Embedding Experiences in Micro-didactical Arrangements

  • Eric Ras
  • Stephan Weibelzahl
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3096)


Experience-based Information Systems (EbIS) enable organizations to capture, store and reuse knowledge and experiences for continuous competence development. However, there are several shortcomings that seem to limit the usage of the stored knowledge. Focusing on technical issues, the stored experiences consist mainly of contextual knowledge provided by domain experts, while declarative and procedural knowledge is required in addition to facilitate learning for novices. Moreover, these systems do not support learning in an optimal way because they do not activate learning processes. We present an approach that enriches retrieved experiences with additional learning elements in so-called micro-didactical learning arrangements, created by a pedagogical agent based on cognitive learning goals and an instructional design model. The advantages of this approach are twofold: first, the applicability of experience packages increases by adding learning elements to the package; second, the application of the experience and the newly gained knowledge in practice deepens the learning effect.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Abran, A., Bourque, P., Dupuis, R., MooreDonald, J.W.: Guide to the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge (SWEBOK). IEEE Press, Piscataway,, Retrieved on 2004/02/28
  2. 2.
    ADL: Sharable Content Object Reference Model (SCORM) Version 2004 (2004),, Retrieved 2004/02/20,
  3. 3.
    Anderson, J. R.: Kognitive Psychologie. Spektrum der Wissenschaft, Heidelberg, (1988)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Anderson, J. R.; Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, Erlbaum, New York (1993) Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Basili, V.R., Caldiera, G., Rombach, D.: Experience Factory. In: Marciniak, J.J. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Software Engineering, vol. 1, pp. 469–476. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (1994)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bergmann, R.: Experience Management: Foundations, Development Methodology, and Internet-Based Applications. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., Krathwohl, D.R.: Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals: Handbook 1 cognitive domain, Longmans. Green and Company, New York (1956)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Efimova, L., Swaak, J.: Converging Knowledge Management, Training and e-learning: Scenarios to make it work. Journal of Universal Computer Science 9(6), 571–578 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Efimova, L., Swaak, J.: KM and (e)-learning: towards an integral approach? In: Proc. KMSS02, EKMF, Sophia Antipolis, pp. 63–69 (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Enns, C.Z.: Integrating Separate and Connected Knowing: The Experiential Learning Model. Teaching of Psychology 20(1), 7–13 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ericsson, K.A., Krampe, R.T., Tesch-Römer, C.: The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological review 100, 363–406 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fitts, P.M., Posner, M.I.: Human performance. Brooks Cole, Belmont (1967)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gagne, R.M., Briggs, L.J., Wager, W.W.: Principles of instructional design (3rd ed.). Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Incorporated, New York (1988)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    IEEE Learning Technology Standards Committee: Learning Object Metadata Standard, (retrieved on 2004/02/26)
  15. 15.
    Jedlitschka, A., Nick, M.: Software Engineering Knowledge Repositories. In: Empirical Methods and Studies in Software Engineering:Experiences from ESERNET, pp. 55-80 (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Krathwohl, D.R., Bloom, B.S., Masia, B.B.: Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook ii, Affective domain, David McKay Company, Incorporated, New York (1964)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lawton, G.: Knowledge Management: Ready for Prime Time? Computer 34(2), 12–14 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mädche, A.: -VISION- A roadmap Toward Next Generation Knowledge Management. Presentation, Prague, VISION EU Project, IST-2002-38513 (2002)s, (retrieved on 2004/02/20)
  19. 19.
    Mann, W.C., Thomson, S.A.: Rhetorical Structure Theory: A Theory of Text Organization. Technical Report RS-87-190, Information Science Institute, USC ISI, USA (1987)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Meder, N.: Didaktische Ontologien, (retrieved on 2004/02/21)
  21. 21.
    Merriënboer van, J.J.G., Clark, R.E., de Croock, M.B.: Blueprints for complex learning: The 4C/ID* model. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 50(2) (2002)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rus, I., Lindvall, M.: Knowledge Management in Software Engineering. IEEE Software, pp. 26-38 (May/June 2002) Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Secchi, P., Ciaschi, R., Spence, D.: A Concept for an ESA lessons learned system. In: Secchi, P. (ed.) Proceedings of Alerts and LL: An Effective way to prevent failures andproblems, Tech. Rep. WPP-167, pp. 57–61. ESTEC, Noordwijk (1999)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Steinacker, A., Seeberg, C., Fischer, S., Steinmetz, R.: MultiBook: Meta-data for Webbased Learning Systems. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on New Learning Technologies (1999)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tautz, C.: Customizing Software Engineering Experience Management Systems to Organizational Needs. PhD thesis, University of Kaiserslautern, Germany, 2000. Fraunhofer IRB Verlag (2001)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tennyson, R.D., Rasch, M.: Linking Cognitive learning theory to instructional prescriptions. Instructional Science 17, 369–385 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Weber, R., Aha, D.W., Becerra-Fernandez, I.: Intelligent lessons learned systems. International Journal of Expert Systems Research & Applications 20(1), 17–34 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eric Ras
    • 1
  • Stephan Weibelzahl
    • 1
  1. 1.Fraunhofer Institute for Experimental Software Engineering (IESE)KaiserslauternGermany

Personalised recommendations