Learning Content Management System (LCMS) Versus
Learning management System
Dr. Walid Qassim Qwaider
The Arab Academy For Banking &
Financial Sciences
Faculty of Information Technology
Computer Information Systems Dept.
Jordán
wqwaider74@yahoo.com
Abstract
This paper explains the evolution of e-
Learning and related concepts and tools and its
connection with other concepts such as,
Learning Management Systems (LMS), and
Learning Content Management Systems
(LCMS) enterprise applications are often
found to be competing for the same
organization resources. The reality is that each
application has very specific strengths and
abilities that may complement each other; but
one often is the best fit. Organizations need to
specify their business requirements and then
carefully consider the functionality of each of
the enterprise applications before making the
investment.
The average organization can meet its e-
Learning management requirements with an
LMS which will also provide robust classroom
and learner management functionality. An
organization interested in moving to a learning
object approach or one also interested in
capturing intellectual capital through
knowledge management should consider an
LCMS which will provide the required content
management and storage (data warehousing)
capabilities.
Keywords: e-Learning, Learning Management
Systems (LMS), Content Management Systems
(CMS), Learning Content Management
Systems (LCMS), BeLs.
1- Introduction
The borderless world of information
technology and the need to acquire
knowledge have affected trends adopted and
learning styles by academic institutions of
1
Dr. Ezz Hattab
The Arab Academy For Banking &
Financial Sciences
Faculty of Information Technology
Computer Information System
Dept.
Jordán
ehattab@aabfs.org
Higher learning. More institutions have
embraced the digital world to be part of their
learning and teaching tools. One aspect of
these technological requirements is a system
for composing, editing, managing, and
distributing e-learning content. Different
terms have been used to describe this
system such as interactive management,
virtual learning environment, content
management system, learning content
management system (LCMS). and learning
management system (LMS), LCMS has
become a demand as e-learning have been
implemented widely (Solemon & Sulaiman,
2006).
Finding a way to organize, present, store and
efficiently update these learning experiences is
what has promoted the evolution of two
enterprise-wide applications:
• Learning content management systems
(LCMS).
• Learning management systems (LMS).
"For contribution-based reusability to grow in
an institution, specific technical tools and user
interface functionalities are critical" (Collis &
Strijker, 2002). The evolution of these
applications has been made possible as a result
of the growth of intranet and internet
capabilities and has been driven by the need to
efficiently sort and distribute large amounts of
information for large distributed organizations
(Irlbeck, & Mowat, 2006)
This paper focuses on an LCMS rather than
versus on an LMS. An LMS and an LCMS are
complementary but very different systems that
serve different masters and address unique
business challenges.
2. Related Work
Learning content management systems
(LCMS) are web-based e-learning
applications that allow an instructor to deliver
standards-based learning content to
communities of learners. Brooks, present
the high popularity of these systems, they
tend to have minimal collaborative
navigation and awareness features, and
students often find themselves learning in a
vacuum without a sense of what the rest of
the learning community is doing. This
paper outlines a number of the awareness
features built into our LCMS, iHelp Courses,
and identifies two specific goals we have on
our research agenda with respect to
awareness in LCMSs (Brooks, 2006).
Dourish and Bellotti perhaps first popularized
the term and provide a general definition of
awareness as “an understanding of the
activities of others, which provides a context
for your own activity” (Gutwin, 1995).
Gutwin et al. refined this definition for
educational groupware, and break awareness
up into four different sub-types: social
awareness, task awareness, concept
awareness, and workspace awareness
(Gutwin, 1995). Of these types, workspace
awareness is perhaps most relevant for
learning content management systems.
Defined as “up-to-the-minute knowledge about
other students’ interactions with the shared
workspace” (Gutwin, 1995), workspace
awareness can be exploited to increase the
social interconnections between students,
motivate the exploration of material, and
provide feedback to the instructor/facilitator of
the course.
Bergstedt, focuses on similarities of CMS-
Systems and e-Learning systems and the
possibility to transfer gained experiences from
the field of CMS to e-Learning systems. This
leads to a set of demands that can be made on
e-Learning systems. The paper concludes with
the thesis that transferring the principles of
content management systems to the world of
eLearning will result in better systems with the
improved functionality we already know from
current CMS (Bergstedt, 2003).
Jurubescu, explains the evolution of e-
Learning and related concepts and tools and its
connection with other concepts such as
Knowledge Management, Human Resources
Management, Enterprise Resource Planning,
and Information Technology. The paper also
2
distinguished Learning Content Management
Systems from Learning Management Systems
and Content Management Systems used for
general web-based content. So Jurubescu,
presented The newest Learning Content
Management System, very expensive and yet
very little implemented is one of the best tools
that helps us to cope with the realities of the
21st Century in what learning concerns. The
debates over how beneficial one or another
system is for an organization can be driven by
costs involved, efficiency envisaged, and
availability of the product on the market
(Jurubescu, 2008).
2- E-Learning Revolution
Form the ‘60s e-Learning developed to cover
now almost 50 percent of training. Starting
with computer-based training (CBT), and
computer-based instruction (CBI), the
distribution in the ‘80s of learning material on
CDs, the introduction in the ‘90s of World
Wide Web opened new possibilities, being
nowadays the primary delivery medium.
Distance education has become an essential
part of formal education, from elementary to
postsecondary. Many conferencing has become
used Web-based also an important way for
organizations to collaborate, markets products
and services and hold cost-effective meetings.
E-learning (online learning or Web-based
training) can take many forms: from a simple
Web page or e-mail discussion group, to
audio, video, and elaborate machine or social
interaction simulations. It can be synchronous
(at the same time), as in chat rooms and Web
conferencing, or asynchronous (not at the same
time), as in e-mail and stand-alone, self-
directed learning (Jurubescu, 2008).
When the e-Learning market initially formed
(David, 2003), it became a covering umbrella
for a multitude of market segments well
established like training managements
systems, and computer-based training content
providers, and new segments such as web-
based training and virtual classrooms. All of
these became aspects of the e-Learning market.
Speaking from a technology point of view, this
resulted in hundreds of mainly niche vendors
selling very different kinds of products under
the e-Learning banner. So over the last years,
the market has changed significantly. Now
vendors forgot e-Learning and talk about e-
Learning wings. E-Learning wings integrate
components from the principal e-Learning
segments, such as learning management
system, learning content management system,
content authoring tool, and collaboration tools
including virtual class-room functionality
(Jurubescu, 2008).
Figure 1: E-learning revolution
(Solemon & Sulaiman, 2006).
e- Learning revolution reveal the emergence
of LCMSs as a platform choice for many
companies seeking fast deployment of e-
learning. The 4-stage revolution is depicted in
figure 1 below whilst table 1 summarizes the
brief descriptions of each stage.
Table 1: Descriptions of 4-stage e-learning
revolutions
(Solemon & Sulaiman, 2006).
3- Learning Management Systems
(LMS)
Learning Management System (LMS) is the
term used to describe a server-based system
that is designed to manage learning content
and learner interactions. The LMS enables the
learning content to be available online,
allowing students to view and interact with
learning materials through a web browser on
essentially any computer operating system or
even on a mobile device with browsing
capability (Adobe, 2008).
3
LMS integrate tools to manage the tracking of
learners and the content along with appropriate
work flow processes. This combination of
tools and processes allows an LMS to support
the delivery and management of learning and
tracking the results. As (Robbins, 2002)
explains, learning management systems
“enable companies to plan and track the
learning needs and accomplishments of
employees, customers, and partners” (p. 1).
Every LMS should have the ability to display a
catalogue, register learners, track learner
progress, and provide reports. LMS must “be
capable of handling various delivery modes –
online, instructor-led, self-paced, collaborative,
facilitated, no facilitated, and the like” (Singh,
2001).
Figure 2 explain the relationship of the
components that comprise a learning
management system. An LMS has the
capability of managing learners and their
records as well as managing the learning
process. Within an LMS, the users interact
with their learner data and with learning
management information. The learning content
is not a part of this configuration.
Figure 2: LMS Components
(Irlbeck, & Mowat, 2006)
Some LMS may have a degree of content
management ability, but this is not their main
focus. According to Rosenberg (2001),
although LMS differ from vendor to vendor in
their focus on one or more of their features,
they all have core capabilities: online
registration system; online course catalogue;
competency assessment; learning assessment;
ability to launch and track e-Learning;
learning material management; customizable
reporting; collaborative and synchronous
learning tools; and ability to integrate with
other enterprise applications (p. 162-164). To
reinforce, the goal of LMS is to manage
processes related to delivery and
administration of training and education. LMS
are structured around the course rather than
course content. Table 1, found later in this
chapter, reinforces Rosenberg's list that LMS
support many learning management functions,
but do not man- age, create, or search for
content for the learner. Collaborative tools
within LMS include capabilities that allow
learners to work simultaneously with other
learners using an inter- net/intranet/extranet
technology coupled with CMS. The next
section describes the combination of content
and learning management via the LCMS
(Irlbeck, & Mowat, 2006).
Content management systems (CMS): are
sometimes confused with course management
systems. Course management systems are
more sophisticated than CMS in that "Course-
management systems integrate content
delivery, communication, learner activities,
collaborative work, feedback, testing, portfolio
development, groupware tools, and
administrative tools for the instructor" (Collis
& Strijker, 2003). CMS – that is content
management systems - are focused on content,
with a purpose to store information and
provide access to the information.
Additionally, CMS are used for the broader
purpose of organizational knowledge
management. “While a CMS itself is not the
source of knowledge, it can be a very valuable
enabler in knowledge-capture processes”
(Robertson, May 2003, p. 1). As a summary,
Table 1 found later in this chapter reinforces
the principle that a CMS is best at managing
content, providing a database and capability to
search for the content and a way to locate and
deliver the content to the appropriate user. The
CMS stores and manages the content, but does
not analyze, organize, or distil content into
knowledge. Those tasks are the function of a
Learning Management System (LMS) and/or
Learning Content Management System
(LCMS), described in the next sections
(Irlbeck, & Mowat, 2006).
4- Learning Content Management
Systems (LCMS)
Learning Content Management System
illustrate a multi-user environment where
learning developers can create, reuse, store,
manage and deliver digital learning content
from a central object repository (Bryan, 2004)
terms LMS and LCMS are not mutually
exclusive. Most LCMS provide basic LMS
functionality, and many LMS include some
aspects of content management as well. Some
vendors provide everything in a single
package. The modern content management
system was invented in late ‘90s by an Inter-
4
net news publishing company. Web publishing
is a fairly complex process. First, the author
has to submit an article, written using tools that
are intuitive for a non-technical writer to use.
Before publishing, an editor needs to review
the article and make changes, possibly even
sending the article back to the author for
further editing. Multiple versions of the
document could be flying back and forth
among the author, and editor. Once the content
is finalized, it needs to be put into the layout
in which it will appear on the site. The editor
may decide to add related links. Somebody
needs to decide where on the site the article
will go. And once it's all done, somebody else
has to post the article to the public web site
(Jurubescu, 2008).
The following figure 3 depicts the elements
that comprise a typical LCMS. The content is
created and stored in a repository that is
accessed by the learning management system
and distributed to the users (i.e., learners). The
individual learner data is also managed by the
system and is accessible to the individual user.
So one begins to comprehend the integration of
content, managing the content for distribution,
and managing learner data.
Figure 3: LCMS Components
(Irlbeck, & Mowat, 2006)
Although 81% of the LCMS reviewed in a
recent Brandon Hall report (Hall, 2003)
incorporated some LMS functionality, this is
not their main focus. The same study also
found that 100% of LCMS reviewed were
described as “interoperable with third-party
learning management systems”. In other
words, they purportedly can operate
seamlessly with LMS created by other
companies. LCMS are based on a reusable
learning object model allowing content to be
reused within or across courses or programs
(Hall, 2003). To accomplish this, LCMS
manage content separately from the media
(technology interface) in which the content
will be delivered. RLO are assembled into
learning chunks or accessed as individual
pieces of information or instruction and
delivered to the learner (Irlbeck, & Mowat,
2006)
 content and learning function and indicates
The efficient and successful deployment of an whether each is part of the functionality
LCMS "relies largely on effective development provided by a LCMS and LMS. Each feature
and use of learning objects, which are reusable, may have greater or lesser application for each
media-independent chunks of information category. For example, a feature may have a
organized by a meta data classification system" robust (R) application for LCMS and a limited
(Ellis, 2001). LCMS were not created with the (L) or no functionality for LMS. The list in
intention of replacing LMS. LCMS and LMS Table 2 is a compilation of possible features
can be complementary and each solves a from Donello (2002) and Hall (2003) and
uniquely different challenge. Feldstein impact learners, content presentation,
emphasized that "organizations that purchase competencies, delivery assessment, and
LCMS's typically start looking at these tools integration with other applications in the
because they are faced with the challenge of organization. Use this table as a guide to the
producing and maintaining a daunting amount information in the following sections.
of customer e-learning content" (Hall, 2002, p.
1). LCMS are particularly suited to handling
large amounts of content for e-learning efforts.
An effective LCMS will enable an
organization to organize courseware without
programming expertise. Also course
management systems (CMS) which combine
elements of both LCMS and LMS, but these
are aimed primarily at formal education
particularly post- secondary and have special
features for that market. Some vendors of these
systems call them LCMS (Jurubescu, 2008).

5- Overview of Existing LCMS and

LMS systems

The are three categories of enterprise-wide

applications increases the amount of
information available to decision makers.
Applications in all three categories have
individual capabilities that make them
appropriate for specific situations. In addition,
all of the applications should strive to meet
certain criteria including:
• Authoring tool neutrality, meaning that
content can be authored using any tool.
• Vendor neutrality, meaning that the
application can manage content authored by
any vendor .
• Browser neutrality, meaning that the
application must appear and function the same
no matter what browser is being used.
• Platform neutrality, meaning that the
application can run on any platform (PC,
MAC, etc.) with any operating system
(Windows, Linux, etc.)
• Scalability, meaning that the application can
scale larger or smaller to meet the
organization’s needs; includes a firewall
(hardware or software that provides security to
a company’s internal systems by blocking
unauthorized access) and includes an intuitive
interface. (Rosenberg, 2001, p. 166).
Table 2 provides a summary of key features
that organizations require to fully manage their
Table 2: Features of LCMS and LMS
Functionality
R = Robust Functionality
L = Limited Functionality
6- LCMS vs. LMS
LCMS focus on stored online content to be
managed and reused through integrated
database functionality. LMS focus on making
learning available and tracking learners. While
there is some overlap in the functionality
between a LMS and a LCMS, the two
enterprise applications have a different focus.
LMSs make the process of scheduling classes,
creating catalogs and registering learners more
efficient. LCMSs on the other hand, focus only
on delivery. In the broadest terms, the LMS
helps get you to the classroom door and the
LCMS man-ages the experience inside the
classroom (Jones, 2001).
To put it another way, “the primary objective
of a learning management system (LMS) is to
manage learners By contrast, a learning
content management system (LCMS) manages
content or learning objects” (Hall, 2003, p. 1)

5
in order for learners to learn efficiently. It
should be noted, however, that many LCMS
have some learner management capabilities.

As mentioned earlier, a learning management

system can save money by reducing learning
administration costs. “The value proposition of
a LMS is cost-efficient training
administration” (Brennan, Funke & Anderson,
2001, p. 9). The LMS cannot, however,
support content sharing and the attendant
savings realized through the use of learning
objects nor can it provide the same level of
learning control or personalization of learning.
Schelin explains that, “the initial benefits of a
LMS are cost-displacement issues, whereas the
LCMS space is all about focusing on the
notion of what we call reducing time to
performance” (2001). Table 3: Comparing between LCMS and LMS

Table 3 provides a summary of Comparing 7- E-Learning Requirements

between LCMS and LMS. the LCMS and
LMS provide a way for organizations to
inexpensively and efficiently create and reuse
content, deliver that content, assess and track
users, and gather important user data”
(Jacobsen, 2002, p. 2). Why not create a single
system to manage content and user
information? Experts tend to predict that at this
time with the present technological constraints,
such a large robust system would require such
a huge organizational effort and is still too
large and complex for the requirements of
most educational and training operations.
However, as LCMS develop their influence on,
and efficiency for e-learning, instructional
design may increase to such a point that it will
be beneficial for developers to explore new
learning techniques to modularize and
manipulate content. The following table
summarizes the differences between LCMS
and LMS (Irlbeck, & Mowat, 2006).
The research department at Thinq believes that
“Learning Management Systems (LMS) are
critical to facilitating the widespread adoption
of e-learning”. To manage e-Learning on an
enterprise-wide basis, an application would
need to be able to store, launch, track, manage
embedded learner assessments, and report on
progress through e-Learning topics, lessons,
and modules. An instructional designer
analyzed the needs of Thinq to first identify
the e-Learning requirements and then match
the requirements to the functionality of CMS,
LMS or LCMS. The instructional designer
reported possible options as shown in the
following table. As can be seen, LMS had all
the elements required to manage e-Learning
effectively. LCMS had most of the
functionality but were less robust, and CMS
did not meet any of the eight requirements to
manage e-Learning, Table 4 provides a
summary of key e-Learning Requirements
(Thinq, 2003).

Table 4: e-Learning Requirements

6
Note: e-Learning requirements adapted from
“Theory & practice: Learning content
management systems” by Jill Donello, 2002
and from “Learning management systems and
learning content management systems
demystified” by Brandon Hall, 2003.
8- LCMS and LMS are Complementary
LCMSs and LMSs are different from one
another, but they also complement each other
well. The well tightly integration between
LMS and LCMS produces an reachable,
ultimately resulting in a richer learning
experience for the user and a more
comprehensive tool for the learning
administrator. An LMS can manage
communities of users, allowing each of them
to launch the appropriate objects stored and
managed by the LCMS (IDC, 2001). In
delivering the content, the LCMS also
bookmarks the individual learner’s progress; a
Figure 4: LCMS –LMS Integration in a Blended e-learning system (BeLs)
Portal
A learner typically enters the e-Learning
environment via a portal. The portal interface
can be as simple as a login screen, or it might
be something more sophisticated like a
knowledge management portal.
Virtual Classrooms/Synchronous BeLs
A common training event launched by an LMS
is a synchronous virtual classroom. Users with
appropriate hardware gather in a virtual space
(typically using the metaphor of a classroom)
where an instructor leads or facilitates a real-
7
record test scores, and passes them back to the
LMS for reporting purposes. The highlighted
portion of Figure 4 explain the relationship of
the two integrated LMS and LCMS in an e-
learning environment.
The LMS and LCMS must be interoperable.
Two of the key benefits of using learning
objects, interoperability and reusability, are
based on XML standards and described by
standard metadata defined by learning
standards bodies.
8- Integration LCMS –LMS with
Blended e-learning system (BeLs)
The following figure 4 depicts the major
functional components in the emerging e-
Learning architecture. Most companies mix
and match the various components to create a
customized integrated solution that meets their
unique requirements (Caton, 2001).
time discussion with a “class” over the Internet
(Caton, 2001).Users have controls for asking
questions and providing feedback about the
pace or difficulty of the presentation. Chat
functions, application sharing, and desktop
sharing are often integrated into these types of
solutions.
Asynchronous Learning
Recently, asynchronous learning was delivered
to the user in the form of static HTML pages.
Personalized delivery of content was limited
by the capacity of training developers to
produce the various permutations of learning
content that might be demanded by the
multitude of teach audiences (Caton, 2001).
Otherwise it was the responsibility of the
learner or manager to decide which static
course or learning event was most appropriate
for each situation.
The LCMS represents an important
technological development in asynchronous
training. It enables dynamic content delivery,
where the right amount of learning content is
delivered to the learner at the time it is most
needed – either to perform a task at hand or to
prepare for an imminent quiz or test.
Essentially, the LCMS works in tandem with
the LMS, with the LMS launching
asynchronous training events that are
dynamically generated by the LCMS.
9- Conclusion
The Learning Content Management Systems
segment allows organizations to leverage one
application to educate a variety of students:
employees, partners, suppliers, and customers.
A Learning Content Management System is an
valuable tool that compresses the time required
to develop learning content.
LCMS and LMS could each be an appropriate
solution depending on the needs of an
organization. By clearly understanding the
differences, the core functionalities of each,
and the benefits of combining or keeping
applications separate, training and education
professionals can help guide decision makers
toward the best solution for the organization.
Matching the right solution to meet the needs
will help organizations effectively allocate
their education dollars through focused
applications to manage the learning,
administration, tracking, and reporting
functions (Michael, 2001). The net result of
this is increased organizational productivity.
References
 Adobe, Adobe solutions for Learning
Management Systems (LMS)",Adobe
Systems Incorporated. All rights reserved.
Printed in the USA, 2008.
 Brennan, M., Funke, S., and Anderson, C.
(2001). The learning content management
system. Retrieved February 25, 2004, from
http://www.mindbranch.com/listing/product/
R104-6256.html.
 Bergstedt, S. & Wiegreffe, S. &Wittmann, J.
& Möller, D," Content Management
Systems and e-Learning-Systems – A
Symbiosis?", Proceedings of the The 3rd
8
IEEE International Conference on Advanced
Learning Technologies (ICALT’03),
2003Bryan Chapman, “e-Learning for the
En-terprise: why Learning Content
Management matters most?”, from Brandon-
Hal.com, Your Guide to e-Learning, 2004.
 Collis, B. & Strijker, A. (2002) New
Pedagogies and Re-usable Learning Objects:
Toward a Different Role for an LMS.
Association for the Advancement of
Computing in Education (AACE).
ED9MEDIA 2002 World Conference on
Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia &
Telecommunications. Proceedings. June 24-
29, 2002.
 Caton. J, "Evaluating Learning Content
Management Systems (LCMS)" , Peer3 –
All rights reserved, May 15, 2001.
 Drakos, N.,Votsch,V., Jones A.,
Müller,V.:Worldwide Web Content
Management.
 David Wilson , “E-Learning suites or not”,
in E-Learning suites, elearnity, June 2003.
 Donello J. (2002). Theory & practice:
Learning content management systems.
Retrieved February 25, 2004, from
http://www.elearningmag.com.
 Ellis, R. K. (2001) LCMS Roundup.
Retrieved May 12, 2005
fhttp://www.learningcircuits.org/2001/aug20
01/ttools.html.
 IDC is the premier global provider of market
intelligence, advisory services, and events
for the information technology,
telecommunications, and consumer
technology markets. IDC helps IT
professionals, business executives, and the
investment community makes fact-based
decisions on technology purchases and
business strategy. www.idc.com
 Hall, B. (2003). Learning management
systems and learning content management
systems demystified. Retrieved March 1,
2004, from http://www.brandonhall.com.
 Hall, B. (2002). Six steps to developing a
successful e-learning initiative: excerpts
from the e-learning guidebook. In Allison
Rossett (ED.) The ASTD E-Learning
Handbook. New York: McGraw-Hill.
 Irlbeck, S. & Mowat J,"Learning Content
Management System (LCMS)", Capella
University (sonja.irlbeck@capella.edu),
2006.
 Jablonski, S., Meiler, C.: Web-Content
Managementsysteme, Informatik Spekrum
23(6) (2002).
 Jurubescu, T," Learning Content
Management Systems", Revista Informatica
Economică, nr. 4 (48)/2008.
 Jones, C. (June, 2001). Rules of the game.  Gutwin, C., Stark, G., Greenburg, S:
Online Learning Magazine, 5 (6). Support for Workspace Awareness in
 Michael Brennan, Susan Funke, and Cushing Educational Groupware. In ACM
Anderson, “The Learning Content
Management Systems – A new e-Learning Conference on Computer Supported
market segment emerges”, An IDC White Collaborative Learning, Indiana
Paper, IDC Analyze the Future, 2001 at University, Bloomington, Indiana,
www.idc.com. USA October 17-20, Distributed
 Robbins, S. R. (2002). The evolution of the LEA Press (1995) 147-156.
learning content management system.
Retrieved February 25, 2004, from
http://www.learningcircuits.org/2002/apr200
2/robbins.html .
 Robertson, J. (June, 2003). So, what is a
content management system? Retrieved
November 20, 2003, from
http://www.steptwo.com.au.
 Rosenberg, M. J. (2001). e-Learning. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
 Solemon, B.& Sulaiman, R, "Rapid E-
Learning Content Management System (RE-
COMS)", International Journal of
Computing & Information Sciences, Pages 1
– 8. Vol. 4, No. 1, April 2006.
 Singh, H. (2001). Learning content
management systems. Retrieved November
20, 2003, from
http://www.internettime.com/Learning/lcms.
 Subrahmanyam , J," FUTURE TRENDS OF
CONTENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
(CMS) for e-Learning: A Tool Based
Database Oriented Approach, Quantum
Softech Limited, Hyderabad, India,
jsrs@hd1.vsnl.net.in .
 Schuster, E., Wilhelm, S.: Content-
Management, Informatik Spekrum 23(6)
(2000).
 S.R. Robbins, “The Evolution of the
Learning Content Management System”,
http://www.learningcircuits.org/NR/exeres/4
8 3F426A-BEA4-4E32-8080-
01FC7AA26DED.htm [6/17/04].
 Thinq. (2003). LMS, the backbone of your
training system. Retrieved February 25,
2004, from http://www.thinq.com.
 Brooks. C, Hansen. C, Greer. J," Social
Awareness in the Help Courses Learning
Content Management System," ARIES
Laboratory, Department of Computer
Science, University of Saskatchewan, 176
Thorvaldson Building, Saskatoon, SK, S7N
5C9, Canada, 2006.
 Dourish, P., Bellotti, V.: Awareness
and Coordination in Shared
Workspaces. Computer Supported
Cooperative Work, October 31 –
November 4, Toronto, Canada
(1992).