Claude W. Chavis, Jr.Walden University

AVATARS AND VIRTUAL WORLDS IN EDUCATION

A.K.A. Onyas Bayn in Second Life

• Virtual worlds evolved from:o Social Networkso Online Gameso Simulations

• Are also known as MUVEs

WHAT IS A VIRTUAL WORLD

2

MULTI-USER VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTSMUVE

• One‐to‐one

• One‐to‐manyo Collaborationo Collegialityo Professional developmento Social interaction

What is A Virtual World

A computer-based simulated environment intended for its users to inhabit and interact via avatars.

Includes OpenSim, Second Life, and Wonderland.Wikipedia

4

Second Life is the most popular non-gaming virtual world. Statistics: • User-to-User transactions in 2009 totaled US$567 million in

2009, growth of 65% over 2008.• The amount of virtual currency in circulation reached L$6.95

billion, growth of 23% over December 2008.• Residents spent 481 million hours in Second Life in 2009, 21%

growth over 2008

SECOND LIFE

5

THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW

• Avatar: your virtual persona

• In‐life: things in the Second Life environment

• Main Grid & Teen Grid : 18+ & 13‐17 years

• Sim (Island): the land in Second Life

• RL/SL: Real Life/Second Life

COMPONENTS OF ONLINE ENVIRONMENTS

• Live interaction in real‐time

• Individual and group work

• Varied presentation formats

• Learning from instructor and peers

• Resources that can be easily shared

• Student activity can be monitored

• Engaging and motivating

BENEFITS OF SECOND LIFE

• Virtual realities such as SL allow for the free exchange of information without the limitations of distance and time that travel normally involves. By using virtual realities, such as galleries and e-portfolios, students from across the world can meet on common ground. Digital media can be shared with relative ease. By using avatars, the usual considerations of appearance can be eliminated from most situations. There are already virtual schools springing up across the world. By eliminating the physical infrastructure required for most schools, costs are minimalized.

WHAT CAN IT DO?

• Collaborative spaces/tools

• Discussions/conferences

• Information/Awareness

• Simulations

• Social interaction

• Virtual schools

• Visualization

BARRIERS AND FACILITATORS

• In the article “Barriers and Facilitators to the Adoption of Tools for Online Pedagogy,” the authors looked at the various factors affecting the adaptation of SL. These factors included cost effectiveness, staff perceptions, strategic initiatives, and the types of support provided by the information technology systems management of a range of educational institutions that have committed to education delivery or pilot projects in Second Life.

BARRIERS

• Time

• Cost

• Pedagogical use

• Technical problems

• Lack of strategic management initiatives

FACILITATORS

• Accommodates different learning styles.

• Construction of understanding and meaning through experience and reflection.

• Immersive active experience.

• Learning in a social constructivist environment.

• Social framework and context.

CONTINUED

AVATARS AND VIRTUAL WORLDS IN EDUCATION

THE PROBLEM

• One of the major problems with this online learning is the lack of a sense of social presence in the asynchronous learning environment in comparison to the face-to-face learning environment of a brick and mortar school. Social presence is considered to be a “significant factor in improving instructional effectiveness … [especially] in distance education” (Chih-Hsiung, 2002).

• Current Practice

• Brick and mortar school predominate.

• Distributed education is becoming more common.oBlackboardoComputer conferencesoWikis

• Limited virtual schools are being opened.

STAGE 1- KNOWLEDGE

STAGE 1- KNOWLEDGE

• The innovation

• Second Life is being used as a platform by early adopters.oBusinessmenoEducatorso IndividualsoNon-profits

STAGE 2- PERSUASION

• Socioeconomic characteristicso Students are familiar with the technology involved.o Students must have computer access.

• Personality variableso Second Life is intensely interactive and engages students.

• Communicationo Anyone can access Second Life using the Viewer.o Access is free but segregated by age groups.

STAGE 2- PERSUASION• Testability

o The Second Life Viewer is currently undergoing beta testing.o The technology is available on all internet ready computers.

• Observationso Second Life is available for all computer hardware platforms.o If a student is not paying attention, their avatar goes to

sleep.

STAGE 3 - DECISION

• Advantageso Use of the program is free.o Linden Lab is responsible for updates.o Students enjoy the game like environment.

• Compatibilityo Runs on portable interactive platforms, such as Blackberries.

• Complexityo The software has a steep learning curveo The problem is being addressed by a new Beta Viewer.

STAGE 4 - IMPLEMENTATION

• Adoptiono We can implement the technology without additional costs.

STAGE 5 - CONFIRMATION

• Many colleges and universities are conducting studies of the technology.

• Many businesses and other organizations have already made Second Life a major component of their networking programs.

• Second Life is the most popular virtual world. • OpenSim is widely adopted as a virtual communication and

collaboration tool for businesses.• Wonderland is widely adopted for education purposes.• It is expected that in near future, all three will be interconnected,

allowing avatars to teleport freely among the regions.◦ This breakthrough will transform virtual worlds into a “Web”◦ Virtual world clients will serve as a browser for this “Web” of

virtual worlds.

31

SUMMARY

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES IN SECOND LIFE

• Genetics

• Astronomy at the Science School.

• Science Lands Blog, follow the link to SLambling blog and then to the Scilands orientation

• EduIsland website

• SLolar Central - a gathering place for Second Life Scholars.

• Second Nature. A blog entry about Second Nature science learning resources.

• Second Life Science Center - a wiki

REFERENCES• Aldrich, C. (2005). Learning by doing: A comprehensive guide to simulations,

computer games, and pedagogy in e-learning and other educational experiences. San Francisco: John Wiley and Sons.

• Alessi, S. M., & Trollip, S. R. (2001). Multimedia for learning: Methods and development (3rd. ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

• Ang, C. S., Avni, E., & Zaphiris, P. (2008). Linking pedagogical theory of computer games to their usability. Internation Journal on E-Learning, 7(3), 533-558. Retrieved from http://www.aace.org/pubs/ijel/

• Annetta, L., Klesath, M., & Myer, J. (2009, ). Taking science online: Evaluating presence and immersion through a laboratory experience in a virtual learning environment for entomology students. Journal of College Science Teaching, 38(1), 27-33. Retrieved from http://www.nsta.org/college/

•

REFERENCES• Arnseth, E. (2006). Learning to play or playing to learn: A critical account of the models of

communication informing educational research on computer gameplay. . The International Journal of Computer Game Research, 6(1). Retrieved from http://gamestudies.org/0601/articles/arnseth

• Bell, D. (2009). Learning from Second Life. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(3), 515-525. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1467-8535/issues

• Boellstorf, T. (2008). Coming of age in Second Life: An anthropologist explores the virtually human. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

• Chang, V., Gutl, C., Kopeinik, S., & Williams, R. (2009). Evaluation of collaborative learning settings in three-dimensional virtual worlds. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 4(3), 6-17.

REFERENCES• Chih-Hsiung, T. (2002). How to develop an active online interaction for learning. In M.

Silberman (Ed.), Training and Performance Sourcebook. New York: McGraw-Hill.

• Chih-Hsiung, T. (2002). The measurement of social presence in an online learning environment. International Journal of E-Learning, 1(2), 34-45. Retrieved from http://editlib.org/p/10820

• Delfino, M., & Manca, S. (2007). The expression of social presence through the use of figurative language in a web based learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 2190-2211.

• Dziuban, C., Moskal, P., Brophy, J., & Shea, P. (2007). Student satisfaction with asynchronous learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1). Retrieved from http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/archive/

• Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences.. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(2/3), 147-166. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/15156

REFERENCES• Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2010). Use of three-dimensional (3-D) immersive virtual

worlds in K-12 and higher education settings: A review of the research. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 33-51. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00900.x/full

• Kesim, E., & Agaoglu, E. (2007). A paradigm shift in distance education: Web 2.0 and social software. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 8(3). Retrieved from http://oojde.anadolu.edu.tr/gojde27/pdf/article_4.pdf

• Nippard, E., & Murphy, E. (2007). Social Presence in the Web-based Synchronous Secondary Classroom. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 33(1).

• Rogers, P., & Lea, M. (2005). Social presence in distributed group environments: the role of social identity. Behavior & Information Technology, 24(2), 151-158.

• Rourke, L., & Anderson, T. (2002). Exploring social interaction in computer conferencing. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 13(3), 257-273. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/j/JILR

REFERENCES• Rourke, L., & Anderson, T. (2002). Using peer teams to lead online discussion. Journal of

Interactive Media in Education, 1(). Retrieved from http://www.jime.open.ac.uk

• Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D., & Archer, W. (1999). Assessing social presence in online course discussions. Journal of Distance Education, 14(3), 51-70. Retrieved from http://www.jofde.ca/index.php/jde/index

• Swan, K., & Shih, L. F. (2005). On the Nature and Development of Social Presence in Online course Discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3), 115-136. Retrieved from http://www.bing.com/search?q=On+the+Nature+and+Development+of+Social+Presence+in+Online+course+Discussions&FORM=WLETLB&PC=WLEM&MKT=en-us

• Warburton, S. (2009). Second life in higher education: Assessing the potential for and the barriers to deploying virtual worlds in learning and teaching. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(3), 414-426. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00952.x/full