APPLIED RESEARCH REVIEW Journal of the Technological Education Institute of Piraeus

VL. VI No 1 2003 ISSN - 1106 - 4110

. PRIMENTAS: The spiral distortion of single jersey tubular knitted fabricsI. Description of the effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

F. KOMISSOPOULOS, G. GAGALIS: E-learning in Greece:

The right content for the right purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

. : : 1990-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35

. : fi . fi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51

. : fi fi fi: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65

. : : fi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .77

. , . , . : / . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .99

. : Antoine Augustin Cournot: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .111

A. VASSILIADIS, M. ROULIA: Application of C.I. Disperse Blue 56to Poly(p-phenyleneterephthalamide) Fibers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .131

. : fi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .139

. : - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .155

. , . : , fi . . . . . . . . . .165

. : ... 41 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .177

. : (model) fi fi: fi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .201

K. KAVADIAS, J. KALDELLIS: An integrated aerodynamic simulation methodof wind turbine rotors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .221

. :, . , E. : fi fi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .243

. , . : . .271

Copyright TEI 2003

. 250

122 44

.: 210.53.81.100

ISSN - 1106 - 4110

APPLIED RESEARCH REVIEW

fi 250, 122 44

Journal of the Technological Education Institute of Piraeus250, Thivon str. 122 44 Egaleo, Greece

, fi fi / fi fi /

:

DITORIAL COMMITTEE

Kikilias Panayiotis TEI of Piraeus, PresidentAntoniou Solon TEI of PiraeusGoudas Constantine University of PatraDiamadopoulos Dimitris TEI of PiraeusExarchakos Theodoros University of AthensCantzos Constantine TEI of PiraeusKontesis Michalis TEI of PiraeusKoronakis Periclis TEI of PiraeusBleris Georgios University of Thessaloniki

Secretary: Kermeli Evangelia

The spiral distortion of single jersey tubularknitted fabricsI. Description of the effect

Anthony PrimentasDepartment of Textile Engineering... of Piraeus

Abstract

Most of the single jersey weft knitted fabrics suffer from wales distortion that result inthe spiral appearance of the knitted goods. This defect is called spirality and causes greattrouble to the knitted garment manufacturers. In this article, among the detailed exami-nation of the nature, the origins and the characteristics of the spirality effect, the distinc-tion between the spirality and the drop effect is attempted.

fi fi fi fi , fi fi. fi - . fi, , fi -.

The spiral distortion of single jersey tubular knitted fabrics. I. Description... 5

Vol. VIII, No 1, 2003, pp. 5-16

1. The nature of spirality

In many tension-free, tubular single-yarn fabrics, knitted in a plain stitch on a circularone needle system knitting machine, the lengthwise rows of loops (stitches) called needlelines or wales, should normally occupy a truly vertical line, parallel to the edges of the fab-ric and at right angles (90) to the crosswise rows of loops called courses, when the fabricis undistorted. In practice, however, an undesirable phenomenon becomes vividly appar-ent, where the wales show a pronounced bias towards the left or the right [Nutting, 1960,Buhler & Haussler, 1981, Araujo & Smith, 1989]. This fault occurs particularly in singlejersey knitted fabrics and garments where a dissymmetry of the loop between the face andback of the fabric becomes visible [Anon., 1980]. This results in seams that do not run par-allel to the edges of garment made up from such material, although the line of courses re-mains perpendicular to the edges of the fabric. This defect has been appropriately termedby Davis et al. (1934) as spirality, since it occurs chiefly in tubular fabrics, where thewales follow a spiral path around the axis of the fabric, forming an angle with the per-pendicular (Figure 1). The comparable defect on a flat knitted fabric is referred to as walespirality [Textile Institute, 1995] where the wales follow a sideways direction forming anangle with the perpendicular. This angle is termed as the spirality angle and is a meas-ure of the fabric spirality [Stevens, 1985].

Figure 1: Spirality of a knitted fabric

If the loops of each course on the technical face of a knitted fabric are examined close-ly, an inclination to lean slightly to the right (or left) is observed, indicating an excess ofyarn on the left or right hand side respectively of the loop, i.e., the formation of each loopis just a little lopsided [Hughes, 1945]. The lifting of the one side of the knitted loop fromthe plane of the fabric is the cause of the appearance of an almost rib-like structure form,as the wales are bunched together [Nutting, 1960].

When the fabric is on a knitting machine, the magnitude of this distortion is unpre-dictable because of the imposition of strains on it due to the take-down tension [Charnock,

6 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

1977]. As the fabric is released from the stress due to this tension, a complete change oc-curs in the shape of each of its unit cells (loops). This rearrangement of the fabric structureresults in an initial fabric distortion. If the fabric undergoes a process of wetting (immers-ing in water, dyeing, washing), there is a further distortion of the fabric which is mainly aresult of reappearance of the forces in the yarn which have been relaxed in the earliersteam setting of yarn [Fletcher & Roberts, 1953]. This factor must be recognised in pro-ducing a commercially acceptable washable product.

Stacey (1951), Parker (1981), Buhler & Haussler (1985), Haigh (1987) and Oinuma &Takeda (1988) who dealt with this phenomenon of spirality agree that the main reasonfor this defect is the unbalanced torque within the yarn, shown by its twist-liveliness,the release of torsional potential energy in the yarn, rather than just the presence of thetwist alone. In combination with the unbalanced active torque in the yarn, there is thecontribution of fabric geometry. The degree of freedom of yarn movement in the fabricstructure contributes significantly to the rise of spirality [Nutting, 1971]. The more slackthe fabric structure, the greater the spirality. This slackness can be achieved by two ways:by changing the tightness factor or, by changing the linear density of the yarn. Haigh(1987) has stated that the loop twisting, over to approximately the same angle as the spi-rality angle, is the result of the section of yarn in each loop that is trying to move to astate of lower strain under the constraint of forces from neighbouring loops. Leaf &Glaskin (1955) and Munden (1959) have shown that much of this distortion arises fromthe residual torque in the yarn. Newly produced ring spun yarns exhibit a tremendoustendency to untwist, before being treated with any dry or wet relaxation method. Thisphenomenon could be explained by taking into consideration that, elastic stresses as welltorsional forces (torque), set up in the component fibres by the twisting action during thespinning process, attempt to be relieved. This tends to cause an opening up of the yarnand gives raise to yarn and fabric defects (e.g., snarls, spirality, cockling) [Anon., 1980].Hence, the greater the twist-liveliness, the greater the spirality [Nutting, 1960]. At thispoint it is necessary to mention that, although this statement is generally acceptable, itwas found in the literature that there is confusion between the twist amount in the yarnand the yarn torque [Davis et al. 1934, Dutton, 1951]. Some statements that reflect this,are given below:...the degree of spirality is related to the twist factor (number of turns per length of the

yarn) [Brackenbury, 1992]; Yarns with lower turns per unit length, tend to develop less spirality in the fabric than

yarns with high twist levels... [Stevens, 1985]....spirality increases with the turns per inch ... [Davis & Edwards 1935];...spirality is often due to an excess amount of twist in the yarn from which the fabric is

knitted... [Roytowski, 1972];

The spiral distortion of single jersey tubular knitted fabrics. I. Description... 7

2. Direction of spirality

It is well known that the yarn twist direction determines the direction of the spiralityin fabrics knitted from singles short staple yarns. Thus, if a Z-twisted yarn is been knittedto produce a single jersey fabric, the technical face of the fabric exhibits spirality in the Zdirection and vice versa [Buhler & Haussler 1985] (Figures 1,2).

Z-spirality S-spirality

Figure 2: Spirality direction of knitted fabrics

3. Measurement of spirality

The angle of spirality can be measured with the help of a protractor, or by using aspecially designed transparent plastic board as is illustrated in Figure 3. The line EF,which is perpendicular to the sides AB and CD of the rectangle ABCD, plays the role ofthe reference line of a wale in the ideal perpendicular relation that exists between walesand courses in an undistorted knitted fabric. If the line AB tallies with a course and theline EG lies along the actual line of the wales, then the angle FEG is the angle of spiral-ity. Using the distances AD10 cm and FG (h cm), Oinuma and Takeda (1988) calcu-lated the percentage spirality (PS%) which is expressed by the following equation:PS(%)(h/10)100 and it is considered as the sum of the net spirality caused by theyarn torque and the additional spirality caused by all other factors.

Figure 3: Transparent board with a protractor configuration

A E B

D F G C

8 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

Another test method for measuring the spirality of the knitted fabrics has been pro-posed by AATCC [Bailey, 1992]. In this test, the fabric samples are marked with a squarebefore washing and drying (Figure 4) and the change in the diagonals of the square ismeasured to calculate the percentage spirality (PS) given by the following formula:

PS(%) 2

(

(

A

B

C

D

B

A

D

C

)

) 100

Nutting (1960) has stated that for a full quantitative description of spirality, both di-rection and angle must be quoted.

Figure 4: Method for the calculation of the percentage spirality (by AATCC)

4. Acceptable spirality

Over many years in dealing with spirality, many workers, researchers and manufac-turers have set limits of spirality acceptability. For some, the maximum spirality angle of5 is acceptable [Nutting, 1971, Smirfitt, 1975] whereas for Haigh (1987) the angle of 7is taken as the upper limit. In United States [West Point Stevens, 1993] a percentage spi-rality of 8% is considered as the maximum a fabric may exhibit to be acceptable by themaking-up industry.

5. Distinction between spirality and drop effects

Bailey (1992) has described the spirality or wale skew as the resulting configurationof a knitted fabric where the wales are skewed from the vertical. The reason for this dis-tortion is the yarn twist liveliness. On the other hand, if the courses skew from the hori-zontal, the apparent effect of the fabric is called course skew (Figure 5). This has alsobeen termed by Oinuma & Takeda (1988) as the drop or corkscrew effect and is in-herent in the process. This occurs due to the helical disposition of the courses [Anon.,1980] and depends on the fact that articles produced with a spiral configuration have astart and an end of a coil not on the same plane.

The spiral distortion of single jersey tubular knitted fabrics. I. Description... 9

Figure 5: Comparison between Drop and Spirality effects

In weft circular knitting machines, fabrics present a course skew because the yarn isknitted in the circumferential direction [Buhler & Haussler, 1985]. According to Brack-enbury (1992), the degree of the course skew or drop depends on the number of feedersused on the knitting machine. In recent years, the machine manufacturers tend to increasethe number of feeders. For this reason, the problem is likely to become more acute. Thedegree of drop is a function of the step S of the helix (Figure 6) due to the number ofcourses knitted per revolution of the machine, to the number of courses per centimetre[Anon., 1980] and the machine circumference. The direction of the inclination of the dropdepends on the direction of either the revolving cam box or the rotating cylinder.

C C

W W

Z S

Drop (Course Skew)

W W

C C

Z S

Spirality (Wale Skew)

10 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

Buhler & Haussler (1981) and Araujo & Smith (1989) suggest that both the spiralityand the drop effect contribute to the final distortion or total spirality of the fabric. It be-comes essential therefore, to describe the effect of the number of feeders on the drop phe-nomenon as well as to investigate the contribution of the drop to the total spirality ofthe produced fabrics.

Figure 6: Effect of the number of feeders on the fabric drop (course skew)

D

Arrangement of a Course in aKnitted Fabric (One Feeder)

DOK

Opened Form of the Figure

LS s

(a)

D

Arrangement of a Course in aKnitted Fabric (Four Feeders)

DOK

1

Opened Form of the Figure

M

S1

(b)

The spiral distortion of single jersey tubular knitted fabrics. I. Description... 11

5.1. Drop effect

In order to investigate the influence of the number of feeders on the drop effect, themodel illustrated in Figure 6 has been used.

Assumptions:

The height of a course (stitch - loop row) or the distance between the central lines oftwo adjacent courses (step S of the helix) is one millimetre. In the Figure 6a one feeder isused while in the Figure 6b, four feeders are used. The diameter of the tubular fabric isassumed to be 23 cm. The various curved (spiral) lines represent a possible ideal positionof the central lines of the successive courses.

Opening the fabric (cutting along a wale) it can be seen that the length of a coursein the first case (Figure 6a- one feeder) is smaller than that of the other case (Figure 6b-four feeders).

Following simple geometrical analysis it can be seen that:

OL ((23 )2 1) OL 72.2567 cm

Also, OM ((23 )2 42) OM 72.2577 cmThe difference 0.001 cm of the length of the courses due to the insertion of three more

feeders can be neglected since the nominal width OK of the opened fabric is 72.2566 cm(d 23 cm).

Furthermore, the inclination of the course in the fabric can be: for one feeder 0.00138 % or 0.0793 (tan-1(S/OK)) for four feeders 0.00152 % or 0.317 for 144 feeders 0.14375 % or 3.038

Note: Machines with 144 feeders usually have a diameter of 86.36 cm (34 inches). There-fore the length of a course will be ((86.36 )2 1442) 271.69 cm.The width of the opened fabric is 86.36271.3 cm and the angle will betan-1 (14.4/271.3) 0.053 rad or 3.038.

The angle of inclination in all the cases is negligible, although the insertion of three ex-tra feeders, in the second case, increases the angle by 75 % (angle ).

In the extreme case of machines with 160 feeders, the inclination in terms of angle de-grees could be considered as contributing to the total spirality, leading to a first con-clusion that a large number of feeders alters, although slightly, the spirality.

Araujo and Smith (1989) attempted to explain their statement of total spirality bycarrying out the following analysis:

Figure 7 represents the development of spirality in a single jersey fabric knitted witha Z-twisted yarn on a multifeed circular machine with an anticlockwise rotating cylinder.

12 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

Figure 7: Spirality of a single jersey fabric knitted from a Z-twisted yarn on a multifeedcircular machine with an Anticlockwise-rotating cylinder.

XX Position of a course due to the total spirality = N/W (open width of fabric);AA Position of a wale due to the total spirality;BB Position of a wale when spirality (drop) due to the number of feeders exists;XD Position of a course when spirality (drop) due to the number of feeders exists;XD Displacement between two consecutive courses knitted by the same feederF/C;F Total number of feeders on the knitting machine;N Total number of needles in the knitting machine;C Number of courses per unit length;W Number of wales per unit length;f Spirality (drop) angle due to the number of feeders (YO

^B);y Spirality angle due to the yarn twist liveliness (BO

^A); fy Total spirality angle (YO

^A or AO^Y).

From the triangle DXX:

tanaf N

F

/

/

W

C

N

F

W

C (1)

Considering that W K

W , C

K

C (2)

and loop shape factor KC/W K

K

W

C (3)

where KW, KC are non dimensional parameters whose values depend on the state of re-laxation and is the loop (stitch) length (mm), then,

tanaf KC

1

/W af tan

-1 N

F

KC/W (4)

FN

ABY

D

X

YB

X

A

af

af

afy

ay

The spiral distortion of single jersey tubular knitted fabrics. I. Description... 13

From the last equation it could be stated that the angle of the course skew (drop) de-pends not only on the number of feeders but also on the shape of the loop in the particu-lar state of relaxation and on the number of the active needles in the knitting machine,which in turn depends on the machine cut and diameter.

If the direction of the rotating cylinder reverses (i.e., clockwise) then Figure 7 will changeto the form shown in Figure 8, indicating that the overall spirality angle will be reduced.

Figure 8: Spirality of a single jersey fabric knitted from a Z-twisted yarn on a multifeedcircular machine with a Clockwise-rotating cylinder.

It could be concluded then that, in many cases it would be beneficial rather than detri-mental, from the total spirality point of view, to use a large number of feeders on a ma-chine, as the drop (due to the number of feeders) and the spirality (due to the yarn twistliveliness) can combine together to create more skew, or they may partially offset eachother and result in less skew [Bailey, 1992]. On the other hand, multiple feeders increasethe chance of a stripy fabric being produced because of possible yarn linear density and/orshade variation between feeders [Walker & Sleath, 1950].

Further to the conclusions of the above investigation, it has been suggested [Anon.,1958] that the number of feeders is responsible only for a distorted appearance of the fab-ric (in terms of drop effect), while the actual spirality is the same whether a single or mul-tifeed machine is used (Figure 9).

Figure 9: Appearance of a distorted fabric due to the drop effect (a. one feeder - b. five feeders), with 0 Spirality Angle

a b

AB Y

D

X

Y B

X

A

af

af

afy

ay

14 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

References

Anon., (1958). More about spirality, Knit Knacks, Vol. 3, No 3, p. 10Anon. (1980). Complement aux etudes de vrillage des tricots, ITF Maille Bull. Scient.,

Vol. 9, No 33, p. 85Araujo, M.D. and Smith, G.W. (1989). Spirality of knitted fabrics. Part I: The nature of

spirality, Textile Research Journal, Vol. 59, No 5, p. 247Bailey, D.L., (1992). Factors affecting the skew of 100% cotton single jersey fabrics, Air

Jet Spinning Conference, College of Textiles, NCSU, Charlotte, N.C., May 28Brackenbury, T., (1992). Knitting Clothing Technology, Blackwell Scientific Pub., Ox-

fordBuhler, G., Haussler, W. (1981). Skewed stitches in plain jersey fabrics, Textil Praxis In-

ternational, Vol. 36, No 10, p. 1092Buhler, G., Haussler, W. (1985) Influences affecting the skew of single jersey fabrics,

Knitting Technique, Vol. 7, No 6, p. 373Charnock, I.L.A. (1977). Yarn quality for knitting, Textile Institute & Industry, Vol. 15,

No 5, p. 175 Davis, W., Edwards, C.H., Stanbury, G.R. (1934). Spirality in knitted fabrics, Journal of

the Textile Institute, Vol. 25, No 3, p. T122Davis, W., Edwards, C.H. (1935). Spirality in knitted fabrics: II Cotton, Journal of the

Textile Institute, Vol. 26, No 3, p. T103Dutton, W.A. (1951). Faults in knitting yarns, Hosiery Times, Vol. 24, No 270, p. 54Fletcher, H.M. & Roberts, S.H. (1953). Distortion in knit fabrics and Its relation to

shrinkage in laundering, Textile Research Journal, Vol. 23, No 1, p. 37Haigh, J.S. (1987). Loop distortion in plain knit fabrics, Wool Science Review, No 64,

p. 81.Hughes, J.W. (1945). Distorted loops (Avoided by knitting machine adjustment), Tex-

tile World, Vol. 95, No 12, p. 123 Leaf, G.A.V., Glaskin, A. (1955). The geometry of a plain knitted loop, Journal of the

Textile Institute, Vol. 46, No 9, p. T587Munden, D.L. (1959). The geometry and dimensional properties of plain-knit fabrics,

Journal of the Textile Institute, Vol. 50, No 7, p. T448Nutting, T.S. (1960). Spirality in weft knitted fabrics, HATRA Research Bulletin, Vol.

4, No 6, p. 18

The spiral distortion of single jersey tubular knitted fabrics. I. Description... 15

Nutting, T.S. (1971). Spirality in weft knitted fabrics, HATRA Notes, No13Oinuma, R., Takeda, H. (1988). Spirality in plain-jersey fabrics knitted of three-ply cot-

ton yarns, Journal of Textile Machinery Society of Japan (English edition), Vol.34, No 3, p. 74

Parker, R. (1981). Cockling in fully-fashioned garments, Knitting Industry TechnicalReview, Vol. 1, No 2, p. 25

Roytowski, R. (1972). The effects of spinning variables on deformations in plain knittedfabrics, M.Phil. Thesis, The University of Leeds, Leeds, England

Smirfitt, J.A., (1975). An introduction to weft knitting, Merrow, WatfordStacey, P. (1957). Twist Liveliness, HATRA Research Bulletin, Vol. 4, No 1, p. 17Stevens, J.C. (1985). Knitting to specification, African Textiles, Dec./Jan., p. 28 Textile Institute, (1995). Textile Terms and Definitions, 10th Edition, Textile Institute,

ManchesterWalker, E.M., Sleath, C.E., (1950). Defects in knitted structures due to yarn irregulari-

ties, Journal of the Textile Institute, Vol. 41, No 7, p. P559West Point Stevens, N.C., U.S.A., (1993). Private communication

16 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

E-learning in Greece:The right content for the right purpose

Fedon KomissopoulosTechnology and Operations ManagementUniversity of Piraeus

George GagalisComputer EngineeringMathematic University Messina Italy

Abstract

The distance learning using electronic means and a whole philosophy is concentratedin the world "e-Learning". This paper has a goal, to give a first clear view of e-Learningunder the prospect of content that is going to be distributed over a certain technology in-frastructure, having clear objectives (education, training) so that results are visible andmeasurable. Further, there is an analysis of the participants in the Greek eLearning mar-ket (the Greek value chain with the key players) to shade light on some times similar andhazy meanings and the future trends of the market. This paper is the outcome of data col-lected from interviews with managing staff of the e-Learning markets companies.

fi "e-Learning". fi fi e-Learning fi fi , fi (-, ) . -, e-Learning -fi fi , . - fi e-Learning .

E-learning in Greece: The right content for the right purpose 17

Vol. VIII, No 1, 2003, pp. 17-34

1. Introduction

The last few years, many companies have joined the competition field of distancelearning using new technologies, especially with the use of Internet.

Like everything, this business effort should have a specific goal and philosophy. Com-mon questions like for whom do I provide my services, using what and how should I pro-vide it, need answers in order to have a prosperous business horizon.

That is why, after a thorough study of the Greek relevant market place, we presentconclusions that will reveal to us that even if we are dealing with new technologies, moretraditional principals still affect the quality of our service.

Principals like What is the really need of my customer? Get trained or tought?Then the implementation of the offered solution to a specific and well-positioned re-

quest has better results.

2. What is e-Learning?

E-Learning refers to anything delivered, enabled, or mediated by electronic technolo-gy for the explicit purpose of learning (American Society for Training and Development).

Of course there are so many other definitions that a book could not include all of them.For our purposes we would agree with the glossary of elearners.com (http://elearners.com/services/faq/glossary.htm) on any definition.

E-Learning tends to be considered as a tool for knowledge management, performancesupport and virtual communities for many organizations, a strategic tool something thatis not happening with e-Training (www.astd.org).

3. How did e-Learning occured?

Figure 1

E-BusinessDistance

LearningE-Learning

18 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

It is very clear to see that e-Learning seems to be an e-business aspect that joint thephilosophy and flexibility of distance Learning with the revolution of telecom, network-ing and new media.

4. Other subclasses

Figure 2

If one would take the distance Learning point of view, we see that e-Learning is some-thing quite smaller from distance Learning philosophy and practice, just because of theuse of new technology, which goes from total e-Learning (satellite, LAN, Wan and inter-net) to a simple Computer Based Training.

Although right now we present subclasses based upon technology, soon we will come tothe conclusion that the content and the need are what make the final separation of definitions.

5. How is e-Learning delivered?

A wide range of technological options is available to the distance educator: Voice (audio conferencing, tapes, voice mails ) Video (slides, film, videotape and real-time moving images combined with audio con-

ferencing - Videoconferencing - instructional TV) Data (electronic mail, fax, real-time computer conferencing, and World-Wide Web

applications, Computer-assisted instruction (CAI) uses the computer as a self-con-tained teaching machine to present individual lessons, Computer-managed in-struction (CMI) uses the computer to organize instruction and track student recordsand progress. The instruction itself need not be delivered via a computer, although

Distance

LearningE-Learning

On Line

LearningCRT

E-learning in Greece: The right content for the right purpose 19

CAI is often combined with CMI. Computer-mediated education (CME) describescomputer applications that facilitate the delivery of instruction.

Other off-line products: DVD, CD-Roms etc. Print is a foundational element of distance education programs. Various print for-

mats are available like textbooks, study guides etc.Going a bit more further on the technology side of e-Learning we can see two types

of learning:

5.1. Synchronous - Asynchronous Learning

Synchronous learning, during which trainer (educator) and the trainees (students)have to be at the same time in front of their PCs (or videoconferencing systems, inter-active TV, or desktop video conference) in order to communicate and create that specialeducator - student relationship. That means that using this method we can have 100% online lesson, live questions, better relations between students etc.

Asynchronous learning is the opposite thing. The session is recorded and it is avail-able on demand on the server, or it is sent attached to e-mail and send to the target group.That means that the student can read the teachers mail at night, do his/her homework dur-ing office hours and join a forum at dinnertime.

The most common method of learning is a mix of the above. That is because all stu-dents must have "physical" date with other fellow students in order to gain team spirit andcommon sense of what they are doing and the fact that they have different paces- theymight even be at different time zones. Of course there are economic reasons also, like thecost of a full videoconference program, or video on demand. Finally, the mix of synchro-nous and asynchronous training gives the rate of self-paced programs.

5.2. Advantages of e-Learning

E-Learning has advantages for both for the trainer and the trainees. Let us not forgetthat it was planned to be for people who are geographically far away from school or uni-versity campuses

The above also includes people who do not have time to go to university, or oppor-tunity, even if they live next to it, ex they are working many hours, or they are disabled.

The total educational content is easily modified and maintained, always updated, nomore wasted time neither going to campus, nor renting a house near the campus.

Here is a short list of the advantages of e/l: Reach a wider student audience Broad array of choices: earn a degree, sharpen your work skills, obtain continuous ed-

ucation credits and prepare for a new job, all without leaving the keyboard.

20 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

Meet the needs of students who are unable to attend on-campus classes Involve outside speakers who would otherwise be unavailable Link students from different social, cultural, economic, and experiential backgrounds Usually e-Learning programs are self paced Usably e-Learning programs are finished in shorter time than traditional programs.

5.3. Disadvantages of e-Learning

Of course there are some disadvantages, like: Participants do not develop their communication skills (compared to traditional ways), In order to get in the e-classroom you will need fast and expensive equipment (hard-

ware and software speaking) Lets not forget that web is not always up and running. The platform and the content of e-Learning need very responsible designing. It has

happened before, while IT leading companies were creating educational software with-out even asking psychologists or teachers.

Someone has to ready to invest sufficient time for his program. E-Learning programs are some time two times more expensive than traditional ones. One must be quite disclipine, with critical thinking Good knowledge of access equipment (modem, email, web browsers etc.)

5.4. Other e-Learning issues:

5.4.1. E-Learning and Copyright

A copyright grants the holder the sole right to reproduce or grant permission to oth-ers to reproduce the copyrighted works. The copyright holder is defined as the person whoowns the exclusive rights to a work. The protection is limited to original works, whetheror not they have been published. However, it is the expression of the idea that is copy-righted, not the idea in and of itself (Brinson and Radcliffe, 1994).

Educators have always utilised outside resources to enhance the Learning (and e-Training) experience for their students. These resources can range from a newspaper clip-ping to a book to a movie. All of these items, and many other resources, are copyrightedmaterials. There are both civil and criminal penalties for infringement of copyright law.

Distance educators have a unique dilemma when dealing with copyright law. Due tothe time that the law was passed and the rapid advancement of technology for distance ed-ucation, the provisions for education in the copyright law are often unclear for the dis-tance education classroom. It is very good for us to know that the same content in a tra-ditional program of a university is also copyrighted and used on-line.

E-learning in Greece: The right content for the right purpose 21

5.4.2. What is ROI?

When you are planning to do business, the main thing you want to know is what willyou gain for every money unit you will invest on your new business. That is an easy wayto understand when you begin to make profit. We call that Return On Investment.

It is very good to see education that way, especially when you are paying to educateyour employees. How many seminars and work hours have been wasted? What did youget back as performance of you staff who got that extra training?

In order to calculate ROI you will need to be able to measure the total financial ben-efits derived from a program and then compare it to its costs.

For example, if someone is translator and took a program where would be taught howto use MS Word more efficiently, and the total outcome of our written translations wouldincrease, so would his/her income!

The only thing we have to do is to translate it to numbers: ex. Before we could type 5translated pages per day, after the seminar we can type 15 and give it to the customerfaster, so 10 pages * our price/page is our total benefit from the seminar.

And ROI is {(Total benefit - Total cost)/Total cost} *100. Keep in mind that ROI can-not take all benefits into account. It is only a number. But what that has to do with e-Learning?

The reduction of traditional training programs of course. Well, first of all, the multime-dia approach saves time! (35-45% training time reduction) That is the first cost we can cut-back! The second cost is the cost of travel and take your car to go to the seminars. An oth-er cost you can cut is that of people missing from work in order to attend to the seminar.

5.4.3. Is e-Learning (and e-Training) effective?

Effective distance education programs begin with careful planning and a focused un-derstanding of course requirements and student needs. Research suggests distant studentsbring basic characteristics to their learning experience, which influences their success incoursework. Distance education students are voluntarily seeking further education. Most-ly, they have post-secondary education goals with expectations for higher grades, they arehighly motivated and self-disciplined and they are older.

5.4.4. How Important is Interaction?

Research findings on the need for interaction have produced some important guide-lines for instructors organising courses for distant students, for example: Learners valuetimely feedback regarding course assignments, exams, and projects, learners benefit sig-nificantly from their involvement in small learning groups. These groups provide supportand encouragement along with extra feedback. Most importantly, the groups foster thefeeling that if help is needed it is r available; Learners are more motivated if they are in

22 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

frequent contact with the instructor. More structured contact might be utilized as a moti-vational tool. (Thrilled & Bronska,1994)

5.4.5. How does e-Learning work?

E-Learning and costPer course or per credit as well as any additional charges must be clear to you before

deciding. Also payment methods are a bit more "e" ex. Major credit cards. Do not forgetthe cost of dialing in from your PC in order to participate in the course.

What is the best Technology mix in order to provide an e-Learning program?Using this integrated approach, the educator's task is to carefully select among the

technological options. The goal is to build a mix of instructional media, meeting the needsof the learner in a manner that is instructionally effective and economically prudent.

5.4.6. Evaluating students

When teaching at a distance, educators must address a different teaching challengethan when teaching in a traditional classroom. For example, instructors no longer have Atraditional, familiar classroom, A relatively homogeneous group of students, Face-to-facefeedback during class (e.g. students' questions, comments, body language, and facial ex-pressions), Total control over the distance delivery system, Convenient opportunities totalk to students individually.

For these reasons, distance educators may find it useful to not only formally evaluatestudents through testing and homework, but to use a more informal approach (see Ange-lo and Cross, 1993) in collecting data to determine:

"Student comfort with the method used to deliver the distant instruction, Appropri-ateness of assignments, Clarity of course content, If class time is well spent, Teaching ef-fectiveness, How a course can be improved."

5.4.7. Types of Evaluation

Evaluation can be either formative, summative, or a combination of both.Formative evaluation: Is an on-going process to be considered at all stages of in-

struction Will enable the instructor to improve the course as he/she proceeds, Facilitatescourse and content adaptation. Will identify major gaps in the instructional plan or theneed for minor adjustments. Some strategies that educators can use to collect formativedata from their distant students such as electronic mail, postcards etc calls at other times.

Summative evaluation: Assesses overall effectiveness of the finished product orcourse. Can be a springboard in developing a revision plan. Can be a baseline of infor-mation for designing a new plan, program, or course. Will not help current students sinceit is conducted upon course completion. Some questions that educators may want to ask

E-learning in Greece: The right content for the right purpose 23

students when collecting summative data include: weaknesses of the course or strengthsof the course, If you were teaching the course, what would you do differently, and so on.(Angello & Cropps , 1993)

5.4.8. Evaluation Methods

Within the context of formative and summative evaluation, data gathered throughquantitative and qualitative methods.

Quantitative evaluation: Involves asking questions, which can be statistically tabu-lated and analysed, frequently using a scale, check list, or yes/no responses. Limits stu-dents to responding to the categories made available to them. Needs a large student sam-ple for relevant statistical analyses. (Angelo & Crops, 1993)

Qualitative evaluation: Is typically more subjective. Involves gathering a widerrange and depth of information. Is more difficult to tabulate into neat categories. Will beless affected by typical small class size. Is a more flexible and dynamic method? Is not lim-ited to pre-conceived topic of inquiry. Allows for student output of topics. (Angelo &Crops, 1993)

Although the above aspects of e-Learning (and e-Training) are critical, there is onehidden aspect that has much to do with technology. It is the content.

6. The content

Definitions: Content: Defined through its function and context information, transaction, enter-

tainment, education and lifelong learning E-Content: information published on any internet platform, from the web to wireless

devices, to internet appliances and broadband television

(From the e-content meeting held in National Documentation Center in Athens, 23rdof November 2001 with mss Heli Lehtimaeki, commissioner of European Committee forSociety of Information)

Technologically speaking, the content of an e-Learning procedure comes from thecombination of traditional media and new media. From a quality point of view, eventhough technology can present an appropriate content the right way, it is very commonto present the inappropriate content the wrong way, just because we had not set a spe-cific quality goal, or we did know the exact use of the content.

Let us take for example that we have a need and we address to a company. The firststep is to sit down together with the customer and discuss the need, for example the needfor his secretary to learn and use commercial correspondence in French language.

24 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

The second step is to define the level of knowledge we want the knowledge target (thesecretary) to acquire- and what is the present level of knowledge.

The third step is to set the time frame we want to achieve that (it may be a week or 6months).

After those three steps we are ready to plan and create or adapt an existing programto our customers needs. See again, we are very much interested in time and level ofknowledge.

Figure 3

Figure 4

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

Step 1 Step 2

Linear Content narration - Presentation

Non-linear Content narration - Presentation

Step 3

Step 4 Step 5 Step 6

Linear

ComplexLengthy

ConciseBrief

UserContact

Time

Narrative non-Linear

Teaching Education

Training Reference

browsing

E-learning in Greece: The right content for the right purpose 25

On the scheme above we can see the relation between time and content complexitybut one must have a very clear view of what is the desired outcome of the content pro-duced. (Yale University)

According to the Oxford Reference section dictionary, to "Train" someone is to bringhim to a desired standard of performance by instruction and practice, especially for an oc-cupation. According to the Yale scheme, when training someone, the content should bebrief and very linear (from step 1 to step 2 and step 3-end).

In the same dictionary we can find also:"Reference": referring to a source for information (very brief content but in no case lin-

ear)"Teaching": to impart information or skill to a person or about a subject, systematical-

ly. As expected, the content used for this scope should be linear (systemat-ically) but lengthy enough to cover all aspects (theory and practice). Teach-ing is the most used method for Learning, so we tend to use the word learn-ing (and e-Learning) although the word teaching is more precise.

"Education": refers to systematic instruction with aspects of character development. Thelengthiest and most non-linear of all.

"Browsing": is to read or inspect items on display covers a small part of everything.

So, from now on, even if we use the term learning (knowledge acquired by study) wemean something deeper that has to do with the complexity of the offered content and thedesired outcome of the procedure.

For our example with the secretary, some short courses - seminars on commercial cor-respondence (TRAINING) would do just fine.

An other issue one should consider that the content (at least the biggest part of it) inall "e" activities consist of multimedia and that is why e-Learning has so many tools topass the right meaning over its audience.

Something to keep in our minds: In the traditional educational process, content weremost of the times in text format. In e-Learning, e-Training etc, content is a combinationof text, sound, video, images, animation, simulations etc.

Distributing content for e-Learning purposes can be something just in time and quitepersonalized thanks to content management platforms.(e-week, 15th Nov.01)

Closing this section, we draw, as conclusions that content can not be stable. It must beadjusted to specific needs the learner has.

So, right now I believe we can make a first separation of meanings depending on tech-nology used and desired outcome. This summative table is a first impression from the in-terviews and the bibliography studied.

26 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

Infrastructure Most common way From the content point of view

(distribution channel of communication

/path for delivering (Synchronous Learning Training Education

content) -asynchronous)

Using all types

of infrastructure

(Satelite, Internet,Synchronous e-Learning e-training *

Intranet, Lan, PC)

Using almost 100%Synchronous

On line Learning On line On line

Internet (and e-Training) training education

Using LAN, WAN

& Intranet - Internet AsynchronousWeb based Web based

*

- Extranetlearning training

Using off-line products **Computer

(CD-Rom etc)Asynchronous *

Based Training*

* No standard reference was found in any interview or in the studied bibliography** If you have children it is most likely that you have gone home with a CD-ROM for example "

my first chemistry lessons" just to help them with their chemistry at school. That was their firstcontact with CBT.

7. Impact of e-Learning (and e-Training) in the labor marketin the future

There will be demand for roles of the following three kinds of people, because of e-Learning:1) Animation/Multimedia developers: these will be the people who actually code and

program the e-Learning modules2) Learning consultants: people with functional experience of the training and develop-

ment industry who will act as functional consultants when a Learning Managementsystem (ex. SABA) is to be deployed in an existing training establishment

3) Content Developers: These will be people who will ultimately convert the offline con-tent to content suitable for e-Learning and will be instructional System Designers.

Some of them already exist or they play more than one role (ex content developer andmultimedia developer), but there will be an increase of demand for staff with such knowl-edge with expertise. (From e-Learning: Rhetoric vs Reality, Gautam Ghosh, www.hu-manlinks.com/manners/articles/e_learning .htm, 16/10/2001)

E-learning in Greece: The right content for the right purpose 27

8. What is the total learning solution?

It is the mix of Technology Content Services Personnel to assist the aboveoffered by a provider that can meet the need of his client for distance education using

new technologies.

In order to have a more helicopter view of the situation in Greece, most important is-sues and findings from the interviews will be presented in the following pages.

9. The business model

9.1. Present situation in Greece

Although it is true that Greece is a slow starter, when talking about new technologiesand new habits concerning technologies, we have experienced great changes past fewyears.

Already 1 out of 2 persons has a mobile phone, 7 out of 10 have a PC in their homeor office but only 1 out of 10 has an internet connection. This very small percentage isnot caused only from the still expensive cost of dial up or the charges of our local P.T.Tor even the "untrustworthy" for many people Greek telecom infrastructure.

While Europe is going mobile (From the e-content meeting held in National Docu-mentation Center in Athens, 23rd of November 2001 with mss Heli Lehtimaeki, commis-sioner of European Committee for Society of Information), Greece has a very good per-formance on adapting e-Learning applications (according to CEDEFOP, www.train-ingvillage.gr).The 43% of the Greek participants to the survey of CEDEFOP answeredthat provide or use methods and tools for e-Learning.

The problem is that there is no clear picture (not only for Greece but for the entireEC) regarding cost and profit evolution. (CEDEFOP)

9.2. A survey

When stuff, from the signor management of companies (most of then managing di-rectors, marketing managers and new business developers) whos main part of incomecomes from giving e-Learning solutions, was interviewed, interesting things, that will bepresented to you right away, were found.

28 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

In order to be able to make this specific interview, we designed a questionnaire withopen-ended questions (Companies names and personal data of participants available). Inmost situations the interview was more an open dialogue with many findings that we triedto include in these pages as clearly as possible.

First of all, e-Learning for most companies that give e-Learning solutions, is just a ter-minology which describes transferring data of any form (video, sound, images) transferredto the target by any electronic mean (satellite, digital TV, internet, intranet, CD-ROMetc.) for educational purpose.

No different definitions for describing e-Learning and e-Training or e-education werereferred, but every one of the interviewed people agreed to the Yale differentiation con-cerning content and final result of the procedure.

9.3. The business model

Even further, all players behind the line, meaning those who cooperate in order to givea total e-Learning solution to the customers, have many beliefs in common. For example,it is very clear for them that e-Learning (and e-Training) was the outcome of distanceLearning (and e-Training) and e-business (as presented before).

The model is divided in two parts: starting from the left, the content developers the platform developers the distributors of the service

The second part is the customers part: end customers (consumers) educational institutions Corporate customers

The customers side will not be analyzed. The reason we did such a separation was toshow the use from the customer. A corporate customer is going to resell it or get moremoney from the skills he took an end customer is taking and keeping the knowledge forhim self etc. Further, there is a categorization based upon a marketing approach that ismore complete.

ContentProviders(producersor resellers) A

Platformdevelopersor resellers) B

Distributorschannels(ISP' s etc.) C

EducationalInstitutions E

End customers D

Corporate F

E-learning in Greece: The right content for the right purpose 29

The whole model is the value chain. The total value of this chain is not easy to compute,because each part of the value chain may be "asset" of each other. That is a very commontactic for big companies that want to be established as total e-Learning solutions providers.

Total e-Learning provider according to the interviewees, is the company who haspresence to all the elements of the first part of the model. Only 20% of the players are to-tal solution providers.

10. The first part

A. Content developersContent developers and/or resellers. Mainly, companies that have a traditional rela-

tionship with educational content. "It is easier and cheaper to localize a content fromabroad than to create it" that may sound logical, but that is exactly where Greek e-Learn-ing industry starts to fail its own market. As many times before, even today we try to lo-calize content rather than create something to respond our own needs.

That is why most courses available on line are soft (business) skills or IT skills devel-oped e.x. in Israel, localized for Greek market.(communication solutions, p.48, 16th issue,Nov-Dec01)

Few exceptions try to take head of the market and as interviewees said they have agood chance because the produce their own content based on realistic needs. (Tailormade, as we will see later on).

An other case that e-Learning is working subservient and not competitively too tra-ditional learning is the following:

Private tutorial centers have placed their content on asynchronous platforms and stu-dents who missed classes or want to read more about a specific subject visit the virtualclassroom.

The content must be adjusted to the specific needs of the customer, to the technolo-gies used, to the platform and of course the courses objectives.

It is very difficult to give access to a dial up user in virtual classrooms were on linelectures take place.

B. The platform developersActually, 50-70% of the involved companies just buy platforms developed abroad and

pay for rights. The company with the platform is actually the main player who tries to at-tract customers. From a quality point of view it is not supposed to be that way because aplatform is the outcome of technology, designed accordingly to meet some needs andstandards.

The feeling we have from the interviews is that the content developers should attractthe customer and the features of the platform should just be added value services.

30 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

Platforms are mainly divided in satellite and Internet platforms. Also, synchronousand asynchronous (according to the synchronous or asynchronous way the are going tobe used). Even if the trend is to use synchronous platforms, in everyday life we see theopposite, the use of asynchronous platforms. And it is not the cost of a synchronous les-son, or the telecom infrastructure that has the last word for the choice between a syn-chronous and an asynchronous platform. It is the use, what positives of e-Learning (ande-Training) we intend to take advantage off.

The Greek value chain according to the interviewees has a very big question markfor this part of the model. Mainly because other financial factors reflect - react on them.For example, Piraeus bank trying to be in every "e" business bought 41% of EXODUS.

The cost for a platform may vary and it depends of the users. Most platforms are usedon a server and the server is connected to the Internet or the Intranet of a company.

C. The distributorsFor e-Learning (e-Training etc) applications, the classical distribution technologies

are: Satellite, TV, Internet, Intranet, videoconferencing. If we were talking about on lineor wbt, a www location would do, provided the hosting services by the ISP .

An Application Service Provider would have more things to give to a total e-Learningsolution provider (cost savings on technical support-personnel, value added services etc.).

11. The second part

Taking a marketing point of view, some target group and potential customers can beunrelieved, and so proactively the companies can adjust their content, platform and dis-tribution accordingly to attract the desired target.

If you put the words "e-Learning (and e-Training)" in any Greek search engine youwill find about 70 entries. Those 70 entries are all universities, companies and organiza-tions with dynamic presence in e-Learning (and e-Training).

The way e-Learning is treated today by Greek reality can be easily seen if someonecategorizes the service by Business to Business, Business to Consumer, Government toConsumer, Government to Business, Business to Government.

Business to businessCompanies mostly, for whose e-Learning is just an other service to attract other com-

panies-customers. Their main goal is to provide complete solutions educating companiespeople (e-Learning, seminars, educational software, training based on new technologies,Decision support systems etc).

Their expectations: Having a customer to one of their products, their main effort is tomake him loyal customer to all of their products, so maximizing the profits per customer.

E-learning in Greece: The right content for the right purpose 31

Business to consumerCompanies that approach and deliver e-Learning as the best cost-benefit solution for

modern people with no time but many educational needs, unemployed people who isseeking further skill improvement, youngsters for an extra help with school lessons.

Their expectations: Most of these companies use e-Learning at the same time with tra-ditional educational programs complementary but are also trying to deliver it as standalone product.

Government to ConsumerUniversities and other public sector organizations. Aristotle University of Thessaloni-

ki, University of Crete and Ioannina, Ministry of Labor. Providing programs for unem-ployed people, postgraduate students. There is no full program on line yet, just some les-sons or programs that lead you to Diploma.

Their expectations: Right now most of them are financially supported by the Euro-pean Union and from a small fee of the participants. Their main goal is to be well estab-lished on their own funds by the time European financing will be over.

Some universities e.g. University of Ioannina are trying to support their on line pro-grams in a way that the whole system will be a separated entity from the university its self.Let us suppose that a whole new company easy to finance will be established and su-pervised from the university, or the ministry just to provide e-Learning services, content.

Government to businessFor further education of people with educational background, like training teachers of

primary schools in new approaches of educational psychology (SocraTES), or trainingbusiness staff when they are scattered in a wide area (University of Macedonia Tilemath-os=learn from far).

Their expectation is quite similar with the Gov2C, but they keep a more humanisticapproach, meaning that they will keep their non-profit status.

Business to GovernmentOn line programs from companies targeting public sectors needs, e.g. If secretaries

from Ministry of Labor were taking the on line Ms Office Tutorial.

Figure 5

Gov2C21%

Gov2B10%

B2Gov10%

B2C34%

B2B25%

32 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

12. How much an e-Learning program costs?

Suggestively prices are: 100 euro/user/year, for the rights of use over an asynchronous platform (using a Learn-

ing management System) and 50 euro/user/course (any kind of courses) 1.700 euro/user, fee for rights for using a synchronous platform, plus 50 euro/user/

year/course (any kind of courses).

13. Epilogue

Closing this part it would be good to pay attention to two major issues pointed outfrom the interviews.

The first issue is the idea of the funs of new technology that e-Learning has come toreplace traditional education methods and so e-Training will replace traditional trainingmethods.

That is totally out of our philosophy. E-Learning has come to work supplementarywith traditional education-training and teaching. The point is to take advantage of the ad-vantages e-Learning provides, such as 24h/day availability, no place restrictions or geo-graphical etc, not to adopt 100% a new system.

The second one is the need for tailor made products. Just like in the real world noclient has exactly the same needs with the next customer, so it happens to the digitalworld, and most of all when we are talking about learning and training. It is of no use tocount success or failure stories of Greek market.

Perhaps you have noticed on figure 5 that 34% of total e-Learning solution is B2C ori-ented and if you visit some of the biggest companies site you will find ready e-Learningpackages, pay and go. Actually the biggest part of this market is working on retail.(e.mar-ket, issue 11,Oct 01, p.58)

Maybe this is the reason why from 2000 to 2001 a 25% of the relative URLs has been"currently unavailable". The entire business environment is very competitive, so gettinga customer and keeping him is matter of satisfying his needs with a better way, a morecomplete way. Taking a lesson on Ms visual C++ and hanging it on your site for sale;seems that this way is not going to work.

E-learning in Greece: The right content for the right purpose 33

References

Books and e-Books:The Yale styles Interface Design: (http://info.med.yale.edu/caim/manual/interface.htm)E-Learning: Strategies for delivering knowledge in the digital age. Marc Rosenberg, Mc

Graw Hill Editions, 26/10/2000.National Actions to Implement Lifelong Learning in Europe, European Commission,

Survey 3, Cedefop-Eyrydice, 2001.Training and Learning for Competence, Executive summary on the second report on

vocational training research in Europe, CEDEFOP 2001.Labour Market & Skill Trends OAED publications, Athens 1999.Training and Labour Market Institute of Technological Education, Athens 1996.EOMMEX, Facts and Dynamics, Eommex Publications, Athens 2000.

Papers presented in conferences:The e-content meeting held in National Documentation Center in Athens, 23rd of

November 2001 with mss Heli Lehtimaeki, Commissioner of EuropeanCommittee for society of Information.

E-Train conference for small and medium enterprises, held in Patra 27/3/2002, with thesupport of GRNet.

Open and Distance Learning Education, June 2001 in the Greek Open University inPatras, M. Meimaris, T. Zerva.

34 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

: - 1990-2000

fi ...

fi -: fi. fi - fi . fi , , fi fi . fi . fi - ( , - , ) fi , fi. , , . fi fi - fi ( - fi fi fi fi). - fi fi .

Abstract

Traditionally, migration in Greece was characterized as being of one direction: out-going. Just recently this phenomenon inversed and a large number of foreigners startedentering our country, having as a result the modernization of the legal framework con-cerning the emigrants. The consequences of the extended arrival of migrants are of mul-ti-dimensional character. Apart from the oversupply of cheep labour force (resulting thewage squeeze, the propitious ground for investment, and the coverage of seasonal needsetc.), the most important is that the labour force, which is being used, is for the state poli-

: 1990-2000 35

Vol. VIII, No 1, 2003, pp. 35-49

cies point of view costless. The migrants aggravate their counties with nutrition, educa-tion and health expenditures, while the minimum benefit in the economy of their homecountry is the remittances. Consequently Greek economic growth occurred due to the ex-propriation of the incoming labour force.

1.

, fi fi fi fi , fi : . fi ( ) . , fi .

fi fi (19 ) , - . : 1890 1910 fi 400 ( fi 1907 2,7 ), 1951-71 "" -1 700 (fi 1961 8,4 . )

. 1971-74 fi fi 150

fi . 1973 -

fi fi fi. fi fi -

, . fi , fi fi fi (backwash effect).

fi fi - (fi ) fi (- ). fi .

, fi (1974-2000), , fi fi fi .

, 1985 1989, - fi

36 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

2.

1950 , fi fi fi .

fi fi fi , - . fi fi fi ... fi . , - fi , , fi fi fi .2

fi , fi (demonstration effect) - fi, .

fi (1973-) . (1973, 1979) , fi fi - . -, fi . fi ( fi " fi" fi -) fi "" fi- fi.

fi fi - . fi fi, , fi , - -. fi - , fi , fi - , fi . -fi fi 2,9% 1969, 19% 1985 30% 1992.

: 1990-2000 37

3. fi

, fi , - fi , .

.4310/29 ( -, , ) fi- fi , -.

.5288/31 ( ) fi . .5405/32 .4310/29 - . fi fi 320/36 ( ) fi .

.. 4429/64 , fi 448/68 . fi 1346/83 - fi .5405/32.

fi fi fi - . fi , fi fi- (, , , ).3

fi fi 1975/91 (fi - , , , - ) fi (4310/29).

fi . - 1991, 1992 ( fi -) fi fi ( ) fi fi ( fi fi ). fi fi "" fi ( fi 1999-2001 fifi ).

fi , fi fi. fi , fi .

38 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

4. fi fi

fi .

fi fi , , ... - .

fi fi, , fi -. .. - .

fi , , fi , fi. - fi , fi , . ( -) fi fi .

, 1950, . fi fi fi , - , .

fi, fi: fi fi

. fi , -fi fi 40% - .4

fi. - fi .5

fi fi fi, fi fi . - .

fi ( 3%), . fi fi fi .

6 fi , ( ) fi ().

: 1990-2000 39

- , fi " " , , fi ( - fi fi), (). - , - , - . fi fi fi .

fi . fi -. 1970 fi fi 31,4% 1980 32,4% 1990 30,2%. . , fi, -, fi ... fi .

fi fi fi fi fi , , . - fi, fi fi, fi fi ( - ...), fi -, fi , " ".

fi (, , -) fi fi .

, fi -, ... fi fi fi fi . fi fi - , fi , fi , ( fi fi, .. fi ).

fi:i. fi : fi -

, fi , fi (, , , -, ...). fi, - fi .

ii. fi fi -

40 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

fi . , -. fi , , fi - fi - . fi : fi (fi fi -

, ...) - ,

fi fi , ( fi ...).

fi fi fi ( -) fi fi .

fi .. (), , , , -, fi fi - fi.

fi "fi" ( fi -), fi fi -, fi , , fi - , fi - , fi fi fi .

fi fi fi .

fi fi . - fi fi , - , ( ), fi , fi, - , fi , -. "" , - , . - 1994 .

: 1990-2000 41

5. :

5.1. (1951-1971)

fi "- ". fi - (Lewis, Jorgenson, Todaro ) -. fi Kindleberger7 fi fi fi fi -fi .

, , - fi , fi ( fi ).

, fi 1960, fi, fi ( ) .

fi fi 15-44 . ( 25-29, 20-25 ).

fi fi . - , ( fi fi), fi fi - .

fi , fi fi , , fi - .

fi fi fi -fi fi. ' fi " " . , fi fi fi - .

fi A. Sauvy8 fi fi fi 18 - (9) fi, fi (6) fi . Sauvy fi 9 , fi .

42 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

1 fi 10 .11

: 1990-2000 43

1

(

fi

fi

)

:

(199

5)

fi

fi

fi

fi

fi

fi

-

18

19

-59

fi

fi

fi

fi

fi

fi

-

fi

fi

fi

(1

0)+(

11)

(8)+

(9)

1951 fi fi fi 5,1 . fi (3) 4,6 . fi (5). 1971 fi 8,5 7 .

(8), (9) (10) fi fi 18 fi. (11) fi - 18 , (12) - .

1971 402. . ( Sauvy 7 - ).

-, , fi, - fi fi fi fi.

.fi fi fi fi fi fi fi. fi .

fi ( fi) .12

fi fi - fi fi 6.841.537 . fi fi fi fi 21 fi 1 . fi.

5.2. (1991-2000)

fi fi , , 1973-92 fi 28 . fi 1991 180 .

fi fi 470 . 1993, 76 fi, fi ( ).

fi fi - 1993 400 , fi - 300-500.000 fi.13 fi -. , ,, , , .

, fi fi - fi fi 1991-2000 200.000

44 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

800.000 fi, fi , , , .. fi 1970, fi , fi.

fi fi fi - fi , - fi -. fi:

(2) 2 fi , - (3) fi fi .14 (4) fi fi , (6) . ( fi (5), ).

(3) fi fi fi 1991 5,56., 2000 12,53 . . fi (4) fi fi fi fi fi fi fi , - fi . (8) fi . ( (7) fi fi () ). 1991 fi 8% 28% 2000. (9) fi, fi.

6.

fi . fi , .15

fi fi fi , fi 2-3 . fi fi -, , fi:

.

fi 1989-96 -, fi fi fi, fi , fi , .

fi (1997-2000) ,

: 1990-2000 45

. (, , , ). fi fi fi fi- fi fi 2000.

fi fi fi - " fi". fi fi fi - fi .16

fi - - ,17 fi fi fi . fi fi fi fi - .

2 (fi )

fi fi % fi - - $: fi

X E.

$

(1) (2) (3) (4)=(2)*(3) (5) (6) (7)(8)=(4)/(7)

(9)*100

1991 200 5,560 1112,0 182,3 6,1 14412,2 7,7 1112,0

1992 300 6,327 1898,1 190,7 10,0 16536,3 11,5 632,7

1993 400 7,094 2837,6 229,3 12,4 18825,6 15,1 709,4

1994 450 7,861 3537,5 242,6 14,6 21387,3 16,5 393,1

1995 500 8,628 4314,0 231,7 18,6 23914,0 18,0 431,4

1996 550 9,543 5248,7 240,7 21,8 26359,8 19,9 477,2

1997 600 10,381 6228,6 273,1 22,8 28835,0 21,6 519,1

1998 700 11,143 7800,1 295,5 26,4 31251,0 25,0 1114,3

1999 750 11,854 8890,5 305,6 29,1 33376,0 26,6 592,7

2000 800 12,530 10024,0 365,4 27,4 35712,0 28,1 626,5

: (2) (3): (2001),

(5): ,

(7): 1991-1997 , 1998-2000 (2001)

46 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

fi fi - fi - .

.

2004. fi .18

fi fi: 1) fi fi 2000

2004 2000.19

2) .3) fi fi fi -

.4) , -

( ).

5) fi fi .

1. fi fi , , fi .

2. fi (1996).

3. Social Europe (1991). fi - , fi .

4. fi (1995), fi (1987)

5. fi fi fi. .. -fi fi 25% . fi , fi .

: 1990-2000 47

6. (1996). - fi , , , .

7. Kindleberger (1965). fi: " P. Rosenstein-Rodan fi fi . ", . 236.

8. A. Sauvy (1963).

9. (1995)

10. : (1995).

11. 1955, 1962, 1966 1969. fifi 1951-71 fifi .

12. . fi , , fi fi fi fi fi .

13. 7/11/93.

14. , fi 35%-65 % . (2001)

15. , , fi , .

16. fi fi fi - fi ( , fi fi fi fi), fi , - , , ..

17. fi: fi fi .. -, , fi - fi .

18. fi fi fi fi.

19. fi fi fi fi 800.000-1.000.000 - , .

48 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

(1993) 7-11-1993.fi . . . (1995) -

: , 15, .fi .(1987) , .Kindleberger C.P. (1965). Emigration and Economic Growth. Banca Nationale der La-

voro, Quart. Rev. pp. 235-254. . (1995) -

. fi . 302-312 . 106 . (1996) , , . . (2003) fi , fi Sauvy A. (1963) Theorie gnrale de la population, vol 1, 2 Paris.Social Europe (1991) Immigration of citizens from third countries into the Southern

Member States of the European Community. A comparative survey of the Situ-ation in Greece, Italy, Spain and Portugal (Supplement).

: 1990-2000 49

fi . fi

. ...

- , - fi fi fi fi fi fi. fi fi, fi fi fi .

Abstract

This article examines the economic-market, social and technological transformationsas well as the specific aesthetic patterns that reshape the urban landscape during the lasttwo decades (from the building scale until the street and urban unit scale). In a followingstep, it is proposed an interpretation of how the growing transportation and mainlycommunication networks together with the prevailing marketing mechanisms influencethe image, the function and the structure of the city and determine the objectives and theefficiency of urban interventions and planning.

fi ... 51

Vol. VIII, No 1, 2003, pp. 51-63

1. fi - fi

fi - fi - fi fi , fi - , - fi fi fi .

, fi -, , , fi fi fi . , , -, fi fi, fi fi fi . fi fi, - fi, fi- fi fi -, fi fi .

, fi fi - , - fi fi fi fi fi fi 1. fi fi, - fi fi fi fi fi fi . fi - - , fi , , .

, , - -fi, - fi fi fi fi, fi fi , - .

fi fi fi fi. fi fi fi-

52 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

fi fi fi -, -fi fi. , fi fi - fi (fi.. fi ..., ), fi fi- fi fi fi fi.

fi , fi fi fi -fi , fi fi (ethnic) fi ( ) , fi fi, , , fi -fi fi - fi - fi . , - fi ( ) - fi.

, fi ( - - ) ( - ) fi fi, fi fi - fi ..., , - , -fi - fi . , fi fi fi - ( ) fi- - 20 .

, , fi fi 2 , fi - 70 80 - 90, - fi

fi ... 53

fi, fi fi -, fi - 100 fi.

2. fi fi

fi fi , - , fi -fi -fi fi fi. fi, - fi .

fi fi- - fi fi fi fi, , fi -3 ( fi Docklands fi )4.

, fi fi fi . - fi fi - fi media, - fi ( fi ).

fi , fi, - , - - fi fi fi ... fi-. , , , , , fi, fi , fi fi, fi fi fi fi fi - ..., fi fi fi -

54 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

fi, fi fi (fi fi fi - fi). , fi fi fi (, , ,, , fi ...), -fi fi.

, fi , : fi fi fi - - fi, - , fi fi ...

, fi , - fi fi fi fi . ( -, fi ).

fi, , fi , fi fi - fi , fi .. , - fi fi fi , - fi, fi (video clips, ...). - (soundtracks). fi fi fi fi fi - fi fifi , fi fi fi fi (, , , .).

fi , fi fi , fi . fi fi fi . , -, fi - fi fi

fi ... 55

fi fi fi fi - , fi5.

3. fi fi

fi fi fi fi, fi fi fi - fi, fi 6.

fi 70 fi fi - , fi -, fi - fi - . - fi (Greenpeace, fi ) - fi fi 7.

, (, ) - - . fi , fi - , fi8 - - fi, fi - fi- fi .

fi fi, 9 fi ( ) - , - fi fi.

56 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

fi fi fi - fi fi 10.

fi fi, fi (.., ..., , fi, fi, modem,..), - fi fi (, , ...)11. fi , fi fi fi , - fi .., fi, fi fi fi fifi ( , , , )12.

, fi, fi - - fi fi fi fi fi, fi.

) , fi , , fi fi fi - fi (fi, fi-, ) (, fax, E-mail, modem .). - fi fi fi , fi , fi , fi , fi fi - .

fi fi (- fi fi fi ) fi fi - , fi fi ( - .. fi fi fi - - ).

fi fi fi fi, fi

fi ... 57

fi fi- fi fi fi fi fi fi, fi fi . fi fi fi - fi fi , -.

media (, - ), fi , -, fi, fi , - fi , - (-, , , , , - ...).

. ... - fi - fi , - , fi, fi fi fi fi, fi , - . fi fi, fi - fi fi , - fi fi . fi, fi fi fi, , fi fi-, fi fi fi (), - , fi - .

fi fi fi fi - - fi fi , fi fi - . fi , - fi fi fi fi fi .

58 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

) fi fi - (...), fi, , fi fi, - fi fi13 fi fi (fi, , -, fi, ).

fi fi fi , - fi , , fi .. fi fi fi fi, , fi - (), fi - fi fi (...). - . -fi fi, , ... fi - fi, - . , , - - fi . fi, - fi (fi - fi).

, fi fi - :

fi fi , fi ( ) , fi- fi .

fi , - fi fi fi - ( ) - fi fi - fi - - , -

fi ... 59

fi fi ( , fi).

fi fi- , - fi .

fi fi -fi fi fi .

fi , fi, fi fi fi fi , fi fi - fi - fi. , fi fi fi fi fi fi fi - , fifi fi .

fi, , , , , ,, fi, , fi, , fi, fi, , , fi , , fi, - , fi fi.

60 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

-

1. Jenks Ch., (1980), Post Modern Classicism. Introduction, A.D., . 5/6, . 5. JeacksCh., (1996), , , . 27.Dal Francesco, (1997), Co Mario Botta, Electa/Rizzai.

2. Samuel P., (1974) , . , .

3. Erasmus Intensive Program, Lille 11/3/93 21/3/93, . 2.2.4. fifi , - fi ( ) (projects), fi . fi fi fi , - ( -fi , , ).

4. Ward Reg., (1994), - Docklands, . . , .

5. fi , -, . ( ., (1991), fi fi fi fi fi, ,2/91, . 25). fi fi - , fi - fi . ., - ., ., (1994), , . -, . 307-333.

6. ., (1988), fi - . fi - , . . - , . 8., . 1,. 80.

7. fi . (24/07/1990) - fi , (90) 218, - 24/7/1990. , fi, ( 1997). -, 19 , (24/11/1993). , . 17.fi , (10/7/1987), , fi . ,( 92), UNCED 92.

fi ... 61

8. fi, fi . fi fi fi fi - fi fi (fi, , fi, , - ..) fi , , - .

9. fi ., (1997), fi fi, . , . 282-318, fi - , . - , fi , . fi .. fi, fi fi fi slums, - . fineighbourhood unit fi . fi fi fi : unit de voisinage Nachbarschaftseinheit. , fi fi - fi fi fi fi . - fi fi fi fi fi. fi fi ( - fi ) fi fi . - . (1979), . 87-102 fifi (. , 12,13 14 1972) Charles Mercher (1975), .148-173 Suzanne Keler (1972) . 276-289. Kevin Lynch, (1992), The image ofthe city, the MIT press. fi fi fi fi , Louvain la Neuve, - Louvain, . fi . ( - 1985), fi , ..., . 2, . 26.

10. fi ., fi ., (1989), , //. - , , . 144-148. .,(1993), , . , , .354.

11. fi ., (1997), .., . 423, fi fi fi fi - fi fi. -

62 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

. fi (GlobalInformation Society).

12. Canter D., (1988), , , (. . fi), University Studio Press, . Piaget ., (1974),Adaptation in tale et psychologie de l intelligence, Herman Paris.

13. Castells Man, (1997), "The Rise of the Network Society", V.1, Blackwell, . 398 401. fi .,(1997), .. . 422. (1993), , . , , . 369.

fi ... 63

fi fi fi:

. ...

fi fi fi - fi. fi fi fi fi . fi - fi, fi fi / fi -fi fi fi fi -. fi - fi fi . fi- fi fi fi .

Abstract

On of the major challenges in valuing ground water is how to integrate the hydrolog-ic and physical components of ground water resources into a valuation scheme. An ap-propriate conceptual basis for valuation identifies service flows as a central link betweeneconomic valuation and ground water quantity and quality. One prominent technique thatattempts to measure total value including use and nonuse values is the contingent valua-tion method. The contingent valuation method values are elicited directly from individu-als via interviews or questionnaires in the form of statements of maximum willingness to

fi fi fi: 65

Vol. VIII, No 1, 2003, pp. 65-76

pay or minimum willingness to accept compensation for hypothetical changes in the en-vironmental goods such as groundwater quantity or quality. The decision maker at-tempting to value groundwater faces significant uncertainties regarding hydrologic, insti-tutional, economic and human health aspects of ground water management. Cost-benefitanalysis is a very powerful tool within the decision making process and taking account thesustainable principals.

1.

fi fi fi 3% fi fi fi . 98% - fi. fi fi fi 0.20%. fi fi fi fi - . - fi . fi - - fi. - fi . fi fi fi .

fi fi fi , fi fi fi . - fi fi fi fi fi fi fi fi. - fi -fi fi. fi : ) , ) fi- - ) fi fi - [1,2,3].

fi fi fi, -. fi [5]: ) -

66 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

, , fi, , - fi , fi fi , ) fi - . fi fi fi fi fi fi -fi fi fi fi fi. - fi - fi ) fi - fi fi , ) ) fi - fi fi [4]. fi fi / - fi [3]. - fi - . fi - fi - fi.

fi / fi fi - fi- fi -fi fi fi .

2. fi

fi fi - fi fi-. fi fi - . fi - fi fi - . fi, fi fi fi fi - . fi fi . fi fi - fi - fi fi, fi , fi fi fi-

fi fi fi: 67

, , fi , fi . fi fi .

fi fi fi- fi fi, fi . fi - (fi ). fi fi fi . fi- fi [6]. -fi fi :

) fi , , .

) fi - , fi fi , fi - fi .

) , fi , fi , fi , - fi.

fi (..) - (...) (..)

() = () + ()

fi fi , fi fi fi . fi (..), fi (..) fi (...)

()= ()+()+()

fi fi fi fi fi fi fi fi fi . (...) fi () () 1.

()=() + ()

68 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

fi fi - fi ) fi - fi, ) fi - .

1: fi

3.

fi fi fi fi fi fi, . . fi . fi - .

fi fi . fi /, fi, , - fi fi - [7].

fi

fi

A

A

A

Yfi fi

fi fi

A

fi fi fi: 69

fi / fi - fi fi. fi fi fi ,

fi fi - fi fi . fi - , fi fi . - fi fi fi - fi fi fi- .

fi fi -fi fi fi fi. fi fi , ) fi - fi fi fi - , fi fi fi , ) fi - fi . - fi fi fi.

fi fi fi fi - fi - fi. - fi fi fi fi fi -. fi fi - fi , fi fi . - fi , fi fi fi - fi , fi .

- fi . - fi fi- fi fi .

70 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

4. fi

fi fi . fi . - fi- fi - fi fi.

fi fi , fi fi -, fi [6]. fi [8]: ) fi , ) fi - , fi , ) fi fi -, fi fi fi fi.

fi fi -fi . -: ) , ) fi - , ) fi ) fi - fi. [6]. fi fi fi fi fi fi fi fi fi .

fi fi fi fi fi : ) fi , fi fi , ) fi , - fi fi -

fi fi fi: 71

fi, ) , -fi, ) fi fi, , - ) fi .

fi- fi fi fi fi fi fi fi. fi fi , - fi - fi [5]. - fi fi fi fi (fi) fi -fi (fi). fi fi- , - fi fi 1983 - fi fi [9].

4.1. fi - :

fi fi fi fi/ [10]:

fi fi - fi (1)

(1)

fi, fi , i -, Ci fi, fi fi.

fi -fi, fi fi fi fi -fi fi fi (2)

(2){ /( )]} [ /( )]}[Bi1+ / { 1+i

Ni

ii o

NiC

= = >0

1

max{ /( )] [ /( )]}[Bi1+ 1+i

Ni

ii o

NiC

= = 0

72 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

, fi - fi fi fi (3)

(3)

4.2. fi fi

fi fi fi fi fi. fi fi fi ) fi , ) fi , , fi .

fi fi - fi , fi (- -), : ) , ) fi , ) - fi , ) -. fi fi-- [6]: ) fi fi , ) fi - fi , ) fi - fi fi fi, ) fi , fi -.

fi - fi fi fi . fi fi-. fi fi- - [11]:

(4)

fi, j j, Bj(t)

j j{1 1+ [B= ={ /( )] () () ()]}t

Tt

j jt C t R t0

{ /( )] [ /( )]}[Bi1+ 1+i

Ni

ii o

NiC

= = >0

0

fi fi fi: 73

j t, Cj(t) fi j t, Rj(t) fi fi j t, T fi fi fi.

fi fi fi - (5):

(5)

fi, Pf (t) fi t, Cf (t) fi fi t, (Cf) fi- fi . fi fi fi - , - -fi. >1 fi ,=1 fi.

5.

fi fi fi fi. fi fi, fi fi fi [10]. -fi fi fi- fi .

fi fi fi . fi fi fi , fi fi fi -fi fi fi fi - fi fi fi , , fi fi . fi fi fi - fi . - fi fi . fi fi fi fi fi -fi fi fi fi fi fi - . -

R t t() () () ( )= P t C Cf f f

74 E E E , Vol VIII, No 1, 2003

fi fi fi fi - fi fi fi. fi fi fi fi , fi fi fi fi fi fi fi fi fi- fi .

6. fi -

fi fi- . - , fi - fi. , - fi fi, fi - . fi - fi fi -. fi- fi -fi fi fi - fi. - fi fi fi , - . fi fi .

fi fi - fi fi . - fi fi fi fi fi .

fi fi fi: 75

1. Anastasiadis P., (2001) Groundwater quality modelling for non-point sources, JournalFresenius Environmental Bulletin, vol. 10 (5) pp. 506-511.

2. ., (1994) fi fi fi . , .

3. Field B.C, (1997), Environmental economics. An introduction, McGraw Hill4. Turner P.K., Pearce D., and Batemen I., (1994) Environmental economics. An ele-

mentary introduction, Herverter Wheatsheaf5. Environmental Protection Agency (1995), A framework for measuring the economic

benefits of groundwater, EPA6. Pearce D.W. and Turner R.K., (1990), Economics of natural resources and the envi-

ronment, Herverter Wheatsheaf7. National Research Council, (1997), Valuing groundwater. Economic concept and ap-

proaches, National Academy Press.8. Hoehn J.L., (1992), The earthscan reader in environmental economics, (Eds A.

Markandya and J. Richardon, Earthscan Publication9. Griffin R.C., (1998), The fundamental principles of cost-benefit analysis, Water re-

sources research, vol.