Simulation Assisted Learning Using HLA and ADL

1. Simulation Assisted Learning UsingHLA and ADL Katherine L. Morse, Ph.D., SAIC Victor P. DiRienzo, Jr., Alion Jake Borah, AEgis Technologies Group

2. Initial Sponsorship • Phil Zimmerman, DMSO, funded • Initial study • Engineering process • Two integration architectures • Two prototypes (one complete, the other in progress)

3. The Instructional Vision Integrate existing HLA-compliant simulations with ADL-compliant, web-based instructional content to provide the student with a richer learning environment; one in which active interaction with simulations supports the proven instructional paradigm of “learning followed by doing.”

4. The Broad Deployment Vision • The warfighter can get simulation-enriched instruction anywhere there is access to a web browser • The location of the simulation and instructional content, whether local or remote, is transparent to the student • The use of open standards preserves DoD’s investment in simulations and content, and protects stakeholders from the risks of proprietary solutions

5. DMSO Requirements • Maximize broad supportability in a distributed deployment environment • Simulation repositories, contents repositories, and LMS may not be co-resident with the student • Minimum impact on the existing HLA and ADL standards • But make recommendations for improvements • Leverage existing expert communities to modify standards as necessary • IEEE SISC • IEEE LTSC • ADL • Use appropriate security mechanisms with minimum configuration modifications • Must work with firewalls and standard security mechanisms • Prepare for projected standardization efforts

6. Technical Requirements • Software architecture that is consistent with the HLA and ADL specs • Engineering process for defining an extended HLA federation with flow of control to support SCORM content

7. HLA-ADL Engineering Process • An adaptation of the HLA FEDEP process model • Addition of a new product during the Conceptual Analysis Step - an “Information Model” • Instructional content described as “Information Objects” • Documents primary learning objectives, essential teaching points, and flow of instructional content • Used in combination with a session scenario and sequence diagrams to visualize the focus of student activities

8. Example Information Model Constrained free play methodology addresses flow of control in simulations integrated with computer based instruction.

9. SOAP-based HLA-ADLIntegration Architecture Client-side Platform Tomcat SCORM LMS Federation Web Services Platform Simulation Platform Browser Tomcat Existing Simulation API Wrapper Listener Launcher Servlet Launcher Applet HTTP Post Listener Federate HTTP Get Collector Servlet Collector Applet SOAP Results Arbitrarily Complex Federation RTI

10. Advantages of the SOAP-based Integration Architecture • By deploying the listener as a servlet, we allow the LMS to get updates on the student's progress in the simulation using HTTP as the transfer protocol, allowing: • Broad range of deployment scenarios for architecture elements • Improved ability to deal with network architecture challenges, e.g. firewalls • SOAP is an XML-based W3C standard for remote method invocation and data transfer • Because it is extensible, we can customize it for our application with very little effort, and trivially extend it later • Solves technical issues which precluded access by multiple students

11. Phase I - Proof of Principle • “Keep It Simple” • Focus on interface issues • Use In-house training material in ADL-format for teaching HLA • Use the in-house HLA HelloWorld simulation distributed with the RTI • Put all components of architecture on student’s machine • HLA RTI • ADL RTE and supporting server • Training material • HelloWorld federation • Use ADL program’s Sample Run Time Environment (RTE) It works!

12. The Role of Open Standards • Enable interoperability • Enable reuse • Leverage best implementations of entire community • Reduce cost • No refactoring of existing instructional content and simulations to proprietary formats • Competitive market holds down tool cost • Leverages use of open source tools and technologies • Eliminate ties to expensive, risky proprietary solutions

13. Plans for FY03 • Test the integrated SOAP architecture with a more complex federation and more substantive content • USMC DVTE (Joint ADL Co-Lab) • NASA biomed simulation [possible candidate] (DMSO) • Conduct workshops between DoD content developers and the ADL community to ensure the HLA ADL design has been thoroughly evaluated and is mature enough to be forwarded to the proper standards community • Develop a draft HLA-ADL specification in accordance with the IEEE Learning Training Standards Committee specification development process if required

14. Benefits of this Approach (1 of 2) • The student engages in the proven instructional paradigm of “learning followed by doing” • The system automatically performs intelligent, real time assessment of the student’s interaction with the simulation and feeds the results directly back to the learning management system, enabling focused, individualized remediation • Automated remediation reduces reliance on instructors for one-on-one student assessment • A legacy simulation may be made available without moving its dedicated hardware or trying to create a new installation on potentially rare hardware, both very expensive propositions

15. Benefits of this Approach (2 of 2) • The simulation can stay home-based with its technical support and configuration management • Content can also be home-based with its technical support and configuration management • Simulations and training are guaranteed to be absolutely up to date when delivered to the student • The warfighter can access this rich training environment both while deployed and while home based • The web-based protocols employed allow operation through most firewalls

16. Next Steps • Test the approach in a larger, more complex environment • Operational simulation • Substantial content with significant interaction with the simulation • Test the feasibility of interaction with remote content and simulation • Identify potential challenges with repositories • Evaluate the efficacy of the broad deployment vision

17. Backup Slides

18. Background • Oct 2000 – As part of HLA transition, DMSO tasked members of the HLA technical support team to build a training distribution system to provide HLA course content to the M&S community. • At the same time, the DoD’s Advanced Distributed Learning Program was in the early stages of delivering the initial SCORM specification • DMSO became an Early Adopter by converting HLA course content into SCORM format. • March 2001 - DMSO commissioned a study to investigate the instructional soundness and feasibility of combining simulations and content using the HLA and SCORM. • Oct 2001 – Member’s of the HLA technical support team were tasked to develop a proof of principle prototype of an HLA ADL architecture. • June 2002 - Demonstrated Phase I • Oct 2002 - Lab tested Phase II architecture using Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP). • Dec 2002 - Demonstration of Phase II architecture at I/ITSEC