|  | FIG PUBLICATION NO. 46 Enhancing Surveying Education through 
	e-LearningA publication of FIG Commission 2 – Professional 
Education
 
 
 ContentsForeword Introduction 1. The concept of e-learning1.1 E-learning defined
 1.2 Policy considerations
 1.3 Continuing professional development
 1.4 Knowledge management
 1.5 Learning at workplace
 1.6 Organizational learning
 2. The nature of e-learning2.1 Trend from technology to pedagogy
 2.2 Reusability
 2.3 Metadata
 2.4 Learning Content Management System
 2.5 Web 2.0
 2.6 Standards
 3. E -learning technology and infrastructure3.1 Internet
 3.2 Learning management systems
 3.3 (Multi-media) software for course development
 3.4 Virtual libraries
 3.5 E-learning infrastructure
 3.6 End-to-end model for e-learning
 4. Effective e-learning4.1 Networking, organizational issues
 4.2 Business models
 4.3 Benefits
 5. Role of e-learning in Surveying5.1 Awareness building
 5.2 Platform for collaboration
 5.3 Sharing good practice
 5.4 Creating a learning community
 5.5 The growing importance of life-long-learning
 6. FIG Policy on e-learning References Case of Good Practice 1: 
UNIGISOverview
 Clearly defined professional qualifications
 Curriculum development
 Distance learning
 Quality assurance
 References
 Case of Good Practice 2: 
ESRI – The Virtual CampusA history of successes
 Challenges and shortcomings
 The way ahead
 Authors Orders for printed copies 
 Surveying is one of the oldest professions. Traditionally land surveyors 
	are professionals who determine or establish points, lines, polygons of the 
	selected real word objects, who collect their attribute data, who register 
	the rights on those and visualize the results. To fulfil the needs of the 
	society usually surveying schools were one of the first higher educational 
	institutions in the field of engineering in every country. On the one hand, 
	to process raw measurements a very high level of mathematical background was 
	needed. That is why so many mathematicians are in close contacts with 
	surveying. On the other hand data processing needed special devices like the 
	abacus, the logarithmic table, the mechanical calculator etc. At the middle of the last century a new device was introduced: the computer. 
It changed dramatically first our computational habits in sixties, and 
afterwards the mapping devices and the data processing practice as a whole new 
way of thinking. In the seventies the remote sensing satellites and in the 
eighties the Global Positioning System (GPS) generated more basic changes. The 
introduction of Internet and the rapid changes of Information and Communication 
Technologies (ICT) caused yet another fundamental transformation of surveying. 
Nowadays the computers are used only for a very little percentage for computing. 
They are totally integrated into our workflow, serving us within data 
acquisition, database developments, data processing, data analysis and 
visualization. Through the computer networks our profession serves the 
e-Society. In the last fifty years computers have changed the work of surveyors totally. 
As usual the way of thinking is always a little bit behind the possibilities. 
The aim of this publication is to summarize the results of FIG Commission 2 on 
the field of computer uses in surveying education, to help academy and surveying 
industry to more quickly make the transformation from traditional teaching and 
learning to e-learning. This publication aims to support FIG community with basic knowledge on 
e-learning and declares the FIG policy in this field. The content is a summary 
of lessons learned in e-learning during the last FIG events, basically at the 
workshop in Enschede, June 2008. We would like to thank for all the contributors 
of this publication, but pre-eminently Prof. Steven Frank, Dr. 
Reinfried Mansberger, Dr. Adrijana Car, Dr. James Petch and
Nicholas Frunzi. January 2010 
	
		| Stig Enemark FIG President
 | Bela Markus Chair, FIG Commission 2
 | Liza Groenendijk Chair, FIG Working Group 2.2
 |  
 Developments in ICT had a huge effect on the surveying profession (Markus, 
2008). New technologies and new opportunities have enabled surveyors to broaden 
their skills and competencies. The number of competencies in which surveyors 
might claim to be proficient now number over 200 (Mahoney et al, 2007). The 
rapid changes in the profession have created a growing need for continuous 
changes in education and an increasing demand for continuing professional 
development (Markus, 2008). 
	 ICT and the impact on the surveying profession and professional education.
 Enemark (2007) summarizes the major key international trends in the surveying 
education as follows: 
	management skills, versus specialist skillsproject organized education, versus subject based educationvirtual academy, versus classroom lecture courseslifelong learning, versus vocational training. Fairly (2009), advocating a clear, concise surveying profile for the future, 
distinguished two major changes taking place across Australia and the EU: 
internationalization and interoperability. Surveyors of today work in an 
increasingly global market and the profession has grown rapidly beyond cadastral 
surveying, with increasing application of surveying and mapping technologies in 
other sectors. Lifelong learning has become a buzz-word and a well established concept for 
continuous professional development of staff engaged in surveying institutions 
and other land professionals (Osskó, 2008). E-learning methods and tools have 
been introduced and are now playing an increasing role in professional 
education. E-learning is one of the main themes in FIG Commission 2 – Professional 
Education (Markus, 2008). Several FIG events in the past years were dedicated to 
e-learning or related topics such as curriculum design, knowledge management, 
and management of education. This technical report summarizes the outcomes of 
the Commission’s workshops, symposia and working groups. The report aims to 
bring together the experiences and viewpoints within FIG on the role of 
e-learning in surveying education. The intention of the report is to support FIG 
members and their affiliates and the surveying public in general in their 
efforts to further develop e-learning initiatives within their organisations. The steps for taking a data model through its conceptual, logical, and 
physical phases, including modelling the user’s view, defining objects and 
relationships, selecting geo-graphic representations, matching geo-database 
elements, and organizing the geodatabase structure are used as guidelines for 
building the structure of this publication.  The report will start in chapter 1 with a general explanation of the concept 
of e-learning; this is followed by a more in-depth description on the nature of 
e-learning in chapter 2. In chapter 3, e-learning technology and infrastructure, 
the more practical aspects of e-learning are covered, with in chapter 4 a 
discussion on effective e-learning. Chapter 5 is dedicated to role of e-learning 
in surveying and in chapter 6 the FIG policy on e-learning is presented. Many 
issues presented in these chapters come back in the two examples of best 
practices in e-learning in surveying at the end of the publication: Case of Best 
Practice 1, UNIGIS, and Case of Best Practice 2, ESRI. 
	 FIG President Stig Enemark delivering his opening speech from a distance by 
	using Video Conferencing (FIG Workshop Sharing Good Practices, Enschede, the 
	Netherlands, June 2008). In the front Liza Groenendijk, editor of this 
	publication. © ITC.
 
 1. The concept of e-learning1.1 E-learning definedMarkus (2008) defines e-learning as follows: “– – e-learning is a learning 
process created by interaction with digitally delivered content, network-based 
services and tutoring support. This definition focuses on the revolutionary 
impact of network-enabled technology. Adding more details on methodology: 
e-learning is any technologically mediated learning using computers whether from 
a distance or in face to face classroom setting (computer assisted learning), it 
is a shift from traditional education or training to ICT-based personalized, 
flexible, individual, self-organized, collaborative learning based on a 
community of learners, teachers, facilitators, experts – –.” Central in this definition are two aspects of e-learning: 
	e-learning as computer assisted learning, ande-learning as pedagogy for student-centred and collaborative learning. These aspects in fact summarise the development of e-learning in time. Early 
developments in e-learning focussed on computer assisted learning, where part or 
all of the learning content is delivered digitally. More recently the 
pedagogical dimension of e-learning has become prominent. 1.2 Policy considerationsE-learning has become popular because of its potential for providing more 
flexible access to content and instruction at any time, from any place (Means et 
al, 2009). Frequently, the focus entails: 
	increasing the availability of learning experiences for learners who 
	cannot or choose not to attend traditional face-to-face offerings,assembling and disseminating instructional content more 
	cost-efficiently, orenabling instructors to handle more students while maintaining learning 
	outcome quality that is equivalent to that of comparable face-to-face 
	instruction. If student outcomes are the same whether a course is taken online or 
face-to-face, then online instruction can be used cost-effectively in settings 
where too few students are situated in a particular geographic locale to warrant 
an on-site instructor (e.g., rural students, students in specialized courses). 1.3 Continuing professional developmentThe potential role of e-learning in Continuing Professional Development was 
already mentioned in the FIG Policy Statement on CPD published in 1996. And the 
experiences within Commission 2 has shown that this was not just a nice policy 
idea at that time, but that e-learning has proven to fit perfectly with the 
concepts of life-long-learning or continuing development. It has proven to be a 
flexible mode of learning for professionals. Due to the high flexibility in 
time-, site- and learning aspects, e-learning is a proper tool and an essential 
driving force for the realisation of life-long learning.  
 © Ballatore
 
 © Verplanke
 E-learning in surveying: anywhere, any time and any one. Student Working on an 
assignment for his distance course at 300 km/hr in a bullet train in Japan (top) 
and students in Ghana participating in an online course with local facilitation 
(bottom).
 1.4 Knowledge managementIn the dynamically changing world of business, the competitiveness of 
companies (and/ or universities) depends heavily on the possibility to find, for 
a given problem, the right knowledge in the right moment. By using a Knowledge 
Management System (KMS), organisations increase returns, save time and money, 
are more adaptable, and have a far better understanding of partners, processes, 
customers, competitors and their business. To benefit from every customer or 
partner interaction, corporations must give employees the opportunities to 
record what was learned. Efficient knowledge management needs not only document 
knowledge but must provide tools for collaboration among all contributors to the 
knowledge pool. Then, other employees must have access to the data and the means 
to understand it in context. Knowledge management helps an organisation gain 
insight and understanding from its own experiences. When employees use KMS, best 
practices are stored throughout the organization, and each employee accessing 
the system has similar power to the best employee (Markus, 2002). 1.5 Learning at workplaceDaily tasks are evolving faster than universities can produce qualified 
graduates. Many employers apply constant, on-the-job training to remain 
competitive. E-learning programs help staff members to obtain new skills and 
critical improvements quickly and efficiently. Companies integrate e-learning into the mainstream. They can easily 
amalgamate learning modules into staff communications, and can add similar tools 
to web-based systems. E-learning opens the world. Likewise, small businesses can access the same 
level of knowledge and insight that was earlier only available to large 
companies. Mobile technology helps e-learning initiatives. Wireless technology allows 
educators to reach learners in their working environment. The ESRI Case (see the appendix) gives an excellent insight in the role and 
development of e-learning to support workplace learning. 1.6 Organizational learningOrganizational Learning (OL) is a powerful tool to improve the performance of 
an organization. In general there are two different processes of organizational 
change that are associated with organisational learning: 
	adaptive learning, where changes are made in reaction to changed 
	conditions andpro-active learning, i.e. organizational changes that have been made on 
	a more intentional basis. Adaptive learning is seen as a process of incremental changes, more automatic 
and less cognitively induced than proactive learning. Proactive learning which 
goes beyond the simple reacting to environmental changes. 
 2. The nature of e-learning2.1 Trend from technology to pedagogyEarly developments in e-learning focussed on computer assisted learning, 
where part or all of the learning content is delivered digitally. These type of 
e-learning activities can be classified according to its objective – whether the 
activity serves as a replacement for face-to-face instruction (e.g., a virtual 
course) or as an enhancement of the face-to-face learning experience (i.e., 
online learning activities that are part of a course given face-to-face) (US 
Department of Education, 2009; Verkroost, 2009). More recently the pedagogical dimension of e-learning has become prominent. 
Learning experiences can be classified in terms of the amount of control that 
the student has over the content and nature of the learning activity. In 
traditional or expository learning experiences, content is transmitted to the 
student by a lecture, written material, or other mechanisms. Such conventional 
instruction is often contrasted with active learning in which the student has 
control of what and how he or she learns. Another category of learning 
experiences stresses collaborative or interactive learning activity in which the 
nature of the learning content is emergent as learners interact with one another 
and with a teacher or other knowledge sources. Typically, in expository instruction, the technology delivers the content. In 
active learning, the technology allows students to control digital artefacts to 
explore information or address problems. In interactive learning or 
collaborative learning, technology mediates human interaction either 
synchronously or asynchronously; learning emerges through interactions with 
other students and the technology (US Department of Education, 2009). Both 
active and interactive learning approaches are student-centred and make use of 
online learning models supported by Web 2.0 technologies. Blended learning 
combines e-learning with face-to-face learning and other learning mechanisms. It 
can include the use of audio, video, documents, software, and "hands-on” 
experiences.  Blended learning recognizes that some learning experiences are not 
appropriate to e-learning and need be taught in other fashion. For example, 
learning how to measure angles with a theodolite is greatly enhanced by 
physically operating the theodolite in practice – setting the instrument 
precisely over a point and precisely pointing the instrument at various objects 
to be measured. (Lam 2008). 2.2 ReusabilityOne of the great advantages of digital medium is the ease of storage and 
reusability of teaching materials or “learning objects.” Keeping learning 
objects on file is done with a push of a button. Upgrading and redeveloping 
materials is simple and easy. To be reusable, e-learning objects should be 
easily disassembled and reassembled. Users should be able to easily mix 
materials from multiple sources without dependence on proprietary systems 
(Hodgins and Conner 2000). Chiappe (2007) defined Learning Objects as: “A digital self-contained and 
reusable entity, with a clear educational purpose, with at least three internal 
and editable components: content, learning activities and elements of context. 
The learning objects must have an external structure of information to 
facilitate their identification, storage and retrieval: the metadata. “ Beck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_object) 
suggests that learning objects have the following key characteristics: 
	Learning objects are a new way of thinking about learning content. 
	Traditionally, content comes in a several hour chunk. Learning objects are 
	much smaller units of learning, typically ranging from 2 minutes to 15 
	minutes.Are self-contained – each learning object can be taken independently.Are reusable – a single learning object may be used in multiple contexts 
	for multiple purposes.Can be aggregated – learning objects can be grouped into larger 
	collections of content, including traditional course structures.Are tagged with metadata – every learning object has descriptive 
	information allowing it to be easily found by a search. There is general trend from long to short in building learning objects. Nano 
learning (n-learning) is the latest term in the natural progression: from 
learning, distance learning (d-learning), flexible learning (f-learning), 
electronic learning (e-learning), blended learning (b-learning), and the recent 
addition, (mobile) m-learning. 2.3 MetadataMetadata is data about data and the time of production. It describes the 
content of data, the data producer, and the purpose(s) for which the data was 
produced. Typical
        
    e-learning metadata allows the potential user (instructor or student) to 
assess the quality and suitability of e-learning materials. Metadata would 
describe the creator, the intended purpose or possible uses of the material, the 
date the material was created and other relevant factors. The purpose of 
metadata is to allow potential users to quickly and easily find and evaluate 
e-learning objects. Metadata can be used to improve the search process, to build user-specific, 
guided paths, and to maintain relationships among disparate educational 
resources. Several metadata projects are under development to target and 
standardize the instructional qualities that are most useful in describing 
educational resources. The efforts of these projects will provide a metadata 
foundation that can be leveraged by future instructional applications. It is 
obvious that the continued success of the Internet is contingent upon automated 
tools that efficiently guide the information gatherer toward relevant and 
appropriate material (Markus, 2000). 2.4 Learning Content Management SystemThe knowledge base for surveying is vast and not completely defined. The 
materials used to form an e-learning experience come from a wide variety of 
sources. In some cases, they are merely text copied from published textbooks 
and/or manuals. In other cases they may be presentations such as PowerPoint 
slides or handouts, live or recorded digital audio, or live or recorded digital 
video. The knowledge base can be in modular or course form with modular form 
(e.g. learning objects) being the recommended format. The knowledge can be built 
by the instructor, borrowed from a virtual library, or purchased from a vendor. 
In a Learning Content Management System all the materials can be organised and 
easily accessed. 2.5 Web 2.0In the past few years a new wave of internet technology, Web 2.0, has emerged 
with the potential to further enhance teaching and learning environment in 
higher education (Ajjan & Hartshorne, 2008). With the use of Web 2.0 students no 
longer access the web only for course information and content; they can do much 
more. Students access the web, collect different pieces of information and 
create new information that could be shared with others. Web 2.0 applications 
replace the traditional passive modes of content delivery, such as posting 
lecture notes and videos, with the knowledge generated by the group. Examples of 
Web 2.0 technologies include wikis, blogs, instant messaging, internet 
telephony, social networking sites, podcasting and online media sharing 
(Groenendijk, 2009).  Blogs (abbreviated from weblogs) are web-based publications consisting 
primarily of periodic articles (normally in reverse chronological order) 
containing text, images and links to web content, such as websites or other 
blogs. Blogs have a variety of formats and might include the user expressing 
their opinion about a topic or documenting activities. Blogs are often used as 
online diaries. Blogs are interactive in the sense that other users could 
provide comments on the information posted by the blog author. Educational 
applications of blogs include researching, tracking, interpreting, and 
evaluating blogs for political commentary, cultural events, business, or other 
news and for examining changes over time. Blogging is now being used as a tool 
for students to keep records of their learning. They also allow feedback from 
instructors and other students. Blogs can be used by single students or by 
groups of students to share ideas, progress on projects, or to pose questions 
(Ajjan & Hartshorne, 2008; Kottyan, 2008). Wikis (What I Know Is) refer to collaborative 
websites that allow users to interact by adding, removing, or editing site 
content. The most well-known wiki implementation is Wikipedia (http://wikipedia.org/). 
A wiki is a type of website that allows anyone visiting the site to add, to 
remove, or otherwise to edit all content, very quickly and easily, sometimes 
without the need for registration. This ease of interaction and operation makes 
a wiki an effective tool for collaborative learning and collaborative writing. 
Wiki is popular software that can be used for student collaboration on projects. 
Wiki allows multiple users to work on the same document(s) from several 
locations, offering a platform for online group work with students from all over 
the world in distance education courses (Molendijk, 2008). Wiki’s allow students 
to work on documents or presentation media collectively, with a history of 
changes always available (Cepek and Pytel, 2006). Instant messaging (IM) is a collection of technologies that create the 
possibility of realtime text-based communication between two or more 
participants over the internet or some form of internal network/intranet. – Chat 
happens in real-time. IM allows effective and efficient communication, featuring 
immediate receipt of acknowledgment or reply. In certain cases Instant Messaging 
might involves additional features, which make it even more popular, i.e. to see 
the other party, e.g. webcams, or to talk directly for free over the internet 
(Yahoo! Messenger, Windows Life Messenger, Skype). Social networks allow users to create personal profiles and establish a 
variety of networks that connect him/her with family, friends, and other 
colleagues. Users of Hyves, Facebook, or LinkIn, for example, utilize these 
sites to stay in touch with friends, make plans, and find new friends, to find 
old schoolmates or to maintain and extend their professional network. A recent 
newcomer in social networking is Twitter: a free social networking and 
micro-blogging service that enables its users to send and read messages known as 
tweets (http://wikipedia.org/, accessed 
31.08.09). Podcasting and webcasting, created either by instructors or by students, are 
another new phase in e-learning. While the term comes from a blend of the terms 
iPod and broadcasting any computer capable of viewing multi-media electronic 
files are used as the instruction medium. Students can produce presentations 
that can be shared with other students. Students download the podcasts, which 
can be either audio or video or both, to view inside or outside the classroom 
(Frank, 2009). Podcasts are developed by lecturers for guiding students during 
practical work in the field. Media sharing websites such as YouTube allow students to find informative 
videos or to create short videos films that can be shared with the world. 
Teachers use YouTube to publish educational videos or refer to videos with 
interesting content, demonstrations or complete courses1. 
Online applications, such as Google Earth and other Virtual Globes, offer 
excellent opportunities for e-learning in surveying and geospatial information 
education (Groenendijk, 2009). 1) Follow the next links 
for the recordings of the opening speech by video conference by FIG President 
Stig Enemark at the FIG Workshop in Enschede, the Netherlands, June 2008:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDqXKgSktXY and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYEU-SJbyiw&feature=related  2.6 StandardsA learning object could be a text file, a videotaped lecture or a computer 
exercise. The Learning Object Standard addresses the accessibility, reusability 
and interoperability of learning objects. Accessibility refers to the use of 
metadata so that learning objects can be identified and evaluated. Reusability 
allows a learning object to be used in different instructional contexts. Interoperability requires that the learning object be independent of both the 
delivery system and the knowledge management system (Polsani, 2003). The premise 
is that educational components could be built that would be reusable in many 
contexts. Users would be able to combine learning objects to create a new 
educational experience such as a course, seminar, etc. (Wiley, 2000). The Sharable Content Object Reference Model (SCORM) defines, packages and 
manages learning objects. Sharable Content Objects are another term for 
e-learning objects. The standards addresses how these objects can be created to 
be reusable across a variety of learning systems. Included in the standards are 
methods of packaging data for multiple uses, compressing (zipping) data for 
transfer, and sequencing data for student acquisition (SCORM, 2004). 
 3. E -learning technology and infrastructureAs mentioned in earlier chapters, the basis of e-learning is digital 
technology – computers and computer networks. The Internet allows one to reach 
out across town or across continents to deliver e-learning courses. Broadband 
computer networks allow vast quantities of data to be moved quickly and 
efficiently from computer to computer. Advances in computer software and 
hardware allow new and innovative approaches to teaching and learning. This can 
present problems as some parts of the globe do not have broadband Internet 
access and/or do not have dependable sources of electricity to run their 
computers (Olaniyi, 2006). 3.1 InternetWhen discussing e-learning technology, the Internet easily comes to mind. 
There is a trend among the Internet community to redesign the whole Internet 
system be one gigantic e-learning system. In most cases, the Internet offers the 
most efficient and cost effective method of conducting e-learning. Beyond having 
the ability to interconnect computers is the need to have the interconnection in 
such a way that e-learning can be effectively and efficiently managed. This 
happens in some part through the standardsdiscussed in Chapter 2 and in other parts by use of vendor or open platform 
software specifically developed for e-learning purposes. Special software for 
organizing e-learning (called platforms) can be used to manage e-learning.
 E-learning is, for the most part, dependent on the Internet. Broadband 
Internet access is necessary to use most e-learning objects other than text 
documents. This can still be a problem in some parts of the world. E-learning is 
made simpler by the use of Learning Management Systems (LMS) which can create 
portals on the Internet through which students can easily find and access 
learning objects. These systems, often called e-learning platforms, are placed 
at the portals to allow instructors and administrators to organize and deliver 
educational courses. 3.2 Learning management systemsE-learning platforms are software that organize and automate many of the 
activities associated with e-learning. These platforms can be organized in a 
variety of ways. E-learning platforms offer users a structure that can be easily 
adapted to multiple uses from augmentation of “brick and mortar” education to 
stand-alone training exercises. They allow easy organization of e-learning 
materials with relatively easy user interaction (Milenov and Kay, 2008). 
Students may use them to work on group projects, take online quizzes and 
examinations, and turn in assignments (Markus, 2006). They can allow students to 
register for classes, pay for classes, and take classes all online. They can 
allow educators to present learning materials, monitor student activity and 
assess student learning (Australian Flexible Learning Community 2002). The 
platforms are commercially available (like WebCT, Blackboard) or Open Source 
(Moodle, etc.). Initially learning management systems were dominated by content, but over the 
last four to five years Web 2.0 features were added to facilitate communication 
and collaborative learning. Internet discussion boards and forums, chats, wikis 
and blogs are common collaborative learning tools integrated in the learning 
management systems. Discussion boards can be used both formally and informally in e-learning. 
Students are able to discuss their understanding of topics with other students 
and with instructors outside of the virtual classroom. An example of the use of Web 2.0 tools in distance education is Virtual GEO, 
an educational portal of the University of West Hungary. The portal is based on 
the open Learning Management System Moodle and makes use of blogs and wikis 
(Kottyan, 2006, Kottyan, 2008). The Institute of Surveying, Remote sensing and 
Land Information at the University of Natural resources and Applied Life 
Sciences, Vienna, also make use of Moodle. An evaluation their e-learning 
experiences with communication tools in Moodle is presented by Mansberger et all 
(2008). Skype, and different kinds of messengers, allows audio/visual group 
communication. Similar to a conference call with telephones, Skype conference 
calls allow cheap, realtime communication. A simple webcam can be added at the 
instructor’s computer to give visual capabilities so that students can see 
demonstrations and lecture. Additional cameras at students’ computers allow 
face-to-face interchange between the instructor and students (Todorovski 2008; 
Wahlstrom 2008). 3.3 (Multi-media) software for course 
developmentThere are literally thousands of software applications available for building 
and managing e-learning courses. Most of the conventional software applications 
used for learning and business, such as word processors, slide presentation 
software, video software and others can and have been adapted to create material 
for e-learning courses. A plethora of new software applications aimed directly 
at creating e-learning courses and materials have also emerged. Companies like 
Adobe, Articulate, imc AG, Lectora, RapideL and SoftChalk, to name a few, make 
software specifically aimed at developing e-learning applications. Most of the 
software appear to support the standards discussed in chapter 2.6. The trend is towards open source and web-based learning. Online applications, 
such as Google Earth, that focus on geospatial information, are being designed 
for e-learning and are being incorporated into e-learning exercises. 
 Personal homepages of online students available to all in the Learning 
Management System. © Boerboom
 3.4 Virtual librariesRepositories of digital information (virtual libraries) can be accessed to 
assist e-learning. Originally developed by converting brick and mortar library 
records to electronic form, they have expanded to include a vast array of 
digital information and data. Specialized virtual libraries contain electronic 
records specific to one or more related topics. FIG maintains a virtual library 
of papers presented at FIG workshops, annual working weeks and conferences. Virtual libraries are indexed databases of electronic educational materials. 
They are places where instructors, researchers and students go to find 
electronic publications on research, theory, history and other important aspects 
of a particular theme. In cases where the learning material is not in electronic 
form users may search and order or reserve copies of the materials. Most 
academic and national libraries have developed virtual capabilities where 
electronic copies library resources may be downloaded. Virtual libraries can 
contain digital copies of textbooks, audio, video, software, datasets and other 
resources that can be quickly accessed by people all over the world. Language 
will always be a barrier to some but virtual libraries are being developed in 
most of the World’s major languages. In addition to traditional libraries being put online in electronic format, 
new virtual libraries are being developed as repositories of learning and other 
materials. In the United States, as in many other countries, a national 
geospatial data clearing house has been established with links to various local, 
state and national geospatial data including survey, mapping, and GIS data. The 
sites are maintained primarily by government agencies and provide a wealth of 
geospatial information. These materials are being incorporated into many 
e-learning courses. Other new virtual libraries are being developed that are repositories of 
e-learning materials. Structure on the IEEE Learning Object model, they allow 
access to learning objects and learning object metadata. These libraries consist 
of e-learning objects that can be accessed and reassembled to modify existing 
courses or to develop new courses.  Access to virtual libraries may be free to all, free to subscribers or at 
some cost to subscribers. Subscribers may pay either a set periodic access fee 
or pay individually for each item they download. Good practices require that 
virtual libraries contain metadata of the learning materials available so that 
students and instructors can evaluate the usefulness of those materials for a 
particular need. The accessing the data need to know not only the content of the 
information and/or data but also any special data formatting or other 
characteristics that will allow them to evaluate whether they have the necessary 
software to take full advantage of the information and data. The role of the virtual library can not be underestimated in e-learning in 
academic settings. Students can access the virtual library where and whenever 
they like; this is an advantage in traditional, blended and complete online 
courses. In particular e-learning courses focussing on participants from 
developing countries, access to online library resources is of vital importance 
and contributes highly to the success of these courses. 3.5 E-learning infrastructureThe learning infrastructure encompasses the culture, processes, tools and 
other essences of learning. It is about creating learning environments that can 
develop tools and processes to improve teaching, lower costs, and provide 
greater access to learning. To fully realize the potential for e-learning, 
students, educators and administrators must re-think the concepts of education. 
Students must become more self-reliant and self-motivated. Educators and 
administrators must become more innovative and flexible.  As the Internet easily reaches across international boundaries, so does 
e-learning. E-learning has the ability to build capacity for developing nations 
with agreements with institutions in developed countries. Students in developing 
countries will be able to receive at least a part of their education while 
working or going to school within their home country.  Alliances formed among e-learning software developers have the advantage of 
extending software use within the learning community. Few developers or vendors 
can offer more than a few of the components needed to build a complex e-learning 
platform. Alliances allow vendors and developers to incorporate more and more 
capabilities into these systems (Barron, 2002). 3.6 End-to-end model for e-learningThe end-to-end principle states that operations should occur at the end 
points of a system or as close to the end points as possible. In e-learning this 
concept would apply when knowledge is transferred from the instructor to the 
student. The standards discussed in Chapter 2 along with the learning platforms 
describe earlier in this chapter provide that end-to-end model. Students can 
access learning objects through a software platform that is located at a server 
site at the host university, agency or company. The nature of the end-to-end 
model for e-learning is such that the instructor and student are seeing the same 
material, organization of material and sequencing of material regardless of the 
distance between the two or the computers that they are using.  To achieve and end-to-end business process, e-learning must be scalable, 
adaptable, agile and must establish a brand. A service-oriented, business driven 
approach is needed. The focus should be on user needs. Educational organizations 
must learn to build ever more complex and flexible applications and products 
over time. (Petch, 2006). 
 4. Effective e-learningTo be successful, e-learning must be easily accessible and cost effective. 
New technology has been and is continuing to be developed that allow us to more 
easily structure and share e-learning. Beyond technology and learning materials, 
social and economic structures must be built and maintained that support 
e-learning. Investment in technology alone does not guarantee success (Bjorke, 
2008). Learning institutions must rethink how learning is best provided to meet 
the legitimate needs of students and potential students. 4.1 Networking, organizational issuesThe requirements for e-learning differ quite a lot from traditional training 
courses: the technology (computers, software), staff equipped to develop and 
facilitate the e-learning courses or learning objects, technical and secretarial 
staff to support the smooth development and implementation of online courses or 
blended courses. Development of new courseware for online training programmes is 
more time consuming than giving a series of lectures and practical sessions, and 
involves advanced expertise, both technical and pedagogical.  The technical requirements for e-learning, is another aspect that might lead 
to frustrations if not taken care of properly. Issues like bandwidth, proper 
software, internet access, technical support in case of troubles, need to be in 
place. 
	 A teacher communicating with his distance students in the Virtual Classroom.
 Communication with secretariat and lecturing staff has to be well organised. 
It is an important aspect to create and maintain a good relation and stay 
motivated for the course. Students in online courses depend completely on the 
online communication. Instructors and teaching staff must be up to date and aware of the 
technologies used in e-learning. They will often find that students are ahead of 
them in technological awareness and can learn from both formalized training and 
interaction with students. The preparation of e-learning materials is time 
consuming but can be rewarding with quality materials being produced and 
motivated students getting involved. The interaction among students and between 
students and faculty lead to continued faculty learning and awareness about 
e-learning. As with most successful undertakings, there must be an institutional “buy in” 
to e-learning, whether it is produced by academia, government or private 
business. There must be a commitment to invest in the technology – computers, 
Internet, etc. – needed to make e-learning effective and successful. 4.2 Business modelsHoppe and Breitner (2003) define three types of business models for 
e-learning. The “market” model defines the players and the market structure. The 
“activity” model focuses on the activities of a business. The “asset” model 
looks at costs and revenue.  Market based e-learning is based on supply and demand. Used by educational 
institutions, it uses e-learning integrated into traditional course offerings as 
well as for continuous learning for professional qualification. However, 
e-learning is used in business as much or more as in academia. With this model 
the student typically pays for education, or it is provided through the state, 
through the normal fee structures of learning.  Activity based e-learning is related to customer needs. The learning is often 
based upon one or more specific business products, usually software. The 
learning may be provided directly from the business or through a service 
provider. Depending on the complexity of the material, the demand for the 
training and the willingness of students to pay for the learning, students may 
or may not pay for the education. ESRI e-learning fits this model. Asset based e-learning is used by academic institutions and by private 
businesses. Again, academic institutions may have all or a part of the costs of 
providing the education subsidized by the state. Students pay directly for the 
e-learning content independent of other educational costs. Academic institutions 
may themselves be the users of the content, either for in-house use or to pass 
on to students. Payment may be by the course or by periodic membership fees. Business factors driving the business models are various. Along with 
traditional university degree programs, there are continuing education demands 
that are being met through e-learning. Learning organizations, including 
universities, are offering nondegree certifications on topic areas that enhance 
employment qualifications. They provide coursework required by regulations on 
continuing professional development. And they provide ongoing training on new 
equipment and software (Barron, 2002). Business models for academic programs can vary widely. An e-learning 
consortium model is used by several universities in Europe. Each university 
contributes one or more e-learning courses to a pool of courses. For each course 
contributed, the university gains access to a certain number of courses from 
other universities. Each e-learning course is developed from existing courses at 
the university. The university delivers the full course to other universities 
including instructor time (Blok, 2008; Markus, 2006). 4.3 BenefitsPerhaps the greatest benefit of e-learning is shown in the recent U.S. 
Department of Education publication „Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in 
Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies” (Means 
et al, 2009). This study looked at various empirical studies done on e-learning 
between 1996 and 2008 and concluded that students using e-learning performed 
better than students who did not use e-learning. The students who performed best 
were those who received blended learning. The studies were primarily performed 
in higher learning environments such as professional education. Other benefits fall into academic, economic, and social realms. Academic 
benefits include increased access to knowledge through online resources, ease of 
revision of course materials, ability of students to connect with experts around 
the world, a more active role for learners in setting the pace of their 
learning, more flexibility for both instructors and students, and scalability of 
courses from small to large numbers of students simultaneously (Lam 2008, 
Mansberger et al, 2006, 2008; Markus, 2006). Economic benefits can include the ability to expand student enrolment, 
reduction of student travel, ease of revision of course materials and reduction 
of teaching facilities (Mansberger et al, 2006; Olaniyi, 2006). Social benefits are mixed. While it can be more difficult to motivate 
students when using e-learning (Bjorke, 2008), students who can self-motivate 
have a more direct control over their individual learning (Olaniyi, 2006). 
 5. Role of e-learning in surveying5.1 Awareness buildingWithin the last decades the introduction of computers has changed rapidly the 
society, science and technology around the surveying profession (Markus, 2008). 
Changes took place in the field of data collection, data storage, data 
processing and visualisation. New technologies appeared, which – 20 years ago – 
were not known by most of the surveyors and other professionals involved in 
spatial data capture, like GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite Systems), GIS 
(Geographic Information Systems), Laser Scanning, Digital Photogrammetry or Web 
Technologies. These new technologies require additional technical knowledge. 
 Table 1: Technological trends and changes in surveying and education due 
to introduction of computers.
 In a global perspective the role of surveyors is also shifting: Enemark 
(2009) entitles the change as the big swing “From Measurement to Management” in 
the sense that surveyors have extended their technical knowledge by social, 
legal, economic and environmental understanding. The new professional fields require a change in the professional education 
and training. A new kind of knowledge is needed. Enterprises and professional 
institutions expect Employability from the alumni of academic studies: 
that means subject specific basic knowledge, professional technical and 
methodological competence as well as generic competences and skills, like the 
ability to communicate, the capacity for teamwork, the learning aptitude and the 
capability for analysis.  Besides the new requirements from a professional point of view the academic 
surveying education nowadays is affected by additional determining factors: 
Globalisation, demographic development, and new public management: 
Table 1: Technological trends and changes in surveying and education due to 
introduction of computers. 
	Globalisation will force academic institutions to cooperate, to 
	exchange staff members and students, but also to sharpen their individual 
	profiles to prove in the national and international competition.In the next 40 years worldwide the population will increase 
	approximately by 30 percent. But the detailed figures show a sharp contrast 
	in the democratic development between countries. In some regions 
	(especially in Europe) the population is decreasing (UN, 2008). Both 
	developments are a challenge for educational aspects.Within the last years at many (especially European) universities new 
	public management was implemented. The benefit of an increased 
	flexibility of financial resources and of the self-reliance in human 
	resource management is accompanied by additional administrative duties and 
	tasks for staff members (Mansberger et al., 2006). Educational institutions in general and academic surveying organisations in 
particular have to meet the outlined changes, frame conditions new challenges. A 
paradigm shift in academic education is required:  
	From teaching to learning:Education has to focus on students, to learning processes and to learning 
	outcomes. Traditional, subject-orientated teaching has to be substituted by 
	individual project-orientated and self-organised learning. Teachers have to 
	change their role from presenters and instructors to facilitators, mentors, 
	tutors, coaches, and consulters (Wildt, 2008).
From timed and on-site lectures to time and site independent 
	education:Modern educational methods enable self-paced and self-directed learning with 
	a high flexibility on time and site. So learning materials and most of the 
	support has to be available 24 hours / 7 days (Markus, 2006).
From self-contained studies to life-long-learning:The increase of worldwide knowledge is estimated to be doubled within four 
	years. Therefore the existing concept of self-contained study courses has to 
	be replaced by the concept of continuing professional development.
 E-learning is a proper facilitator to manage this paradigm shift in academic 
education as shown in a (modified) list of the most important features of 
e-learning outlined by Markus (2006): 
	E-learning services designed using learner-centred approaches.E-learning gives learners a chance to speed up or slow down as needed.E-learning can happen when needed. It enables a high flexibility on time 
	and site for teachers and students.E-learning does not require physical presence.E-learning promotes greater student interaction and advances 
	collaboration.E-learning uses interactive technology to develop fun, engaging, 
	effective simulations.E-learning opens global opportunities. But nevertheless all proponents of this modern teaching and learning 
technologies have to be aware that 
	E-learning is just a tool and Learning is the objective. Powerpoints and 
	scripts to download on the internet are not e-learning. Pedagogy must take 
	the lead, while technology responds to the pedagogical training (Bjørke, 
	2008).E-learning does not save time for the teachers – but it improves the 
	knowledge transfer.Virtual communication cannot completely substitute personal 
	communication (Mansberger et al., 2008). The introduction of e-learning requires accompanying measures. Teachers have 
to acquire new competences: Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) as 
well as e-pedagogy are needed ingredients for operating e-learning. In this 
point surveyors are favoured as they are very familiar and skilled in working 
with ICT. Institutions dealing with surveying education also have to redesign the 
curricula: Subjects, contents and learning methods have to be adapted to 
e-learning to meet the demands of employability.  And finally, high priority must be given to the introduction of a quality 
assurance system to guarantee the high level of academic surveying education. 
The urgency of this requirement is enhanced by the increased time-independency 
as well as site-independency of students and lecturers due to international 
mobility programs and the availability of new electronic teaching tools 
(Mansberger et al., 2006). 5.2 Platform for collaborationIn the early days of e-learning discussions were dominated by content. The 
content still remains a constant factor in e-learning, but with the introduction 
of Web 2.0 technologies to the higher education the focus shifted towards online 
communication and collaboration (O’Reilly, 2006).  The modern forms of ICT – also called social software – are appropriate 
facilitators for implementing the metamorphosis from “teaching” to “learning”. 
Communication tools in e-learning are platforms for collaboration for all actors 
involved in professional educational (e.g. teachers, learners, experts, 
facilitators, mentors, supervisors, coaches) and they enable mutual learning in 
different appearances: 
	between peers or between persons with different educational statusbetween practice and academicbidirectional or in groupssynchronous or asynchronouscross-functional or cross-sectionalin a local or global levelformal or informal. 5.3 Sharing good practiceWorkshops and conferences organised by FIG Commission 2 (Professions 
Education) have identified a large evidence of e-learning projects and a high 
level of acquired experience within the academic surveying community. The topics 
for Lessons Learnt in the field of e-learning are manifold and cover 
educational, didactical, pedagogical issues, but also technical and economical 
aspects. Experiences of experts in surveying education with e-learning and 
developments of practical e-learning materials are published in the proceedings 
of above mentioned conferences (FIG, 2006; FIG, 2007; FIG, 2008; FIG, 2009). It is the order of the day to share this knowledge within the professional 
community to enable an improvement of academic surveying education on a global 
level. Demandorientated education outlined by modern and up-to-date learning 
technologies is the best promotion for the surveying profession and a conditio 
sine qua non for the recruitment of students. 
 Table 2: Overview of major online distance programs offered in the field 
of surveying, geo-information science and remote sensing.
 5.4 Creating a learning communityE-learning is an important driving force for the implementation of up-to-date 
learning activities. Technology-enhanced learning also opens global classrooms: 
e-learning is a catalyser for collaboration across national and international 
boundaries as well as a facilitator for worldwide networks of academic learning 
communities. These networks facilitate the development of high quality courses 
and study programmes ensuring currency, relevance and a broad curriculum 
catalogue (Bjørke, 2008). Working together, sharing of experiences and resources, is considered of 
great importance for the success and further development of e-learning in the 
field of surveying, geo-information science and land administration 
(Groenendijk, 2008). New national and international partnerships between 
academics and professionals have to be established with the objective to share 
knowledge in the development of staff, in the development of learning contents, 
in the development of pedagogic concepts, and in the development of business 
models. But all the activities and efforts of creating international learning 
communities have to take into consideration the regional requirements of 
learning outcomes, the cultural differences in learning style and content, and 
the language barriers. From a technical point of view the limiting factors of 
e-learning are the access to computers and the internet penetration within a 
region or a country. 5.5 The growing importance of 
life-long-learningThe current increase and improvement of technologies and methods and the new 
needs of employability in the field of surveying profession necessitates a 
continuous knowledge gain surveying experts. University graduation is no longer 
a ticket for professional career. Learning for life has to be shifted to 
life-long learning (Enemark, 2009) to meet the challenges of this accelerated 
change of requirements for profession. Additionally, the need for more flexible 
learning paths will keep growing in the future to react to the ever-faster 
changing needs of the labour markets, to the demographic developments and to the 
more mobile workforce (Bacher, 2009). Academic surveying institutions have to provide life-long-learning. 
University studies and traditional professional education have to be adapted, 
have to be extended by (part-time) training programmes and have to be integrated 
to a system of Continuous Professional Development (CPD). 
 6. FIG policy on e-learningIt is amongst the objectives of FIG Commission 2 (Professional Education)  
	to support academic institutions and industry with new methods of 
	knowledge management, helping surveyors continuously to update their 
	academic and professional profilesto promote content development experiences, facilitating international 
	researches in surveying education and training and to initiate joint 
	projects on this field (curriculum development, educational material 
	development, joint courses, quality assurance etc.)to strengthen knowledge transfer between FIG Commissions, inspiring 
	activities on knowledge networks andto improving dissemination of information on educational theory and 
	practice to the members across the world. FIG has recognised e-learning as a proper tool to realise the above outlined 
objectives. Therefore appropriate strategies were discussed within 
FIG-Commission 2 to promote the use of e-learning in the surveying community and 
to encourage academic, professional and governmental institutions to use this 
cutting edge learning technology. This can be achieved by the following 
activities: 
	FIG will stimulate e-learning by raising the awareness about the 
	paradigm shift in education from teaching to learning, by communicating 
	employability and life-long-learning as the new requirements for an 
	up-to-date academic professional education, and by incentivising teaching 
	staff (e.g. FIG award for e-learning).FIG will distribute information on the topic of e-learning to the 
	surveying community, e.g. by publishing conference papers, by this booklet 
	on e-learning, by compiling a reference book about e-learning or by a 
	register of “good practice”.FIG will bring experts together to share their knowledge on the 
	topic of e-learning. This can be done physically during conferences or 
	workshops or virtually in form of electronic discussion forums.FIG promotes e-learning networks starting with FIG Commission 2 
	as a seed. But FIG will also increase cooperation on the topic of e-learning 
	with other organisations in the field of geosciences, like ISPRS and ICA.FIG will encourage their members to develop and share e-learning 
	contents within surveying education. This can be achieved by the 
	establishment of a database with specific learning materials, such as 
	literature, scripts, interactive learning tools, test questions, etc; and 
	through development of a quality assessment guide for e-learning courses.FIG will influence and encourage governmental and administrative 
	bodies to support the introduction of e-learning and life-long-learning 
	as well as to provide the political frame conditions to enhance these 
	activities. 
 
	Ajjan, H. and R. Hartshorne (2008). Investigating faculty decisions to 
	adopt Web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. Internet and Higher 
	Education 11, 71–80.Australian Flexible Learning Community (2002). Retrieved June 5,2009, 
	from:
	
	http://community.flexiblelearning.net.au/TechnologiesforLearning/content/article_442.htm.Bacher, G. (2009). The European Higher Education Area: Goals Achieve & 
	Outlook towards 2010 and Beyond. FIG Workshop on Navigation the Future of 
	Surveying Education, Vienna, Austria.Barron, T. (2002). Evolving Business Models in eLearning. Summary white 
	paper: Learning on Demand. Retreived June 30, 2009, from
	
	http://www.sric-bi.com/LoD/summaries/EvolvBizModelsSum.pdf.Beck, R. J. (2007) What are learning objects? Retrieved December 25, 
	2009, from: 
	http://www4.uwm.edu/cie/learning_objects.cfm?gid=56.Bjorke, S. A. (2008). Challenges and training needs of E-supporters. 
	Sharing Good Practices: E-learning in Surveying, geo-information Sciences 
	and Land Administration. FIG International Workshop, Enschede, Netherlands, 
	11–13 June, 2008.Blok, C. A. (2008). Sharing e-courses in GI science with partners: 
	business model, experiences, and lessons learnt. Sharing Good Practices: 
	E-learning in Surveying, geoinformation Sciences and Land Administration. 
	FIG International Workshop, Enschede, Netherlands, 11–13 June, 2008.Cepek, A. and J. Pytel (2006). Collaborative Academy. FIG Workshop on 
	eGovernance, Knowledge Management and e-learning. Budapest, Hungary, 2006.Chiappe, A. et al., 2007: “Toward an instructional design model based on 
	learning objects”, in Educational Technology Research and Development, 
	Springer, Boston, pp. 671–681.Enemark, S. (2007). Promoting the interaction between education, 
	research and professional practice. Proceedings FIG Commission 2 – 
	Symposium, Scientia est Potentia – Knowledge is Power, 7–9 June 2007, Czech 
	Technical University, Prague, Czech Republic.Enemark, S., 2009: Surveying Education: Facing the Challenges of the 
	Future, FIG Workshop on Navigation the Future of Surveying Education, 
	Vienna, Austria.Fairlie, K. (2009). Navigating the global consciousness: a young 
	surveyor’s future. Proceedings FIG Working Week, Surveyors key role in 
	accelerated development, 3–8 May 2009, Eilat, Israel.FIG (1996). FIG Publication no. 15. CPD – Continuing Professional 
	Development and its future promotion within.FIG (2006) Workshop on eGovernance, Knowledge Management and e-learning; 
	Proceedings. Editor: Bela Markus. Published by College of Geoinformation. 
	University of Hungary. April 2006. Budapest. Hungary.FIG (2007). Scientia Est Potentia; Jubilee Proceedings. Editor: Aleš 
	Čepek. Published by the Czech Technical University in Prague. June 2007. 
	Prague. Czech Republic.FIG (2008). FIG International Workshop. Sharing Good Practices: 
	E-learning in Surveying, Geo-Information Sciences and Land Administration. 
	Proceedings. Editors: Liza Groenendijk, Christian Lemmen. Published by 
	International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation 
	(ITC). June 2008. Enschede, the Netherlands.FIG (2009). FIG Workshop on Navigation the Future of Surveying 
	Education. Proceedings. Editor: Austrian Society of Surveying and 
	Geoinformation. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Vermessung und 
	Geoinformation (vgi). 97.Jahrgang, Heft 1/2009. Vienna, Austria.Groenendijk, E. M. C. (2009). “Experience-based learning and e-learning: 
	a perfect combination.” International Archives of Photogrammetry, Remote 
	Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences 38(6/W7).Groenendijk, E.M.C. (2009). Experience-based learning in the 
	geo-information sciences: 15 years of nuts game. Proceedings FIG 
	International workshop, Navigating the future of surveying education, 26–28 
	February 2009, Vienna, Austria.Groenendijk, E.M.C. (2008) Sharing Good Practices in E-Leaning: outcome 
	of a workshop. FIG International Workshop Sharing Good Practices: E-learning 
	in Surveying, Geoinformation Sciences and Land Administration. Enschede, 
	Netherlands.Hodgins, W. and M. Connor (2000). Everything you wanted to know about 
	learning standards but were afraid to ask. Line Zine, Fall 2000. Online 
	version. Retrieved June 5, 2009, from
	
	http://www.learnativity.com/standards.html.Hoppe, G. and M. H. Breitner (2003). Business Models for E-learning. 
	University of Hannover, Discussion paper 287. Retrived from June 1, 2009, 
	from:
	
	http://www.wiwi.uni-hannover.de/Forschung/Diskussionspapiere/dp-287.pdf.Kottyan, L. (2006). Open systems in e-learning. In: Proceedings FIG 
	Workshop eGovernance, Knowledge Management and eLearning, 27–29 April 2006, 
	Budapest, Hungary.Kottyan, L. (2008). Sharing student knowledge in exchange programs. In: 
	Proceedings FIG International Workshop. Sharing Good Practices: E-learning 
	in Surveying, Geoinformation Sciences and Land Administration, 11–13 June 
	2008, ITC, Enschede, the Netherlands.Lam, S. Y. W. (2008). Blended e-learning Model for Geomatics Curriculum: 
	Design, Implementation and Evaluation. Proceedings of FIG Commission 2 
	Workshop, Sharing Good Practices: E-learning in Surveying, Geo-information 
	Sciences and Land Administration, 11–13 June, 2008, Enschede, Netherlands.Lam, S. Y. W. (2008). Blended e-learning Model for Geomatics Curriculum: 
	Design, Implementation and Evaluation. Proceedings of FIG Commission 2 
	Workshop, Sharing Good Practices: E-learning in Surveying, Geo-information 
	Sciences and Land Administration, 11–13 June, 2008, Enschede, Netherlands.Learning organization (2009). Retreived 8 Aug 2009, from:
	
	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_organization.Macromedia (ND). E-learning Standards. Online document. Retrieved June 
	5, 2009, from
	
	http://www.adobe.com/resources/elearning/standards.html.Mahoney R., F. Plimmer, J. Hannah and J. Kavanagh (2007). Where are we 
	heading? The crisis in surveying education and a changing profession. 
	Proceedings FIG Working Week 2007, Strategic Integration of Surveying 
	Services, 13–17 May 2007, Hong Kong, China, Mansberger, R., C. R. Michalek, and T. Bauer (2008). Communication Tools 
	in E-learning: Experiences in Academic Geomatics Education, Sharing Good 
	Practices: E-learning in Surveying, Geo-information Sciences and Land 
	Administration, FIG International Workshop, Enschede, the Netherlands, 11–13 
	June 2008.Mansberger, R., H. Schuh, G. Steinkellner (2006). Impacts of the Bologna 
	Process and of New Public Management on the Academic Surveying Education in 
	Austria. XXIII International FIG Congress, International Federation of 
	Surveyors.Mansberger, R., T. Bauer and E. Heine (2006). Flop or Top – Experiences 
	with E-learning in Academic Education. FIG Workshop on eGovernance, 
	Knowledge Management and eLearning, Budapest, Hungary, 2006.Markus B. (2000): Educational metadata, FIG Working Week, Prague, Czech 
	Republic. Markus B. (2002). (Global) spatial knowledge management, GSDI 6 
	Conference – From global to local, Budapest, Hungary.Markus, B. (2006). Experiences in and Around e-learning. Proceedings 
	XXIII FIG Congress, Shaping the Change, 8–13 October, 2006, Munich, Germany.Markus, B. (2008). Thinking about e-learning. Proceedings FIG 
	International Workshop. Sharing Good Practices: E-learning in Surveying, 
	Geo-information Sciences and Land Administration, 11–13 June 2008, ITC, 
	Enschede, the Netherlands.Means, B., Y. Toyama, R. Murphy, M. Bakia and K. Jones (2009). 
	Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis 
	and Review of Online Learning Studies. U.S. Department of Education, Center 
	for Technology in Learning, May 2009.Milenov, P. and S. Kay (2008). Provision of technical support and 
	regulatory reference information on the control of agricultural subsidies in 
	EU through use of Wiki-based Knowledge Management. Sharing Good Practices: 
	E-learning in Surveying, geo-information Sciences and Land Administration. 
	FIG International Workshop, Enschede, the Netherlands, 11–13 June, 2008.Molendijk, A. M., H.J. Scholten & J. Kaandorp (2008). Geographical 
	Information for all: Breaking the Barriers for GI Distance Learning. In: 
	Proceedings FIG International Workshop. Sharing Good Practices: E-learning 
	in Surveying, Geo-information Sciences and Land Administration, 11–13 June 
	2008, ITC, Enschede, the Netherlands.O’Hear, S. (2006). How E-learning 2.0 – How Web technologies are shaping 
	education. ReadWriteWeb. Retrieved June 1, 2009, from:
	
	http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/e-learning_20.php.Olaniyi, S. S. (2006). E_learning Technology: The Nigeria Experience. 
	Shaping the Change: XXIII FIG Congress, Munich, Germany, October 8–13, 2006.O’Reilly, T., 2006:
	
	http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2006/12/web-20-compact-definitiontryi.html, 
	last visited: 12 April 2008.Osskó, A. (2008). The importance of changes in land surveyors’ 
	education. Proceedings FIG International Workshop. Sharing Good Practices: 
	E-learning in Surveying, Geo-information Sciences and Land Administration, 
	11–13 June 2008, ITC, Enschede, the Netherlands.Pasternack, P., R. Bloch, C. Gellert, M. Hölscher, R. Kreckel, D. Lewin, 
	I. Lischka, A. Schildberg (2009). Die Trends der Hochschulbildung und ihre 
	Konsequenzen. HoF Wittenberg – Institut für Hochschulforschung an der 
	Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg. Bundesministerium für Bildung, 
	Wissenschaft und Kultur (BMBWK). Wien. Retrieved September 29, 2009, from:
	
	http://www.bmwf.gv.at/uploads/tx_bmwfcontent/studie_trends_hsbildung.pdf.Petch, J. (2006). All things „e”: understanding the real challenges in 
	an accelerating world. FIG Workshop on eGovernance, Knowledge Management and 
	e-learning. Budapest, Hungary, 2006.Polsani, P. (2003). Use and Abuse of Learning Objects. Journal of 
	digital information. Vol 3, Issue 4, Article No. 164, 2003-02-19. Online 
	version. Retrieved June 5, 2009SCORM (2004). SCORM Explained. Online document. Retrieved June 5, 2009, 
	from: 
	http://www.scorm.com/scorm-explained/.Todorovski, D. (2008). Capacities, tools and methods that support 
	E-learning. Sharing Good Practices: E-learning in Surveying, geo-information 
	Sciences and Land Administration. FIG International Workshop, Enschede, 
	Netherlands, 11–13 June, 2008.UN, 2008: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. 
	World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision. Retrieved September 22, 2009, 
	from:
	
	http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/wpp2008/wpp2008_highlights.pdf.Verkroost, M. J. (2009). From multi-usable courseware to a multi-usable 
	pedagogy. In: Proceedings ISPRS Workshop Commission VI/2 V12, E-learning 
	Tools, Techniques and Applications, 17–19 June, 2009, Potsdam, Germany.Wahlstrom, D. A. (2008). Distance Education Using Contemporary 
	Technology. Sharing Good Practices: E-learning in Surveying, geo-information 
	Sciences and Land Administration. FIG International Workshop, Enschede, 
	Netherlands, 11–13 June, 2008.Wildt, J. (2008). Reader “Lehren und Lernen”. Manuscript of the Course 
	on Didactic 2008/09 at the BOKU-University of Natural Resources and Applied 
	Life Sciences Vienna. Centre for Research on Higher Education and Faculty 
	Development of the University of Technology Dortmund. 2009.Wiley, D. A. (2000). Connecting learning objects to instructional design 
	theory: A definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. In D. A. Wiley (Ed.), The 
	Instructional Use of Learning Objects. Retrieved June 1, 2009, from:
	
	http://reusability.org/read/chapters/wiley.doc. 
 
	
		|  Dr. James Petch
 Telaman Ltd, Manchester and
 University of Manchester
 
 
 |  Dr. 
    	Adrijana Car
 UNIGIS Salzburg at Centre for Geoinformatics, University of Salzburg and
 UNIGIS International Association
 |  The UNIGIS network of universities has provided postgraduate distance 
learning in Geographic Information Science and Technology (GISc&T) since the 
early 1990s (Molendijk and Scholten, 2006) based on a model developed in the UK 
in 1988–89. It has grown from a UK partnership, to a European consortium into a 
global network offering different types of academic programmes and 
qualifications in several languages to students with a wide range of backgrounds 
(http://www.unigis.net/). This success is based on two sets of factors related first to the setting up 
and secondly to the sustaining of a programme of learning which has continued to 
meet a vigorous market demand. These factors provide insights into good practice 
for all aspects of such distance learning provision and they may hold lessons 
for other programmes.  From the outset UNIGIS was conceived as cooperation between institutions 
which could benefit from the sharing of resources and expertise and who by 
committing to a common purpose could each achieve success in reaching a growing 
market that alone they could never aspire to. Additionally cooperation was seen 
as a fast track and a sustained track to innovation and continuing progress in a 
rapidly changing field. Thus a prime building bock of the collaboration has been 
a contract that sets out these aims and principles in a transparent manner. 
Everyone has a stake in the collaboration and clear benefits. Having such a 
contract has ensured recruitment to the network and ensured continuing 
commitment and inputs to the common cause.  A further factor for success has been the careful selection and grooming of 
potential partners and a corresponding clear commitment to continuing support 
once they are members. The UNIGIS network didn’t aim to recruit the most famous 
names or the biggest GI operations. Size didn’t matter. What mattered were 
ambition, a willingness to share and cooperate and a commitment to stay on 
course. Potential members had to show that being a member would make a 
difference to them and that being part of UNIGIS was part of their strategy. 
Sustained resourcing and maintained objectives were an essential criterion for 
membership. Joining UNIGIS had to be an institutional commitment.  A major benefit for joining UNIGIS, that was a conscious part of agreements, 
was being able to plug in immediately to a mature, quality assured course with 
proven processes and instruments for administration, design and development. 
This strategy has in fact brought other benefits. As new members join they bring 
their own good practices and enrich the understanding of the wider group as to 
what works well and what does not. With an active, involved community there is a 
constant development of all aspects of the course and this is reflected in a 
strengthening array of practices. The lesson here is that usage and challenging 
of practices makes for improvement. But, the prerequisite is the adoption of 
common practices in a trusting group.  Many other aspects of the UNGIS experience show the importance of sustaining 
good practice, which means renewal and constant improvement. This focus on 
quality has many facets (Strobl and Car 2009). 
    Clearly defined professional qualificationsCredible qualifications and their acceptance depend on a number of factors, 
especially: 
	curriculum and syllabusprofessional relevance and employabilitytrack record with alumni and in industryformal accreditation and quality indicators. With UNIGIS programmes primarily taken in part-time in-service mode by 
professionals already active in the field of GIS&T, learning is directly coupled 
with professional practice. Employers have and express clear expectations and 
learners already know from on-the-job experience about their strengths and 
weaknesses, and thus about deficits to be compensated and gaps to be filled. 
In-service programmes therefore undergo constant practical checks of relevance, 
and receive immediate feedback regarding topical priorities and curricular 
completeness.  Additionally, students are sensitized to topics currently dealt with in their 
study programme, and to recognize issues in their professional practice which 
otherwise would have gone unnoticed. This kind of awareness building is a core 
objective of advanced courses; seeing problems often is a more critically 
important qualification than solving them. Reputation is a critical factor in sustaining success, whether in education 
or other knowledge-centric activities. A documented and evident track record, as 
well as word of mouth recommendations, of delivering what has been promised, of 
fulfilling the personal and professional objectives of students, and above all 
of advancing the professional capabilities and careers of alumni are important 
factors in attracting and convincing future applicants to pursue a particular 
education track. The UNIGIS programme has spawned a number of informal communities of practice 
and institutionalized a loosely knit alumni network (‚Club UNIGIS‘) based on its 
strength of  not having a clearly defined operational mission. Rather, this 
network, like other groups in UNIGIS autonomously collaborates on a broad range 
of topics from simple (to rather complex) technical support to information about 
job offerings, jointly tackling more complex projects or looking for particular 
expertise on a given subject. There is a lot of giving and taking across this 
network, recently most valuable professionals (MVPs) were identified by their 
generous contributions through sharing advice and offering support. All this 
works without an organisational framework or institutional infrastructure, 
demonstrating the power and effectiveness of online communities sharing a common 
purpose. For the entire UNIGIS network, a common core curriculum is a key constituting 
element, a strong common denominator binding programmes in a variety of 
languages, institutional and legal frameworks and variants in their mode of 
delivery together. In a continuously evolving environment like GISc&T, a 
curriculum cannot be considered as being set in stone, it rather has to adjust 
to innovation, demands from professional practice, and an expanding set of 
application domains. Rapid change, though, would create confusion and 
organisational challenges, and unstable expectations regarding educational 
outcomes. Therefore managing curricular change is an ‚art‘ of balancing adaption 
and innovation with a certain level of stability and continuity.  Curriculum development is a major ‚export article‘ of UNIGIS, as partners in 
the network have been and still are involved in curriculum development projects 
around the world (see e.g. Car and Strobl 2007;
http://tempus.geoinfo.geof.hr/). 
Typically conducted as consortia projects in particular regions, and frequently 
co-funded by European Commission programmes, new curricula (plus their 
implementation) are set up at institutions launching or enhancing education in 
GISc&T. The distance learning / eLearning / online learning mode of delivery clearly 
is the key factor why prospective students choose this type of programme. Over 
several years it has become increasingly evident that there is no 
one-size-fits-all model for organisation and delivery of postgraduate 
qualifications in GISc&T (Howell et al 2003). Full distance learning serves 
part-time students well while there is a growing demand for ‚going back to 
school‘ for a condensed full-time study experience (which might be split over 
several periods) or even entering postgraduate online learning immediately after 
undergraduate studies. The organisation and communication concept behind a distance education offer 
clearly is a core success factor determining the long term sustainability of 
programmes like UNIGIS (Molendijk et al 2008). Several aspects of the concept 
which underpin continued attraction of UNGIS course are: 
	combination of advantages of centralized course delivery with regional 
	access to supportleveraging of novel Internet-based communication facilities to really‚ 
	stay in touchbalancing an accepted core set of knowledge and skills with flexible 
	options to enable individual choices of elective subjects. While distance learning clearly is important, it is not a value per se. It is 
valuable, if it enhances the accessibility of continuing education for a target 
group of learners. The actual issue therefore is catering to the needs of a 
mature, well motivated and professionally active community of learners who are 
less mobile due to their job locations as well as social commitments. Bridging 
distances, and facilitating communication by online media is a very helpful 
element in allowing access to continuing education. International differences in educational systems, cultural expectations, 
online access and levels of prior learning are significant. Maintaining a common 
standard of across qualification systems in different countries turns out to be 
an impossible objective and likely will be a challenge forever. Nevertheless, 
the professional commonality between North America and Central Asia, between 
Europe, Latin America and the Indian subcontinent is greater than it might be 
expected, not the least due to the unifying and ‚standardizing‘ force of a 
global software industry and common issues in professional practice. Quality Assurance is a permanent challenge in a distributed set of programmes 
being taught across all boundaries of cultures, languages, professions and 
levels of economic development (ENQA 2005). UNIGIS (Car 2008) has therefore 
implemented a clearly defined framework of goals, tools and indicators 
facilitating the integrity, monitoring and continuous improvement of academic 
programmes. These start from a common core curriculum referenced to established 
benchmarks, standards for teaching and performance assessment, and 
cross-programme checks like joint degrees, credit transfer options and mutual 
evaluations. 
	Car, A. (2008). Towards a Quality Assurance Concept for Postgraduate 
	Distance Learning Programmes for Professionals. Lernen mit Geoinformation 
	II. T. Jekel, A. Koller and J. Strobl. Heidelberg, Wichmann: 172–178.Car, A and J. Strobl (2007): TEMPUS: GISc&T Position and Role in 
	Croatian Higher Education, [Online], available:
	
	http://vector1media.com/article/feature/tempus-%3agisc%26t-position-and-role-in-croatian-higher-education/, 
	accessed on February 4, 2009.DiBiase, D., DeMers, M., Johnson, A., Kemp, K., Luck, A.T., Plewe, B., 
	and Wentz, E. (2006). Geographic Information Science & Technology Body of 
	Knowledge, Washington, D.C.: Association of American Geographers.ENQA. (2005). Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the 
	European Higher Education Area. Bergen Report. European Association for 
	Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA) published on. Accessed from
	
	http://www.enqa.eu/files/ENQA%20Bergen%20Report.pdf, accessed on 
	February 4, 2009.Howell, S. L., P. B. Williams and N. K. Lindsay (2003). Thirty-two 
	Trends Affecting Distance Education: An Informed Foundation for Strategic 
	Planning [online]. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration. State 
	University of West Georgia, Distance Education Center VI(III, Fall 2003).
	
	http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall63/howell63.html, accessed on 
	February 4, 2009.IHEP (2000). Quality on the Line: Benchmarks for Success in 
	Internet-Based Distance Education. The Institute for Higher Education 
	Policy, Washington DC published on April 2000. Accessed from
	
	http://www2.nea.org/he/abouthe/images/Quality.pdf, accessed on February 
	4, 2009.Finnie, R. and Usher A. (2005). Measuring the Quality of Post-secondary 
	Education: Concepts, Current Practices and a Strategic Plan. Canadian Policy 
	Research Networks Inc. (CPRN).Research Report W|28,
	
	http://www.cprn.com/doc.cfm?doc=1208&l=en, accessed on February 4, 2009.Molendijk, M.A. & Scholten, H.J. (2006). From Local Heroes towards 
	Global Communicators: the Experience of the UNIGIS network in educating GIS 
	Professionals Worldwide. In Nuffic Expert Meeting. Den Haag: NUFFIC.Molendijk, M.A., Scholten, H.J. & Kaandorp, J. (2008). Geographical 
	Information for all: breaking the barriers for GI distance learning. In L. 
	Groenendijk & C. Lemmen (Eds.), Proceedings FIG International Workshop 2008: 
	Sharing Good Practices: E-learning in Surveying, Geo-information Sciences 
	and Land Administration (pp. 85–100). Enschede: FIG International.Strobl, J. (2008): Digital Earth Brainware. A Framework for Education 
	and Qualification Requirements. In: Schiewe, J. & Michel, U. (Hrsg., 2008): 
	Geoinformatics paves the Highway to Digital Earth. gi-reports@igf, 
	Universität Osnabrück, pp. 134–138.Strobl, J. and A. Car (2009). Continuing Professional Education via 
	Distance Learning – Success Factors and Challenges. FIG International 
	Workshop Vienna 2009 “Navigating the Future of Surveying Education”, Vienna, 
	Austria. The FIG Commission 2 and the Austrian Society for Surveying and 
	Geoinformation (OVG). 
 
	
		| 
		 Nicholas Frunzi, ESRI
 Nicolas Frunzi delivering his key note speech at the Commission Workshop 
		in Enschede, the Netherlands.
 |  
    
    The Virtual Campus is ESRI’s e-learning solution, providing a platform 
	for both synchronous and asynchronous online courseware. First launched in 
	July of 1997, for the past 12 years the Virtual Campus has supported an 
	average of 10,000 students per month, totaling over half a million students. In 2001, ESRI partnered with the authors of Geographic Information Systems 
and Science (GIS&S) to produce a hybrid e-learning course offering, entitled
Turning Data into Information Using ArcGIS 8. The course was designed to 
complement the GIS&S book and reinforce its concepts through exercises and 
examples. Although the book was no a requirement for course completion, when 
combined, the two provide a well-rounded pairing of academic and practical 
instruction. When the book was updated to a second edition in 2004, the course 
was updated to use ArcGIS 9. Since its introduction, over 5,100 students have 
taken this e-learning class, and as such, ESRI views the collaboration with the 
authors as a success, and is dedicated to continuing the relationship with the 
author team. The course will soon be updated to complement the forthcoming third 
edition of the book. Additionally in 2001, ESRI decided it was time to offer a synchronous 
e-learning product, known as Live Training Seminars. A Live Training Seminar 
(LTS) is one hour of free synchronous content featuring an instructor lecturing 
with PowerPoint presentations or demonstrations through the Virtual Campus. 
Interactivity is achieved via a virtual chat, where the students post questions. 
At intervals throughout the hour, the instructor will answer, via voice, the 
questions that were posed via chat. An assistant in the room collects the 
questions for the instructor. Currently, ESRI provides LTSs approximately every 
six weeks, three times during a given day at 9:00am, 11:00am and 3:00pm PST. 
There are over 1,200 attendees on average, for each day ESRI offers the 
sessions. This model uses a streaming media server and the only requirement from 
the student’s perspective is a Windows Media plug-in on their computer and 
Virtual Campus access. This model became a quick success and as such ESRI 
developed a dedicated studio space for LTS production. ESRI also built derivative works from the LTS. A Training Seminar (TS) is an 
asynchronous version of an LTS. ESRI digitally records each LTS and then selects 
the best presentation of the three and conducts a small amount of 
post-processing to clean up the live event. The TS is then uploaded to the 
Virtual Campus to be consumed by anyone at anytime for free. This model of 
educational offering has grown beyond being simply a by-product of an LTS. ESRI 
now creates TSs to teach important topics that do not necessarily need the added 
value of a live instructor to interact with and answer questions. A second derivative work was the Web Workshop (WW), which were implemented 
between 2001 and 2005. Web Workshops differed from the LTS and TS by two 
important characteristics. The Web Workshop was a “for fee” educational offering 
derived from a TS. In this case, ESRI would create an exercise from a TS using 
the software to allow the student to not only hear the lecture and see the 
PowerPoint slides and demos, but to actually download the data and use the 
software hands-on, to accomplish similar tasks as outlined in the TS. These Web 
Workshops became very popular and useful in an on-demand learning environment, 
allowing short focused topics and the ability for the student to actually use 
the software. Over time ESRI also wanted to produce shorter courses in the 
original format, so the WW model was eliminated to become one-module courses, 
removing confusion and simplifying ESRI’s educational offerings. In 2004, ESRI added another synchronous offering: the Instructor-led Virtual 
Classroom (ILV). In this model, ESRI wanted to expand the success of the LTS and 
WW into a larger event. ESRI decided on a total of nine hours of instruction 
delivered over three days, three mornings or three afternoons. At this juncture 
ESRI was very concerned with trying to provide eight hours of instruction in one 
continuous day, online. There was a worry that the current delivery methods 
would not keep a student’s attention for the extended time period. To mitigate 
this concern, training was offered on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday (mornings 
or afternoons) of a given week. This allowed ESRI to manage any technical issues 
with the students on the Monday before the class began. The ILV instructional 
model was similar to the LTS in that there is a live instructor presenting 
PowerPoint slides and demos. ESRI usedthe existing LTS studio and media streaming equipment. Different than the LTS, 
the ILV offered software exercises. Using a Citrix® virtual environment, 
students were able to take training without having any impact on their 
production environments. Importantly, it allowed the instructor to “shadow” the 
student’s work if they needed assistance, by viewing their progress through 
Citrix and even taking over the control of the machine as necessary to provide 
further instruction or assistance. ILVs also introduced phone conferencing in 
the virtual classrooms, allowing voice, instead of virtual text chat, so the 
students would have access to speak to each other, the class, and the 
instructor.
 2005 brought the introduction of ESRI’s use of Sharable Content Object 
Reference Model (SCORM). The SCORM specification is promoted by the US 
Department of Defense as a standard e-learning specification allowing content to 
be easily packaged and consumed by different Learning Management Systems (LMS). 
This ability allows ESRI to take courses out of the Virtual Campus and give them 
to customers, mostly in the US Federal Government, for consumption in their own 
LMSs. The biggest lesson learned from this effort was that the SCORM standard 
was designed under a different educational philosophy than ESRI’s courses. SCORM 
assumes that you want to have full linear control over the learning experience. 
SCORM can force learners to visit every page of a course in a specific order 
before taking a test, then restrict them from revisiting pages or retaking the 
test. ESRI has a more fluid, non-linear philosophy; less concerned about the 
order the student visits, or consumes content, as long as they pass the test. 
ESRI also allows students to take the test as many times as they wish, and 
re-read the material as often as they like. In 2007, looking to reach another need of on-demand training, ESRI began 
producing the Instructional Series Podcast as a new e-learning option. These 
free mp3 files contain approximately 10 minutes of instruction about a single 
topic with no supporting, i.e. visual, materials. With a minimum of resources, 
ESRI can produce a new podcast every few weeks using a laptop, the Audacity® 
recording software and a microphone. Although there is a small amount of 
post-production, these offerings are very quick and inexpensive to produce. The 
podcasts have been exceptionally positive with on average over 65,000 downloads 
per year. Assessing the most successful training on the Virtual Campus, a number of 
consistent themes emerge. Classes that included “Tips and Tricks” are very 
popular. This type of training is often seen to fill in the gaps in a student’s 
knowledge to make them more productive. All topics where ESRI was able to take 
very technical information and provide it in a simple instructional way were 
also met with great satisfaction. Classes that had exercises focusing on 
real-world problems often allowed students to finish the class and immediately 
apply it to their work or study. Classes that are a comprehensive discussion of 
a topic, mixed with asynchronous delivery, allowed self-directed learners to 
consume, absorb, and implement at their own pace, something not seen in 
synchronous online or in classroom events. Short, just-in-time training options 
like the LTS, TS, WW, one-module courses, and podcasts are very popular, not 
only because the majority of these offerings are free. They truly do provide the 
education that the student needs, when they need it, in a short, focused amount 
of time, allowing them to get back to their business at hand. Looking holistically at the Virtual Campus, ESRI has also had to acknowledge 
and address shortcomings. A limitation that ESRI has experienced for a number of 
years is the inability to offer extensive classes in our server and 
enterprise-level technologies. This training was provided through LTS, TS, and 
podcast, but while these methodologies are very useful, ESRI was unable to 
provide web classes that would allow the student to use the software during 
exercise scenarios. This was caused by two factors. When taking a web course 
with exercises, students are allowed to download trial versions of the software 
to use with the class. Downloading and installation is not an issue with ArcGIS® 
Desktop, ESRI’s GIS software for desktop and laptop PC’s. Installation of ArcGIS 
Desktop is as straightforward as installing any PC-based software. Installing a 
product like Arc-GIS Server on the other hand, required extensive permissions as 
well as configuration and tuning skills. This added complexity as well as the 
inability to install ESRI’s exercise datasets into production Server 
environments has prevented ESRI from providing indepth server and 
enterprise-level training through e-learning. Third party course authoring has had inconsistent results. Often ESRI works 
with subject matter experts who are excellent classroom instructors, but have a 
very difficult time creating materials for asynchronous consumption by students. 
Another issue was the timeliness of delivery. In all cases, and not 
unexpectedly, third party authors had other primary means of employment and 
writing a class for the Virtual Campus was a secondary priority. This often 
caused issues where course development started using a specific version of 
ESRI’s software but was not completed until after a new software version 
release. This often meant a course had to be rewritten or at least updated 
before it was published, adding to time and costs. Course completion rates have been an ongoing issue. Being that the original 
course design was asynchronous and lacked much interactivity, averaging 24 or 
more hours of instruction, course completion rates tended to be below 36%. In 
many cases there was just too much material to keep the learner continually 
engaged. Another factor in this statistic was that in academic settings, 
instructors would select individual modules in different courses as needed to 
support their curriculum. This is possible since the entire catalog was 
available to them through the University Site License. This need points to what 
works very successfully today and the future direction of the Virtual campus: 
shorter engagements for specific topics. A continuing challenge for ESRI has been the ESRI Course Catalog search 
feature. As of this writing, there are 216 items in the course catalog, and the 
search is not very robust. This causes frustration among students in their 
effort to find what they need. As ESRI shrinks the size of each class, the 
obvious by-product would be a catalog containing more classes than in the past 
when the majority of the training on the Virtual Campus was four- or six module 
courses. This fragmentation of material is very good for the student in an 
on-demand context, but if they can’t find the training, ESRI is not solving 
their problem. As a result of this limitation, ESRI has started a project to 
overhaul and replace how searches are performed on the Virtual Campus, with the 
intent of making the catalog much easier to navigate. Looking forward, with the success of the ILV model, and more of society being 
familiar and comfortable with e-learning, ESRI has recently embarked on offering 
full-day synchronous instruction via the web. After a few technical 
difficulties, the first test offering was met with complete success and was 
enjoyed by both the students and the instructor alike. ESRI took the feedback 
from the event and offered another equally successful event a few weeks later. 
While the sample size of 38 students is not comprehensive from a statistical 
sampling prospective, it provided enough data to move forward in this area. ESRI 
will continue to conservatively expand the program with the objective that it 
can deliver most, if not all, of the classroom curriculum in a synchronous 
e-learning context. This will allow ESRI to extend the reach of its current 
classroom-based instructor-led offerings, by being able to leverage the 
e-learning platform to deliver synchronous training to a student’s desk, no 
matter where they are in the world. From a technological prospective, ESRI has 
moved off of the Citrix Platform for software exercise work and is now using a 
hosted platform, allowing students to access virtual machines in a hosted 
environment that have ESRI’s software and course data on them. Taking the experiences that ESRI has learned over the past 12 years, 
observing the use of the asynchronous and synchronous e-learning on the Virtual 
Campus, as well as what has been seen in the classroom, ESRI is in the process 
of completely redesigning how it provides asynchronous e-learning. The intent is 
to move this training away from the long-used linear learning model with an 
abundance of supporting material, (i.e., threehour modules,) to a much more 
on-demand delivery methodology for the entire Virtual Campus, not simply the 
LTS, TS, and podcasts that are currently offered. Students will be able to 
access very specific topics when they need to learn about a finite function or 
task. They can learn a broader collection of topics in any order they choose. 
Within the classes themselves, there will be a dramatic reduction of text, an 
(optional) addition of voice, and much more interactivity using Flash and other 
technologies. This design is not to use technology for technology’s sake or any 
“wow” factor. It is to allow students to change context to allow them to absorb 
and retain the material at a better rate. The main force to accomplish this will 
be the extensive use of exercises, allowing the student to spend more time 
actively implementing, rather than reading. This modularization and exercise 
focus is also intended to achieve a long-standing educational goal: the reuse of 
materials both in an e-learning and classroom context. Since ESRI will now be 
offering its classroom education on the web, it makes sense to use the same 
exercise materials for classroom and online training. At a minimum, the target 
is extensive repurpose, if complete reuse is not an option. Finally, the use of 
virtual machines and a cloud-based solution will also allows ESRI to teach 
server and enterprise-based training courses in an e-learning delivery method. Given the current success of podcasts, ESRI’s next advance will be into video 
podcasting, where, again, students with a portable media player can now not only 
listen, but view instructional materials. The design will be similar to that of 
existing podcasts, but extend them into video: 10 minutes of instruction on a 
specific topic, limited words visually presented, much more voice and 
demonstration activity. The video podcasts can be accessed in two ways. First, 
on a computer connected to the Virtual Campus, which allows ESRI to provide a 
hi-resolution solution for those without bandwidth and screen impedances. 
Alternatively, students can download the video podcast (in either mpeg or 
another format) to a portable media player, e.g., Apple’s iPhone®, Microsoft’s 
Zune®, etc., and consume the material from the device. A future expansion of 
this type of delivery might also be to cellular devices, allowing ESRI to 
provide geospatial education to areas in developing nations where there is 
limited Internet infrastructure, but a robust cellular availability. As previously discussed, discovering smaller educational items in the catalog 
will be more dependent on search. In addition to improving the existing search 
feature, ESRI will develop a needs assessment tool wherein a student can enter 
information about their level of knowledge and what additional knowledge they 
wish to acquire. The search tool can then lead the student to a collection, or 
perhaps even a single learning item to satisfy their educational need. In comparison to the age of the World Wide Web, ESRI’s Virtual Campus has 
been providing geospatial e-learning for a long time. ESRI’s Virtual Campus is 
an integral component of the future of geospatial education in academia, as well 
as in business. As such, ESRI continues to keep ahead of new developments in 
e-learning technologies and pedagogy and intends to continue to evolve the 
platform to meet the needs of the current and future generations of students and 
business professionals alike. 
 
	
		| 
		 Prof. Bela Markus, FIG Commission 2 chair, at the Symposium in 
		Enschede in 2008.
 | 
		 Prof. Steven Frank at the Symposium in Vienna in
 2009.
 | 
		 Dr. Reinfried Mansberger at the Symposium in Vienna in 2009.
 
 |  Ir. Liza Groenendijk, editorFIG Commission 2.
 Chair Working Group 2.2. e-learning
 Education Portfolio Manager,
 Faculty of Geo-information Science and Earth
 Observation (ITC), University Twente,
 Enschede, the Netherlands
 Prof. Dr. Bela MarkusChair FIG Commission 2.
 Professional Education
 Head, Land and GeoInformation Knowledge
 Center
 Faculty of Geoinformatics,
 University of West Hungary
 Prof. Dr. Steven FrankChair elect FIG Commission 2.
 Professional education
 Department of Engineering Technology and
 Surveying Engineering
 New Mexico State University, USA
 Asst. Prof. Dr. Reinfried MansbergerFIG Commission 2, Working Group 2.3.
 Institute of Surveying, Remote Sensing and
 Land Information
 University of Natural Resources and Applied
 Life Sciences (BOKU Wien)
 Dr. Adrijana CarCoordinator international UNIGIS distance
 learning programs at the Centre for
 Geoinformatics (Z_GIS), Salzburg University
 Senior scientist at the GIScience research unit,
 Austrian Academy of Sciences
 Dr. James PetchFounding Director UNIGIS International
 Telaman Ltd, Manchester and University of
 Manchester
 Nicolas FrunziDirector of Educational Services
 ESRI, California , USA
 MSc. Pei LinlinE-learning Specialist
 ITC, Enschede, the Netherlands
 
 Participants of the e-learning workshop in Enschede in June 2008.
© ITC
 
 Participants at the Commission 2 Symposium in Vienna in 
February 2009.
 
 Published in EnglishCopenhagen, Denmark
 ISBN 978-87-90907-76-1
 Published byThe International Federation of Surveyors (FIG)
 Kalvebod Brygge 31–33, DK-1780 Copenhagen V
 DENMARK
 Tel. +45 38 86 10 81
 Fax +45 38 86 02 52
 E-mail: FIG@FIG.net
 www.fig.net
 January 2010 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSEditors: Liza Groenendijk and Bela Markus
 Cover photos: © Gerard Kuster, 2006 (middle); BOKU, 2009 (left), ITC, 2008 
(right)
 Pictures on courtesy of ITC (www.itc.nl ) and 
BEV (www.bev.gv.at)
 Design and layout: International Federation of Surveyors, FIG
 Printer: Oriveden Kirjapaino, Finland
 
 |