[1. Aghaee, N. (2013) Finding potential problems in the thesis process in higher education: Analysis of e-mails to develop a support system. In Education and Information Technologies, online. DOI:10.1007/s10639-013-9262-z, http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10639-013-9262-z]Search in Google Scholar
[2. Aghaee, N. and Hansson, H. (2013). Peer Portal: Quality enhancement in thesis writing using self-managed peer review on a mass scale. In The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(1), (pp. 186-203).10.19173/irrodl.v14i1.1394]Search in Google Scholar
[3. Aghaee, N. and Larsson, K. (2013). Students’ Perspectives on Utility of Mobile Applications in Higher Education. In Trends in Mobile Web Information Systems, (pp. 44-56). Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-319-03737-0_6]Search in Google Scholar
[4. Aghaee, N.; Larsson, U. and Hansson, H. (2012). Improving the Thesis Process: Analysis of Scipro Support e-mails. IRIS conference 2013. Retrieved February 01, 2013 from http://iris.im.uu.se/wp-uploads/2012/08/iris2012_submission_66.pdf]Search in Google Scholar
[5. Alexander, S. (2001) E-learning developments and experiences. In Education + Training, 43(4/5), (pp. 240-248).10.1108/00400910110399247]Search in Google Scholar
[6. Biggs, J. (2003). Aligning Teaching and Assessment to Curriculum Objectives. Imaginative Curriculum Project, LTSN Generic Centre]Search in Google Scholar
[7. Biggs, J. and Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. (2nd ed.), Glasgow: McGraw-Hill International.]Search in Google Scholar
[8. Bossewitch, J. and Preston, D.M. (2011). Teaching and Learning with Video Annotations. Mobility Shifts: an International Future of Learning Summit. Retrieved March 14, 2013, from http://learningthroughdigitalmedia.net/teaching-and-learning-with-video-annotations]Search in Google Scholar
[9. Christie, M.F. and Ferdos, F. (2004). The mutual impact of educational and information technologies: Building a pedagogy of e-learning. In Journal of Information Technology Impact, 4(1), (pp. 15-26).]Search in Google Scholar
[10. Choi, H.J. and Johnson S.D. (2005). The effect of context-based video instruction on learning and motivation in online courses. In American Journal of Distance Education, 19 (4), (pp. 215-227).10.1207/s15389286ajde1904_3]Search in Google Scholar
[11. Clarke, A. (2008). E-learning Skills. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1007/978-1-137-22735-5]Search in Google Scholar
[12. Cohen, L.; Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education. (6th ed). New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203029053]Search in Google Scholar
[13. Concannon, F.; Flynn, A. and Campbell, M. (2005). What campus-based students think about the quality and benefits of e-learning. In British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), (pp. 501-512).10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00482.x]Search in Google Scholar
[14. Cook, C.; Heath, F. and Thompson, R.L. (2000). A meta-analysis of response rates in web- or internet-based surveys. In Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60(6), (pp. 821-836).10.1177/00131640021970934]Search in Google Scholar
[15. Creswell, J.W. (2007). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Prentice Hall; 3 edition]Search in Google Scholar
[16. Denscombe, M. (2010). The Good Research Guide for small-scale social research projects. Third Edition, McGraw-Hill International]Search in Google Scholar
[17. Dron, J. (2007). Designing the undesignable: social software and control. In Educational Technology & Society, 10(3), (pp. 60-71).]Search in Google Scholar
[18. Ehlers, U.-D. (2004). Quality in e-learning from a learner’s perspective. In European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning. Retrieved March 20, 2014, from http://www.eurodl.org/index.php?article=101]Search in Google Scholar
[19. Garrison, D.R. (2003). Self-Directed Learning and Distance Education. In M.G. Moore & W.G. Anderson (eds.) (1986), Handbook of distance education (2nd ed.), (pp. 161-168).]Search in Google Scholar
[20. Hammond, M. (2004). The peculiarities of teaching information and communication technology as a subject: A study of trainee and new ICT teachers in secondary schools. In Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 13(1), (pp. 29-42).10.1080/14759390400200171]Search in Google Scholar
[21. Hansson, H. and Moberg, J. (2011). Quality processes in technology enhanced thesis work. Bali, Indonesia: 24th ICDE World Conference on Open and Distance Learning.]Search in Google Scholar
[22. Hashim, N. and Hashim, H. (2010). Outcome based education performance evaluation on the final year degree project. In the Proceedings of the 7th WSEAS international conference on engineering education.]Search in Google Scholar
[23. Jones, M. (2013). Issues in Doctoral Studies-Forty Years of Journal Discussion: Where have we been and where are we going? In International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 8.10.28945/1859]Search in Google Scholar
[24. Kahiigi, E.K.; Ekenberg, L.; Hansson, H.; Tusubira, F.F. and Danielson, M. (2008). Exploring the e-Learning State of Art. In The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 6(2), (pp. 77-88).]Search in Google Scholar
[25. Kain, D.J. (2003). Teacher-Centered versus Student-Centered: Balancing Constraint and Theory in the Composition Classroom. In Pedagogy, 3(1), (pp. 104-108).10.1215/15314200-3-1-104]Search in Google Scholar
[26. Kuo, Y.; Walker, A.E.; Belland, B.R. and Schroder, K.E.E. (2013). Predictive Study of Student Satisfaction in Online Education Programs. In The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(1), (pp. 16-39).10.19173/irrodl.v14i1.1338]Search in Google Scholar
[27. Lemon, J.S. (2007). The effect of reminder intervals on response rates for web surveys. In Association for Survey Computing (p. 103).]Search in Google Scholar
[28. Moore, M. (1989). Three types of interactions. In The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), (pp. 1-6).10.1080/08923648909526659]Search in Google Scholar
[29. Muilenburg, L.Y. and Berge, Z.L. (2005). Student barriers to online learning: A factor analytic study. In Distance Education, 26(1), (pp. 29-48).10.1080/01587910500081269]Search in Google Scholar
[30. Penny, K.I. (2011). Factors that Influence Student E-learning Participation in a UK Higher Education Institution. In Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning, 7. Retrieved December 10, 2012, from http://ijello.org/Volume7/IJELLOv7p081-095Penny754.pdf10.28945/1377]Search in Google Scholar
[31. Peterson, J. (1993). Learning through teaching. In L. Odell (ed.), Theory and Practice in the Teaching of Writing: Rethinking the Discipline, (pp. 9-40). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[32. Reinhart, J. and Schneider, P. (2001). Student satisfaction, self-efficacy, and the perception of the two-way audio/video distance learning environment: A preliminary examination. In Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 2(4), (pp. 357-365).]Search in Google Scholar
[33. Richards, C. (2005). The Design of Effective ICT-Supported Learning. Activities: Exemplary Models, Changing Requirements, and New Possibilities. In Language Learning & Technology, 9(1), (pp. 60-79).]Search in Google Scholar
[34. Richards, C. (2006). Towards an integrated framework for designing effective ICT-supported learning environments: the challenge to better link technology and pedagogy. In Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 15 (2), (pp. 239-255). 10.1080/14759390600769771]Search in Google Scholar
[35. UHR (2013). The Swedish Higher Education Act, Föreskrifter och allmänna råd om bilaga till examensbevis (hsvfs 2002:5). Universitets Och Högskolerådet. Retrieved February 13, 2014, from, http://www.uhr.se/sv/Studier-och-antagning/Antagning-till-hogskolan/Examina-pauniversitet-och-hogskola/Bilaga-till-examensbevis/hsvfs/ ]Search in Google Scholar