(ONLINE CLASSES ARE NOT A GOOD IDEA) - Annotated Bibliography Example

They gave recommendations on supporting the ease and speed of use of CMS, and how it can support diverse teaching needs and goals of end users. These authors are credible sources, because Ioannou is a doctoral student in the educational technology program in the Department of Educational Psychology at the University of Connecticut, while Hannafin is an associate professor in the Department of Educational Psychology at the University of Connecticut. They have worked on similar studies on technology enhanced learning environments and technology integration.

The intended audiences are: school information technology or information systems manager or director and end users of CMS. The main limitation of the article is that it did not conduct any empirical research on a specific CMS to determine its strengths and limitations. It depends on existing studies to argue and support its preference for client-based CMS too. I plan to use this paper to explain existing CMS uses and limitations. This article can also help provide recommendations on CMS development.

(251 words). Ramage, T.R. (2005). A system-level comparison of cost-efficiency and return on investment related to online course delivery. Dr. Thomas R. Ramage Publications. Paper 2. Retrieved from http://spark.parkland.edu/ramage_pubs/2/ Ramage (2005) compared the costs and revenues of Illinois community colleges and their online delivery systems, in order to examine their cost-efficiency and to contrast the outcomes among online courses at chosen community colleges. Findings showed that online programs at 83% of the community colleges were not cost efficient and did not give a positive return on investment.

Apparently, online courses are not cost-efficient, since only two of the 12 participating colleges were determined to be cost efficient. The mean return on investment was negative at –15%. Cost per student credit also varied, which indicated that diverse factors influence the costs and