e-Technologies in Engineering Education Learning Outcomes Providing Future Possibilities

The Intersection of Learning Architecture and

Instructional Design in e-Learning
Diana L. Wilkinson, AT&T Business Learning Services

Abstract
Peers collaborate, learn from each other, learn to con-

A sturdy Learning Architecture is necessary to lay the founda- tribute to the knowledge community as they learn to
tion for effective learning in the age of the Internet. Comple- work towards common goals and shared vision
mentary technologies must be integrated into what is poten-
tially so pervasive that it could be said to be a Learning Eco-
Mentors coach individuals and teams to remove barri-
system. Not only is the technology of this infrastructure im- ers to understanding, provide guidance to aid in explo-
pacted by the decision to knit disparate parts into an inte- ration of efficient approaches when students become
grated whole, but Instructional Design methodology is impacted frustrated, curious, or anxious to validate their under-
as well. A Learning Ecosystem capitalizes standing
on reusability, on underlying shared logic
and taxonomy, and on convergence of learn-
Challenge is balanced with the needs
ing and Knowledge Management to support and abilities of individual students
a new model where learning and work are
seamlessly and inextricably linked.
Learning experience is perceived as
fun.
I. Introduction
TEE 2002 The challenge of learning and applying that
Optimal learning occurs in the simulation of learning is at the core of engineering
real world, problem-based activities. This disciplines. The challenge of technology-
happens in a safe environment where errors based business is to apply engineering
are expected, and failure deepens learning A UNITED ENGINEERING solutions to customers’ needs. What
experience. Optimal learning occurs in envi- FOUNDATION CONFERENCE differentiates both schools and businesses
ronments where: Davos, Switzerland 11-16 August 2002 is how well and how efficiently we meet this
h t t p : / / w w w. c o e . g a t e c h . e d u / eT E E
challenge.

Learners are scaffolded as they de-
velop self-efficacy in enabling technologies II. Context

Availability and delivery of instructional resources We have come to the fork in the road where we can choose to
adapt to learner’s needs redefine how we learn, how we teach, how we apply, how we
solve problems, how we differentiate ourselves and those we

Feedback is continuous represent, and how we contribute to the greater good. Our com-
puting technology and the Internet has evolved to the point

Scoring is constantly visible to compare accomplish- that we can leverage and refine the infrastructure to enable au-
ment to one’s own previous attempts, the best of one’s thentic learning. We can tap into our collective knowledge re-
cohorts, and the total field that has ever been scored serves both to withdraw and contribute new knowledge, new
applications, and new insights. We have begun to experiment

Access to the underlying knowledge-base has been with ways to convert inaccessible tacit knowledge into acces-
skillfully crafted and organized for learners sible explicit knowledge, and recognize the value of converging
these information sources with e-learning. Knowledge manage-

Cognitive loading is eased until foundation understand- ment and e-learning provide us with the tools and infrastructure
ing is established, then cognitive dissonance and chal- to consciously and dramatically alter our approach.
lenge increased until complexity mirrors the real world
We learn best by doing. We get our instructional design model

Pace of learning is controlled by learners backwards when we insist on deluging students with facts, prin-
ciples, theorems, axioms of both pure and applied science, then

Proceedings of the 2002 eTEE Conference 11-16 August 2002 Davos, Switzerland 213
e-Technologies in Engineering Education Learning Outcomes Providing Future Possibilities

expect them to recall and apply this knowledge in practice. We students and providing them the support, knowledge and in-
learn best by starting with a realistic problem that needs to be centive to join the learning community.
solved and seeking the resources and knowledge relevant to
help solve the problem posed. We learn best by making mis- B. Knowledge Base
takes, having experts tutor and guide us as we improve our
solutions until we arrive at optimal ones. We learn best when we Working backwards from the desired learning outcome, the learn-
accept personal responsibility for our own learning. ing delivery system needs to provide access to all relevant re-
sources. These resources can include: a knowledge base, a sci-
We also learn from others through observation and then perfect ence, a particular body of knowledge, or a human resource such
our newly acquired knowledge via mimicry. We are more effi- as a mentor, professor or subject matter expert. The instructional
cient learners once we acquire social learning skills. We need to designer is challenged to create a realistic and engaging virtual
become members of a larger learning community, a network of environment that allows learners to investigate, relate, and ap-
birds-of-a-feather where we can posit our questions and our ply the knowledge base to resolve the litany of problems in-
insights. volved in constructing desirable epiphanies of understanding.

As students we must learn to manage all our resources. We C. Learning-How-To-Learn

must know how to query for relevant knowledge and discrimi-
nate what is valid. We must develop strategies for solving prob- The primary goals of education must be to help students learn
lems. We must have a safe place, a laboratory, where we can how to learn, seek, test, and apply information. Students must
experiment, test and make mistakes as we learn. We learn in learn to build upon what is already known to construct new
order to solve problems. We solve problems to improve the knowledge, new applications and new solutions. How does e-
human condition and because to do so is intrinsically and/or learning help us ensure more authentic learning is enabled and
extrinsically rewarding. that we do not simply mirror traditional teaching models in an
electronic delivery mode? We must recast our traditional in-
A. Learning Infrastructure structional design into constructed new models. Our new mod-
els must be performance-based, include problem-solving goals,
The fork in the road – the enabling technology/the infrastruc- be contextually relevant and learner-centric. Our new model must
ture – is coming together…but it is not fait accompli. One of the focus on developing competencies and critical thinking. Our
architectural problems awaiting solution is the elegant integra- new models must be sensitive to individual needs and contexts,
tion of and access to our collective knowledge base. We have to as well as the dynamics of groups learning as cohorts. We must
work out the mechanisms of contribution, validation, organiza- engineer learning structures to optimize the learner’s opportu-
tion, permission, rights, privileges and payment – but then some- nity to explore, discover and develop personal learning con-
how connect all relevant bodies of knowledge and create sim- structs.
plistic yet intelligent access.
D. Problem-based Learning
III. e-Learning Strategies
Goal-oriented problems that are case-based lend themselves to
One of Stephen Covey’s principles is to “begin with the end in narrative description and simulation. Multiple voices of experts
mind.” This principle can be applied quite well to the instruc- can be evoked to tell relevant stories and direct students to
tional design of e-learning. The premise for a course of learning investigate the foundation knowledge necessary to underpin
should be driven by what the student will construct and, what reasonable solutions. The e-learning structure should allow stu-
deliverable is to be created that will demonstrate that all requi- dents to peel away the layers of its onionskin as they pursue the
site skills and knowledge have been mastered. This strategy construction of their own solutions.
must be implemented in several areas.
The brave, new world of e-learning will be predicated on our
A. Motivation ability to build engaging, realistic scenarios that enable discov-
ery learning. The best designs can be repeated by changing out
The design of problem-based learning is not trivial. Problems the specific problem set and/or the resources required for solv-
must be intriguing, relevant and sufficiently challenging to mo- ing the problem within a reusable framework. Fundamental re-
tivate students to want to participate. Not all students will drink sources may be applicable in multiple contexts. Reusability is
willingly from the well. Strategies must be employed to help key to efficient design, so we must look for opportunities to
reluctant students overcome their objections and become ac- repurpose content, context, application, and format — the com-
tive participants. Like shepherds online instructors, facilitators binations and permutations of which are nearly infinite, and not
and mentors can expect to spend time locating straggling unduly limiting or stifling to creativity.

Proceedings of the 2002 eTEE Conference 11-16 August 2002 Davos, Switzerland 214
e-Technologies in Engineering Education Learning Outcomes Providing Future Possibilities

IV. Integration of Learning and Work B. Instructional Design of e-Learning

In the brave new world, learning and work are simultaneous, Instructional Design methodologies currently fall into two camps.
interlocking activities, as natural and organic as breathing. All One is the systematic, waterfall approach that adheres to a logi-
information is available in its atomic form as concepts, facts, cal sequence of assessing needs, designing, developing, imple-
procedures and actions. Intelligence stems from rules encoded menting and evaluating learning solutions, and depends on com-
into systems, application of enabling technologies, and critical pleting and validating each step before engaging in the next.
thinking of people who convert tacit knowledge to explicit infor- The contrasting approach depends on the rapid prototyping
mation and reverse the process to complete the cycle. More and iterative refinement of an instructional solution. Both pro-
naïve workers extract explicit information from the Knowledge cesses have merit, and to some degree, principles from each
base and convert it into personal, tacit knowledge through re- perspective can be employed in a hybrid solution. The specific
peated practice and experience applying the knowledge in a balance of which ID approach should predominate should be
variety of situations. Tacit knowledge enables skillful perfor- determined by the situation.
mance and wisdom in terms of critical thinking, problem solving,
and decision-making. Instruction should augment the relevant body of knowledge in
ways that make it accessible, understandable, and relevant to
Learning is a continuous process of solving graduated series of learners. The roadmap for a convergent process could be:
problems resulting in improvement of both performance and
performance self-efficacy. 1) Conduct a Needs Assessment.

A. Knowledge Management 2) Identify, modify or create relevant competency models

for the jobs and skills the correlate with the needs.
Knowledge Management is the effort to codify and organize
information so it can be viewed as knowledge, and the effort to 3) Build and/or organize relevant Knowledge Base.
transfer knowledge to those less knowledgeable. Knowledge
management is more than databases and Web portals. It is the a. Establish or refine underlying content taxonomy.
total system of discriminating what is useful, codifying it, vali- b. Craft and/or index libraries of stable and enduring
dating what is useful, making it accessible and retrievable, dis- resources to make them accessible.
criminating what is relevant to a problem, applying knowledge c. Create structures to organize the dynamic part of
to solve problems, evaluating effect, defining and deriving rules knowledge base; i.e.: asynchronous and synchro-
and best practices to contribute back into the knowledge base. nous discussion dialogues.
d. Establish protocol and behavior for contributing
Within any domain of knowledge, there are several tensions or to the knowledge base including validation pro-
dichotomies of forces that require different management strate- cess.
gies. Some content is within the control of an organization or e. Promote synthesis and data mining of free-form
institution. Some is external, and cannot be directly controlled. discussions and contributions of both experts and
Some is universal, while other is local. Some content is stable, learners.
while other is dynamic and subject to change. Some knowledge
is declarative such as facts or concepts, while other is proce- 4) Build Learning Interventions including objectives, se-
dural or rule-based. Validity, reliability and currency of informa- quence of instruction, problem sets around what needs
tion require overt management. to be known.

“Information” is a complex term. Some information is about other a. Balance strategies for developing skills, knowl-
information. Some information is related in particular ways to edge, attitudes and behaviors.
other information. Some are descriptive, illustrative, demonstra- b. Determine delivery mode or blend of delivery
tive, problem sets, scenarios, directions, applications, or spe- modes.
cific to the cause-effect paradigms that relate to prediction and c. Leverage, modify or develop competency models
troubleshooting. Knowing these attributes and relationships to establish benchmark of desirable characteris-
helps transform information into knowledge. Storing it in a re- tics and standards.
trievable format helps make at least some of it manageable. Learn- d. Build problem sets that match desired competen-
ing to apply knowledge eventually builds wisdom. cies. Graduate difficulty level, complexity, and va-
riety of problems.
e. Develop a scoring rubric for problem-sets.

Proceedings of the 2002 eTEE Conference 11-16 August 2002 Davos, Switzerland 215
e-Technologies in Engineering Education Learning Outcomes Providing Future Possibilities

f. Build scenarios that mirror the real world in which 4. Examine each course in terms of cohesiveness, adher-
to anchor the problem sets. ence to objectives, graduation of difficulty of problem
g. Associate each scenario and problem set with pre- sets, comprehensiveness of supportive resources, de-
requisite skills and knowledge needed to fully un- gree to which each SKAB is supported, and identify
derstand and solve the problem. gaps where more explanation or discovery of underly-
h. Separate need to know from nice to know. ing knowledge will be necessary go accommodate the
i. Determine a strategy for weaning learners from range of learners expected to participate in each offer-
spoon-fed access to resources, to learning where ing.
to find them in a real world context.
j. Establish an understanding of conventions and 5. Create additional activities to help learners fill residual
navigation of the learning environment. gaps; create mechanisms for feedback so learners can
k. Establish skills necessary for learning-to-learn make adjustments and develop self-efficacy around the
i. Collaboration focus of learning experience.
ii. Critical Thinking
iii. Problem Solving V. Learning Ecosystem
l. Establish level playing field by screening for pre-
requisites and providing remediation. The fundamental architectural elements of a comprehensive
and cohesive learning ecosystem include (Figure 1):
5) Examine course design in terms of adherence to objec-
tives, cohesiveness, graduation of problem sets, com- • Shared, master content taxonomy
prehensiveness of supportive resources, degree to
which each SKAB (Skill, Knowledge, Attitude, and • Learning Management System
Behavior) is supported.
• Learning Content Management System
a. Identify gaps where more explanation or discov-
ery of underlying knowledge will be necessary to • Object Repositories & access to external Knowledge
accommodate the range of learners expected to Management & Electronic Performance Support
participate. Systems
b. Create adaptive activities to help learners fill these
gaps. • Workflow Management & Integration System
c. Create feedback mechanisms so learners make ad-
justments and develop self-efficacy around desired • Assessment & Evaluation Engine
transformations in SKABs.
• Simulation and Game Engine for Virtual Labs
This process must be must be considered at macro program and
curriculum levels as well as micro course and object level. Pack- • Discussion, Collaboration Tools & Web
aging decisions should be made with regard to sequence of Conferencing
instruction, reusability of components, grading, standards, and
independence of content. • Mentoring & Support

1. Assemble objects into courses by selecting scenarios

and problem-sets relevant to competency models and A. Managing Objects
performance/learning objectives.
The foundation of this Learning Ecosystem is built of objects.
2. Establish an assessment strategy that will satisfy level Objects are built such that “content” of objects is independent
of mastery required by performance/learning objectives. of its “container;” that is — to store content in databases and
refer to them via Web-enabled index structures commonly built
3. For each course (within the parameters established by in XML. A genre of commercially available Content Manage-
objectives and assessment strategy,) design the ment Systems has emerged to expedite the organization, ver-
overarching premise, the “blend” of independent and sion-control, ownership permissions, check-in/check-out, and
collaborative activities and of synchronous and asyn- visibility to different audiences of documentation. Other Media
chronous learning events, the approach, the metaphor, Asset Library systems have emerged to serve comparable need
the challenge, the rallying point, the game... to manage original and derivative graphics, photographic im-
ages, animation, video, and audio files. Learning Content Man-
agement Systems have emerged for the express purpose of

Proceedings of the 2002 eTEE Conference 11-16 August 2002 Davos, Switzerland 216
e-Technologies in Engineering Education Learning Outcomes Providing Future Possibilities

Figure 1. Learning Ecosystem.

managing repositories of Reusable Learning Objects according 2) Layers of Reusability: Objects vary in terms of their poten-
to SCORM (Shareable Content Object Reference Model) guide- tial to be reused, and the contexts in which they can be
lines; the emerging standard being adopted throughout the e- reused. Candidates for global-reusability must be self-con-
learning industry. These systems require integration around a tained units of instruction, free of contextual references,
shared taxonomy. neutral in tone, reasonably stable and validated in the con-
texts in which they are likely to be reused. Within each
1) Reusability: Decomposing and storing content into ob- specific curriculum and domain of knowledge another layer
jects enables reusability on four different fronts. of reusable objects can also be established. Yet another
layer of objects with low probability of reuse will be needed
Style: Same “content” object presented with different “con- to create the contextually specific elements to create mean-
tainers” differentiated by creative style, framework or “skin.” ingful learning experiences for different audiences con-
cerned with different situations.
Organization: Same object appears in different degree pro-
grams, curricula, courses, modules, lessons, etc. 3) Strategies for Maintaining Repository: To maintain an ef-
ficient repository that is not polluted with nearly redundant
Context: Same object used as presentation, practice or as versions of comparable content, a process for validating
reference. reusable content is needed. One approach is systematic.
Globally reusable objects are jointly identified, developed,
Output Medium: Same content presented in Web, PDA, or tested and accepted. A minimal set of highly reusable ob-
paper formats. jects will evolve. Another approach is not to control the
identification or development of what might be reusable,

Proceedings of the 2002 eTEE Conference 11-16 August 2002 Davos, Switzerland 217
e-Technologies in Engineering Education Learning Outcomes Providing Future Possibilities

but to allow access and evaluation of objects to let the Program

“buyer beware.” The chaotic approach will minimize the Curriculum
initial administration, but will inevitably lead to a prolifera- Course
tion of more objects that are not likely to adhere strictly to Syllabus/Course Information
reusability guidelines. This will make reviewing and select- Topic
ing existing content a more time-consuming task, and will Problem-Set
generally detract from the efficiency of the system. Rather Environment
than editing copies of original objects to suit the needs of Backstory
specific audiences and proliferating redundant objects, the Collaboration
preferred strategy is to use existing objects as is, then com- Problem
plete course assemblies by adding objects of limited poten- Scenario
tial for reuse in order to establish context. Context
Requirements
B. Taxonomies Constraints
Demonstration
1) Content Taxonomy: Retrieval of content from various re- Simulation
positories is optimized if a common content taxonomy is Game
used. One master taxonomy of the hierarchical topical clas- Construction
sifications of the content is needed for the domains of knowl- Self-test
edge involved. The taxonomy needs to be dynamically main- Resource
tained, preferably using a mediated contribution model that Knowledge
allows all content developers to suggest new terms and Learning Intervention
relationships. Suggestions must be validated by an expert, Glossary
and then inserted into the taxonomy. Once initialized, the Test/Self-test
content taxonomy can be used to tie together all the index- Discussion Forums
ing structures of the Learning Management System, Learn- Access to Mentor & Support
ing Content Management System, and Content and Media Assessment
Assets Management Systems. The taxonomy can supply Guide
consistent, selectable keywords used to describe each ob-
jects’ metadata. The same taxonomy can be leveraged as VI. Conclusion
the topical classification used to browse content objects.
Taxonomy terms and alias/synonym relationships can be Excellence in delivering effective and efficient e-learning de-
defined, expanding its use as a master glossary for the con- pends on a well-conceived plan to create a comprehensive, inte-
tent domain. grated infrastructure. This potential can be exploited by em-
ploying an instructional design strategy that motivates students
The paradox of reusable objects is that although reusability and focuses on learning-by-doing. Effectiveness is enhanced
is enhanced by genericising content using neutral tone de- by blending problem-based learning with collaborative experi-
void of humor, and removing contextual references, use of ence, by blending asynchronous and synchronous learning
specific contextual grounding and novelty increases both events, and supporting students individually with mentoring.
motivation and memory. To optimize and manage the inven- Efficiencies are gained by designing learning interventions
tory of objects while promoting engaging learning experi- around performance objectives and generalizable competencies.
ences requires blended assembly of both highly reusable Additional efficiencies are realized by integrating Learning Man-
and not-so-reusable objects into course deliverables. agement Systems, Content and Media Asset Management Sys-
tems, Learning Content Management Systems, and engines for
2) Structural Taxonomy: A structural taxonomy of the content building assessments, simulations, games and multi-player labo-
elements and assembly hierarchy facilitates the organiza- ratory environments.
tion and promotes the reusability of resources (see Table
1). Content-independence allows for the design elements of “con-
tainers” such as templates, “skins,” and frameworks to be built
The assembly hierarchy of this structural taxonomy could once and used many times…freeing content developers to fo-
be: cus on content. Additional efficiencies on the order of Metcalf’s
Law can be realized as a well-managed foundation layer of glo-
bally reusable and highly reusable, domain specific objects
evolve, and are assembled into multiple configurations of learn-
ing interventions.

Proceedings of the 2002 eTEE Conference 11-16 August 2002 Davos, Switzerland 218
e-Technologies in Engineering Education Learning Outcomes Providing Future Possibilities

Table 1. A Structual Taxonomy.

Object Type Related Structure Description

Competency Job/Degree Model Descriptions of roles, and skills that apply to each role

Knowledge & Knowledge Base, Facts, Discriminations, Declarations, Concepts, Ideas, Principles,
Information Content Management System Rules, Procedures, Entities, Actions, Descriptions, Portrayals; Result
of deductive or inductive reasoning; Knowledge derived from
Information

Syllabus/Course Course Description of course, expectations, requirements and logistics

Information

Learning Course (or Search) Self-contained unit of instruction that provides elaboration of
Knowledge, questioning, practice opportunities, feedback

Context Learning Object or Course Establishes the context or situation with which to anchor a learning
(or result of Search) event

Environment Learning Object or Course Nice-to-know; Broader than context; establishes the backstory and
(or Search) expanded, peripheral description of context

Scenario Learning Object or Course Establishes storyline, foundation, circumstances and pre-conditions
(or Search) for a problem or set of problems

Backstory Learning Object or Course Nice-to-know; establishes background information relating to either
(or Search) scenario or characterization

Problem Problem-Set, Learning Object, Presentation of a question or issue requiring an answer; types
Course (or Search) include: categorization, interpretation, and design. Feedback is
delivered in response to answers

Demonstration Learning Object or Course Observation of procedure, experiment or cause-and-effect

(or Search) relationships

Simulation Learning Object or Course Practice opportunity, may take the form of either realism or abstracted
(or Search) fantasy; experience cause-effect relationships

Assessment Learning Object or Course Collection of question items to be answered, scored and fed-back
(or Search)

Media Demonstration, Simulation, Visual and auditory content including graphics, photographs,
Environment, Assessment or animation, video and audio
Course (or Search)

Guide Learning Object or Course Instructions used to aid an instructor/ facilitator; not generally
available to students

Proceedings of the 2002 eTEE Conference 11-16 August 2002 Davos, Switzerland 219
e-Technologies in Engineering Education Learning Outcomes Providing Future Possibilities

A. Threats The Learning Ecosystem can be defined within or across insti-

tutions to achieve a strategic equilibrium comparable to a non-
• Poor models and poorly constructed content will poi- cooperative game. Each player assumes each other’s strategies,
son learner and institutional acceptance of e-technolo- then chooses its own. As each player optimizes opportunities,
gies in education. new Nash equilibrium is established. The community will even-
tually develop practices that will contribute to the greater good.
• Poorly defined and poorly linked taxonomy and search- Once arrived at this balance, ongoing energy will be required to
ing mechanisms will frustrate rather than enable. sustain the gains and continue to optimize the intersection of
learning architecture and instructional design.
• People of influence may hold on to traditional methods
and retard or prevent adoption of e-learning by the Acknowledgments
critical mass of any discipline.
Thanks to AT&T colleagues in Business Learning Services for
B. Opportunities validating this paper: David Tai, David O’Leary, Patty Albaugh,
Tami Bryan, Claudia Becker, Glenn Schuffenhauer and Kathy
• Creating a meaningful and sound infrastructure includ- Johnstone. Thanks to Wayne Hodgins for his review and ad-
ing taxonomy and standards for the discipline vice.

• Collaboration across the discipline. References

• Exploiting enabling technologies as they emerge. [1] Advanced Distributed Learning of the US Department of
Defense. SCORM. Retrieved <http://www.adlnet.org>.
• Reusability of both “contents” and “containers” in-
creases ability to: [2] Bonk, Curtis J. and Kira S. King. (1998) Electronic Collabo-
rators. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associ-
o Shorten development cycle and reaction time ates.
needed to adjust to change

Rapid Prototyping [3] Covey, Stephen. (1989) The Seven Habits of Highly Effec-

Reduction in resources needed for tive People. New York: Simon & Schuster.
development and testing

Rapid Delivery [4] Davenport, Thomas H. and Laurence Prusak. (2000) Work-
o Focus on improving ability to adapt to indi- ing Knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
vidual learners’ needs for either remediation
or acceleration. [5] Duch, Barbara J., Susan E. Groh, and Deborah E. Allen. The
o Focus on sustaining learner motivation by Power of Problem-Based Learning. Sterling, Virginia: Sty-
creating gaming contexts, making goals ex- lus.
plicit, providing continuously visible scoring,
incorporating elements of fantasy where it [6] Gladwell, Malcolm. (2000) The Tipping Point. Boston: Little,
helps to trigger the imagination and memory, Brown and Company.
and competition while preserving individual
privacy. [7] Hodgins, Wayne. (2000). Into the Future: A Vision Paper.
Commission on Technology and Adult Learning. Retrieved
C. Achieving Equilibrium <http://www.learnativity.com/into_the_future2000.html>.

The difficulty is getting to the “tipping point.” Once the critical [8] Kirchner, Paul A. The inevitable duality of education. Re-
mass of foundation layer objects are in place, momentum will trieved <http://www.ou.nl/info-alg-english-r_d/OTEC-re-
drive increasing efficiencies in the compression of new custom- search/publications/oratie%20paul/
ized learning offerings. Available resources will be directed to- The%20inevitable%20duality%20of%20education%20-
wards new work and the pruning and refining of repositories. %20Final%20for%20web.pdf>.
Complex environments will be costly and time-consuming to
build. Strategies that use learners to build this infrastructure [9] Merrill, M. David. (2000). "Knowledge objects and mental
provide benefits to learners and the institutions supporting them. models" In D. A. Wiley (Ed.), The Instructional Use of Learn-
Not only will these students learn-to-learn, they will be better ing Objects. Bloomington: Association for Educational Com-
prepared to continue to contribute as part of the larger Knowl- munications and Technology. Also available online.
edge Community.

Proceedings of the 2002 eTEE Conference 11-16 August 2002 Davos, Switzerland 220
e-Technologies in Engineering Education Learning Outcomes Providing Future Possibilities

[10] Nash, John. (1950) Non-cooperative Games. Thesis (Ph.D.) Author's Biography
Princeton University.
Diana Wilkinson is an AT&T Business eLearning Strategist,
[11] Nonaka, Ikujiro and Takeuchi, Hirotaka.(1995) The Knowl- and was eLearning Manager for AT&T Network Operations and
edge-Creating Company. New York: Oxford University Engineering Training. She has worked as instructional technolo-
Press. gist, trainer, course developer, systems analyst, market analyst,
account executive, technical sales consultant, data processing
[12] Prensky, Marc. (2001) Digital Game-Based Learning. New operations manager, and programmer. Her recent projects in-
York: McGraw Hill. clude defining content taxonomy and implementing assessment
and evaluation for AT&T’s Learning Management System, edu-
[13] Schank, Roger C. (2002) Designing World-Class e-Learn- cating training developers in instructional design for eLearning,
ing. New York: McGraw-Hill. integrating accessibility accommodations, and oversight of train-
ing administration system facilitating training and knowledge
[14] Stewart, Thomas A. (1999) Intellectual Capital. New York: management support of managers preparing for alternate as-
Doubleday. signments in advent of business emergencies.

[15] Von Krogh, Georg, Kazuo Ichijo and Ikujiro Nonaka. (2000) Ms. Wilkinson has completed all but dissertation for a Ph.D. in
Enabling Knowledge Creation. Oxford: Oxford University Educational Technology at University of Kansas, an MBA from
Press. Webster University, and BA in Mathematics from William Jewell
College. Her interests include: development of unified theory
[16] Wiley, David. A. (Ed.) (in press). The Instructional Use of for eLearning, games and simulations, intelligent tutors, inter-
Learning Objects. Bloomington: Association for Educational face designs, assessment and evaluation, mentoring networks,
Communications and Technology. Also available online. optimizing “Flow” and learner experience.

Proceedings of the 2002 eTEE Conference 11-16 August 2002 Davos, Switzerland 221