as well as possible into the learning
ecosystem of the university, the system must:
◦Present a university strategy in terms of ICTE or distance learning,
◦Give the justification for the transition to distance learning,
◦Have courses available in electronic format,
◦Keep the ease of learning.
Anonymous access is not allowed and registration seems impossible, which
does not leave the possibility for the moment to study and deeply evaluate
the technical and educational elements in this platform.
2. edX-Based e-Learning System
We see that the edX platform used as an e-learning system at the American
University of Harvard also has a very good degree of utility and usability. edX
can accommodate thousands of learners, teachers, and tutors (it had more than
10 million users following: + 1569 online courses, + 89 programs, and + 11

33
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
languages). It is one of the most used open-source platforms in the world, it
is clear, well-structured, useful documentation, its many discussion forums,
and videoconferences focused on all the issues generated by the complexity of
distance learning. The edX platform is a MOOC (online learning platform).
It hosts and provides free online university-level courses around the world.
It also researches online learning and how users use it.
In table 4, we see that:
• The Harvard University of Cambridge uses the services of edX and
seems to generalize this experience across all disciplines of the subjects
taught. However, the university uses the majority of the functionality
of the edX platform. But there are still a few functionalities to set
up the system that will best integrate with the university’s learning
ecosystem, the system must:
◦Have a target audience specified and justified,
◦Give the justification for the transition to distance learning,
◦Have training based on an existing face-to-face diploma,
Access to the courses is authorized and registration seems essential, which
leaves the possibility to study and deeply assess the technical and educational
elements in this system.
3. Coursera-Based e-Learning System
Coursera platform used as an e-learning system at the American University
of Duke also has a very good degree of utility and usability. Coursera can
accommodate thousands of learners, teachers, and tutors (it had over 24 million
registered users and over 2,000 courses); Coursera is a MOOC offering online
training open to all. Coursera is dedicated to making the best learning in the
world available free of charge to anyone looking for it.
• The Duke University of Durham uses the services of Coursera and
seems to generalize this experience across all disciplines of the dies
taught. However, the university uses the majority of the functionality
of the Coursera platform. But there are still a few functionalities to set
up the system that will best integrate with the university’s learning
ecosystem, the system must:
◦Give the justification for the transition to distance learning,
◦Has training based on an existing face-to-face diploma?

34
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
Access to the courses is authorized and registration seems essential, which
leaves the possibility to study and deeply assess the technical and educational
elements in this system.
4. Synthesis
We can argue that the beginning of the e-learning era in Morocco is launched
under the impetus of certain Moroccan universities (Ibn Zohr, Cadi Ayad,
Ibn Tofail ...), but remains to be seen its development and momentum while
respecting the favorable conditions for teaching and learning Moroccan
students.
The use of this assessment grid of the state of play at the national level
against the international level, allows us to make a comparative study between
Moroccan, European, and American studies.
We can deduct from this grid that French, and English experiences in
e-Learning and launched under the impulse of most French and English
universities (Paris I, Paris VIII, Harvard, Duke ...), but remains to be seen
in its development to do critical work. Moreover, especially in teaching and
learning at universities.
CONCLUSION
When teaching in Morocco started in the e-learning era, dropout and failure
rates were very high. Research on this learning has shown that learners need
a personalized system and in particular personalized follow-up. Similarly, the
first observations of university systems indicate that around 10% of learners
go until the end of the course. This type of situation covers situations that we
can problematize in research. In this number of students who drop out. So
providing a personalized and customizable system could help them maintain
their motivation and learning.
To provide such a system, we suggest exploring three phases: assessing
the need for personalization, personalization, and validating its impact. The
first phase is to identify the reasons why students drop out on the one hand.
On the other hand, it consists of identifying the conditions, which make it
possible to maintain/relaunch their motivation until the end of the course or
to predict the quality of learning. The second phase is to provide personalized
and customizable environments. To validate their impact in the third phase.

35
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
In this vein, a comparative and evaluative study of e-learning platforms is
presented in chapter 3 to validate what has been developed in the context of
this chapter. Indeed, it will be based on the results from the study and analysis
of the evaluation dimensions of e-learning platforms that we conducted in
chapter 2 to build a quality evaluation approach to e-learning platforms to
justify our choice.
REFERENCES
Attwell, G. (2007).. Personal Learning Environments - the future of e-learning?
e-learning Papers, 2(1). https://issuu.com/elo-wiki/docs/informallearning
Benyounes, B. (2009). Évaluation de la fonctionnalité et l’utilisabilité de la
plateforme d’apprentissage Moodle: une approche du génie logiciel. Mémoire
présenté comme exigence partielle de la maîtrise en informatique - université
du Québec à Montréal.
Britain, S., & Liber, O. (1999). A Framework for Pedagogical Evaluation of
Virtual Learning Environments. JISC Technology Applications Programme.
Charpille, J. L., & Couniliufm, E. (2002). Mettre à distance la formation.
Publication de l’Académie de Nancy-Metz de décembre 2001.
Colace, F., De Santo, M., & Vento, M. (2003). Evaluating Online learning
platforms: a Case Study. Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’03). http://csdI2.computer.org/comp/
proceedings/hicss/2003/1874/05/187450154c.pdf
Collier G., Robby, R., (2002). SUN Microsystems, e-learning interoperability
standards. by Eduworks Corporation.
Dennery, M. (2013). Bâtir son environnement d’apprentissage personnel :
la première des formations. Le blog de C-Campus.
Dossou A., Koffi, D., Durand, A., Leproust, M., & Vanderstichel. (2007).
Étude comparative de p1ateformes de formation à distance. Projet de fin
d’étude, Master Ingénierie Pédagogique MultiMedia, CUEEP de Lille.
Gerhardt-Powals, J. (1996). Cognitive engineering principles for enhancing
human-computer performance. International Journal of Human-Computer
Interaction, 8(2), 189-221. doi:10.1080/10447319609526147

36
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
Guité, F. (2011). Constructivisme, socioconstructivisme et connectivisme. http://
www.francoisguite.com/2007/10/constructivisme-socioconstructivisme-et-
connectivisme/
Huart, J., Kolski, C., & Bastien, C. (2008). L’évaluation de documents
multimédias. Etat de l’art. In Leleu-Merviel (dir.), Objectiver l’humain?
Volume 1, Qualification, quantification, Paris, Hermès Sciences Publications.
Revue des Interactions Humaines Médiatisées, 9(2), 52.
ISO/IEC 25010:2011. Systems and software engineering -- Systems and
software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) -- System and
software quality models
ISO/IEC 9126-1: 2001. Software Engineering -Software product quality
-Part 1: Quality Model
ISO/IEC 9126-2: 2003. Software Engineering -Software product quality
-Part 2: External Metrics
ISO/IEC 9126-3: 2003. Software Engineering -Software product quality
-Part 3: Internal Metrics
ISO/IEC 9126-4: 2004. Software Engineering -Software product quality -Part
4: Quality in use Metrics
Jarraud, P., & De La Passardière, B. (2004). Un profil d’application du LOM
pour Campus Sciences (Vol. 11). Revue STICEF.
Karim, F., & Goodwin, R. (2013, October-December). Using Cloud Computing
in e-learning Systems. International Journal of Advanced Research in
Computer Science & Technology, 1(1), 66–67.
Liu, C.-H. (2010). The comparison of learning effectiveness between
traditional face-to-face learning and e-learning among goal-oriented users.
In Digital Content, Multimedia Technology and its Applications (IDC), 2010
6th International Conference on. IEEE.
Looney, M., & Lyman, P. (2000, July/August). Portals in Higher Education:
What are they and what is their potential. EDUCAUSE Review, 35(4), 28–36.
Masterman, L. (2013). The challenge of teachers’ design practice. Routledge.

37
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
Née Dahmani, F. B. (2010). Modélisation basée ontologies pour l’apprentissage
interactif - Application à l’évaluation des connaissances de l’apprenant (PhD
dissertation). Computer Science Department, Mouloud Mammeri University
of Tizi-Ouzou, Algeria.
O’Neil, M. (2001, May). What is E-learning. Home Magazine.
Ouadoud, M., Chkouri, M.Y., Nejjari, A., & El Kadiri, K.E. (2016). Studying
and Analyzing the Evaluation Dimensions of E-learning Platforms Relying
on a Software Engineering Approach. International Journal of Emerging
Technologies in Learning, 11(1), 11-20. doi:10.3991/ijet.v11i01.4924
OVAREP. (2000). Étude comparative technique et pédagogique des
plateformes pour la formation ouverte et à distance. Academic Press.
Porter, S. (2015). To MOOC or Not to MOOC: How Can Online Learning
Help to Build the Future of Higher Education? Academic Press.
Roland, N. (2013). EPA : système ou écosystème. Hypomnematon.
Senach, B. (1993). L’évaluation ergonomique des interfaces homme-machine:
une revue de la littérature. In L’ergonomie dans la conception des projets
informatiques. Toulouse: Octares éditions.
Simard, C. (2002). “Normalisation de la formation en ligne, Enjeux, tendances
et perspectives”, document d’orientation stratégique, préparé pour l’Agence
universitaire de la francophonie(AUF). Bureau Amérique du Nord.
Sonwalkar, N. (2013). The First Adaptive MOOC: A Case Study on Pedagogy
Framework and Scalable Cloud Architecture—Part I. In MOOCs Forum (Vol.
1, pp. 22-29). Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
Tricot, A., Plégat-Soutjis, F., Camps, J. F., Amiel, A., Lutz, G., & Morcillo,
A. (2003). Utilité, utilisabilité, acceptabilité: interpréter les relations entre
trois dimensions de l’évaluation des EIAH. In C. Desmoulins, P. Marquet,
& D. Bouhineau (Eds.), Environnements informatiques pour l’apprentissage
humain, ATIEF / INRP éditions (pp. 391–402). Academic Press.
Weller, M. (2007). Virtual Learning Environments: Using, Choosing and
Developing your VLE. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203964347

38
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
ADDITIONAL READING
Ouadoud, M., Chafiq, T., Rida, N., & Chkouri, M. Y. (2019). Generate a
Meta-Model Content for Collaboration Space of Learning Management
System Compatible with IMS-LD. International Journal of Interactive Mobile
Technologies, 13(01), 37–52. doi:10.3991/ijim.v13i01.9440
Ouadoud, M., & Chkouri, M. Y. (2019). Generate a Meta-Model Content for
Communication Space of Learning Management System Compatible with
IMS-LD. In M. Ezziyyani (Ed.), Advanced Intelligent Systems for Sustainable
Development (AI2SD’2018), Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing
(pp. 24–39). Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-
11928-7_3
Ouadoud, M., & Chkouri, M. Y. (2019). Designing an IMS-LD Model
for Communication Space of Learning Management System. In M.
Ezziyyani (Ed.), Advanced Intelligent Systems for Sustainable Development
(AI2SD’2018), Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (pp. 40–54).
Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-11928-7_4
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
ADL: Advanced distributed learning.
AICC: Aviation Industry CBT Committee.
C3MS: Community, content, and collaboration management systems.
CAU: Cadi Ayyad University.
CEHL: Computer environments for human learning.
DE: Distance education.
DL: Distance learning.
DoD: Department of Defense.
EML: Educational modeling languages.
GPL: General public license.
ICT: Information and communication technologies.
ICTE: Information and communication technologies for education.
IEEE: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.
IMS: Instructional management systems.
ITU: Ibn Tofail University.
IZU: Ibn Zohr University.

39
State-of-the-Art E-Learning Platforms Intended for Teaching and Learning
LCMS: Learning content management system.
LMS: Learning management system.
LOM: Learning object metadata.
LTSC: Learning Technology Standards Committee.
MOOC: Massive open online course.
ODL: Open and distance learning.
PLE: Personal learning environment.
PLUME: Promoting useful, controlled, and economic software.
SCORM: The SCORM® (sharable content object reference model) was
created to address these interoperability, reusability, and durability challenges.
As a reference model, it was intentionally designed to leverage standard
web technologies as well as existing learning technology specifications
that already existed. SCORM® is comprised of a collection of interrelated
technical specifications and guidelines designed to meet the DoD’s high-level
requirements for creating interoperable, plug-n-play, browser-based e-learning
content. It consists of three different technical specifications “books” that
collectively address challenges associated with interoperability, portability,
reusability, and the instructional sequencing of self-paced e-learning content
(Available at https://www.adlnet.gov/adl-research/scorm).
Social Constructivism: Is centered on the learner. The learner learns
through its representations. The construction of knowledge although personal
is carried out in a social setting. The context and come from both what we
think and what others bring as interactions.
VLE: Virtual learning environment.
W3C: World Wide Web Consortium.