QURANIC MULTIMEDIA MEMORY MODEL (QM3) FOR 
MEMORIZATION OF HOLY QURAN 
OMAR IBRAHIM MASSOUD HAMMZA 
(Matric no: 4110152) 
Thesis submitted in fulfillment for the degree of 
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 
Faculty of Science and Technology 
Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia 
Nilai, Negeri Sembilan 
September 2016 
11 
BIODATA OF AUTHOR 
Omar Ibrahim Massoud Hammza is a PhD candidate, Faculty Science and Technology 
in Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia (2016) Interesting in Multimedia technology he 
received his Msc degree in Information and Information Technology in (2010) from 
Universiti Utara Malaysia and BA in Computer Science in (2004) from High Center of 
Poly-Vocation / Sebha - Department of Computer Techniques. His current research 
interests include Quranic Multimedia in Memory Model. 
III 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 
This thesis is the end of my journey in obtaining my Ph. D. I have not traveled in a vacuum in this 
journey. This thesis has been kept on track and been seen through to completion with the support 
and encouragement of numerous people including my well-wishers, my friends, colleagues and 
various institutions. At the end of my thesis I would like to thank all those people who made this 
thesis possible and an unforgettable experience for me. At the end of my thesis, it is a pleasant 
task to express my thanks to all those who contributed in many ways to the success of this study 
and made it an unforgettable experience for me. I would like to extend thanks to the many 
people, 
Special mention goes to my enthusiastic supervisor, Dr. Qais Faryadi. My PhD has been an 
amazing experience and I thank Prof. Dr. Ismail Bin Abdullah, not only for their tremendous 
academic support, but also for giving me so many wonderful opportunities. 
Last but not least, I would like to pay high regards to my family for their sincere encouragement 
and inspiration throughout my research work and lifting me uphill this phase of life. I owe 
everything to them. Besides this, several people have knowingly and unknowingly helped me in 
the successful completion of this thesis. 
IV 
ABSTRAK 
Menghafal Al-Quran merupakan suatu usaha dalam islam yang penting dalam pelaksanaan 
semangat beragama antara Muslim. Menghafal AI-Quran secara tradisional memerlukan tahap 
disiplin dan keazaman yang tinggi. Untuk membantu usaha menghafal ini, kajian ini 
mencadangkan model barn yang melibatkan ingatan teks AI-Quran yang dipanggil Al-Quran 
Multimedia memori Model (QM3). Campuran kajian yang dilakukan terhadap ingatan perkataan, 
model ingatan dan kognitif teori pembelajaran Multimedia. Model yang dilaksanakan melalui e- 
pembelajaran untuk menggalakkan penghafalan yang lebih baik. Lebih daripada 35 orang pelajar 
dari sekolah menengah awal timur tengah warganegara Libya telah diambil untuk menilai 
keberkesanan model dicadangkan ini berdasarkan bentuk eksperimen sebelum dan selepas 
. Keputusan sangat ketara di mana peningkatan prestasi kira-kira 20% ditunjukkan oleh pelajar- 
pelajar yang terlibat sendiri dalam menghafal Al-Quran yang menggunakan model menghafal 
yang dicadangkan. Dengan kata lain, QM3 mengurangkan masa yang diperlukan untuk 
menghafal kira-kira 30% jika dibandingkan dengan kaedah tradisional. Selain itu, QM3 
mengurangkan kecenderungan dalam kesalahan untuk kaedah tradisional lebih daripada 80%. 
Berdasarkan perbanding QM3 didapati efektif di mana ia mencapai 1.17s disbanding kan dengan 
konvensional teknik, 1.73s pagi tempoh masa penghafazan. Ini menunjukkan pengurangan masa 
32.33%. Keputusan positif juga menunjukkan kecenderungan pengukuran dalam melakukan 
kesilapan. Di sini, kaedah tradisional menceritakan kemungkinan kesilapan sebanyak 0.15 
berbanding 0.03 yang dipaparkan oleh QM3. Kedua-dua keputusan menunjukkan hasil 
manifestasi yang menjanjikan impak QM3 terhadap penghafalan. la boleh juga dirasional dengan 
alasan yang munasabah bahawa QM3 telah meningkatkan kaedah tradisional dari segi masa dan 
ketepatan. 
V 
ABSTRACT 
Quranic memorization is an essential Islamic repertoire in the implementation of religiousity 
among Moslems. The traditional manner of memorizing the Quran requires a high level of 
discipline and determination. To assist the effort of memorization, this research proposes a new 
model of committing quranic text to memory called the Quranic Multimedia Memory Model 
(QM3). It hybridizes the study performed on verbatim memory, models of memory and 
Cognitive Multimedia Learning Theory. The model is implemented via e-learning to promote 
better memorization. Over 35 students from early secondary school of Middle Eastern Libyan 
nationality are taken to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed model based on the pretest and 
posttest experimental design. The main objective of this study is to develop a new model called 
Quranic Multimedia Memory Model (QM3). The result is significantly promising whereby a 
performance improvement of approximately 20% is exhibited by students who engaged 
themselves in quranic memorization using the proposed model. On the other hand, QM3 reduces 
the time required for memorization approximately 30% when compared to the traditional 
method. Furthermore, QM3 drops down the propensity of error for the traditional method by 
more than 80%. Based on the comparison QM3 is found effective where it achieved 1.17s 
compared to traditional method (TM). This denotes a 32.33 % time reduction. Positive result is 
also witnessed for the error propensity measure. Here, the traditional method narrates an error 
possibility of 0.15 as compared to 0.03 which is displayed by QM3. Both of the results indicate a 
promising manifestation on the impact of QM3 towards memorization. It can therefore be 
rationalized with reasonable certainty that QM3 does improve the traditional method in terms of 
time and accuracy. 
VI 
ýý oa: ý-6 
ä,. a.. Lö. -J1 äi., 11z11 : 
11 j-J=- 
ý:,. h. 11 Iýý, ý, ý 1ýý: Jº ýý c. aýl ý.. 1. . l,. ýa.. a: 1º9 . I, tw. Q; yº ý, ý ýý sý ý. ýý1ö11 
. 
QM3 ö. ýaeJ. l . 6, `1., ýA äý; 
Uä11 ö1S1. ý11 ý, ý ö1S1. i 1 ýI j 11ä1º Lý4;, 
11 ýýyr sL w; l I. ý. a> lrýý 
ý°Iý, yl ý, ý. 1 ý;.. ýº ý ý, yl ýý. 1 ý uuý 
35 ý, e 
ýI , t. 4:,: -y1 C, ýt,. ýi ý ý, -, ý, I ýýýI ýºtý ý 'yi j,: ýI L; e 
ýýýý., Qý; l, l äý_: JI . ý,, ý: 1º r_.,, aý1 ý (Posttest) 4. L, 
11 
, ý.: ryº, (Pretest) 
(*/20) ý y}v L4 31 ýyJýJI s1. )1 Jl 
z2,, 2º t. ý;, LiJ. u (*/. 30) ýý, ý11 r; yuº z4º ,. j14 QM3 u 
ýýsTsýº ilýº ýýL, ý ýº ä,,,. ý ý QM3 ýý-, ý J o99-ý. ' .: ý_1ä: 
1 
s 1.17 iw QM3 ý. ýý äý, tý. l. º `, ýt.,, ýi Ic, . ('/. 
80), ý, ° ,: ý zý. -. 1º zý 
ýý1. º ý,. ýýº ý (/32.33) ä. ý ýýº L-, Jxe u>ýý. 
TM ä, 4-ä: Jº äý, lz1º ý:. ä;, u. - 
vl yLýjý jý. 
1.1 
ý. QM3Li , ýc (0.03) , ýý. ä(0.15) e 
i. ýýºýýL, iävýCýi 
ýýý.: 1ºýiýýý1ºý,. ýýtýý, ý.. 1ýº'-DQM3 ý. ýº'ýýýý-ýýýýýýº 
ý:,, "sý11 ý' `,.. r ý" ä,, ý, 1äJl ää~+, 1z11 J. J_ÄiI äJjz. -. ä. u 
ii-Äi QM3 
. . 
lzä. d. l ä"sý ýJý . 
1ý11 ýylhl. º 
vii 
CONTENT PAGE 
Contents 
AUTHOR DECLARATION 
BIODATA OF AUTHOR 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 
ABSTRAK 
ABSTRACT 
CONTENT PAGE 
LIST OF TABLES 
LIST OF FIGURES 
LIST OF APPENDICES 
ABBREVIATIONS 
CHAPTER I- INTRODUCTION 
1.1 Introduction 
1.2 Research Background 
1.3 Problem Statement 
1.4 Research Objectives 
1.5 Research Question 
1.6 Scope of the research 
1.7 Significance of Study 
1.8 Research Hypothesis 
1.9Thesis Organization 
1.10 Summary 
CHAPTER II- LITERATURE REVIEW 
2.1 Introduction 
2.2 Quranic Memorization 
2.3 Memory Classification 
2.3.1 Verbatim Memory (VM) 
Page 
i 
11 
111 
iv 
V 
V1 
vii 
X 
xii 
xvii 
XVIII 
1 
1 
2 
4 
5 
6 
6 
8 
10 
11 
12 
13 
13 
14 
20 
21 
VIII 
2.3.2 Semantic Memory (SM) 
2.3.3 Memory Integration (MI) 
2.3.4 Multi-Store Memory Model (MSMM) 
2.3.5 Working Memory Model (WMM) 
2.4 Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning (CTML) 
2.5 Instructional Design (ID) 
2.6 E-Learning (EL) 
2.6.1 Framework 
2.6.2 Implementation 
2.6.3 Strength and Weakness 
2.6.4 Blended Learning 
2.7 Interactive Multimedia Architecture and Learning 
2.8 An Evaluation of Multimedia Learning Tools in the Markets 
2.9 Summary 
CHAPTER III- METHODOLOGY 
3.1 Introduction 
3.2 Traditional Memorization Model (TMM) 
3.3 Quranic Multimedia Memory Model (QM3) 
3.3.1 Acquisition in QM3 
3.3.2 Abstraction in QM3 
3.3.2.1 Extraction in Abstraction 
3.3.2.2 Association in Abstraction 
3.3.2.3 Ratification in Abstraction 
3.3.2.4 Schematization in Abstraction 
3.3.3 Absorption in QM3 
3.3.3.1 Decomposition in Absorption 
3.3.3.2 Cascading in Absorption 
3.3.3.3 Evaluation in Absorption 
3.3.3.4 Attachment in Absorption 
3.3.4 Assertion in QM3 
27 
33 
34 
37 
40 
46 
52 
53 
56 
59 
61 
62 
63 
70 
71 
71 
76 
80 
85 
88 
89 
91 
93 
94 
96 
98 
100 
102 
103 
104 
ix 
3.4 Experimentation Process 
3.4.1 E-Learning Development 
3.4.2 Research Design 
3.4.3 Research Hypothesis 
3.4.4 Research Material for Experiment 
3.4.5 Research Measurement of Experiment 
3.4.6 Research Sample Size 
3.4.7 Procedure of Experimentation 
3.4.7.1 Pretest Procedure in Experimentation 
3.4.7.2 Posttest Procedure in Experimentation 
3.5 Data Collection 
3.6 Data Analysis 
3.7 Summary 
CHAPTER IV- FINDINGS 
4.1 Introduction 
4.2 Findings 
4.3 Summary 
CHAPTER V- ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION 
5.1 Introduction 
5.2 Analysis 
5.3 Discussion of Findings 
CHAPTER VI- CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 
6.1 Introduction 
6.2 Conclusion 
6.3 Recommendations and limitation for future work 
References 
Appendices 
107 
107 
109 
110 
111 
113 
114 
116 
117 
119 
121 
121 
122 
123 
123 
124 
153 
154 
154 
154 
159 
171 
171 
173 
179 
182 
211 
X 
LIST OF TABLES 
Page 
Table 2.1: Schedule for Spaced Repetition 25 
Table 2.2: Categories of Arabic Multimedia Application for teaching AL-Quran 64 
Table 2.3: Comparison among Three Applications 69 
Table 3.1: Present errors of memorizing ayat for 3 participants in pre-test (TM) 72 
Table 3.2: Present errors of memorizing ayat for 3 participants in posttest (QM3) 72 
Table 3.3: present Correct of memorizing ayat for 3 participants in pretest (TM) 73 
Table 3.4: present Correct of memorizing ayat for 3 participants in posttest (QM3) 73 
Table 3.5: Possible Relationship between Tempo and Pronunciation Variability 84 
Table 3.6: Approximately Similar and Lesser Sample Size of Study 114 
Table 4.1: Memorization time for Traditional method and proposed model QM3 where Avg 125 
obtained for each sample from Appendix (H, J) 
Table 4.2: Memorization Time for Traditional method and proposed model QM3 in first 127 
percentage group (20 to 24) 
Table 4.3: Memorization Time for Traditional method and proposed model QM3 in the 128 
second percentage group (25 to 29) 
Table 4.4: Memorization Time for Traditional method and proposed model QM3 in the third 129 
percentage group (30 to 34) 
Table 4.5: Memorization Time for Traditional method and proposed model QM3 in the 130 
fourth Group percentage (35 to 39) 
Table 4.6: Error propensity between Traditional method and proposed model QM3 where 131 
Avg obtained for each sample from Appendix (I, K) 
Table 4.7: Error Propensity between Traditional method and proposed model QM3 in the 133 
first percentage group (11 to 71) 
Table 4.8: Error Propensity between Traditional method and proposed model QM3 in the 134 
second percentage group (72 to 79) 
Table 4.9: Error Propensity between Traditional method and proposed model QM3 in the 135 
third percentage group (80 to 84) 
Table 4.10: Error Propensity between Traditional method and proposed model QM3 in the 136 
fourth percentage group (87 to 97) 
Table 4.11: Error Propensity between Traditional method and proposed model QM3 in the 
fifth percentage group (100) 
Table 4.12: Average summary between Traditional Method vs. proposed model QM3 
Table 4.13: Descriptive statistics for Memorization Time for Traditional method and 
proposed model via Spss 
Table 4.14: Test of Homogeneity of Variances 
Table 4.15: ANOVA for Memorization Time 
Table 4.16: Descriptive statistics for Error propensity for Traditional method and proposed 
model via Spss 
Table 4.17: Test of Homogeneity of Variances 
Table 4.18: ANOVA for Error Propensity 
Table 4.19: Participant's observation and checklist findings with TM in class (Faryadi, Q. 
2012) 
Table 4.20: Participant's observation and checklist findings with QM3 in class (Faryadi, Q. 
2012) 
Table 4.21: Descriptive statistical for three different Applications 
Table 4.22: Descriptive statistical for Nour Elbyan 
Table 4.23: Descriptive statistical for BianAjmy 
Table 4.24: Descriptive statistical for Quran Memorization cd 
Table 4.25: ANOVA for the significant differences among the Applications 
Table 4.26: Descriptive statistical for three different Applications 
Table 4.27: Descriptive statistical for Nour Elbyan 
Table 4.28: Descriptive statistical for BianAjmy 
Table 4.29: Descriptive statistical for Quran Memorization cd 
Table 4.30: ANOVA for the significant differences among the Applications 
Table 6.1: Overall Comparison of the Average summary between Traditional method and 
proposed model QM3 
XI 
137 
139 
140 
141 
141 
142 
143 
143 
144 
145 
146 
147 
148 
148 
146 
150 
150 
151 
152 
152 
179 
XII 
LIST OF FIGURES 
Figure 2.1: Pillars of Islam and Quranic Memorization 
Figure 2.2: Memorized vs Non - Memorized Quran in Prayers 
Figure 2.3: Moses' Prayer in Facing Difficult People 
Figure 2.4: Promise of Blessing in the Quran 
Figure 2.5: Serenity in the Quran 
Figure 2.6: Hadith As-Saburah. Necessity of Solat for Children 
Figure 2.7: Fierceness vs Compassion in Islam 
Figure 2.8: Classification of Memory 
Figure 2.9: Verbatim Memory 
Figure 2.10: Repetition in Verbatim Memory 
Figure 2.11: Spaced Repetition 
Figure 2.12: Example of Semantic Memory 
Figure 2.13: Possible Rationale for Semantic Memory 
Figure 2.14: Distortion in Semantic Memory 
Figure 2.15: Stability of Semantic Memory and Verbatim Memory 
Figure 2.16: Imbalance Semantic Memory (SM) and Verbatim Memory (VM) 
Figure 2.17: Integration of Semantic and Episodic Memory 
Figure 2.18: Multi-Store Memory Model (Atkinson & Shiffrin, 1968) 
Figure 2.19: Rehearsal and Encoding in Transfer 
Figure 2.20: Working Memory Model (Baddeley, 2003) 
Figure 2.21: Visual vs Spatial Information 
Figure 2.22: Short vs Longer Words in Remembering 
Figure 2.23: Episodic Buffer and Central Executive in Memory Integration 
Figure 2.24: Framework for Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning 
Figure 2.25: Multimedia Principle 
Figure 2.26: Coherence Principle 
Page 
14 
15 
16 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
23 
24 
27 
28 
29 
30 
32 
33 
34 
36 
37 
38 
38 
39 
41 
42 
42 
XIII 
Figure 2.27: Spatial Contiguity Principle 43 
Figure 2.28: Temporal Contiguity Principle 43 
Figure 2.29: Modality Principle 44 
Figure 2.30: Redundancy Principle 44 
Figure 2.31: Design Effect on High-Knowledge Learner 45 
Figure 2.32: Role of Instructional Design 46 
Figure 2.33: ADDIE Model 47 
Figure 2.34: Integrating Theories and Models in Design 49 
Figure 2.35: Normal Learning vs E-Learning 52 
Figure 2.36: Pedagogical Framework (Granic, Mifsud & Ukusic, 2009) 53 
Figure 2.37: EUT Framework ((Ramakrisnan et al., 2012) 54 
Figure 2.38: Simplistic E-Learning Framework 55 
Figure 2.39: Blended Learning 61 
Figure 2.39: Nour Elbyan application 65 
Figure 2.45: BianAjmy application 67 
Figure 2.48: quran memorization cd application 68 
Figure 3.1: Traditional Memorization Model in overall sketch 77 
Figure 3.2: Overview for the inside process (big picture) for Traditional Memorization 78 
Model (TMM), N= Ayah no 
Figure 3.3: Detailed view Process of Traditional Memorization Model (TMM), N= Ayah no 79 
Figure 3.4: Quranic Multimedia Memory Model (QM3) In General 82 
Figure 3.5: Process of Quranic Multimedia Memory Model (QM3) 83 
Figure3.6: Detailed Process of Quranic Multimedia Memory Model (QM3) 84 
Figure 3.7: Basic Variation in Pronunciation 86 
Figure 3.8: Four Phases in Abstraction for QM3 88 
Figure 3.9: Cue Extraction for surah (54), verse 3.90 
Figure 3.10: Successful Association between Cue and other words in one Ayat 92 
Figure 3.11: Unsuccessful Association between Cue and other words in one Ayat 92 
Figure 3.12: Illustration of Ratification 93 
Figure 3.13: Illustration of Ratification 94 
Figure 3.14: Illustration of Schematization. Source from (http: //legacy. quran. com/94) 95 
XIV 
Figure 3.15: Four Phases in Absorption for QM3 96 
Figure 3.16: Abstraction and Absorption in Quranic Multimedia Memory Model (QM3) 94 
Figure 3.17: Illustration of Decomposition 99 
Figure 3.18: Cascading vs Non-Cascading 101 
Figure 3.19: Evaluation - Cascading Cycle 102 
Figure 3.20: Attachment and Schematization 103 
Figure 3.21: Integrated Memory through Schematization and Attachment 104 
Figure 3.22: Cue Extraction for Surah (94), Verse 5 and 6 105 
Figure 3.23: Illustration of Recognition in Assertion Phase In QM3 105 
Figure 3.24: Iterative Development 108 
Figure 3.25: Example of Iterative Development 108 
Figure 3.26: Experimentation design for quran memorization 109 
Figure 3.27: Procedure of Two Step Randomization for material selection 111 
Figure 3.28: Repeated Measure for quran memorization 113 
Figure 3.29: Procedure of Experimentation for quran memorization 116 
Figure 3.30: Interface of Pretest for Traditional Approach 117 
Figure 3.31: Layout of Pretest Aligned with Traditional Memorization 114 
Figure 3.32: Flow Chart of Pretest 118 
Figure 3.33: Flow Chart of Posttest 119 
Figure 3.34: Layout of Posttest Aligned with Quranic Multimedia Memory Model 120 
Figure 4.1: Overview of Result research findings for quran memorization 124 
Figure 4.2: Memorization Time for Traditional Method and QM3 126 
Figure 4.3: Memorization Time for Traditional Method and QM3 in first Group 127 
percentage 
Figure 4.4: Memorization Time for Traditional Method and QM3 in the second 128 
Group percentage 
Figure 4.5: Memorization Time for Traditional Method and QM3 in the third Group 126 
percentage 
Figure 4.6: Memorization Time for Traditional Method and proposed model QM3 in the 130 
fourth group percentage 
Figure 4.7: Error Propensity of Traditional Method and proposed model QM3 132 
xv 
Figure 4.8: Error Propensity of Traditional Method and proposed model QM3 in 134 
the first percentage group 
Figure 4.9: Error Propensity of Traditional Method and proposed model QM3 in 135 
the second percentage group 
Figure 4.10: Error Propensity of Traditional Method and proposed model QM3 136 
in the third percentage group 
Figure 4.11: Error Propensity of Traditional Method and proposed model QM3 137 
in the fourth percentage group 
Figure 4.12: Error Propensity of Traditional Method and proposed model QM3 138 
in the fifth percentage group 
Figure 4.13: Traditional Method vs QM3 139 
Figure 4.14: Means plot with standard deviation for three different applications 147 
Figure 4.15: A survey for Nour Elbyan on general review for Nour Elbyan, the checklist is 147 
presented in appendix F 
Figure 4.16: A survey on of general review for BianAjmy, the checklist is presented in 148 
appendix F 
Figure 4.17: A survey on general review for Quran memorization cd, the checklist is 149 
presented in appendix F 
Figure 4.18: Means plot with standard deviation for three different applications 150 
Figure 4.19: A survey on specific review for Nour Elbyan, the checklist is presented in 151 
appendix G 
Figure 4.20: A survey on specific review for BianAjmy, the checklist is presented in 151 
appendix G 
Figure 4.21: A survey on specific review for Quran memorization cd, the checklist is 152 
presented in appendix G 
Figure 5.1: Formulation for Corrected Letter Measurement In Quran Memorization 155 
Figure 5.2: Example of Memorization Time 156 
Figure 5.3: Example of Error Propensity 157 
Figure 5.4: Reduction Measure 158 
Figure 5.5: Memorization of Item that depends on the convention of memorizing the quran 160 
and Time 
XVI 
Figure 5.6: Isolated Memory Item 161 
Figure 5.7: Impact of Isolated Memory Item on Memorization Time 161 
Figure 5.8: Deteriorated Item and Additional Memorization Time 162 
Figure 5.9: Deterioration and Error Propensity 163 
Figure 5.10: Repetition in the Traditional Method and QM3 164 
Figure 5.11: Impact of Decomposition on Memorization Time 165 
Figure 5.12: Repetition and Cue of quran memorization 166 
Figure 5.13: Impact of Cue on Memorization Time 167 
Figure 5.14: Regularity of Cue Activation 168 
Figure 5.15: Cue and Deteriorating Item 169 
Figure 5.16: Synergy of Cue and Schematization 170 
Figure 6.1: Overall Comparison of the Average summary between Traditional method and 179 
proposed model QM3 
Figure 6.2: Possible Employment of Visualization from surah 66, verse 6 in proposed model 180 
QM3 
XVII 
LIST OF APPENDICES 
A Data collection instruments. 211 
B Example showing how instruments have been used. 212 
C Computer software developed as part of the research. 213 
D List of equipment used. 216 
E An Evaluation of Multimedia Learning Tools in the Markets 217 
F Appendix 1 222 
G Appendix 2 224 
H Memorization Time Data using Quranic Multimedia Memory Model (QM3) 226 
I Error Propensity Data using Quranic Multimedia Memory Model (QM3) 231 
J Memorization Time Data using Traditional Method (TM) 236 
K Error Propensity Data using Traditional Method (TM) 241 
L Supporting Articles to use One-Group Pretest and Posttest Design. 246 
M Supporting letter from Supervisor 247 
N Supporting letter from Libyan embassy 248 
XVIII 
ABBREVIATIONS 
VM Verbatim Memory 
SM Semantic Memory 
MI Memory Integration 
MSMM Multi-Store Memory Model 
WMM Working Memory Model 
CTML Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning 
ID Instructional Design 
EL E-Learning 
TMM Traditional Memorization Model 
QM3 Quranic Multimedia Memory Model 
ADDEI Analysis, Design, Development, Evaluation, Implementation