https://www.stuff.co.nz/sundaystartimes/4041738a20455.html
A must-read no matter what you think about 2nd Life!
Thanks for posting this John - yet another example of excellent journalism but poor imagination! I guess one of my criticisms of Second Life is that the orientation to the place is appalling. Fortunately, I was able to quickly make contact with other educators and those using SL to extend their first lives rather than playing fantasy sex games!!!
There has been some serious consideration given to providing a better Orientation area by and for educators and this should soon be available. I think it will provide a much more positive first experience for many people, and certainly will be a better place to guide students to.
It is a pity that the reporter didn't visit me in Second Life - Arwenna's garden (my private garden rather than the NMIT garden) is gradually becoming a meeting place for Kiwi educators (check this comment out) and very few of the conversations there resemble the ones in this article (although if I am honest - I have had those too!)
I am very interested in people's early orientation experiences - let me know how they were!!
and
Business World this week (May 6th 2007) has a very comprehensive special report on Virtual Life which brings together a number of interesting articles and provides, in my opinion, a much more balanced view and debate than the Sunday Times article. It doesn't confine itself to Second Life but talks of the Virtual Web or the 3D Web in principle.
One article The Coming Virtual Web (originally published April 16th 2007) includes the following;
"Virtual worlds also are providing new online venues for education well beyond posting class notes and reading lists. Dozens of universities are conducting classes and other activities inside Second Life. At Ball State University in Muncie, Ind., for instance, some freshmen are taking the English 104 composition course partly inside the world, writing about field trips they take inside Second Life. A sign of how compelling the notion is: The first class drew 300 applicants for 18 slots. " (My emphasis!)
Does this inspire you Cliff??
This is all interesting stuff. Of course, elearning when used in a constructive and pedagogically sound manner, has been providing "online venues for education well beyond posting class notes and reading lists" for quite some time now, with or without the latest developments in virtual worlds. Compelling does not equate to educationally sound regardless of the number of universities jumping on board. When it comes to technology in learning and teaching “why?” is a valid question, whether it be rock drawings, chalk boards, OHP transparencies, flash animations, power points … or virtual 3D. What are the reasons for choosing any particular learning environment, be it classroom, lecture hall, computer suite, home, café … or virtual world? Perhaps these sorts of questions are what the slightly unbalanced but rather hilarious Sunday Times article is provoking! It is all too easy to get caught up in the hype and try to apply the latest technological wizardry without considering some of the more basic elements underlying an effective course design. What would really interest me is not the level of take-up of Second Life (impressive though that is), but the extent of the course design process that these successful institutions engage with in order to ensure their virtual world has some pedagogical value and validity.
I agree with you John, that it what will be very interesting to see the course design process that institutions successful in educating in virtual worlds use. At present much of the information comes by way of blogs, or postings on SL education forums - both of which represent personal and often frgamented views of process or underlying frameworks that may have been used. One publication that shows a promise of collecting such information in the future (thanks to Aaron's eduforge resource page for the link) is the Proceedings of First Second Life Education Workshop, Aug 2006. While the collected papers are largely experience reports rather than academic research papers they do offer some interesting insights in to what early adopters are invetigating or trying to explore. It would certainly be useful to collect links of any material that relates to the issues you raise and I would certainly welcome any such information for publication here.
John
Just a few articles to start you off.
From the Impact of Digital Media Symposium hosted by the New Media Consortium on their campus in Second Life
- The Pedagogy of Civic Participation - Keynote by Howard Rheingold (recorded audio)
- Are We Playing Games? Finding Legitimacy in the Academy - Panel discussion (recorded audio - see Oct 18 in schedule)
Research proposal by Sarah Robbins (SL: Intellagirl), PhD Candidate at Ball State University
Papers presented by the Association of Inernet Researchers
- Learning and Play in Virtual Environments: Interdisciplinary Perspectives part 1
- Learning and Play in Virtual Environments: Interdisciplinary Perspectives part 2
Podcast from Professor Beth Ritter-Guth, Lehigh Carbon Community College and DeSales University
Cheers
Aaron/Isa goodman
Here’s a recent research report for those interested in some in depth investigation of social software (Second Life included) and its effective application to learning and teaching: From Australian Flexible Learning Framework…
NETWORKS, CONNECTIONS AND COMMUNITY: LEARNING WITH SOCIAL SOFTWARE
http://www.flexiblelearning.net.au/flx/go/pid/377
And here’s some food for thought from a few people who have considerable credibility within the open and distance / elearning field….
Terry Anderson
“The question that remains unresolved is how important both real time interaction is and if that interaction (and resulting learning) is significantly enhanced by a sense of shared presence.
The capacity to create spaces in which multiple forms of human discourse can flourish, while still retaining access to the Net’s resources is very compelling. I imagine that in a dedicated learning environment, the avatars may more closely resemble their human owners, much as anonymity has not been a big feature of online learning. The very low cost, plus capacity to engage in simulations, discourse, collaborative projects and web quests are features very much in demand by online designers and educators. These [are] well supported in SL. As with many new technologies, some of the features of SL – such as text chat, profiles, private space are provided through other social software applications and learning management systems. Therefore one must have a compelling need to engage simultaneously in order to justify the learning curve and technological requirements of these systems.”
Graham Atwell
“I see some of the universities are developing on-line classrooms. But why? There is no more interest in having my icon sit down to an on-line lecture than there is in sitting down to a lecture myself. And considerably less contextual interest. Why oh why do we keep trying to copy traditional pedagogies in different on-line environments.”
“Second Life and other such environments raise interesting questions about identity. It may be because they are art students, but all the participants on the Flensburg course spent a long, long time designing their avatars - getting their hair right, doing their makeup and worrying about thir clothes. And I think having an avatar and being able to change its appearance does help in developing and projecting an on-line identity and presence that is often lacking in text based on-line communication. Having said that I worry about the idea of a second identity. I think we should be encouraging learners to see their on line identity as part of themselves - not something separated. I said this at the plenary session on informal learning at Educa On-line and was criticised by some of the games people who pointed to the importance of play in learning. I take their point, but am still unconvinced by the subtext in SL which is that you can be someone completely different than yourself (despite being in a world which attempts whenever it can to copy western capitalism as a model).”
George Siemens
“As educators, we have a fundamental drive to appear to have the answers. We see everything through a desire to colonize for learning purposes. If students blog, instant message, blog, or play games, we want to use these for learning. This is generally a good thing. But it's not always a perfect fit. Sometimes, we are further ahead to leave the natives to their tools and customs without seeking to adopt for our learning aims."
>>"The question that remains unresolved is how important both real time interaction is and if that interaction (and resulting learning) is significantly enhanced by a sense of shared presence."
Yes that is the question; and as an educationalist one that I ask myself constantly.
>>As with many new technologies, some of the features of SL – such as text chat, profiles, private space are provided through other social software applications and learning management systems. Therefore one must have a compelling need to engage simultaneously in order to justify the learning curve and technological requirements of these systems.
I couldn't agree more. A few days ago I presented a similar argument to Arwenna (Clare) when presented with a room in SL with a whiteboard and video screen for presentations. Surely Breeze or Elluminate (to name 2) could do this just as well. Deliver streamed video to multiple viewers along with synchronous chat. Her response was to provide an example of a video session she experienced in SL. I can't remember the subject matter (climate change I think it was) but what really struck a nerve for me was her mention of an audience response and how that affected the participation of the viewers in the ongoing discussion. Someone said "WOW". Now I know that doesn't seem like much and in a chat log may not have been significant. But there was something in the shared presence of that person, the physicalness of that "WOW", that triggered others to respond. It is something I myself have experienced in SL but haven't quite been able to put a finger on. It is in this experience somewhere that an answer to the above question lies. And it is in being in SL I believe (not outside talking about it) that the answer to the question may be found.
>>“I see some of the universities are developing on-line classrooms. But why? There is no more interest in having my icon sit down to an on-line lecture than there is in sitting down to a lecture myself. And considerably less contextual interest. Why oh why do we keep trying to copy traditional pedagogies in different on-line environments.”
Yes, yes!! I couldn't agree more.
>>"I think we should be encouraging learners to see their on line identity as part of themselves - not something separated."
In my experience of these communities I am yet to be convinced that the average user sees their online identity as separate from themselves. More so I believe that it is an extension of themselves that has no outlet in real life but can be expressed in the current medium.
>>"I take their point, but am still unconvinced by the subtext in SL which is that you can be someone completely different than yourself."
Having been very active in SL for a year now I can say that I have some experience in the medium. And to tell the truth I'm not sure that "you can be someone completely different than yourself" is the subtext. It may be what the advertising blurbs use to generate interest but even though I may be talking (and have done) to Optimus Prime, a small green frog in a dress and a very large rat, conversationally and intellectually they were still participating developers in a mashup of Moodle and Second Life and remained so despite their appearances. Why should the student body be any different. Is there a fear here that underlies this view in terms of the power of the student to be more than the lecturer, to look better or more different (thus maybe displaying their greater modelling and texturing abilities), to move better (thus displaying their appitude in the environment), to have cooler goodies (are they better scipters too). Is it that there will be less control in an environment in which the student is much more familiar, at home.
>>“As educators, we have a fundamental drive to appear to have the answers. We see everything through a desire to colonize for learning purposes. If students blog, instant message, blog, or play games, we want to use these for learning. This is generally a good thing. But it's not always a perfect fit. Sometimes, we are further ahead to leave the natives to their tools and customs without seeking to adopt for our learning aims."
Good point and I'm very much yet to be convinced that virtual environments are any kind of panacea for educational delivery. But I'm also as unconvinced that they don't have a place in the future of education. And I'd add that (noting my distaste for the over used "digital natives, digital immigrants" scenario) I blog, instant message, play games, wiki, flickr and youTube and have used these "tools and cultures" for many years. Its not just our students who are in these environments, for many teachers it is our environment as well. Some of us are not only "natives" but were around at the culture's creation. For me Second Life was first an interest born out my game modelling, modding and scripting interests. Colonizing it for learning purposes was the least from my mind. But being there and being an educationalist has sparked an interest in its possibility as a learning environment and it is that possibility that is currently at the forefront of my activities in Second Life (though of course if you just want to purchase a beautifully modelled and scripted lamp for your SL garden I do a good line in outdoor lighting).
To round up I would say that "my activities in Second Life" is the point here. I'd reiterate that in my opinion it is in Second Life (or whatever chosen MUVE you subscribe to) that the answers will eventually be found. The discussion is going on in Second Life on a daily basis. Come on in and join it.
Aaron
SL: Isa Goodman
Thankyou Aaron. Your passion for exploring this medium is commendable. Plenty to agree on here too. I don’t think I entered this discussion to debate the merits or otherwise of Second Life –see my post May 7th….. with regard to any particular technology, strategy, “delivery” (yuk!) method or learning environment, one of the first questions for those engaged with course design is “why?” The question doesn’t just apply to Second Life. And yes, it is probably as relevant in Second Life as it is in real life. But for now my own passion is to bat such issues around in real life with real people with real names in real contexts
Cheers
John
Of course John... and a good passion to have as well... *smiles*
And just so we get the some more of the context:
A slightly expanded view of Terry Anderson's discussion went as follows:
"Nonetheless, it doesn’t take too much imagination to see that this environment offers everything that Moos and Muds had with the important affordance to create ones own gestures, buildings and activity scripts. Of course we know that busy students and harried teachers are not usually interested in new hobbies nor programming tasks that eat up time. But the capacity to buy or barter such artifacts opens lots of possibilities. The capacity to create spaces in which multiple forms of human discourse can flourish, while still retaining access to the Net’s resources is very compelling. I imagine that in a dedicated learning environment, the avatars may more closely resemble their human owners, much as anonymity has not been a big feature of online learning. The very low cost, plus capacity to engage in simulations, discourse, collaborative projects and web quests are features very much in demand by online designers and educators. These are well supported in SL. As with many new technologies, some of the features of SL – such as text chat, profiles, private space are provided through other social software applications and learning management systems. Therefore one must have a compelling need to engage simultaneously in order to justify the learning curve and technological requirements of these systems. I imagine that for opening sessions, special guests and other multiple site activities, SL would provide not only excitement but a great deal of dare I say “realism’ that likely justifies the effort."
Graham Atwell went on to say:
"Having said that I do see a future for such immersive environments. But such places need to be outside the control of the Linden Corporation and need to be designed to allow real creativity for learners. In Europe there is particular interest in ‘virtual exchanges’ between learners in different countries and I think such an environments could be brilliant for this. But the learners must be able not just to select form a selection on Linden sanctioned appearances and names but to really shape and develop their own environment and to collaborate in the development of its social norms and social environments. OK - it might end up like SL - dominated by sex clubs, and strictly based on wealth. But I am still optimistic that there is an alternative."
Full article and a couple of interesting responses here
And I must say that I agree with many of the comments made by Sean Fitzgerald on the numerous factual errors made in this article.
And George Siemens went on to say:
"I'm still undecided on SecondLife - it certainly has potential...but I haven't been able to see the deep value. Stephen and Graham (see comments as well) have presented critical views. I have spent time in Second Life, happily flying around and trying to figure out what to do. Perhaps my concerns rest more with time required. For example, I listen to a fair number of podcasts...but I only do so when driving. I like text better for scanning - I'm in control of pace and depth. The learning nuggets held in Second Life require a fair degree of effort to acquire. It's entirely possible that the learning is deeper in games...but I like my games simply to play. Once learning becomes a partly explicit task, then I feel like my play is manipulated toward ends other than what I control."
And a further reference from George on the same blog where he links to this:
"...so I'm working on this much longer post about second life and some of the recent critiques of SL...but as I sit here, up waaay too late, and having been roaming around in SL tonight, the little mantras of "what is the requirement?" - "what does this do differently or better than what has come before?" Kept running through my head. One answer to the former question is...there is no requirement. No requirement you can pin an ROI to. No requirement you can justify to a boardroom. Really - at this point there isn't - so stop looking.
There was also never a requirement for Picasso. There certainly was never a requirement for Calder. None for Cummings or Ginsberg or Mozart or Simon&Garfunkel. Did they however advance our collective understanding of the possible? Of the range of human potentiality? Damn straight.
2003. 3 years ago people. That's when SL went live. 3 years. I've been involved in acquisitions that took longer than 3 years. How deep have any of you gone into SL? I'm telling you this..there are some amazing artists at work in there. I'm still thinking through the implications for learning but I do know that the mere existence of something like SL is changing the discussion."
Thanks John and Isa - These are all really useful leads and they all seem to lead to the kinds of thoughts that we have been expressing here: we may not yet know the best way to make use of these new Web2.0 and Web3D technologies, but the potential appears to be very real and very large!
While checking out the above and also looking for any academic publications that I could find, I came across this very comprehensive 2006 report Learning in Immersive Worlds from JISC (Joint Information Systems Committee) in the UK. The report looks at a number of immersive environments including Second Life and draws some interesting conclusions. I will try to post more when I have had time to read it properly and think on it more closely.
While checking out the above and also looking for any academic publications that I could find, I came across this very comprehensive 2006 report Learning in Immersive Worlds from JISC (Joint Information Systems Committee) in the UK. The report looks at a number of immersive environments including Second Life and draws some interesting conclusions. I will try to post more when I have had time to read it properly and think on it more closely.
Hi John,
Another John here. Having taught by contact and completely by distance/online for 11 years now I can understand where you're coming from when you ask the question "Why".
From a contact perspective there is less to be gained from discussion via these technologies when a stroll to the cafe can achieve a much richer interface. In the Facilitating eLearning Communities course at MIT I worked hard to convince the MIT students that they shouldn't meet up so that they could experience the peculiar pleasures of learning by distance for themselves. If I was teaching by contact I would only be able to justify use of Second Life to establish inter-institutional activities. Intra-institutional activities would be taught more efficiently in a physical room. When placed in a completely distance online context the ability for classmates in different cities or continents to interact, initially for purely social purposes, is highly effective in promoting more earnest discourse later. In a real life class, presence is quickly established, in the virtual world it can take around 3 weeks. We need the social aspects in SL to help the class to form and norm. Moodle forums like this are fine but how more engaging to interact in an imaginative 3D world and to recognise the individuals in the class - however peculiar they might appear. Curiously when I think of Aaron, even though I have seen him, I now see his avatar Isa's face.
I 'm completely in agreement as regards the importance of pedagogy and course design. These elements are embedded into the processes at The Open Polytechnic and become second nature.
Johns
It has always been my view that Second Life is not about replicating experiences that I can have in real life, but those that I cant. In almost all facets of the experience that SL has been for me that is what I have looked for, and fortunately at times found.
Given my interest in and research into gaming environments and their use in education I couldn't be more pleased with the talented group of people that I find myself surrounded by there, albiet that they occur in presence through the guise of an avatar and pseudonym. Ultimately they are still the respected academics behind the avatars and the discussions that we have in the SL environment are those weighted with their qualification to carry the titles they do. In terms of having this experience elsewhere, with this group of people, I'm unsure that it could have happened. The majority would have been totally unattainable given our distance and time zones and in many cases probably unapproachable given their academic standing. Second Life in many ways has facilitated this social and educational networking by removing many of these barriers and I am more the richer for it.
It is in parallel rich experiences such as this one that I believe one of the main educational values of SL lies. It is part of my chosen task there, given my skillset in terms of forming and manipulating the gaming capabilitites of the SL environment, to create some of those experiences.
Regards
Aaron/Isa Goodman
Yes, I'm looking forward to seeing someone produce a massive scale human body I can walk through, an enzyme or engine I can see working from the inside, participate in atomic fusion...the list is endless. I want to be able to control the ocean temperatures and see the effect on the weather by teleporting in time not place.