Virtuaalsed õpikeskkonnad ja õpihaldussüsteemid

Virtuaalsed
õpikeskkonnad ja
õpihaldussüsteemid
IFI7208.DT Õpikeskkonnad ja -võrgustikud

Haridustehnoloogia
ajalugu
Nicholson, P. (2007). A History
of E-Learning. B. Fernández-
Manjón, J. M. Sánchez-Pérez,
J. A. Gómez-Pulido, M. A.
Vega-Rodríguez, & J. Bravo-
Rodríguez, Computers and
Education (lk 1–11). Dordrecht:
Springer. http://doi.org/
10.1007/978-1-4020-4914-9_1
Molnar, A. (1997). Computers in
Education: A Brief History. The
Journal. http://thejournal.com/
Articles/1997/06/01/
Computers-in-Education-A-
Brief-History.aspx
Anderson, T., & Dron, J. (2011).
Three Generations of Distance
Education Pedagogy. The
International Review of
Research in Open and Distance
Learning, 12(3), 80–97. http://
dx.doi.org/10.19173/
irrodl.v12i3.890
Sumner, J. (2000). Serving the
System: A critical history of
distance education. Open
Learning: the Journal of Open
and Distance Learning, 15(3),
267–285. http://doi.org/
10.1080/713688409
https://marinabuinitskaja.com/2020/09/17/oppekeskkonnad-ja-vorgustikud-luugemine/
Benjamin, L. T. (1988). A History
of Teaching Machines.
American Psychologist, 43(9),
703–712.
https://marinabuinitskaja.com/2020/09/15/a-history-of-teaching-machines-t-benjamin-jr-texas/
https://gerlimagistriope.wordpress.com/2020/09/19/ulevaade-haridustehnoloogia-ajaloost/
https://maikimagistriope.wordpress.com/2020/09/13/i-teema-haridustehnoloogia-ajalugu/
https://vahjakivi.wordpress.com/2020/09/17/ulevaade-haridustehnoloogia-ajaloost/
https://jyrikman.wordpress.com/2020/09/06/example-post/
Luik, P. (2004). Õpitarkvara
efektiivsed karakteristikud
elektrooniliste õpikute ja
drillprogrammide korral. Tartu:
Tartu Ülikool. http://
hdl.handle.net/10062/1067
https://kyllikmagister.wordpress.com/2020/09/13/ulevaade-haridustehnoloogia-ajaloost/
http://www.toretigu.eu/informaatika/opikeskkonnad/haridustehnoloogia-ajalugu/
https://vivikaope.wordpress.com/2020/09/13/ulevaade-haridustehnoloogia-ajaloost/
https://digitegu.wordpress.com/2020/09/18/ulevaade-haridustehnoloogia-ajaloost/
https://leilalehtmets.wordpress.com/2020/09/13/1-ulevaade-haridustehnoloogia-ajaloost/
https://mariannmiblog.wordpress.com/2020/09/11/ulevaade-haridustehnoloogia-ajaloost/
https://pavelkatomascz.wordpress.com/2020/09/15/ulevaade-haridustehnoloogia-ajaloost/
https://pavelkatomascz.wordpress.com/2020/09/15/ulevaade-haridustehnoloogia-ajaloost/
https://oppivkrislin.wordpress.com/2020/09/14/haridustehnoloogia-ajalugu-opikeskkonnad-ja-vorgustikud/
https://msopingud.wordpress.com/2020/09/13/esimene-ulesanne-ulevaade-haridustehnoloogia-ajaloost-taiendava-lugemise-kokkuvotte/
https://msopingud.wordpress.com/2020/09/13/esimene-ulesanne-ulevaade-haridustehnoloogia-ajaloost-taiendava-lugemise-kokkuvotte/
https://kylliveeb.wordpress.com/2020/09/18/ulevaade-haridustehnoloogia-ajaloost/
https://tammaimaarja.wordpress.com/2020/09/11/ulevaade-haridustehnoloogi-ajaloost/
https://liinavallimae.wordpress.com/2020/09/14/esimese-teema-postitus/
https://minumagister.wordpress.com/2020/09/14/haridustehnoloogia-ajalugu/
https://merlinimagister.wordpress.com/2020/09/10/esimene-teema-ulevaade-haridustehnoloogia-ajaloost/
https://ollearak.wordpress.com/2020/09/20/i-teema-ulevaade-haridustehnoloogia-ajaloost-distantsope/

(Anderson & Dron, 2011)
Summary of Distance Education Pedagogies
We conclude by arguing that all three current and future generations of DE pedagogy have an
Generation of
distance
education
pedagogy
Technology Learning
activities
Learner
granularity
Content
granularity
Evaluation Teacher
role
Scalability
Cognitive–
behaviourism
Mass media:
Print, TV,
radio, one-to-
one
communication
Read and
watch
Individual Fine:
scripted and
designed
from the
ground up
Recall Content
creator,
sage on
the stage
High
Constructivism Conferencing
(audio, video,
and Web),
many-to-many
communication
Discuss,
create,
construct
Group Medium:
scaffolded
and
arranged,
teacher-
guided
Synthesize:
essays
Discussion
leader,
guide on
the side
Low
Connectivism Web 2.0:
Social
networks,
aggregation &
recommender
systems
Explore,
connect,
create,
and
evaluate
Network Coarse:
mainly at
object and
person
level, self-
created
Artifact
creation
Critical
friend, co-
traveler
Medium

(Nicholson, 2007)
Table 1-1. The changing focus of educational technology over the past 30 years (after Charp,
1997; Herrington, Reeves et al., 2005; Leinonen, 2005; Mortera-Gutiérrez, 2006; Nicholson
& McDougall, 2005; Pilla, Nakayama et al., 2006; THOMSON, 2005)
Era Focus Educational characteristics
1975-1985 Programming;
Drill and practice;
Computer-assisted learning –
CAL.
Behaviourist approaches to learning
and instruction; programming to
build tools and solve problems;
local user-computer interaction.
1983-1990 Computer-Based Training;
Multimedia;
Use of older CAL models with
interactive multimedia courseware;
Passive learner models dominant;
Constructivist influences begin to
appear in educational software design
and use.
1990-1995 Web-based Training Internet-based content delivery;
Active learner models developed;
Constructivist perspectives common;
Limited end-user interactions.
1995-2005 E-Learning Internet-based flexible courseware
deliver; increased interactivity;
online multimedia courseware;
Distributed constructivist and
cognitivist models common; Remote
user-user interactions.

(Jones, 2011, lk 71)
Table 2.7. Five paradigms of university e-learning.
Period Title Description
Late 1980s to
early 1990s
Text-based CMC Text-based tools for e-mail, Usenet
news, perhaps FTP. Not always Internet
based. Very limited use. Limited
access. Difficult to use. (e.g., Oliver,
1985)
~1995 – late 90s Web-based Lone
Ranger
Lone-Ranger academics using Web and
Internet tools to enhance teaching.
Increasing access, creation difficult.
Little institutional support (e.g., Jones,
1996b)
1995 to 1999 Cottage Industry Ad hoc development of systems to
increase ease-of-use. Often multiple in
an institution. Often arise from work of
Lone-Rangers. Origins of the LMS
(e.g., Goldberg et al., 1996)
1998 – ?? Industrial E-learning becomes an institutional
concern. Must be a single institutional,
“enterprise ready” system represented
by a LMS. (e.g., Tickle, Muldoon, &
Tennent, 2009)
~2005 – ?? Post-industrial Rise and increasing availability of
Internet access, social media, mobile
devices etc. turns focus from
institutional provision to the use of
personal tools. From integrated systems
to learning networks (Downes, 2007)
2.5.2. Usage of industrial e-learning: quantity

(Leinonen, 2010, lk 12)
tools live on and continue to have an effect on us; the newer paradigms
and forms live simultaneously with the old ones (Figure 1).
Below I will present a chronological, thematic, and summarizing histo-
ry of the mainstream development of computer-based learning tools in
five phases. It is worth mentioning that the categorization is a general-
ization of the stages.
I – Late 1970s – early 1980s: programming, drill, and practice.
Accordingtomyownexperience,inthelate1970sandearly1980sthecom-
Figure 1:
Timeline of the
Main Paradigms
of Using Comput-
ers in Learning
drill and
practice
Computer-based
training(CBT)
with multimedia
Internet-based
training (IBT)
e-Learning Social software +
free and open
content
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

(Põldoja, 2016, lk 20)
Table 1. Five generations of using computers in education (adapted from Anderson & Dron,
2011; Jones, 2011; Leinonen, 2010; Nicholson, 2007).
Era Focus Learning technolo-
gies
Learning activities
1959–1985 Computer assisted
instruction
Personal computers,
intelligent tutoring
systems, artificial
intelligence, pro-
gramming tools
Drill and practice
exercises, program-
ming
1985–1993 Computer-based
training
Educational desktop
software, multimedia
CD-ROMs
Reading, drill and
practice exercises,
educational games
1993–1998 Web-based training Web sites, e-mail,
discussion forums,
chat
Reading, writing,
discussing, testing
1998–2005 E-learning Learning management
systems, learning
objects and reposito-
ries, computer-based
assessment tools,
video conferencing
Discussing, creating,
constructing
2005– Technology-enhanced
learning
Web 2.0, social soft-
ware, personal learn-
ing environments,
mobile devices, e-
textbooks, interactive
whiteboards, open
educational re-
sources, massive
open online courses,
learning analytics
Exploring, connecting,
creating, evaluating,
planning personal
learning, reflecting
The beginning of each generation may be connected to an important turning

Rühmaarutelud
• Moodustage 5…6-liikmelised arutelu rühmad
• Valige üks kahest teemast: haridustehnoloogia ajalugu või
õpilepingud
• Tehke lühikokkuvõte

Õpilepingud
Isiklik kogemus. Rakendusvõimalused hariduses?
Rakendusvõimalused tööalases koolituses? …

Haridustehnoloogia ajalugu
Mis oli huvitavat? Millised seosed tekkisid? Mida oleks ajaloost
õppida tehnoloogiapõhise õppe lahenduste disainimisel?

Virtuaalse õpikeskkonna vahendid
• Õpihaldussüsteem (learning management system, LMS; virtual learning environment,
VLE; course management system, CMS)
• Õppeinfosüsteem (study information system, SIS)
• Õpiobjektide repositoorium (learning object repository, LOR)
• Õpiobjektide autorvahendid
• Testimiskeskkonnad
• e-Portfoolio
• …

Õpihaldussüsteemi põhifunktsionaalsused
• Kursuste haldus
• Õppijate haldus
• Ajakava
• Õppematerjalid
• Ülesanded
• Suhtlusvahendid
• Hinded

Õpihaldussüsteemid ja õpikeskkonnad
Eestis
• Eestis arendatud keskkonnad: VIKO, IVA, Edutizer, Krihvel,
LePress, EduFeedr, Dippler, eDidaktikum, eKool, Stuudium/
Tera, Õpiveeb, Opiq, Foxcademy
• Eestis kasutusel olnud välismaised keskkonnad: WebCT,
Moodle, Ilias, Canvas, Eliademy, LearnLoop

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5WEO0ChbZ0zugXGwS5lgCA

http://www.hanspoldoja.net/
moodle/

https://canvas.instructure.com

https://github.com/instructure/canvas-lms

2. teema lugemismaterjalid:
Õpikeskkonna ja võrgustiku roll
õpiprotsessis

Väljataga, T., Pata, K., & Priidik, E. (2009).
Õpikeskkonna kujundamine haridustehnoloogiliste
vahenditega. K. Pata, & M. Laanpere (toim),
Tiigriõpe: Haridustehnoloogia käsiraamat (lk 11–
30). Tallinn: TLÜ informaatika instituut.

Dillenbourg, P., Schneider, D., & Paraskevi, S.
(2002). Virtual Learning Environments. A.
Dimitracopoulou (toim), Proceedings of the 3rd
Hellenic Conference on Information &
Communication Technologies in Education (lk 3–18).
Rhodes: Kastaniotis Editions.
Virtual Learning Environments
Pierre Dillenbourg, Daniel Schneider, Paraskevi Synteta
{Pierre.Dillenbourg|Daniel.Schneider|Paraskevi.Synteta}@tecfa.unige.ch
Phone: +41 22 705 9376 - Fax: +41 22 705 6379
TECFA - FPSE - University of Geneva
40 bd. Du Pont d’Arve - CH-1205 Genève
SUMMARY
Is the concept of 'virtual learning environment' just a popular label to describe any educational
software? No, the concept includes several interesting features that justify the use of a specific
label. We review these features in the first part of our contribution. Do these features guarantee
pedagogical effects? No, we review in the second some potential contributions of virtual learning
environments. Turning potential effects intro actual outcomes is the challenge of designers.
KEYWORDS : Virtual learning environments, educational Internet, virtual communities
WHAT IS A VIRTUAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT ?
Does a « virtual learning environment » refer to any educational web site? No. However, as
many fashionable words, some authors use it in a very broad way, including for instance Web sites
that simply include static Web pages. Is a «virtual learning environment» restricted to systems
including some 3D / virtual reality technology? No. Some environments include less
sophisticated interfaces, namely text-based ones. Between these over-general and over-specific
definitions, there is a range of environments, which vary along the criteria listed below. Our goal
is not to decide which environments deserve the «virtual learning environment» label, but to
provide an understanding of their specificity.
Is a “virtual learning environment” synonymous to a «virtual campus»? No. A “virtual
campus” provides University courses, while the name «virtual learning environment» does not
restrict the scope to any age or level. The former is hence a sub-category of the latter. A “virtual
campus” covers a set of courses, often a whole diploma programme, while «virtual learning
environment» can be used for smaller parts of a curriculum.
We argue that virtual learning environments can be identified by the following features and we
will discuss them one by one through this contribution:
A virtual learning environment is a designed information space.
A virtual learning environment is a social space: educational interactions occur in the
environment, turning spaces into places.
The virtual space is explicitly represented: the representation of this information/social
space can vary from text to 3D immersive worlds.
Students are not only active, but also actors: they co-construct the virtual space.
Virtual learning environments are not restricted to distance education: they also enrich
classroom activities.
«ICTs in Education», Volume I, A. Dimitracopoulou (Ed), Proceedings of 3rd
Congress
HICTE, 26-29/9/2002, University of Aegean, Rhodes, Greece, KASTANIOTIS Editions Inter@ctive 3

Paulsen, M. F. (2003). Online Education and
Learning Management Systems. Global E-learning in
a Scandinavian Perspective. Bekkestua: NKI
Forlaget.

Weller, M. (2007). Virtual learning environments:
using, choosing and developing your VLE.
Abingdon: Routledge.
What we talk about when we
talk about e-learning
E-learning produces more angst and enthusiasm than can be consumed
locally, so it tends to spill over into other areas. One could draw a complex
Venn diagram with e-learning intersecting with other topics in education,
including lifelong learning, increased educational demand, education in
developing countries, the nature of assessment, the role of the academic,
commercialization in education, intellectual property and flexibility in
education. And then there is the overlap with broader technological develop-
ments such as open source software, web services integration techniques,
educational technology standards, the semantic web, etc. And underlying
all of these activities is the environment in which e-learning takes place, the
VLE or LMS (see below for a discussion on terminology). The pedagogical,
political, technical and economical arguments that pervade e-learning are
all reflected in the choice, deployment and development of a VLE in an
organization.
Unsurprisingly the issues which proliferate around e-learning lead to
confusion, resentment and sometimes disdain from many educators. Their
job, and inclination, is to teach and research in their subject and remain up to
date in that field, not to continually develop new skills in using technologies
or become experts in educational theory, XML programming and educational
technology standards. As these areas develop rapidly the energy required to
keep up with them becomes an increasing drain on the resources of any
academic. What many enthusiasts, government officials and managers often
fail to appreciate is that an educator’s time (and interest) is a finite resource;
if one occupies it with one area it is at the detriment of another. If they engage
with e-learning at all, then the feeling many educators have is one of
bewilderment and confusion, akin to that of Einstein, who, lost on his way to
a meeting, telephoned his wife Elsa and asked, ‘Where am I? And where
should I be?’
Rather like the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, the message of this
book is ‘Don’t Panic’. The presence of a VLE in your institution is the means
by which you can engage effectively with these issues. It won’t make you
understand educational theory, and it won’t change your institution overnight,
Chapter 1
1111
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1011
1
2
3111
4
5
6
7
8
9
20111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
30111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
40111
1
2
3
44111

Anderson, T. (2008). Towards a Theory of Online
Learning. T. Anderson (toim), The Theory and
Practice of Online Learning (lk 45–74). Edmonton:
AU Press.
CHAPTER2
TOWARDS A THEORY
OF ONLINE LEARNING
Terry Anderson
Athabasca University
It is the theory that decides what we can observe.
– Albert Einstein
There is nothing more practical than a good theory.
– Lewin, K., Field Theory in Social Science
INTRODUCTION
Theory has been both celebrated and condemned in educational practice
and research. Many proponents have argued that theory allows and even
forces us to see the big picture and makes it possible for us to view our
practice and our research from a broader perspective than envisioned from
the murky trenches of our practice. This broader perspective helps us make
connections with the work of others, facilitates coherent frameworks and
deeper understanding of our actions, and perhaps most importantly, allows
us to transfer the experience gained in one context to new experiences and
contexts. Critics of theory (McCormick & McCormick, 1992) have argued
that too strict adherence to any particular theoretical viewpoint often filters
our perceptions and thus blinds us to important lessons of reality. The
intent of this chapter is to look at learning theory generally, and then to
focus in on those attributes of the online learning context that allow us to
focus and develop deeper and more useful theories of online learning.

3. teema lugemismaterjalid:
Õpihaldussüsteemid

28 TechTrends • March/April 2007 Volume 51, Number 2
The application of computers to education
has a history dating back to the 1950s, well
before the pervasive spread of personal
computers (Reiser, 1987). With a mature
history and varying approaches to utilizing
computers for education, a veritable alphabet
soup of terms and acronyms
related to computers in
education have found their way
into the literature, most of them
non-standardized. Learning
Management System (LMS) is
one approach to the application
of computers to education
which holds great potential
and important concepts yet is
often misunderstood and the
term misused. This article will
clarify the use of the term LMS
by presenting a history and
definitionofLMS,differentiating
it from similar terms with which it is often
confused, and discussing the role it can play
in education. It will then describe current
application and available features of LMSs,
and conclude by identifying trends and
recommending future research.
History and definition of LMS:
What are LMSs?
The history of the application of computers
to education is filled with generic terms such as
computer-based instruction (CBI), computer-
assisted instruction (CAI), and computer-
assisted learning (CAL), generally describing
drill-and-practiceprograms,moresophisticated
tutorials and more individualized instruction,
respectively (Parr & Fung, 2001). LMS has its
history in another term, integrated learning
system (ILS) which offers functionality beyond
instructional content such as management
and tracking, personalized instruction and
integration across the system (Bailey, 1993;
Becker, 1993; Brush, Armstrong, Barbrow, &
Ulintz, 1999; Szabo & Flesher, 2002).
The term ILS was coined by Jostens Learn-
ing, and LMS was originally used to describe the
management system component of the PLATO
K-12 learning system, content-free and separate
from the courseware (R. Foshay, personal com-
munication, October 24, 2006). The term LMS
is currently used to describe a number of differ-
ent educational computer applications, and we
would argue that it is often used incorrectly. Lat-
er sections of this article will differentiate LMS
from other terms with which it is often confused,
but prior to describing what LMS is not; we will
focus on describing what an LMS is.
The key to understanding the difference
between LMS and other computer education
terms is to understand the systemic nature of
LMS. LMS is the framework that handles all
aspects of the learning process. An LMS is the
infrastructure that delivers and manages in-
structional content, identifies and assesses in-
dividual and organizational learning or training
goals, tracks the progress towards meeting those
goals, and collects and presents data for super-
vising the learning process of an organization as
a whole (Szabo & Flesher, 2002). An LMS deliv-
ers content but also handles course registration
and administration, skills gap analysis, tracking
and reporting (Gilhooly, 2001).
Bailey (1993) presents the following general
characteristics of an LMS in education:
An Argument for Clarity:
What are Learning Management
Systems, What are They Not, and
What Should They Become?
By William R. Watson and Sunnie Lee Watson
“A veritable
alphabet soup
of terms and
acronyms related
to computers
have found
their way into
the literature.”
Watson, W. R., & Watson, S. L. (2007). An Argument
for Clarity: What are Learning Management Systems,
What are They Not, and What Should They Become?
TechTrends, 51(2), 28–34. http://doi.org/10.1007/
s11528-007-0023-y

HAMISH COATES, RICHARD JAMES AND GABRIELLE BALDWIN
A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THE EFFECTS OF
LEARNING MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS ON UNIVERSITY
TEACHING AND LEARNING
ABSTRACT. The rapid uptake of campus-wide Learning Management Systems
(LMS) is changing the character of the on-campus learning experience. The trend
towards LMS as an adjunct to traditional learning modes has been the subject of
little research beyond technical analyses of alternative software systems. Drawing on
Australian experience, this paper presents a broad, critical examination of the
potential impact of these online systems on teaching and learning in universities. It
discusses in particular the possible effects of LMS on teaching practices, on student
engagement, on the nature of academic work and on the control over academic
knowledge.
INTRODUCTION
There is a significant change taking place in higher education that has
received surprisingly little analysis. In the last few years, integrated
computer systems known as Learning Management Systems (LMS)
have rapidly emerged and are having, and will increasingly have,
profound effects on university teaching and learning. LMS are
enterprise-wide and internet-based systems, such as WebCT and
Blackboard, that integrate a wide range of pedagogical and course
administration tools. These systems have the capacity to create virtual
learning environments for campus-based students, and are even being
used to develop fully online virtual universities. They are becoming
ubiquitous at universities around the world, adding a virtual dimen-
sion to even the most traditional campus-based institutions.
Unlike other financial or human resources management systems
recently introduced into universities, online LMS have the potential
to affect the core business of teaching and learning in unanticipated
ways. Despite this, research into the ramifications of LMS, in par-
ticular the pedagogical issues, is still in its infancy. In spite of wide-
spread levels of adoption, and although the systems are essentially
devices for teaching, attention has been most often focussed on their
Tertiary Education and Management 11: 19–36, 2005.
Ó 2005 Springer
Coates, H., James, R., & Baldwin, G. (2005). A
Critical Examination Of The Effects Of Learning
Management Systems On University Teaching And
Learning. Tertiary Education and Management,
11(1), 19–36. http://doi.org/10.1007/
s11233-004-3567-9

Siemens, G. (2004, 22. november). Learning
Management Systems: The wrong place to start
learning [ajaveebipostitus]. Loetud aadressil http://
www.elearnspace.org/Articles/lms.htm

Viited
• Anderson, T., & Dron, J. (2011). Three Generations of Distance Education Pedagogy. The International Review of
Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 80–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v12i3.890
• Hill, P. (2020). State of Higher Ed LMS Market for US and Canada: Mid-Year 2020 Edition. https://
philonedtech.com/state-of-higher-ed-lms-market-for-us-and-canada-mid-year-2020-edition/
• Jones, D. T. (2011). An Information Systems Design Theory for E-learning. Canberra: Australian National
University. http://hdl.handle.net/1885/8370
• Leinonen, T. (2010). Designing Learning Tools: Methodological Insights. Helsinki: Aalto University School of Art and
Design. http://urn.ﬁ/URN:ISBN:978-952-60-0032-9
• Nicholson, P. (2007). A History of E-Learning. B. Fernández-Manjón, J. M. Sánchez-Pérez, J. A. Gómez-Pulido, M.
A. Vega-Rodríguez, & J. Bravo- Rodríguez, Computers and Education (lk 1–11). Dordrecht: Springer. http://
doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4914-9_1
• Põldoja, H. (2016). The Structure and Components for the Open Education Ecosystem: Constructive Design
Research of Online Learning Tools. Helsinki: Aalto University. http://urn.ﬁ/URN:ISBN:978-952-60-6993-7

See materjal on avaldatud Creative Commons Autorile viitamine–Jagamine
samadel tingimustel 3.0 Eesti litsentsi alusel. Litsentsi terviktekstiga tutvumiseks
külastage aadressi http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ee/
Hans Põldoja
hans.poldoja@tlu.ee
IFI7208.DT Õpikeskkonnad ja -võrgustikud
https://opikeskkonnad.wordpress.com
Digitehnoloogiate instituut
Tallinna Ülikool

Virtuaalsed õpikeskkonnad ja õpihaldussüsteemid

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (20)

Similar a Virtuaalsed õpikeskkonnad ja õpihaldussüsteemid

Similar a Virtuaalsed õpikeskkonnad ja õpihaldussüsteemid (20)

Más de Hans Põldoja

Más de Hans Põldoja (20)

Último

Último (20)

Virtuaalsed õpikeskkonnad ja õpihaldussüsteemid