INTRODUCTIONThe continuous development of information and communication technologies has virtualized the teaching process in many ways. Instructors now use various forms of multimedia and web-based systems to deliver and teach content to students. The use of computer-mediated communication (CMC) has enabled synchronous (real-time chat) and asynchronous (forums, email) communication to provide a more socially constructed form of learning. Understanding the connection between technology and the learning process has been the goal of many scholars who have argued that the use of technology should play an important role in transforming the process into a student-centered model that is flexible enough to meet the needs of the individual. student. However, despite the use of technology we see today, this goal is far from being achieved. The setback comes from focusing on automating instructional efforts by recreating the classroom environment instead of creating new forms of content and learning tools that meet the dynamic needs of each student. The traditional approach in distributing and transmitting content from teacher to student is unable to keep up with the increasing pace at which knowledge grows. There are many challenges to overcome to successfully incorporate technology within the learning paradigm. These challenges include high production costs, insufficient storage, low content standards, isolated and closed systems. However, the new Internet (Web 2.0) and other recent technological developments can help redefine the learning process that meets the needs of the 21st century and overcome the shortcomings of current methods. The end result should be an environment where large numbers of students participate in the original article content, tools, and network effect. As the education system increasingly focuses on the student-centered model, the quality of content and tools will increase rapidly. Unfortunately this is not the case now as most systems are developed and marketed for institutions and teachers rather than students. Recent developments in SCORM, SIF and LETSI have the potential to support the creation, delivery and monitoring of learning content as well as activities that are consistent with student needs. Success also depends on instructors using the variety of tools effectively to meet student learning objectives. Works CitedMiles, C. (1992). Checklists for evaluating thinking in action. Journal of Developmental Education, pages 32-33.Mumford, A. (1986). Learning to learn for managers. Journal of European Industrial Training, p 10.