The aim of the paper is to stress the relationship between individual metacognitive accuracy and academic performance. Moreover, we tested the relationship between the accuracy, items diffi culty and bias score and exam results. Metacognitive monitoring calibration of 100 university students was tested in exam settings, using postdated confi dence judgments. Absolute local and global accuracy and total bias score were related with test performance, diffi culty and types of the items: multiple choice and open ended items. The most important results show local and local inaccuracy or overconfi dence, but also an unexpected greater accuracy on low performing subjects compared with there's more performing counterparts. The open ended items low, but positively correlate with metacognitive monitoring inaccuracy, both local and global, a possible illustration of the hard-easy eff ect. The bias score is globally negatively related with performance, but the more the subjects respond to the diffi cult open-ended items, the lower the bias in selfappreciation. We conclude that there is a global expected relationship between test results and both accuracy and bias score. Also, particular results show a more nuanced relationship between local and global accuracy, items diffi culty and type and bias score. Some theoretical and methodological issues are discussed and futures research direction is proposed.

Often we discuss about student's educational needs and wishes. What about teacher's needs and/or wishes in terms of educational system functional rules? Simply the teachers should sometimes use paper and students should always use computers or others devices for the same material or task? We think not. But we estimate they both needs a minimal package of teaching and learning tools for a well-structured learning management system (LMS) that will compose a reliable and decent virtual learning environment. Successfully distance learning imply a well-organized pedagogical approach and, subsequently, a structured learning environment. In this perspective, if we struggle to improve the results, we consider that both teachers’ and students’ perspective must be taken into account. We agree that the students must have all the tools that they need to learn. But for this purpose, the teachers should also have the essential tools for managing the learning process. If we demand why the LMS's are not entirely accepted as good learning environments, a good reasons seems to be even the lack of this minimal technical tools for managing teaching-learning processes. This paper emphasizes the teachers’ experience of the most utilized learning management systems (LMS), in both technical and pedagogical perspective. First, in technical perspective, we focus on the strengths and weakness of some commonly used LMSs: Moodle, Blackboard, Google Drive and Google Scholar, Sakai, Joomla LMS, Wordpress LMS. Second, we struggle about pedagogical demands for an ideal LMS: we outlined some of the most useful tools for teacher as didactic process manager, as they result from a survey on some existing software applications (the most used LMS's). We tried to propose the most necessary tools for teachers and students in order to cover the entire teaching and learning process. Also, we propose an “ideal” LMS, completed with functionalities imposed by the pedagogical and administrative norms.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 Unported License, permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.