<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>A Framework for E-Learning in Agricultural Education</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Stavros Valsamidis</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Ioannis Kazanidis</string-name>
          <email>kazanidis@teikav.edu.gr</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Ioannis Petasakis</string-name>
          <email>jpetasakis@hotmail.com</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Alexandros Karakos</string-name>
          <email>karakos@ee.duth.gr</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Accounting Department, Kavala Institute of Technology</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Agios Loukas, 65 404, Kavala</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="GR">Greece</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Democritus University of Thrace</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Xanthi</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="GR">Greece</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <fpage>373</fpage>
      <lpage>384</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>Further education and training are very important factors for the agriculture sector. Unfortunately, the lack of time and space has lead to their limited appliance to farmers. Limited financial support and low background knowledge in Information and Communications Technology are two more suspending factors. At the same time rapid technological progress has lead to the implementation of Internet applications which offer e-learning. This paper proposes a framework for applying e-learning to agriculture. It may be applied to three different stages of educational process: (i) platform development, (ii) courses development and delivery, (iii) platform and courses evaluation. The Nielsen Heuristics for system usability, the Technology Acceptance Model for evaluation, and indexes and metrics for system log file analysis are used. The expected benefits of the framework application are the qualitative presentation of educational material, the overcoming of spatial and time restrictions and the continuous evaluation of courses.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>e-learning</kwd>
        <kwd>agriculture</kwd>
        <kwd>Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)</kwd>
        <kwd>indexes and metrics</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>1 Introduction</title>
      <p>
        Times change. New technologies cause new capabilities and provide new occasions
for everyone. People try to increase their knowledge with lifelong education but at
the same time they have less time to allocate because of the intensive requirements in
their jobs. On the other hand, the advances in Information and Communication
Technologies (ICT), assisted an alternative mode of learning, e-learning, to come on
to the scene. It changes the way people meet and communicate. ICT affects the way
people teach and learn
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref26 ref30 ref32 ref6">(Delacey and Leonard, 2002; Radcliffe, 2002; Starr, 1997)</xref>
        .
      </p>
      <p>
        E-learning is technology-based learning such as computer-based learning,
webbased learning, virtual classroom and digital collaboration
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref32 ref6">(Tsai and Machado, 2002)</xref>
        .
The e-learning education gives the learners the opportunity for education without the
restrictions of time or location. A significant benefit of e-learning is that it allows
Copyright ©by the paper’s authors. Copying permitted only for private and academic purposes.
learners access to learning material at their convenience
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">(DeLima, 1999)</xref>
        . The
advantage lies in the fact that training can be offered without the necessity for a
physical classroom, as learners can learn anywhere where there is access to the
Internet. Arnone (2002) reports that some learners find that e-learning suits their
learning styles better than the conventional, face-to-face options - which could be
attributed to the fact that some learners are more visual than auditory. Furthermore,
some learners prefer working at their own pace and prefer not to restrict their
learning to a specific location.
      </p>
      <p>
        Many organizations, institutes, universities, schools and corporations are investing
substantial amounts of time and money in developing online alternatives like
elearning to traditional types of education and training systems. Many authors have
discussed the way in which e-learning can be used for the delivery of training,
assessment and support
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">(Fichter, 2002)</xref>
        .
      </p>
      <p>E-learning in agriculture related fields is still in the early phases of adoption, but is
being implemented more now than ever. A study by Elbert and Alston, (2005),
indicated that Cooperative Extension could serve as a change agent in the Digital
Divide.</p>
      <p>
        Extension professionals and agricultural educators express an increasing desire to
inform farmers about improved management practices and other issues via the
Internet
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15 ref22">(Hall et al. 2003; O’Neill, 1999)</xref>
        . In the 1990s and 2000s, studies indicate
limited perception of and experience in the use of the Internet for educational
communication purposes. According to Gloy et al. (2002) and Tavernier et al.
(1996), modern communication strategies, such as computers, e-mail, and the
Internet, were less preferred by the farmers.
      </p>
      <p>
        Agricultural extension, both at the central and local levels, has been and remains
one of the most notable and successful agents for assisting farmers with knowledge
and technology adoption
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10 ref13 ref27 ref3">(Burt, 2006; Fliegel, 2001; Eveland, 1986; Roling, 1988)</xref>
        .
Farmers who utilize precision agriculture and other technology-driven production
strategies may not view the Internet as a hurdle, but may view it as the best way to
obtain cutting-edge information
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">(Ferguson, 2002)</xref>
        . Therefore, evidence suggests that
extension needs to continue to embrace the use of the Internet
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15 ref22 ref33">(Hall et al. 2003;
O’Neill, 1999; Tennessen et al. 1997)</xref>
        .
      </p>
      <p>
        Traditionally, extension has provided agricultural producers with timely
information covering a wide variety of farm management and business technologies
to assist them in maintaining profitable and sustainable production. The primary goal
of agricultural extension is the decimation of research information developed by
universities and research institutions to potential users, particularly farmers
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref25">(Park et.
al, 2007)</xref>
        .
      </p>
      <p>
        Additional education and training methods are needed for agricultural producers to
remain competitive, since the field of agriculture is affected immensely by global
market changes
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">(Drew 2008)</xref>
        . Despite an overall lack of support for the Internet, it is
important to know whether preference for innovative communication strategies is
related to farmers’ demographic characteristics. Previous study
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">(Hall et al. 2003)</xref>
        indicated that younger and more educated farmers demonstrated a greater
appreciation for modern sources of information.
      </p>
      <p>
        If farmers perceive technology as difficult to learn, time consuming, or a threat, in
some way, they probably will not use it
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">(Carr, 1999)</xref>
        . Therefore, in addition to
providing training sessions to introduce farmers to the benefits of using the Internet
as a communication strategy, educators must specifically address reasons why
farmers are hesitant to utilize the Internet as a communication strategy on an
individual needs basis
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">(Hall et al. 2003)</xref>
        .
      </p>
      <p>Farmers have generally been constrained by time and finances, commitment to
family and jobs, and responsibilities in the operation of the family farm or business.
According to Nudell et al. (2005), by utilizing video-conferencing, educators are
successfully facilitating connections between their clients and educational resources
located anywhere in the world.</p>
      <p>
        Some metrics, which are firstly introduced by the authors
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23 ref23 ref24 ref24">(Valsamidis et al.
2010a; Valsamidis et al. 2010b)</xref>
        , are used for the evaluation of the e-learning usage
by the learners.
      </p>
      <p>The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 describes the background theory.
Section 3 describes the proposed framework. Section 4 presents discussion about the
framework together with directions in the future.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>2 Background Theory</title>
      <p>This paper proposes a framework for applying e-learning in agricultural. However
before we proceed to the proposed framework some background theory would be
presented. More specifically this section presents the Nielsen Heuristics for system
usability, the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) used in evaluation as well as
specific indexes and metrics for system log file analysis.</p>
      <sec id="sec-2-1">
        <title>2.1 Nielsen Heuristics</title>
        <p>
          Nielsen (1994) proposed ten general principles for the interface design which are
called heuristics. Every e-learning system should try to follow these heuristics in
order to be easy in its use. The Nielsen’s heuristics are the following:
1. System status visibility. The system should inform users through appropriate
feedback about what is going on.
2. Match between system and the real world. The system should present
information to users’ language with familiar phrases and concepts
3. User control and freedom. System should provide a clearly marked
“emergency exit” in case of user mistake.
4. Consistency and standards. System should be consistent and follow specific
standards and conventions in order not to confuse its users.
5. Error prevention. Even better than a good error message is the adequate
design of the system which eliminates error conditions. For this reason the
platform shall ask for confirmation from users before the commit to an
action such as course or user removal.
6. Recognition rather than recall. System should reduce user’s memory load by
making options and actions visible. In addition it should provide simple
instructions, easily retrievable whenever appropriate.
7. Flexibility and efficiency of use. The system should provide alternative
ways of navigation to experienced users, not seen by the novice users,
which accelerate learning process.
8. Aesthetic and minimalist design. Minimalism should characterize system
design. Users should not see information which is irrelevant or rarely
needed.
9. Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors. Error messages
should be simple and help user recover from errors. Therefore attention
should be paid at the language used in error messages.
10. Help and documentation. Adequate documentation should be available
whenever needed by the user. For this reason the proposed LMS should
provide links to help and documentation in all of its pages.
2.2 TAM
Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">(Davis, 1989)</xref>
          was developed in order to
explain the acceptance of information systems as well as to predict the value of
related factors to the spread of these systems
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">(Davis, 1989)</xref>
          . TAM is studying the
factors that affect the intention of the user to use an information system, an
environment or just information, and proposes the connection between two main
factors: the perceived ease of use and the perceived usefulness.
        </p>
        <p>Davis (1989) defines perceived usefulness as the degree a person believes that a
specific system will be raising his/her performance in his/her job. Respectively the
perceived ease of use is defined as the grade that a person believes that the use of a
specific system does not need effort.</p>
        <p>
          According to this model the main factors that affect the actual use of a system are
the perceived ease of use and the perceived usefulness. Research has proved the
validness of TAM model, which is widely accepted
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">(Legris et al. 2003)</xref>
          .
        </p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-2-2">
        <title>2.3 Indexes and metrics</title>
        <p>
          Data analysis techniques have been used to discover the sequences patterns of
learners from log files
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref28">(Romero et al. 2007)</xref>
          . Server log files store information
containing the page requests of each individual user. After the pre-processing this
information can be seen as a per-user ordered set of web page requests from which it
is possible to infer user navigation sessions. The extraction of sequential patterns has
been proven to be particularly useful and has been applied to many different
educational tasks
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref29">(Romero et al. 2008)</xref>
          .
        </p>
        <p>The platform usage may be analyzed with specific indexes and metrics. In brief
the metrics used are presented in Table 1. The number of the sessions and the number
of the pages viewed by all users are counted for the calculation of course activity.
The index unique pages measure the total number of unique pages per course viewed
by all users.</p>
        <p>Description of the index/metric
The total number of sessions per course viewed by users
The total number of pages per course viewed by users
The total number of unique pages per course viewed by users
The enrichment of courses (1- Unique Pages/Total Pages)
The disappointment of users (Sessions/Total Pages)</p>
        <p>It is the complement to the disappointment (1-Disappointment)</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>3 Proposed Framework</title>
      <p>This paper proposes a framework for applying e-learning in agricultural. The goals
of the proposed framework may be summarized on the following three:
· Development of an innovative e-learning platform that shall be adequate for
farmers’ characteristics while at the same time provides all the necessary
features and tools for educators.
· Development and delivery of life-long learning courses in agricultural domain.
· Continuous evaluation and revision of delivered courses through specific
evaluation process, in order to further improve educational content.</p>
      <p>Therefore the proposed framework is applied in three different stages of
educational process: i) platform development, ii) courses development and delivery,
iii) platform and courses evaluation.</p>
      <p>The rest of subsections are investigating the requirements that system and courses
should fulfill in order to achieve the above goals and provide a path to a continuing
courses’ evaluation.</p>
      <sec id="sec-3-1">
        <title>3.1 Platform Development</title>
        <p>The first stage of the proposed framework is the development of an innovative
elearning platform. This platform shall be a Learning Management System (LMS) which
intends to be an asynchronous learning system for delivering and managing learning
content. The platform that will be used could be one of the widely used for e-learning like
Moodle, eClass, Claroline with the appropriate modifications in order to be adequate for
use by farmers, or an entirely new platform design exclusively for this reason. Whatever
LMS used according to TAM is should be easy and useful both for educators and
learners. These two major factors will define the use and success of the adopted LMS.
Therefore the proposed LMS should be useful containing qualitative courses and also
conform to Nielsen Heuristics, presented above, in order to be easily used by learners and
educators. This factor is even more crucial since most of the farmers are not familiar with
Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs).</p>
        <p>In addition to the above, the proposed system should provide adequate tools and
features both for learners and educators. Educators need to easily manage their online
classes and deliver educational content while learners shall be able to easily use the
platform and exploit its features and capabilities.
More specifically LMS should fulfill the following requirements in regards with
educators needs:
· Provide integrated authoring tools that let educators to easily develop online
courses,
· let educators upload specific educational documents and publish announcements
to their learners,
· Record user actions and provide useful feedback to educators for both students
and their courses.</p>
        <p>The adopted LMS should also satisfy learners’ needs. Since learners will be farmers
system should:
· use simple and familiar language for them,
· have minimalistic design without extra options that reduce learners memory
load,
· provide appropriate documentation and help whenever needed,
· motivate learners to their study,
· let learners keep notes on their courses,
· provide tools for communication between learners and educators such as
forums, chat rooms etc.</p>
        <p>As long as these requirements are fulfilled learners’ and educators’ perceived ease
of use and usefulness will be raised and subsequently LMS usage will be also be
increased.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-2">
        <title>3.2 Courses Development</title>
        <p>The second stage of the proposed framework is the development of adequate to
the agricultural domain courses. This section aims to guide authors in creating quality
such distant education courses. The delivered courses in the e-learning platform
should cover a wide range of domains related to agriculture techniques. Since in
agricultural domain many times techniques and supplies are improved, the courses
should be accordingly updated with all the evolutions in agricultural science.</p>
        <p>We propose a process consisting of two main layers: the Pedagogical Design
Layer and the Technical Layer.</p>
        <p>The Pedagogical Design Layer includes three basic activities and is similar to
that proposed by Barrera–Sanabria (2004) and Kazanidis and Satratzemi (2009).
First, the educational goals of instruction have to be defined. These goals should be
clearly indicated and appropriate to the farmers’ characteristics. Second, the
instructors have to decide on the contents to be presented to the learner, which must
cover all the predefined educational goals. Contents of a course should cover all the
basic knowledge of a specific domain while at the same time provide advanced
information and techniques for those that want to go one step further. The next step
of this layer is to effect the definition of the applied instructional strategies. Here, the
instructor studies all the parameters, such as the generated student groups and the
teaching strategies for each group. For example content may start with a simple
example and proceed to instruction domain theory or start with a small question, in
order to motivate learners, and continue with a theory and an example module.</p>
        <p>The Technical Layer can be divided into two main steps: the development of
educational material and the course construction design.</p>
        <p>Educational material development. First of all authors have to find or create the
necessary educational material for the course. The material should be related to the
predefined course content and adopt the following specifications – characteristics:
· Clear, simple, friendly and explanatory text. You should use simple and
understandable language learners.
· Reports on the experience of student. The content should be enriched by
references and examples of learners’ previous experience.
· Use different types of media (text, graphs, videos etc), or other types of
educational material (theory, activities, examples etc) in order to motivate
learners in their study
· Many examples and case studies. Examples are a key element of the
traditional teaching. They help learners to better understand the subject.
Each time after the presentation of a case study content should be analyzing
the situation presented and make reference to alternative actions that could
be followed.
· Clearly formulated aware of any difficulties they may learners face. Where
possible, also should be given all necessary explanations - comments to
clarify possible misunderstandings or questions from learners.
· Explanatory titles and subtitles. The titles and subtitles of the text should
enable learners to understand what will be the content of each unit.
Particularly in the online hypermedia systems, where the transition from
one section to another can be done not necessarily sequentially, the names
of the links should state clearly the material presented by the respective
course units.
· Summaries at the end of each chapter. As in traditional classroom education
where the teacher spent the last few minutes in a summary of taught
educational material each course unit should indicate a summary of main
points which were addressed in it.</p>
        <p>A qualitative educational material, appropriately designed for use by farmers
will motivate learners continue with their study and learn more in less time.</p>
        <p>Course construction design. At this step the instructor designs the course
structure. The course is separated into learning units, modules, or chapters. Each unit
shall contain learning objectives that are comprehensive enough to ensure that the
course will likely be mastered by the learners. An appropriate structure of the course
will help novice learner with their study while at the same time will help more
experienced learners proceed faster.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-3">
        <title>3.3 Course evaluation and revision</title>
        <p>It is crucial factor in e-learning to continuously evaluate and revise the delivered
courses. We propose three distinct ways for evaluating platform, delivered courses
and the results of e-learning.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-4">
        <title>Platform Evaluation</title>
        <p>To test the extend of the e-learning platform acceptance by users, the TAM should be
used. According to TAM the adoption of a technology is mainly depended on the
perceived ease of use and the perceived usefulness of that technology by the user.
Consequently, a system’s usefulness and how easy it is to use should be carefully
evaluated.</p>
        <p>There upon the goals of the platform evaluation are to find out:
·
any possible effect on the learning process and proposed knowledge of
subjects
· the usefulness of either the overall or separate system features (adaptive or
not)
· the usability of the system
Courses’ Evaluation</p>
        <p>The courses should be evaluated according their quality and usefulness by the
learners. For this reason the metrics and indexes presented earlier are used. Course
evaluation may be applied in three steps: i) Logging the data, ii) Data pre-processing,
iii) course ranking in accordance with indexes and metrics</p>
        <p>Logging the data. This step involves the logging of specific data from an LMS. A
module may record attributes before and after web server request processing, was
implemented. In detail, the installed module at the web server of the LMS platform,
monitors fields such as: request_time_event, remote_host, request_uri,
remote_logname, remote_user, request_method, request_time, request_protocol,
status, bytes_sent, referer, agent and user requests. These fields may be recorded with
the use of an Apache module. The development of such a module has the following
two advantages: rapid storage of user information, since it is executed straight from
the server API and not by the LMS application, and the produced data are
independent of specific formulation used by the LMS platform.</p>
        <p>Data pre-processing. The data of the log file contain noise such as missing values,
outliers etc. These values have to be pre-processed in order to prepare them for data
analysis. The produced log file is filtered, so it includes only the following three
fields: (i) courseID, which is the identification string of each course; (ii) sessionID,
which is the identification string of each session; (iii) page Uniform Resource
Locator (URL), which contains the requests of each page of the platform that the user
visited.</p>
        <p>Indexes and metric. The aforementioned fields of the previous section are not
adequate in order to evaluate the course usage. So, some indexes and metrics are
used for the facilitation of the course usage evaluation as presented in section 3.3.
First, the indexes Sessions, Pages, Unique pages, Unique Pages per CourseID per
Session are computed and then, the metrics Enrichment, Disappointment, Interest and
Homogeneity are calculated.</p>
        <p>Platform courses may be ranked according to these metrics and feedback should
be send to the educators with actions required in order to improve their courses.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-5">
        <title>Evaluate the results of e-learning</title>
        <p>An important goal of e-learning is that it should be equivalent to or better than the
learning provided through other delivery modes, such as the traditional face-to-face
and classroom-based methods of instruction. According to Kirkpatrick (1979), the
results of learning can be evaluated at four levels:</p>
        <p>Level 1: reaction is a measure of the learners’ reactions to a course.</p>
        <p>Level 2: learning is a measure of what the learners have learned.</p>
        <p>Level 3: transfer is a measure of the changes in the learners’ behavior when they
return to their jobs after their training programs.</p>
        <p>Level 4: result is a measure of the production outcomes that occur because the
learners are doing their jobs differently.</p>
        <p>Therefore e-learning results may be also be evaluated in the above four levels.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>4. Discussion and Conclusion</title>
      <p>E-learning in agriculture is still very new but the study by Elbert and Alston (2005)
indicated that Cooperative Extension could serve as a change agent in the Digital
Divide.</p>
      <p>This paper proposes a framework for applying e-learning in agricultural. Initially a
review on the e-learning in agricultural took place in order to show the paper
motivation. Following the essential framework background theory was presented. In
particular we discuss the Nielsen Heuristics for system usability, the Technology
Acceptance Model (TAM) which is used in evaluation procedure and we propose
specific indexes and metrics for system log file analysis. The proposed framework
presented in detail as well as how it can be applied in agricultural domain. The
expected benefits of applying such a framework for distant and continuous training
of farmers are the following:
· qualitative presentation of educational material via ICT,
· overcome of spatial and temporal restrictions that farmers usually have,
· evaluation of courses using current metrics and indicators that will lead to
further improvement of the course.</p>
      <p>The proposed evaluation method through specific indexes and metrics uses
existing techniques in a different way and it has the the following advantages: (i) It is
independent of a specific LMS, since it is based on the Apache log files and not the
LMS platform itself. Thus, it can be easily implemented for every LMS. (ii) It uses
new metrics in order to facilitate the evaluation of each course in the LMS and the
instructors to make proper adjustments to their course educational material. From a
pedagogical point of view this method contributes to the improvement of course
content and course usability and the adaptation of the courses in accordance to
learner capabilities. Improvement of course quality gives to learners the opportunity
of asynchronous study of courses with actualized and optimal educational material.</p>
      <p>However there are some limitations in this framework. First of all ICTs are not
widely spread in the target group of this study. More specifically many farmers still
do not have access to a personal computer and are not familiar with Internet. In
addition since this framework is proposed by use in life-long learning the learners are
not students in a specific class or education level and therefore each learners has
different pre-knowledge of the instructional domain. Subsequently there is a
possibility to either novice students find difficult the educational content while on the
same time some experienced users find useless and boring. For this reason the use of
adaptive hypermedia should also be examined.</p>
      <p>As future work we also suggest to include in the target group:
· Economically and socially disadvantaged youth and adults.
· Special needs groups.
· Geographically-challenged individuals.</p>
      <p>By eliminating travel miles and hours of faculty and staff instruction through
distance education, considerable savings are predicted throughout the extension
system. Additionally, these savings can be passed on to e-learning participants,
easing the economic burden of learning.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Arnone</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2002</year>
          )
          <article-title>Mixing and matching distance-education software</article-title>
          .
          <source>Chronicle of Higher Education</source>
          ,
          <volume>48</volume>
          (
          <issue>37</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>33</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>34</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Barrera-Sanabria</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Selley</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D. A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>García-Ojeda</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J. C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mendez-Ortíz</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2004</year>
          )
          <article-title>Designing Adaptive Educational web Sites: General Framework</article-title>
          .
          <source>Proceedings of 4th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT</source>
          <year>2004</year>
          ). p.
          <fpage>973</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>977</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Burt</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2006</year>
          )
          <article-title>Building an Extension Information Network: An Oregon Agricultural Case Study</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Extension, [On-line]</source>
          ,
          <volume>44</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          )
          <article-title>Article 1T0T7</article-title>
          . Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2006february/tt7.php,
          <source>[Accessed 21 March</source>
          <year>2011</year>
          ].
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Carr</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jr</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1999</year>
          )
          <article-title>Technology Adoption and Diffusion. The Learning Center for Interactive Technology</article-title>
          , Available at: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate /innovation/adoptiondiffusion.htm,
          <source>[Accessed 20 March</source>
          <year>2011</year>
          ].
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Davis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1989</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology</article-title>
          .
          <source>MIS Quarterly</source>
          ,
          <volume>13</volume>
          (
          <issue>3</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>319</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>340</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Delacey</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Leonard</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2002</year>
          )
          <article-title>Case study on technology and distance in education at the Harvard Business School</article-title>
          .
          <source>Educational technology and society</source>
          ,
          <volume>5</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ) p.
          <fpage>13</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>28</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Delima</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1999</year>
          )
          <article-title>Web-based learning more cost effective</article-title>
          .
          <source>Computing Canada</source>
          ,
          <volume>25</volume>
          (
          <issue>27</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>29</fpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Drew</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2008</year>
          )
          <article-title>The study of the impact of the M.S. of Agronomy Distance Education Program on student careers. M.S. thesis</article-title>
          , Iowa State University, in Proquest Digital Dissertations.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Elbert</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>C.D.</surname>
            and
            <given-names>A.J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Alston</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2005</year>
          ).
          <article-title>An Evaluative Study of the United States Cooperative Extension Service's Role in Bridging the Digital Divide</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Extension</source>
          . Available at: www.joe.org/joe/2005october/rb1.shtml,
          <source>[Accessed 7 April</source>
          <year>2011</year>
          ].
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Eveland</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1986</year>
          )
          <article-title>Diffusion, Technology Transfer and Implications: Thinking and Talking about Change</article-title>
          .
          <source>Knowledge</source>
          ,
          <volume>8</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ), p.
          <volume>303</volume>
          _
          <fpage>322</fpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          11.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ferguson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2002</year>
          )
          <article-title>Educational Resources for Precision Agriculture</article-title>
          .
          <source>Precision Agriculture</source>
          ,
          <volume>3</volume>
          (
          <issue>4</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>359</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>371</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          12.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fichter</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2002</year>
          )
          <article-title>Intranets and e-learning: a perfect partnership</article-title>
          .
          <source>Online</source>
          ,
          <volume>26</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>68</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>71</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fliegel</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2001</year>
          )
          <article-title>Diffusion Research in Rural Sociology: The Record and Prospects for the Future</article-title>
          . Middleton, WI: Social Ecology Press.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          14.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gloy</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Akridge</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Whipker</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2002</year>
          )
          <article-title>The Usefulness and Influence of Information Sources on Commercial Farms. Paper presented at the 2002 AAEA Annual Meeting</article-title>
          , Tampa, FL.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          15.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hall</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dunkelberger</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ferreira</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>W.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Prevatt</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Martin</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>N.R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2003</year>
          )
          <article-title>Diffusion-Adoption of Personal Computers and the Internet in Farm Business Decisions: Southeastern Beef and Peanut Farmers</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Extension</source>
          ,
          <volume>41</volume>
          (
          <issue>3</issue>
          ), Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2003june/a6.shtml,
          <source>[Accessed 10 March</source>
          <year>2011</year>
          ].
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          16.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hemmati</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>E. Sefidian,</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2006</year>
          )
          <article-title>E-learning and investigation on its application in on-the job training for the staff of AREO, Proceeding of the Iranian agricultural education seminar</article-title>
          , Tarbiat Modares University, Iran,
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -2 Nov, p:
          <fpage>221</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>232</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          17.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kazanidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Satratzemi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2009</year>
          )
          <article-title>Applying learning styles to SCORM compliant courses</article-title>
          . In I. Aedo,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
            <surname>Chen</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Kinshuk,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
            <surname>Sampson</surname>
          </string-name>
          &amp; L. Zaitseva (eds.),
          <source>Proceedings of the 9th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning</source>
          Technologies p.
          <fpage>147</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>151</lpage>
          . Riga, Latvia.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          18.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kirkpatrick</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1979</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Techniques for evaluating training programs</article-title>
          .
          <source>Training and Development Journal</source>
          ,
          <volume>33</volume>
          (
          <issue>6</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>78</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>92</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          19.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Legris</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ingham</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Collerette</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2003</year>
          )
          <article-title>Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model</article-title>
          .
          <source>Information and Management</source>
          ,
          <volume>40</volume>
          (
          <issue>3</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>14</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation>
          20.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nielsen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1994</year>
          )
          <article-title>Enhancing the explanatory power of usability heuristics</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings ACM CHI'94 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems: Celebrating Interdependence</source>
          . p.
          <fpage>152</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>158</lpage>
          . Boston, MA, April
          <volume>24</volume>
          -28.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref21">
        <mixed-citation>
          21.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nudell</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Roth</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Saxowsky</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2005</year>
          )
          <article-title>Non-traditional Extension Education Using Videoconferencing</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Extension</source>
          ,
          <volume>43</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ), Available at: http://www.joe.org/2005february/tt3.shtml_,
          <source>[Accessed 05 April</source>
          <year>2011</year>
          ].
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref22">
        <mixed-citation>
          22.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>O</given-names>
            <surname>'Neill</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>B.</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1999</year>
          )
          <article-title>Teaching Consumers to Use the Internet to Make Consumer Decisions</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Extension</source>
          ,
          <volume>37</volume>
          (
          <issue>3</issue>
          ), Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1999june/iw4.html,
          <source>[Accessed 7 April</source>
          <year>2011</year>
          ].
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref23">
        <mixed-citation>
          23.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Valsamidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kazanidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kontogiannis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Karakos</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <article-title>2010a) Automated suggestions and course ranking through web mining</article-title>
          .
          <source>Proceedings of 10th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies ICALT</source>
          <year>2010</year>
          , Sousse, Tunisia.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref24">
        <mixed-citation>
          24.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Valsamidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kontogiannis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kazanidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Karakos</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <article-title>2010b) Homogeneity and Enrichment, Two Metrics for Web Applications Assessment</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Proceedings of 14th Panhellenic Conference on Informatics (PCI2010)</source>
          , Tripoli, Greece.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref25">
        <mixed-citation>
          25.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Park</surname>
            , D.B.,
            <given-names>Y.B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Cho</surname>
            and
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lee</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2007</year>
          )
          <article-title>The use of an e-learning system for agricultural extension: a case study of the Rural Development Administration, Korea</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension</source>
          .
          <volume>13</volume>
          (
          <issue>4</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>273</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>285</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref26">
        <mixed-citation>
          26.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Radcliffe</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2002</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Technological and pedagogical convergence between workbased and campus-based learning</article-title>
          .
          <source>Educational technology and society</source>
          ,
          <volume>5</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>54</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>59</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref27">
        <mixed-citation>
          27.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Roling</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>N.G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1988</year>
          )
          <article-title>Extension Science: Information Systems in Agricultural Development</article-title>
          . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref28">
        <mixed-citation>
          28.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Romero</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ventura</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2007</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Educational Data Mining: a Survey from 1995 to 2005</article-title>
          .
          <source>Elsevier Journal of Expert Systems with Applications</source>
          ,
          <volume>33</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>135</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>146</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref29">
        <mixed-citation>
          29.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Romero</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gutierez</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Freire</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ventura</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2008</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Mining and Visualizing Visited Trails in Web-Based Educational Systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Educational Data Mining</source>
          <year>2008</year>
          ,
          <source>Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Educational Data</source>
          Mining p.
          <fpage>182</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>186</lpage>
          . Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref30">
        <mixed-citation>
          30.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Starr</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R. M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1997</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Delivering instruction on the World Wide Web: overview and basic design principles</article-title>
          .
          <source>Educational technology</source>
          ,
          <volume>37</volume>
          (
          <issue>3</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>7</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>15</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref31">
        <mixed-citation>
          31.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tavernier</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Adeaja</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.O.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hartley</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Schilling</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1996</year>
          )
          <article-title>Information Technologies and the Delivery of Extension Programs</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Agricultural &amp; Food Information</source>
          ,
          <volume>3</volume>
          (
          <issue>4</issue>
          ), p.
          <fpage>75</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>85</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref32">
        <mixed-citation>
          32.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tsai</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            <surname>Machado</surname>
          </string-name>
          , (
          <year>2002</year>
          )
          <article-title>E-learning, online learning, web-based learning, or distance learning: Unveiling the ambiguity in current terminology</article-title>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref33">
        <mixed-citation>
          33.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tennessen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , PonTell,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Romine</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
            &amp;
            <surname>Motheral</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>S.W.</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1997</year>
          )
          <article-title>Opportunities for Cooperative Extension and Local Communities in the Information Age</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Extension</source>
          ,
          <volume>35</volume>
          (
          <issue>5</issue>
          ), Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1997october/iw4.html,
          <source>[Accessed 4 April</source>
          <year>2011</year>
          ].
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>