IITSEC Presentation on Learning in Virtual Worlds
- 1. Efficacy of Second Life in Constructivist Learning Activities Irene T. Boland, Ph.D. PulseLearning
- 2. Roadmap Why study learning in a 3D Future research MUVE? Impact on Theory Second Life Constructivism Participants Research questions 3D Model Findings Advice for improvements ISD for 3D environments 2
- 3. Learning in a 3D MUVE? A Campus (Recruitment) Academia Corporate A Course (Learning) Government Military An Event (Community Building) 3
- 4. Platform Examined: Second Life 4
- 5. Learning Theory: Constructivism Cognitive Constructivism • One person • Thinking • Connecting to prior knowledge Social Constructivism •Two or more people •Thinking and discussing •Co-creating new knowledge 5
- 6. Participants University of Central Florida Accounting class Dr. Steven Hornik 1st year students (18-23 years old) No prior SL experience Class Format Lecture (face-to-face or recorded) LMS for assessment Second life optional Pre-research Visited class site in SL Worked with 3D model in SL 6
- 7. Research Question One Can learners improve their knowledge of accounting by using a 3D interactive model of the accounting equation in Second Life? 7
- 8. Research Questions Two and Three Will students learn more working in small groups or alone? Will students experience greater anxiety reductions if they work in small groups or alone? 8
- 9. Controlling against extraneous variables Two Hour Window – Pre-Test – Learning Experience – Post-Test Same – Instructions – Pre-Test – Instructional Movies – Practice Problems – Post-Test Different – Learning Experience – group or solo 9
- 10. 3D model of the accounting equation Visual feedback Instructional note card Text feedback 10
- 11. Measuring Learning Percentage Learning Gains Round 1 Round 2 All Group Solo All Group Solo (N=134) (n=42) (n=92) (N=163) (n=51) (n=112) 4.66% 2.98% 5.43% 14.26% 7.35% 17.41% Results Validity Learning? YES Representative? YES Learn more in groups? NO Chance? YES/NO Null Hypotheses Rejected? YES/NO 11
- 12. Learner Anxiety Concept-Specific Anxiety Scale Validated instrument by Dr. Gene Oetting Process Learner self-rates anxiety related to concepts such as “using SL for accounting class work”. 12
- 13. Measuring Anxiety Round 1 (N = 134) Round 2 (N = 163) Group (n = 42) Solo (n = 92) Group (n = 51) Solo (n = 112) Number -2.42 -4.08 -1.65 -2.79 Percent -5.76 -9.71 -3.93 -6.64 Results Validity Anxiety Reduced? YES Representative? YES Reduced more in groups? NO Chance? YES/NO Null Hypotheses Rejected? YES/NO 13
- 14. Adverse Impacts 57% of participants reported no adverse impacts Technical Personal – SL platform very slow, frozen – Confusion (what should I do?) – Computer crashes – Disorientation (where am I?) – Forced hardware upgrades – Loneliness (the big empty) – Slow client upgrades – Dizziness (falling down) 14
- 15. Participants Advice for Improvements • 3D Accounting Model Good • Community Interaction • Personal Adverse Impacts Bad • SL Learning Curve • More Videos of the Model Better • Virtual Study Groups 15
- 16. ISD for 3D • Planning – hardware – current capabilities and required upgrades – servers - concurrent users, streaming bandwidth, mirrors – platform client – installation, upgrades, compatibility • Analysis – technical skills – computers, internet, 3D environments – skills for this environment – navigation, motor skills, communication • Design – environment, site within the environment – learning plan for this content – in/out of world, synch/asynch 16
- 17. ISD for 3D, continued • Development – Learning materials – Environment, manipulatives/models, stock avatars – Synchronous scheduling – Assessment administration • Implementation – Traditional communication channels to drive learners in world • Evaluation – Learner performance (native in-world, LMS outside) – Learner reaction, recommendations for improvement (objective and open-ended) 17
- 18. Future research Repeat the Current Study using: a) controlled and supervised environment b) established stock avatars c) different age groups d) different content e) participants with MUVE experience f) starting assessment of overall content mastery level (which may contribute to high performance on pre-tests and lower anxiety overall), and g) content Analysis of Chat Logs Recorded During a Learning Experience (difficulties encountered, strategies used by learners) 18
- 19. Impact on Theory • Constructivist Expectation – learners in groups learn more • Experiment Results – learners perform better solo • Why? – Because it was in a MUVE? • What next? – Repeating the experiment in a highly controlled environment could narrow the possible list of explanations. – Interviewing learners whose results indicated that working solo was advantageous may help identify the exact causes of this and whether it relates to the use of the MUVE (novel experience) or other factors. 19
- 20. Questions? 20