Group items tagged

This study examines students’ reactions to the virtual biosciences laboratory developed in Second Life® (SL) at the University of East London. Final year undergraduates and masters students studying biotechnology took part in a trial of a virtual Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) experiment in Second Life and evaluated their experience by anonymous questionnaire. Learning gains were measured at various points during the study using pre- and post-tests, and interaction with demonstrators was monitored and compared during the real life (RL) practical. Both groups showed a significant increase in learning gain over the pre- and post-tests, although no difference in gains between the two groups was detected. However, students who conducted the PCR experiment in SL required significantly less demonstrator assistance during the subsequent RL practical. The SL practical was well received by students, with 92% of participants reporting that they would like to use the system again and many requesting other experiments to be made available in this manner in the future.

The aim of this study was to determine whether conducting the PCR experiment in the virtual world of Second Life produced similar learning gains to those observed in the physical world laboratory and to see if working in the Virtual Lab enhanced students understanding of the experiment. The student perceptions of the Virtual Lab as a teaching mechanism and the perceived impact on their learning was examined through questionnaires.

The SL group completed a pre(virtual) Lab quiz and then individually registered for Second Life to create an avatar under instructor supervision. Each student completed some orientation exercises on UEL Island to become adequately skilled in using the Second Life environment (e.g. flying, putting on clothing etc.). The student avatars then met in the Virtual Lab to perform the PCR experiment. This was initially demonstrated by a member of staff before each student completed the virtual experiment themselves. Throughout this teaching session the students received face to face and virtual communication from their instructor.

Learning in virtual worlds

The notion of distance

Of the respondents 28 were female and two were male. The youngest respondent was born in 1984 and the oldest respondent was born in 1952. Half of the respondents were born before 1967.

Virtual worlds in UK Higher and Further Education

Second Life is by far the most widely used virtual world in education.

Research underpinning the May 2008 snapshot revealed that over 80% of UK universities were developing or teaching within the Second Life virtual world.

Two British researchers have just completed a study of undergraduate students that found "many young students are far from being the epitomic global, connected, socially-networked technologically-fluent digital native who has little patience for passive and linear forms of learning."

Instead, the study found that students use a limited range of technologies for both formal and informal learning and that there is a "very low level of use and familiarity with collaborative knowledge creation tools such as wikis, virtual worlds, personal web publishing, and other emergent social technologies."

The study included a questionnaire survey of 160 students, followed up by in-depth interviews with 8 students and 8 staff members at both institutions. The findings show that many young students are far from being the epitomic global, connected, socially-networked technologically-fluent digital native who has little patience for passive and linear forms of learning. Students use a limited range of technologies for formal and informal learning. These are mainly established ICTs - institutional VLE, Google and Wikipedia and mobile phones. Students make limited, recreational use of social technologies such as media sharing tools and social networking. Findings point to a very low level of use and familiarity with collaborative knowledge creation tools such as wikis, virtual worlds, personal web publishing, and other emergent social technologies.

I’ve come to see a couple of use cases as future killer apps – namely virtual meetings and education.

We generate revenue by selling land (where merchants build stores, land owners rent houses, educators teach and companies meet) and collecting monthly maintenance fees (somewhat analogous to hosting services), charging for currency exchange services (Linden Dollars to US Dollars and vice-versa) and for search and classified ad placement. We also make money as the economy expands and we issue Linden dollars to stabilize the exchange rate.

Second Life is the only social media/social computing property where, at its core, user-generated content and the economy is the experience. As a result, our estimates place our monetization levels at 3-30x that of major media and social computing properties.

Advantages of Second Life over web-conferencing

Experience - whereas video is a one-way, passive experience, SL is a group one. This is a completely different dynamic, if the presentation makes use of it. If they just passively show a video, they might as well be on the web. Think of it, when done well, as comparing sitting in a movie vs at a comedy show where the audience can yell out comments that are instantly worked into the skit. Collaboration - participants get a completely different experience when they 'see' each other. It is more involving and interactive. This gives the speaker a chance to gather instant feedback, adjusting the presentation on the fly. There is even software for SL that allows participants to give feedback at specified times via their keyboard. Also, we find that "leaders" emerge in virtual focus groups, who often bring out information from others but don't dominate as they might in a "real" focus group. Screening - starting with a larger group, sub-groups can be created based on criteria such as beginners, those giving great feedback, gender, etc. These avatars can be instantly transported into other prepared rooms or SL environments for follow up, further Q&A, take a tour, etc. Also, participants can click on each other's profiles and learn about each other, something many like to do.

Spatiality - in a three-dimensional space people can move, and use proximity and distance to each other or to objects (for example for group building, voting by feet, to 'physically' separate collaboration tasks from one another, or just to non-verbally communicate preferences). In video conferencing, all you see is somebody else's mimics. There is no concept of space at all - which is crucial, however: remember Nonaka's Ba. Embodiment - being virtually embodied as an avatar can augment the feeling of co-presence, the feeling of being there together with your colleagues, peers, or collaboration team, etc. Directing your virtual representation, you visualize where your attention is at every point in time. In a video conference, nobody knows if you are paying attention or just looking at a totally different application on your screen. Configurability and scriptability - a virtual world can be more than a container for space, physics and avatars. Realized as a reactive, interactive and maybe even intelligently behaving environment it can harbor, support, and augment rich user experiences.