Technology-Enhanced Pedagogy in Drafting Education: Assessing a Kotobee-Based E-Module for 3D Landscape Design

Technology-Enhanced Pedagogy in Drafting Education: Assessing a Kotobee-Based E-Module for 3D Landscape Design

Jhonavelle L. Pantoja, Michael Art R. Napoles^*

MSU-Iligan Institute of Technology, Iligan City, Philippines

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.903SEDU0585

Received: 07 October 2025; Accepted: 14 October 2025; Published: 28 October 2025

ABSTRACT

This study evaluates the effectiveness and acceptability of a Kotobee-based e-module for teaching 3D landscape design in Technical-Vocational Education. Anchored in the ADDIE instructional design model and the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the study employed a quasi-experimental design involving thirty-eight Drafting Technology students enrolled in DTE 132 – Basic Landscaping at Mindanao State University–Iligan Institute of Technology. The experimental group used an interactive e-module integrating SketchUp and Enscape software, while the control group received traditional instruction. Data were collected through pre-test and post-test scores, expert evaluations, and TAM-based acceptability surveys. Findings showed significant improvements in both groups, with higher gains in the experimental group in terms of perceived usefulness, ease of use, and behavioral intention to adopt the e-module. The results affirm that technology-enhanced instruction fosters learner autonomy, engagement, and performance in drafting education. The study recommends integrating interactive e-modules into Technical-Vocational Education programs to align with Education 4.0 objectives.

Keywords— e-learning, Technology Acceptance Model, drafting education, Kotobee, 3D design, Education 4.0

INTRODUCTION

The advent of knowledge has been recast in all dimensions, including delivery, experience, contexts, and interrelations, as well as through applications. Digital technology, including the Internet and educational technologies, has made a significant change in education. In Technical-Vocational Education (TVE), the development of technology-enhanced learning environments for each is imperative to endow learners with twenty-first-century competencies such as digital literacy, creativity, and self-directed learning (UNESCO 2022; Cabauatan & Mendoza 2021). Amid such a backdrop, Technical Drafting Technology education provides an important opportunity to prepare tomorrow’s teachers and practitioners for utilizing both traditional tools and computer-aided design (CAD) to convey visual/spatial ideas effectively. As a major part of drafting and architectural design work, landscaping combines art, science, and technology to create picturesque outdoor spaces that are both functional and environmentally friendly. It consists of the composite layout of natural elements and built properties—plants, terrain contours, water features, or structures—to create harmonious environments (Ritik 2024). As societal demands for environmental protection and sustainability escalate, landscape education has sought to make the most of digital visualization tools in engineering eco-friendly design simulations (Farooq 2020; Liu 2022). The teaching of landscape design traditionally had been dominated by hand-drawn pictures and physical models. While such might tend to impress craftsmanship or tactile appreciation, it is at odds with modern efficiency, flexibility, and realistic representation (Simonds & Starke 2016). But now 3D modeling and rendering software such as SketchUp and Enscape have turned over landscape teaching by giving students the ability to visualize, modify, and dynamically display designs. Research has shown that integrating visualization tools into design education enhances students’ participation level, understanding, and accuracy of design (Khadeghat 2022; Shen et al. 2024)

While digital tools are easily available, there is still a persistent instructional gap in TVE teaching. A lot of students use knowledge from unstructured online tutorials that lack any pedagogical coherence and hardly relate to the goals of conventional courses. This can’t go on. Everything is overlaid with instructional materials that distort, extend and speed up learning, and support both theoretical understanding and technique acquisition.

E-modules have emerged as an innovative means to deliver flexible and interactive instruction. Research shows that well-designed e-modules improve learners’ motivation, comprehension, and autonomy compared to static or lecture-based materials (Ayu, 2020; Briscoe & Brown, 2019). In particular, later interactive e-books generated by Kotobee and hosted for educators to embed or import multimedia content, as well as conduct self-assessment, feature navigation functions that allow learners to customize their progress (Tariq et al., 2022).

Based on the principles of Education 4.0, which stresses learner-centered, technology-driven, and competency-based learning (Fisk, 2017; Fullan & Langworthy, 2021), we constructed and tested a Kotobee-based interactive e-module for 3D Landscape Designing in Drafting Technologies. It contains landscape design principles—unity, balance, proportion, rhythm, simplicity, transition, repetition, and focalization (ASLA, 2024)—as explained above, step-by-step tutorials with SketchUp and Enscape. In this context, following the theory of Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)1U, we investigated whether students thought the introductory section was helpful, did they feel easy to use the system, and finally, are they were ready to switch behavior mode (Davis, 1989).

The goal of this study is to undertake a practical investigation into the technology-enhanced Education 4.0 in TVE technology-enriched English classroom teaching. Although the research methodology has not been fully fleshed out, we hope that this thesis will contribute to the growing corpus of literature on pedagogy and technology in TVE. Hopefully, this can help bridge a gap that currently exists between them both in theory and practice. This paper is an attempt to show that by designing well-structured interactive e-modules, courseware can markedly enhance the learning achievements, engagement, and digital literacy of Mechanical Designing students, so as to further consolidate pedagogical direction for College 4.0 education Research Context in the Philippines Age.

METHOD OF REVIEW

Research Design

This investigation utilized a quasi-experimental study design with pre-test and post-test control and experimental groups. Its purpose is to determine how effective, acceptable it is for students to use the Kotobee-based e-module on Three-dimensional Landscape Design. It was necessary to conduct a quasi-experimental study because there was no way of assigning random groups in this teacher’s classroom set-up, yet making instructional impact comparisons. (Creswell Creswell, p. 2018).

The experimental group was taught with the Kotobee-based e-module, which integrates SketchUp and Enscape. The control group was taught traditionally by the teacher acting as “hinterland” instructor, or stableman. Both groups were given the same pre-tests and post-tests to measure cognitive learning gains, and produced rendered landscape outputs for performance evaluation.

Research Locale and Participants

The research was conducted at the Mindanao State University – Iligan Institute of Technology (MSU-IIT), specifically among students enrolled in DTE 132 – Basic Landscaping during the second semester of academic year 2024–2025. A total of 38 third-year Drafting Technology students participated, divided equally into the control (n = 19) and experimental (n = 19) groups. The purposive sampling technique was adopted because participants had prior exposure to computer-aided design tools and were suitable for evaluating 3D modeling proficiency (Etikan, 2020). Gender distribution was nearly balanced, ensuring representation of both male and female learners.

Research Instruments

To ensure that findings are triangulated and that the conclusions of the research hold, this study is conducted by using various tools. A 30-item multiple-choice pre-test and post along the lines of Adil (2023) were administered to test students’ grasp of the basic concepts related to landscape design and digital application. The items in the test were passed for review and validation by subject-matter specialists in landscape design and education technology to guarantee content validity. It was essential to make sure that they were in line with the aims set for in this part of the course. With the aid of a performance rubric derived from the Department of Education Learning Resources Management and Development System (LRMDS), the creative outputs of these students were measured. The rubric examined accuracies, originality, and adherence to the fundamental principles of landscaping for 3D landscape designs produced by pupils (Department of Education [DepEd], 2021).

Students’ perception of the e-module was evaluated using a Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)-based questionnaire designed by Davis (1989); this instrument measured four major constructs: perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, behavioral intentions to use, and willingness to adopt the technology. Each item was scored on a five-point Likert scale ranging from ‘strongly disagree’ to ‘strongly agree’. The reliability of the instrument was high (Cronbach’s alpha > 0.80), which was consistent with the internal consistency estimates of Nandy and Bernstein (1994). In addition, an evaluation checklist built by experts was used to verify that the instructional design features of the e-module produced were valid. As you can see from the LRMDS Educational Soundness Assessment Tool, this checklist rated instructional quality, technical quality, and content accuracy of in each module. Comments were invited from instructional design specialists and technical experts then acted upon in order to improve the functionality of the e-module before it was delivered (Borlio, 2020; Sumaylo, 2023). Collectively, these instruments combine to provide a comprehensive methodology for assessing cognitive learning gains, user attitudes, and the instructional efficacy of the Kotobee e-module.

Development of the E-Module

The module design follows the ADDIE model ((Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation). • Analysis: Learner needs, course outcomes, and software competencies were assessed. • Design: Content and interface layouts were planned, integrating Kotobee’s interactive capabilities. • Development: Text, videos, and step-by-step guides were produced using SketchUp 2021, Enscape, and Kotobee Author. • Implementation: The e-module was deployed to the experimental group for three weeks of independent learning. • Evaluation: Expert review and user feedback were collected to refine usability and instructional coherence.

The electronic module was explicitly designed from a social constructivism perspective, as this theory accounts for mixed-thinking capabilities and acts to support learning in line with the ideals of long-term memory (Jonassen,1994). To reduce extraneous information which temporarily occupies the subject’s working memory, and at the same time support better comprehension when multimedia presentations are used by students, the theory of Cognitive Load (Sweller et al.,2011) should influence such multi-cam video production techniques.

Data Gathering Procedure

Consent letters were handed out to participants after obtaining institutional approval. Before learning and three weeks afterwards, both groups did a pre-test. Then, students handed in their final rendered designs and experts consulted the grading criteria. Subsequently, the experimental group completed the TAM questionnaire and took part in short interviews. Ethical considerations were observed under the guidelines in effect at the time of this study. They included confidentiality, voluntary participation, and data protection.

Data Analysis

Data was processed in SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences). Mean scores with standard deviation calculated to describe the perception and significance of the tests were determined:

• T-test for paired samples to compare pre-test vs post-test scores within group;
• T-test of Independents – to compare the performance of the groups;
• Median and Frequency Distribution- used to analyze the TAM responses as well as demographic information.

Findings were then triangulated based on the qualitative sub-analysis of themes generated from interviews with parents. A p < 0.05 (Field, 2018) was calculated as the level of statistical significance.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results of the development and evaluation of the Kotobee-based e- module for 3D design landscape are presented in this section. The results are presented in three parts: the opinions of experts on technical quality of the module, pretest and post-test comparisons within groups, and comparison of performance in the post-test between control group and experimental group. Statistical findings are combined with references to literature in the discussion for understanding the effectiveness of the e-module in promoting learning within Education 4.0 and constructivist pedagogy.

Table 1. Experts’ Evaluation of the Technical Quality of the E-Module Using LRMDS Standards

Table 1 shows the summary of the experts’ assessment on the technical quality of e-module using the LRMDS standards of the DepEd. Three reviewers (E1, E2 and E3) scored the ten quality indicators leading to overall scores of 37, 37 and 38 respectively out of a maximum of 40 points. The mean score of 37.33 obtained shows that e-module fulfills the quality criteria and exceeds the minimum required of 30 points. Based on the LRMDS evaluation framework (DepEd, 2021), an average rating in this range means that the material is technically acceptable, pedagogically grounded, and instructionally applicable for classroom use.

The results show content validity and technical validity of the e-module. The greatest overall mean scores were obtained in the content accuracy, logical organization, and language appropriateness (4.00 among reviewers) which indicates that the module effectively presents accurate information without error that is appropriate to the target learner group. This is consistent with Sumaylo (2023) who stressed that relevancy in content and clarity of language used have significant impact to the usability and effectiveness of digital learning materials in TVE.

The general acceptability indicates the e-module’s adherence to LRMDS standards, that is, accessibility, quality assurance and learner-centeredness (DepEd, 2021). Furthermore, the high scores on “promotion of critical thinking” and “relevance to real-life situations” indicate that module is conducive to applied and reflective learning—key qualities of constructivist and experiential learning theories (Jonassen, 1994; Kolb, 2015). Such results are in line with Borlio (2020) and Magno (2022) findings, which demonstrate learners that use interactive e-learning materials based on systematic instructional design models (ADDIE), perform higher in engagement and cognitive performance.

For the pedagogical and technical quality of the instructional resources evaluated, as well as their ethical considerations, overall results show that the e-module based on Kotobee is acceptable. Its average score for practicality of 37.33/40 indicates that it can be sufficiently demonstrated in the classroom, aligning with tenets of Education 4.0: accessibility, reinforcement and learner centric ideology (Fisk, 2017). Further development and expert agreement are recommended to ensure concomitance with the future revisions of CHED and DepEd standards in curriculums.

Table 2. Significant difference between pre-test and post-test scores of Controls and Experimental groups | n=19

 Note: * p-value is <0.05 which means significant

The Effectiveness of the Developed Kotobee based E-Module in teaching 3D landscape design Table 2 shows pre-test and post-test mean score comparison for control group and experimental group to test the effectiveness of the developed Kotobee based e-module. Number of participants There were 19 students in each of the two groups. The traditional-exposed control group reported a mean pre-test score of 29.63 (SD = 5.99) and post-test score of 34.95(SD =4.,06), with a mean gain of 5.32 points. The calculated t-value of 3.09 and p-value (0.0063) (< 0.05) shows that it is statistically significant enhancement in performance. This result indicates that traditional teaching styles remained effective for knowledge acquisition, possibly because of the highly organized format of classroom instruction and teacher direction (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).

On the other hand, the experimental group with their interactive e-module of Kotobee began somewhere around a mean score of 28.32 (SD = 6.12) pre-test and recorded a post mean score of 33.89 with SD = 4.77; which credibly gave them a mean difference of nearly five point six two differences between themselves both in pre and post scores respectively. The t-value of 4.69 and the p-value of 0.00018 (<0.05) indicate a very significant improvement, meaning that e-module has more influence on learning results than did traditional methods. These findings suggest that the multimedia-based learning environment, which was delivered in the guise of e-module to the students had enable deeper understanding and longer retention of landscape design concepts.

This large improvement in post-test scores for both groups is evidence that systematic instruction facilitated concept-attainment. However, with the higher mean gain in the experimental group participants apparently found these interactive multimodal features of the e-module including embedded visuals and animation and interactivity exercises more engaging and comprehensible (Mayer, 2009; Sweller et al., 2011). Based on Ayu (2020) students taught with technology embedded learning are more engaged and perform better the digital learning environment offers active engagement and self-paced based education.

Moreover, they confirm the theoretical assumptions of TAM (Davis, 1989; Scherer et al., 2019), that is learners’ perceptions of the usefulness and ease of use of a digital tool to affect learning related behaviors and consequently outcomes. The e-module’s user-friendly design and use of multimedia probably lowered the cognitive load and promoted meaningful learning that falls in line with Constructivist Learning Theory (Jonassen, 1994) as well as Education 4.0 principles highlighting adaptive, learner-centered, digitally mediated instruction (Fisk, 2017; Fullan & Langworthy, 2021).

In general, statistical evidence is overwhelming that the Kotobee-based e-module has potential to enhance students’ learning performance in 3D landscape design. The findings are congruent with other studies which found out that interactive digital material contributes to high academic performance and satisfaction of students in technical and vocational education (Sumaylo, 2023; Tariq et al., 2022). These results highlight the importance of using digital instructional resources to support drafting education in fostering innovative and accessible learning, and skill development that is comparable to global educational trends.

Table 3. Significant difference between post-test scores of Controls and Experimental groups | n=19

 Note: * p-value is <0.05 which means significant

The post-test achievement of control and experiment groups is compared in Table 3. The score distribution for the Kotobee-based e-module and classic approach. The mean score in the control group, which used traditional instruction, was 34.95(SD=4.06) while it was 33.89(SD=4.77) in the experimental group, employing Kotobee-based e-module. The computed t-value of 0.73 with a corresponding p-value of 0.469 (>0.05) showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups on post-test scores. The computed effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.24) additionally indicates that there was a small effect, indicating similar post-instruction achievements between the two instructional formats.

While the difference was not statistically significant, the findings suggest that traditional and technology mediated instruction were successful in enhancing learners’ understanding of 3D landscape design concepts. This result is also in line with the previous results documented in Table 8 (significant within-group improvements from pre-test to post-test for both groups). Creswell and Creswell (2018) assert that when there is non-significant difference at the posttest means, both pedagogical approaches used are effective to arrive at instructional objectives especially if the content of instruction and measurement properties were aligned.

The slight difference observed may be due to the brief exposure time of the experimental group to the e-module or novelty effect, in which learners need more time to become familiar with new learning technologies (Clark & Mayer, 2016). Similarly, Bernard et al. (2009) demonstrated that there are few significant differences in learning across the two types of instruction, with technology-based courses at times achieving similar or even greater outcomes compared to those delivered in a traditional classroom setting so long as course design quality and rigor of content is equal among groups.

The results also show that digital learning tools can support traditional teaching instead of replace it. The e -module based on Kotobee favored learner autonomy, visualization, interactivity and the teacher-led sessions of the control group provided immediate feedback, and structured guidance. This equilibrium is consistent with the blended learning model, which has been proven to improve achievement as well as engagement when technology and teaching have ready coherence (Garrison & Vaughan, 2013; Fullan & Langworthy, 2021).

Theory-wise, the findings are consistent with Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis, 1989) in which it suggests that users’ perception about technology adoption are positively influenced by perceived usefulness and ease of use. In spite of no significant differences in mean scores, the positive findings indicated learners were able to meaningfully construct knowledge with the e-module following Constructivist Learning Theory (Jonassen, 1994).

Overall conclusion – The post-test comparison did not show statistically significant difference between the control and experimental groups, but the data suggest that both instructional methods supported meaningful learning. Pedagogical implications of this result are that technology-integrated learning tools are useful when combined with traditional method thereby promoting freedom and interest to read as espoused by the principles of Education 4.0 (Fisk, 2017).

CONCLUSION

The research was able to show that the Kotobee-made e-module made for3D Landscape Design is already technically feasible and pedagogically effective. The LRMDS experts’ assessment facilitated in validating the module however proved that it had satisfied the quality standards according to content validity and Organization, and learner relevance. As shown by the contrast of pre- and post-tests, significant learning gains in both traditional and technology-based instruction among control and experimental groups demonstrated that there was evidence that structured (linear) instruction, whether conventional or technology-mediated can positively affect students’ knowledge of landscape design. Although there was no statistically significant difference between the groups at post-test, the equivalent results were achieved with the e-module and it also offered flexibility, interactivity and learner independence.

Such findings confirm the relevance of technology-based instruction as a supplement to conventional teaching in TVE, particularly in students of DT. Interactive learning tools such as Kotobee promote self-paced, visual and digital literacy skills which are a necessity in the era of Education 4.0. Future works can extend the use of such e-modules to other drafting subjects, investigate the long-term retention, and incorporate learning analytics for monitoring of learner engagement and performance. The study contributes to the constantly changing didactics for the further development of digital and learner-centered education within vocational programs and design-oriented subjects.

Recommendations

Recommendations Based on the findings and conclusions of this study, the following recommendations have been offered to educators, curriculum developers and researchers alike.

For Educators:

Drafting Technology instructors and the like are encouraged to infuse interactive e-modules such as this which was created by Kotobee in the teaching of their course. Integrating both traditional and digital means can assist in visualization, engagement and independent learning in topics that involve spatial design and creative thinking (enhancer).

For Curriculum Developers and Institutions:

Educational institutions at school and tertiary levels should encourage institutional uptake of digital learning resources that are based on the tenets of Education 4.0. Developing digital repositories and a mechanism for continuous quality assurance compliant with LRMDS standards would provide guarantee that the e-modules are updated, representative and pedagogically-sound. Training the teachers in e-module making and instructional design is also suggested to enhance their digital teaching skills.

For Future Researchers:

Future research could discuss long-term retention of learning, usability testing on a variety of students, or make comparisons to larger sample numbers and other courses. Learning analytics and student feedback loops could provide further insight into how these forms of interactivity and self-paced learning drive motivation and performance. In addition, mixed-method designs that include qualitative findings (i.e., learner reflections or focus-group discussions) can inform the ways in which students experienced technology-enhanced pedagogy.

These are the implications highlighted by these recommendations, when it reinforces the importance of keeping alive pedagogical innovation in TVE, for learners to adapt themselves as well as being creative and competent in technology while moving forward in this educational scenario.

REFERENCES

1. Adil, J. G., & Napoles, M. (2023). Game-based education using Minecraft in developing student performance and interest in basic landscaping. Philippine Normal University.
2. American Educational Research Association (AERA). (2011). Code of ethics. AERA Publications.
3. American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA). (2024). Principles of landscape design. ASLA Publications.
4. Ayu, M. (2020). E-learning and its impact on student engagement. Journal of Education and Technology, 15(2), 45–53.
5. Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E. C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243–1289.
6. Borlio, M. (2020). Designing e-learning modules for blended instruction: Frameworks and best practices. International Journal of Instructional Technology, 7(2), 55–68.
7. Briscoe, P., & Brown, T. (2019). Modular learning and lifelong education. Open Learning Review, 17(3), 203–217.
8. Cabauatan, L., & Mendoza, R. (2021). Digital transformation in Philippine technical-vocational education: Challenges and opportunities. Asian Education Studies, 8(4), 122–133.
9. Calatrava, M. (2022). Development and evaluation of Kotobee-based e-learning materials in physical science. Philippine Journal of Educational Technology, 10(2), 55–66.
10. Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning (4th ed.). Wiley.
11. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
12. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
13. Department of Education (DepEd). (2021). Learning Resources Management and Development System (LRMDS) evaluation manual. DepEd Publications.
14. Etikan, I. (2020). Comparison of convenience and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 9(1), 1–4.
15. Farooq, S. (2020). Urban green spaces and human well-being: A review of landscape functions. Environmental Design Journal, 6(1), 77–89.
16. Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
17. Fisk, P. (2017). Education 4.0: The future of learning for the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Pearson Education.
18. Fullan, M., & Langworthy, M. (2021). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. Routledge.
19. Gagné, R., Wager, W., Golas, K., & Keller, J. (2005). Principles of instructional design. Wadsworth.
20. Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2013). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. Jossey-Bass.
21. Jonassen, D. (1994). Thinking technology: Toward a constructivist design model. Educational Technology Publications.
22. Khadeghat, S. (2022). SketchUp in landscape visualization: Applications in 3D education. Landscape Journal, 41(2), 115–128.
23. Kolb, D. A. (2015). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (2nd ed.). Pearson Education.
24. Liu, Y. (2022). Integrating digital technology in sustainable landscape design. Urban Ecology and Design Review, 9(3), 101–115.
25. Magno, C. (2022). Evaluating instructional quality of modular resources using LRMDS criteria. Philippine Journal of Educational Development, 19(2), 45–59.
26. Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
27. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
28. Ritik, N. (2024). Modern perspectives on sustainable landscape architecture. International Journal of Environmental Design, 18(1), 35–47.
29. Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Tondeur, J. (2019). The Technology Acceptance Model in educational contexts: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 128, 13–35.
30. Shen, L., Wang, C., & Zhou, H. (2024). Digital transformation in landscape architecture education: A review. Computers in Education Research, 5(2), 88–104.
31. Simonds, J., & Starke, B. (2016). Landscape architecture: A manual of environmental planning and design (6th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
32. Sumaylo, E. M. (2023). Development and validation of e-modules for self-paced learning in vocational education. Journal of Applied Educational Research, 9(1), 44–59.
33. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. Springer.
34. Tariq, M., Rehman, A., & Akhtar, K. (2022). Effectiveness of Kotobee in interactive e-learning. International Journal of Modern Education Research, 4(2), 77–89.
35. UNESCO. (2022). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. UNESCO Publishing.