RICT ITB 2009 : Assessing Web 2.0 Applications for Indonesia

Assessing Web 2.0 Applications for Indonesia Distance Learning in Rural Areas

Yenni M. Djajalaksana1, Tiur Gantini2, Frederic Constantianus3
Information Systems Program, Information Technology Non-degree Program
Maranatha Christian University, Jl. Prof. Drg. Soeria Soemantri No. 65, Bandung, Indonesia
Tel. +62-22-201-2186
1ymd261@yahoo.com, 2tiur.gantini@gmail.com, 3frederick_constantianus@yahoo.com



Abstract— The emergence of fast-growing Web 2.0 applications in various categories such as social bookmarking, blogs, wikis, social networking, social media sharing, mashups, VOIP, and virtual worlds opens up the potential for Indonesia rural higher education development in the present and in the future. With the existence of Web 2.0 applications, the improvement potential on Indonesia distance learning education for Indonesia rural areas are limitless; however, there are many obstacles that might hinder the possibilities to implement the Web 2.0 applications for Indonesian students in rural areas. This article presents the assessment on the Web 2.0 applications’ potential based on the Indonesia rural areas’ condition from policy, infrastructure, human resource readiness, and cost-benefits perspectives. Although there are many challenges to implement these applications in Indonesia rural areas, the Web 2.0 applications will still become potential tools to expand the learning opportunities for Indonesia rural areas communities. The researchers draw assessment and propose recommendations based on the previously published research in other developing countries and literature reviews.

Index Terms— distance learning, rural areas, Indonesia education, Web 2.0.


I. Introduction
Indonesia is an archipelagic country with over 17,500 islands. The over 230-million Indonesian population placed the country as the fourth most populated countries in the world, just below China, India, and the United States of America [1].
Most Indonesians are populated in big cities located in Java, Sumatra, Kalimantan, Sulawesi, or Bali islands. As an archipelagic country, it is a challenge for Indonesia to provide communication infrastructure that will serve urban, suburban, and rural areas equally. Therefore, despite the advance development of technology infrastructures in its big cities, the rural areas development in Indonesia is limited in term of infrastructures of communication and technology. With the current available infrastructure, as of March 2008, the communication technology only served approximately 40 percent of the Indonesian population [2].
Following the low service level of communication technology for Indonesian population, there is also a problem for higher education participation. Indonesia has approximately 15% gross enrollment ratio in 2006, approximately four million students enrolled in 82 public and 2,800 private higher education institutions [3]. It is noted that the quality and resource gaps are among the important issues facing Indonesia higher education due to its geographical challenge as an archipelagic country. Therefore, the use of technology to provide better opportunity for communication as well as education is worth consideration in the near and long-term future.
Several initiatives in the Indonesia higher education development to provide Information and Communication Technology (ICT) for education included the followings: free library service automation systems, development of management information system and database systems for Indonesia higher education, SISDIKSAT (satellite-based education system – a tele-teaching initiative via satellite, GDLN (Global Development Learning Network), UT (Universitas Terbuka, Indonesia Open University), and INHERENT (Indonesia Higher Education Network) [3].
INHERENT, specifically offers the opportunity to serve wider areas with distance learning education, and provide the infrastructure needed for institutions to use Web 2.0 applications when serving learners in rural areas.
This paper will first give the overview on Web 2.0 applications and their use in education, discuss the Indonesia country-specific condition for rural area education, assessing the Web 2.0 applications for Indonesia rural areas’ education, review lessons learned from previous researches in other countries’ experience when serving rural areas’ education, and finally provide conclusions and recommendations for further development on the potential of using Web 2.0 applications in Indonesia rural areas.

II. Web 2.0 Applications
The development of the first generation of Web applications in the 1990s marked a significant change in world-wide information dispersion [4]. The possibility to exchange information through electronic mail (email), web sites, or audio/video conferences opened up the possibilities to communicate beyond the boundaries of geographic locations.
The failures of dotcom business in 2001 became the inflection point of the web technology development [5]. Although the dotcom business failures created a perception of the saturation in the World Wide Web market, the development of web applications was never stagnant. Instead, there was a development of ideas between O’Reilly and MediaLive International which marked the birth of Web 2.0 Conference [6].

A. What is Web 2.0
Web 2.0 is defined as the following [7]:
“a perceived second generation of web development and design, that facilitates communication, secure information sharing, interoperability, and collaboration on the World Wide Web”.
The Web 2.0 is different than its first generation in term its demand-pull approach which stimulates users to contribute the contents or materials which will be published to the members of the community or the entire web users, depending on the access settings [4].
The demand-pull approach of the Web 2.0 technology made us experience the explosion of the web contents which comes along with the explosion of the web global users. As an illustration, Vaughan [6] compared the Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 using the following Fig. 1 which described the Web 1.0 as “the most read-only Web” and the Web 2.0 as “the wildly read-write Web”.

Figure 1. Comparison Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 [7]

B. Web 2.0 Applications
There are several types of Web 2.0 applications that are currently available:
1. Social Bookmarking: applications to share favorite bookmarks of URLs. E.g. Del.icio.us (http://del.icio.us/); Connotea (http://www.connotea.org/).
2. Blogs: applications to share personal or public journal entries which mimic personal diary. E.g. Google’s Blogger (http://blogger.com/); Edublogs (http://edublogs.org/).
3. Wikis: applications that enable multiple users to edit a web page collaboratively. E.g. Wikispaces (http://www.Wikispaces.com/); PbWorks (http://pbworks.com); Google Docs (http://documents.google.com).
4. Social Networking: applications that use social networks that connects people to people within groups or similar interests. E.g. Facebook (https://www.facebook.com); MySpace (http://www.myspace.com); Friendster (http://www.friendster.com).
5. Social Media Sharing: applications that enable media contents posting and sharing. E.g. Flickr (http://flickr.com/); YouTube (http://youtube.com); Slideshare (http://www.slideshare.net).
6. Mashups: applications that enable visual data and concept integrations in order to find connections among them. E.g. Quintura (http://www.quintura.com/); Visuwords (http://www.visuwords.com).
7. VOIP (Voice Over Internet Protocol): applications that enable real-time synchronized communications among users, whether they communicate using text, audio, or video. E.g. (http://www.wiziq.com/); Dimdim (http://www.dimdim/com/).
8. Virtual Worlds: applications that mimic real world environment and provide virtual environment with real-time synchronized and collaborative communication environment in 3 dimensions world. E.g. Second Life (http://secondlife.com/).

Educators around the world view Web 2.0 applications as a new mean of delivering teaching and learning materials to their students. However, it is important to realize that the Web 2.0 applications are not the substitutes of teaching methods, but instead, they will facilitate and enhance the teaching and learning processes in the classroom, whether it is face-to-face, online, or hybrid courses. Hartman, Dziuban, and Brophy-Ellison [8] stressed on the importance of “Faculty 2.0” which represents the new generation of faculty who must keep up with the rapidly changing technology savvy students. Although using technology for teaching and learning, the notion of “learner-centered” approach must be maintained [9].

C. Web 2.0 for Distance Learning Education
Web 2.0 applications provide vast opportunities for educators to deliver their teaching and learning materials in pure online or hybrid (face-to-face and online) classroom environments. Distance learning education which relied heavily on the use of texts, videos and audio recording packed in a video tapes or CD-Roms will be able to utilize the power of Web 2.0 applications in order to facilitate distance learning.
Specific Web 2.0 applications such as the VOIP and Virtual Worlds provide the possibility for students who are located in different areas of the world to participate in a real-time synchronized classroom environment, communicate instantly with other students and their instructor, and even view each other during their classroom time.
The remaining of Web 2.0 applications provide the opportunity for instructors to assign certain tasks or projects that can be done collaboratively regardless the students locations that are scattered all over the world. Although Web 2.0 applications such as social bookmarking, blogs, wikis, social networking, social media sharing, and mashups will not provide full possibility for real-time communications among its users, they bridge the gap of communication and connectivity that distance learners could not do in the past.

III. Assessing Indonesia Rural Areas Readiness for Web 2.0
Indonesia is relatively new in providing ICT-based distance learning education to serve the needs for education in rural areas. There are specific challenges that are prominent to the government and to the Indonesian community. Although it is not impossible to overcome the challenges, the complexity of the challenges specific to the Indonesia rural areas will require higher level of efforts from the government as well as the academic community when serving education in those areas.

A. Distance Learning Policy and Regulations
Indonesia began to provide distance learning education since 1978 in junior secondary schools and 1980s for in-service primary schools teachers using scheduled radio broadcasting method [10]. As the initial effort to provide distance learning education yield signs of success, the distance learning education for higher education, through Open University (Universitas Terbuka) was later implemented in 1984 using postal mailed learning materials and tests, with supplements of dedicated television broadcasts and internet [10]. Following the development, in 1992, distance learning for primary schools was adopted using interactive radio communication technology as supplements to the face-to-face method [10]. The distance learning education nowadays has further been enhanced with more advanced computer technology and internet access.
Although the distance learning education for higher education initiated in 1984, it was not until 2003 that this type of education finally received its formal acceptance. It was in the National Law on the National Education System No. 20/2003 (UU Sisdiknas No. 20/2003) that Indonesia has finally acknowledged distance education as one of the many choices available for Indonesians to obtain education. With the national law, distance learning education has been accepted as equal education to the traditional face-to-face education provided by public higher education and private accredited higher education institutions [11].
Today, the Open University’s distance learning education has been viewed as the solution to Indonesian population with economical, geographical, and/or time constraints and limitations [11]. The enrollment experienced ups and downs since its first establishment – for example, in 1996, there were 397.543 students, which remained increasing to 442.897 students in 1998 as the highest point, then it was decreasing consistently until it was only 225.000 in 2003 [11]. The enrollment figure in Open University is now increasing again. In early 2009, the Open University has approximately 532.000 registered students, 98% of which are government employees [12]. This is viewed as one of the indications that distance learning education for higher education in Indonesia has attracted a large population in Indonesia and has potential growth in the future.
Despite the increasing enrollment in Indonesia Open University, the ICT literacy of the students is still very limited. As of early 2009, there were only approximately 6,000 students (1.1 % of total student population) who were familiar with and used ICT to support their learning [12]. This figure gave an illustration on the next challenges for Indonesia distance learning education, especially in the rural areas.
Finally, in addition to the Open University, by 2003, there are also over 1,800 private universities and 86 public universities who provide distance learning education using ICT-based [11]. Several of the public institutions have received support either from the Indonesia government or special projects from the World Bank (GDLN project) for conducting distance learning education. These conventional universities now become the competition to the Open University in term of providing equal access to education for Indonesians resided in rural areas. In a way, this trend will hopefully become positive enforcement for better quality in providing distance learning education in Indonesia.
Based on the current active policy and regulations in relations to the distance learning education, Indonesia government has shown its support for ICT use to improve education for rural areas. In consequence, this positive support from the policy and regulations perspectives is favorable for using Web 2.0 applications in educating students in rural areas.

B. Internet and Communication Infrastructure
The geographical layout of Indonesia remains one of the most difficult challenges to address in term of providing the access to the Internet and Communication technology. The unequal spreads of Indonesian population in its wide-spread geographical layout has consequently provide unequal potential benefits for commercial companies. It is highly understandable if commercial companies that provide internet and communication technology are not attracted in providing the access to areas with low profit potentials. Therefore, the Indonesia government and public companies have to be the ones who step up to the plate and provide the access to rural areas.
For the purpose of assessing the Web 2.0 applications’ potential for distance learning education in the rural areas, the researchers are specifically assessing the Internet and Communication technology network readiness and availability in Indonesia. This approach is chosen as the Web 2.0 applications rely heavily on Internet connection, although those applications can be provided either through the International Internet connection or only through the Indonesia Internet Exchange (IIX) connection if the higher education institutions set up their own server infrastructure in their home institutions rather than using the resources available on the world wide web.
The Global Information Technology Report 2008-2009 from the 2009 World Economic Forum [13] provides indicators for Indonesia (see Appendix) in comparison to the other 133 countries in the world. Among the other countries in the same neighborhood such as Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, and several others, Indonesia is still among the lowest ranks for the network readiness (Table 1).

Table 1. Network Readiness Index [13]
Country/ Economy
Rank
2008-2009
Score
Singapore
4
5.67
Malaysia
28
4.76
China
46
4.15
Thailand
47
4.14
India
54
4.03
Brunei Darussalam
63
3.87
Vietnam
70
3.79
Sri Lanka
72
3.79
Indonesia
83
3.62
Philippines
85
3.60

More specifically, in term of infrastructure environment, overall, Indonesia is ranked 103. It is ranked 97 for the number of telephone lines, ranked 105 for Secure Internet servers, ranked 107 for electricity production. These several items of the infrastructure environment shows current and potential limitations and challenges for Indonesia Higher Education that would like to implement the Web 2.0 applications which require International Internet connection or National Internet connection at the very least.
As of March 2008, the communication technology only served approximately 40 percent of the Indonesian population [2]. It is highly predictable that the 40 percent would represent Indonesian population that resides in the urban and sub-urban areas rather than the rural areas. Additionally, in 2008, there are 64.4% of rural areas without telecommunication service and infrastructure [14]. Thus, the Internet and Communication infrastructure will be the biggest issue in trying to implement Web 2.0 applications for rural area distance learning education.
The government deregulation on telecommunication services that allow private business to operate telephone services which was once monopolized by PT. Telkom and Indosat (both are National Telephone companies) have opened up the possibility for less expensive and more affordable variety of telecommunication services. Although this change was expected to accelerate the process of adoption of ICT-based distance learning education, there are multi-dimensional problems that arise from variety of factors such as: software, hardware, infrastructure, human resources, and the culture of academicians [11].
Several efforts that have been done for providing Internet and Communication services for rural areas including the utilization of internet kiosks (warung internet) and telecommunication kiosks (warung telekomunikasi). From these channels, students in rural areas should have better access to the Internet, which enable the Web 2.0 applications implementation on their learning. However, the affordability of the internet costs might remain an issue for the rural areas.
One more recent alternative for Internet connection for education is the availability of INHERENT (Indonesia Higher Education Network) which was established in 2006 with 32 nodes in 32 higher education institutions as the network backbone. By 2008, INHERENT [15] has grown and connected 82 public higher education institutions, 140 private higher education institutions, 12 regional offices for private higher education institutions coordinators, and SEAMOLEC (Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization Regional Open Distance Learning Centre). As of 2008, INHERENT bandwidth capacity provides 30 MBps for advance level connection, 8 MBps for medium level connection, and 2 MBps for basic level connection [15]. The existence of INHERENT in Indonesia provides a positive encouragement of the possibility of implementing Web 2.0 applications for distance learning education for students in rural areas.
In 2006, there was also an establishment of National Education Network (Jardiknas, http://jardiknas.org/) that combined the City Wide Area Network (WAN), ICT centers, and higher education institutions in Indonesia. By 2007, Jardiknas has connected 1,014 institutions and 11,825 schools [16].
The most recent development for Internet infrastructure is the effort to integrate Indonesia’s network with neighboring countries in South East Asia through collaboration with SEAMOLEC since 2008. The use of multicast technology with satellite is expected to overcome the geographical challenges faced by Indonesia when providing the internet connection using cables [16]. Although the collaboration with SEAMOLEC is intended to provide connectivity and network with global education world, the Indonesia rural areas might also benefit from this collaboration with better access to the internet.
Based on the recent development in ICT infrastructure in Indonesia, there is certainly a better prospect for implementing the use of Web 2.0 applications for Indonesia rural area distance learning education. Although it will be harder for the rural areas to acquire sufficient and appropriate access to the Internet, it is certainly a positive trend for future distance learning education in those areas.

C. Human Resource Readiness
The human resource readiness in Indonesia can be viewed from two perspectives – quantity and quality. The following discussions will cover both perspectives to assess the use of Web 2.0 applications for distance learning education in Indonesia. Although the researchers had difficulties to obtain recent, accurate, and consistent statistical data, the following discussion will at least portrait the situation in Indonesia.
Based on United Nations Development Program (UNDP) Human Development Report 2007/2008 [17], Indonesia is placed in the medium human development countries, ranked as the 107th country. By 2005, Indonesia telephone mainline users were 58 per 1,000 peoples, cellular subscribers were 213 per 1,000 peoples, and internet users were 73 per 1,000 peoples [17]. By 2007, there are 353 mobile telephone subscribers per 1,000 peoples and 56 internet users per 1,000 people [13]. These are quite interesting changes which indicated that the growth of population and the growth of internet users are not at the same pace or speed, while the mobile telephone subscribers grew rapidly over the course of two years. By the end of 2007, the total of internet users in Indonesia has reached 25 million users [18]. In term of quantity, those figures portrait the condition that Indonesian population is still far left behind in term of their technology utilization. However, the growth rate, especially in the mobile telephone subscribers shows positive trends and potential for future development. As Web 2.0 applications use the Internet can be accessed either from telephone lines or mobile telephone, despite the low penetration at the present, this show positive trend for the future adoption of Web 2.0 applications.
Although the ICT penetration and usage in Indonesia shows a positive trend, Indonesia faces bigger challenge in term of quality. Not only that the general population knowledge and skills in using ICT are still limited, but also that the workforce who would support the use of ICT is still far from sufficient.
Based on the Global Information Technology Report 2008-2009 (see Appendix), Indonesia readiness component combined for individual readiness, business readiness, and government readiness for ICT is ranked 65 among 143 countries [13]. Among the three sub-components, the worst is the government readiness which is ranked 111 among 143 countries. The rank shows that Indonesia government is not yet prioritizing ICT development at their maximum.
Indonesia faces complex problems in term of human resource quality, especially in the rural areas. One of the major problems is the availability of human resources who are ICT literate and the availability of workforce to support the use of ICT in rural areas. Efforts to provide qualified ICT workforce in Indonesia includes providing formal and non-formal ICT education [19].
Based on the data from Center for Research and Application of Information and Electronic Technologies of the Office for the Research and Application of Technologies, 2001 [19], the internet users in Indonesia comprise the following:
· Based on the usage, 42% for commerce, 30% for higher education, 21% for government, 6% for research institutions, and 1% for non-government offices.
· Based on their professions, students 39%, workers 22%, managers 17%, assistant managers 5%, professionals 5%, directors 4%, entrepreneurs 3%, and others 5%.
· Based on their educational backgrounds, elementary school/junior high school 2%, high school 41%, college graduates 9%, undergraduates 43%, and graduates 5%.
Since there is no recent data that reflect the present situation, those figures might not be accurate, but at least give the illustration on the profile of internet users in Indonesia.
Assuming that the use of Web 2.0 applications for distance learning will be targeted on students who completed high-school education and will continue to higher education level, efforts to improve the ICT uses in high schools has been one of the government programs (e.g. Jardiknas). However, the educational reach to rural areas might still be limited. Prioritization for scholarships in education was given to poor students, although misallocation to the higher economic status students remained a problem [20]. Nevertheless, there were efforts to provide better education for those who are in needs.
Stepping ahead, there is also a need to educate the potential instructors who will teach the distance learning education in rural areas. Since Web 2.0 applications are relatively new for Indonesian communities, instructors who will deliver the teaching materials to their students must also be well-educated on using the applications [8]. Although there were no hard data available to provide facts on the Web 2.0 literacy among instructors of distance learning education, it is an important issue for Indonesia to resolve.
Based on the discussions on this section, it seems that the human resource readiness of using Web 2.0 applications for distance learning in rural areas will be a major problem on top of the limitation in infrastructure. Not only that the students are not ready, the instructors might not be ready to use the applications either. More efforts are needed to be pursued to enable the use of Web 2.0 applications for distance learning purpose.

D. Costs v.s. Benefits
To assess the costs and benefits of using Web 2.0 applications for distance learning education in Indonesia rural areas, there are several considerations:
1. Whether the Web 2.0 applications used would be those available in the international internet connection or within the national internet connection (either in the INHERENT, Jardiknas, or other connection within Indonesia network only).
2. What kind of facility that distance learning students in rural areas will use to have the Internet connection? Are they going to connect to the Internet from Internet kiosks, telecommunication kiosks, higher education institutions or other educational institutions with the international internet connection or the national internet connection? Are they going to use their own cellular phone connection or local phone connection to access the internet?
3. Whose costs are being assessed? Costs of the educational institutions that provide the education and utilize the Web 2.0 applications, or costs of the students who purchase the education?
4. Currently, the Web 2.0 applications has been viewed as beneficial applications for better learning and better collaborations among students and between students and the instructors [21]. However, the issue is how to measure those benefits in tangible monetary values.

A wide range of Web 2.0 applications listed previously in Section II provides different alternatives for implementations. Without any modification, those listed are all available in the international internet network, but only some are available in the national internet network in Indonesia. Applications such as blog, wikis, social media sharing, or VOIP can easily and economically (e.g. use the free ones) be installed in the local/national servers located in Indonesia for better rural area access, but applications such as social bookmarking, social networking, mashups, or virtual worlds might be harder or more expensive to be installed in the local/national servers due to royalty or copyright of the software.
Depending on the availability of the telecommunication infrastructure and facility in the rural areas where students reside, costs and benefits of using Web 2.0 applications will be affected. Costs will increase when students use cellular phone connection for internet connection because of geographical limitations. If students would like to utilize the internet connection available in the higher education institutions or other educational institutions, distance between home or working location with the institutions will affect the costs. Thus, it is going to also affect the overall costs of using Web 2.0 applications for distance learning education.
Since costs and benefits can be viewed from both sides from the institutions’ perspective and students’ perspective while those two types of costs will affect each other, the use of Web 2.0 applications for distance learning education might not always be advantageous for both constituents.
The researchers decided to leave those costs and benefits assessment on using Web 2.0 applications open as there are too many variables involved for accurate assessment. At the very least, the discussions will trigger further thoughts on assessing the quantitative costs and benefits of using the Web 2.0 applications for conducting distance learning education.
While it is difficult to measure the benefits and challenges in term of financial or quantitative manner, it is possible to assess Web 2.0 applications implementation in term of qualitative benefits and challenges. Therefore, the researchers summarized the benefits to learning and technical challenges in the following Table 2.:

Table 2. Benefits and Challenges to Implement Web 2.0 Applications for Indonesia Rural Areas Distance Learning Education.
Type of Web 2.0 Appli-cations
Benefits to Learning
Technical Challenges and Possible Solutions
Social Book-marking
Improve information sharing for students and instructors in the learning process
At the moment, only available in the international servers.
Blogs
Improve reflective and analytical thinking from students on certain issues which can be shared with greater audience.
There are already many free blogs sites available within Indonesia national internet network. Alternatively, there are free blogs applications that can be installed on servers placed in Indonesia internet network.
Wikis
Improve potential for collaborations among students who are located in scattered locations.
At the moment, only available in the international servers. However, there are free wikis applications that can be installed in the servers placed in Indonesia internet network.
Social Net-working
Improve connectivity and networking among students and instructors.
At the moment, only available in the international servers.
Social Media Sharing
Improve the variety of course content materials for teaching purposes and improve the possibility to communicate not only through texts but also through audio and video media.
At the moment, only available in the international servers.
There is a need of high internet bandwidth that might make it very difficult for rural areas.
It can be costly if the internet cost is based on bandwidth utilities.
Mashups
Improve students’ conceptual thinking in a collaborative work space.
At the moment, only available in the international servers.
VOIP
Improve the possibility to communicate through audio and video on real-time basis. This application opens the potential use of real-time virtual classroom.
At the moment, only available in the international servers.
There is a need of high internet bandwidth that might make it very difficult for rural areas.
It can be costly if the internet cost is based on bandwidth utilities.
Virtual Worlds
Improve the possibility to communicate through real-time environment, and increase the visualization of the course materials when lecture is done in the virtual worlds.
At the moment, only available in the international servers.
There is a need of high internet bandwidth that might make it very difficult for rural areas.
It can be costly if the internet cost is based on bandwidth utilities.

Although the assessment above is somewhat very limited, at least this will give the idea on how those Web 2.0 applications can be considered for distance learning education in rural areas.

IV. Learning from Other Countries’ Experiences
It will be advantageous to look at other countries’ experiences in resolving problems and challenges to provide distance learning education in their rural areas. Therefore, the following section will primarily discuss and present a summary of past research or discussions within this topic.
Several selected studies on rural areas in other countries revealed the following findings:
· The use of satellite-based telecommunication in Malaysian rural areas provides the lowest-cost remote area connectivity options in the area where cellular or landline connectivity is not available [22].
· WiMAX is one of the best alternatives to provide internet connectivity for rural areas with low population density [23].
· Flexible network for internet using CDMA access is one of the alternatives to provide internet connectivity in Africa rural areas [24], where 80% the population live. Based on this study, the low cost and the audio/video features provided with this alternative are promising.
· In order to provide internet connectivity to low population, as low as 25 users in rural areas of Canada will require the following four considerations: Fiber Optic Connectivity to the Internet through regional municipality, tower space at low cost and co-location of transmission equipment in the town building, cost effective wireless transmission equipment, affordable Interconnection with the Public Switched, Telephone Network [25].
· WCDMA technology is the best option among CDMA and GSM technologies to provide internet connectivity in Africa, especially in rural areas where high signal loss is experienced [26].
· A case study in Hungary revealed the potential of using HAPs (High altitude platforms), either aircraft or airships operating at 17- 22 km altitude, for the provisioning of broadband wireless services because HAP based telecommunications networks have the potential to deliver a range of communications services and other applications cost effectively (e.g. broadband and third-generation mobile for rural area) [27]. Similar proposal on the use of HAP to provide WiMAX connectivity as it is one of the cost effective alternatives provided that collaboration with major broadband and wireless alternative can be pursued [28].
· IPTV (Internet Protocol Television) provides the possibility of applying e-learning in China rural areas [29].
· A very good alternative for community in rural areas of developing countries is the Asynchronous Network (Asynch-NET) provided by Mobile Access Point (MAP). This asynchronous network is the footstep for e-services implementation in the communities with low-income and low population density. Study revealed that the Asynch-NET framework provides ‘the always-on’ e-services at the similar operating cost of Asynch-NET which is economical to other options [30].
· E-learning can be one of the best learning methods for rural areas population [31]. This study proposes a framework for providing Internet access to rural areas using wireless network. Several challenges identified in the study were the high cost of initial installation, the human resource literacy for the internet kiosks, and natural disaster potential in rural areas.
· Assessment on possible digital learning platforms in China showed that Blog, distance network education, the combination of the fourth and fifth media are potential to provide digital learning platform in China’s rural areas [32].

While those studies only cover alternative solutions partially to the problems in Indonesia, those are potential ideas to be implemented in Indonesia rural areas distance learning education.

V. Conclusions and Recommendations
The assessment on implementing Web 2.0 applications in Indonesia rural areas’ distance learning education provides several conclusions:
· Indonesia policy and regulations on the use of ICT are positive enablers for potential implementation of Web 2.0 applications in providing distance learning education in rural areas.
· Internet infrastructure and human resource readiness are the major problems/challenges that might hinder the implementation of Web 2.0 applications for learning purpose. However, in the long-term, when those two problems/challenges resolved, Web 2.0 applications are definitely potential to facilitate learning in distance learning education.
· The availability of national education network such as INHERENT, Jardiknas, and others give the vast possibility to accelerate distance learning education for Indonesia rural areas.
· There are various costs and benefits considerations to judge the possibility of implementing Web 2.0 applications for learning purpose in rural areas of Indonesia – the setup of Web 2.0 applications, type of facilities used, type of costs, and the translations of benefits itself in comparison to the costs.
· Various alternatives such as the use of WiMAX, WCDMA, or HAP arouse from previous studies in other countries’ rural areas.

Thus, based on those conclusions, the researchers view Web 2.0 as potential applications to implement in Indonesia rural areas distance education in the future.
Consequently, the researchers would like to recommend the following:
· Efforts to solve the problems of internet connectivity infrastructure and human resources must be at the highest priority before the actual implementation.
· There would be intensive training to use Web 2.0 applications provided, especially for the future distance learning instructors.
· Indonesia also needs to consider different alternatives as learned from other countries’ experiences to serve rural areas with Internet connectivity.

Finally, considering the difficulties experienced by the researchers in obtaining accurate and recent statistical data on Indonesia rural areas, potential future improvements for future research would be the following, but not limited to:
· There should be specific study to obtain the statistics on the number of internet users, area of Internet coverage, Indonesia ICT education, and other such detail statistics.
· It is potential to develop Indonesia ICT Database portal that will collect and monitor data on the development of ICT in the future.

VI. Appendix
Source: Global Information Technology Report [13]
References
[1] Wikipedia, “Indonesia”, 2009, retrieved May 7th, 2009 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesia.
[2] Kompas.com, “2015 semua layanan telekomunikasi berbasis internet,” 26 March 2008, retrieved May 8th, 2009 from http://www.kompas.com/read/xml/2008/03/26/20163627/2015.semua.layanan.telekomunikasi.berbasis.internet.
[3] T.D. Kunaefi, “ICT in university teaching/learning and research in Southeast Asian countries: A case of Indonesia,” presented at Regional Seminar on Making a Difference: ICT in University Teaching/Learning and Research in Southeast Asian Countries, Jakarta, August 2007.
[4] J.S. Brown, & R.P. Adler, “Minds on fire: Open education, the long tail, and learning 2.0”, EDUCAUSE Review, January/February 2008, pp. 17 – 32.
[5] T. O’Reilly, “What is web 2.0 design patterns and business models for the next generation of software,” 2005, retrieved May 11, 2009 from http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/ news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html.
[6] N. Vaughan, “Passion, curiosity-driven learning and web 2.0: What’s the connection?,” presentation at Lilly Conference on College and University Teaching, Traverse City, Michigan, USA, 2008.
[7] Wikipedia, “Web 2.0,” 2009, retrieved May 6th, 2009 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0.
[8] J.L. Hartman, C. Dziuban, & J. Brophy-Ellison, “Faculty 2.0”, EDUCAUSE Review, September/October, 2007, pp. 62-76.
[9] A. W. Chickering, & S. C. Ehrmann, “Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever,” AAHE Bulletin, October 1996, pp. 3-6.
[10] A. Purwadi, “Policy on open, distance, and electronic learning in Indonesia,” retrieved May 10, 2009 from http://www.teknologipendidikan.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/policy-on-open-agung-purwadi.pdf.
[11] P. Pannen, “Distance education public policy and practice in the higher education: A case of Indonesia,” paper presented at Revista Brasileira de Aprendizagem Aberta e a Distância, São Paulo, Setembro, 2003, retrieved May 10, 2009 from http://www.abed.org.br/revistacientifica/Revista_PDF_Doc/2003_Distance_Education_Public_Policy_Paulina_Pannen.pdf
[12] Kominfo News, “Hanya 6.000 mahasiswa UT memanfaatkan ICT,” April 14, 2009, retrieved May 10, 2009 from http://bipnewsroom.info/index.php?_language=Indonesia&_mainNo=11&_subNo=&_insideSubNo=&newsid=48670&_link=loadnews.php&MMN_position=281:281.
[13] The Global Information Technology Report 2008 – 2009. Retrieved May 9, 2009 from http://www.weforum.org/pdf/gitr/2009/gitr09fullreport.pdf.
[14] Kompas.com, “Swasta minati internet kabel listrik,” May 18, 2008, retrieved May 10, 2009 from http://www.kompas.com/read/xml/2008/05/18/08221498/swasta.minati.internet.kabel.listrik.
[15] “INHERENT – Indonesia Higher Education Network: Development programs and utilization,” 2008, retrieved May 11, 2009 from http://pjjpgsd.seamolec.org/system/files/u1/PJJ-Inherent-Talk.ppt.
[16] G.H. Prijowirjanto, B. Djokosumbogo, B.S. Prakoso, & K. Mustafa, “Sejarah perkembangan infrastruktur teknologi informasi dan komunikasi, dari jarnet hingga jardiknas menuju South East Asian Education Network (SEA EduNet)”, paper presented e-Indonesia Initiative 2008 (eII2008)-Konferensi dan Temu Nasional Teknologi Informasi dan Komunikasi untuk Indonesia, 21-23 Mei 2008, Jakarta, retrieved May 11, 2009 from http://khalidmustafa.wordpress.com/2008/05/23/sejarah-pengembangan-infrastruktur-teknologi-informasi-dan-komunikasi-dari-jarnet-hingga-jardiknas-menuju-ke-south-east-asian-education-network-sea-edunet/
[17] UNDP, “Human Development Report 2007/2008 Fighting climate change: Solidarities in a divided world,” 2007, Palgrave MacMillan, NY, retrieved May 10, 2009 from http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR_20072008_EN_Complete.pdf.
[18] A.Z. Syaifudin, “Tantangan dan peluang ekonomi internet di Indonesia,” Dec 7, 2008, retrieved May 12, 2009 from http://www.km.itb.ac.id/web/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=106:tantangan-dan-peluang-ekonomi-internet-di-indonesia&catid=75:diskusi-diluar-isu-energi-pangan-dan-pendidikan&Itemid=110.
[19] H. Yuhetty, “ICT and education in Indonesia”, paper presented at the Asia and Pacific seminar/workshop on Educational Technology, Tokyo, October 2001, retrieved May 12, 2009 from http://gauge.u-gakugei.ac.jp/apeid/apeid02/papers/Indonesia.htm.
[20] R.A. Sparrow, “Protecting education for the poor in times of crisis: An evaluation of a scholarship programme in Indonesia,” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, February 2007, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 99-122.
[21] Y.M. Djajalaksana & T. Gantini, “Potensi web 2.0 sebagai alat bantu pengajaran dan pembelajaran,” in Proceedings of Konferensi Nasional Sistem Informasi 2009, Informatika: Bandung, Indonesia, 2009.
[22] M.A. Abdullah & E.M. Husni, “The applications of satellite communication: towards better telecommunication system in rural areas in Malaysia,” Research and Development, 2002, SCOReD 2002, Student Conference on 16-17 July 2002, pp. 141 – 144.
[23] R. Giuliano, C. Monti, & P. Loreti, “WiMAX fractional frequency reuse for rural environments,” Wireless Communications, IEEE,vol. 15, issue 3, June 2008, pp. 60 – 65.
[24] A.I. Kilenga & S.H. Mneney, “Flexible network for Internet access in rural areas”, Africon Conference in Africa, IEEE AFRICON 6th, vol. 1, 2-4 Oct. 2002, pp. 211 – 216.
[25] F.D. Menard & R. Proulx, “Overcoming the digital divide in rural areas serving broadband profitably to as few as 25 subscribers,” Access Networks & Workshops, AccessNets '07, Second International Conference, 22-24 Aug 2007, pp. 1 – 6.
[26] P. Rasello & T.J. Afullo, “CDMA performance for rural telecommunication access” AFRICON, 7th AFRICON Conference in Africa, vol. 1, 17 Sept. 2004, pp. 161 – 166.
[27] T. Van Do, G. Buchholcz, L. Juhdsz, & J. Pakai, “Providing telecommunications services for rural areas from the HAP (High Altitude Platform): a case study in the region of Hungary,” Telecommunications Network Strategy and Planning Symposium, NETWORKS 2006, 12th International Symposium, Nov 2006, pp. 1 – 5.
[28] Z. Yang & A. Mohammed, “Wireless broadband services for suburban and rural applications from High Altitude Platforms with an economical business model design,” Communications and Networking in China, ChinaCom 2008, 3rd International Conference, 25-27 Aug 2008, pp. 1034 – 1038.
[29] Z.X. Liang, L. Quan, Y. Jie, & S. X. Juan, “Education IPTV for e-learning in rural area,” Information Science and Engieering, ISISE '08, International Symposium, 20-22 Dec 2008, vol. 2, pp. 268 – 271.
[30] K. Greyson, M. Kissaka, D. Haule, & V. Ndume, “Asynch-NET: Footstep for always-on e-services in the rural areas of developing countries: Case study-Tanzania,” Technology for Education in Developing Countries, 4th IEEE International Workshop, 10-12 July 2006, pp. 5 – 6.
[31] F. Rabbi & A. Arefin, “ELearning using wireless ad-hoc network to support people of rural areas,” Communication Technology, ICCT '06, International Conference, 27-30 Nov 2006, pp. 1 – 4.
[32] H. Gong & S. Yan, “Study on supportive technologies to construct rural digital learning platform,” Intelligent Information Technology Application, IITA '08, 2nd International Symposium, 20-22 Dec, vol. 1, pp. 794 – 798.