• Save
Two Options - One Virtual World
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Two Options - One Virtual World

on

  • 392 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
392
Views on SlideShare
392
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Two Options - One Virtual World Two Options - One Virtual World Presentation Transcript

    • Two Options –One Virtual World: Does it make a difference whether we talk or chat in SecondLife? Gwen Noteborn & Martin Rehm EDiNEB 2010, London
    • What is Second Life (SL)? •3D Metaverse founded in 2003 by Linden Lab •Login via web-application •Avatars 2
    • Potential of SL a student-centered immersive virtual environment that helps to unlock creative problem solving and offer a deeper level of collaborative learning Bignell & Parson (2010) It is Innovative & Fun! 3
    • Brand your own product •Brand Management Course •Personal Care Product •160 students •33 groups •SL 4
    • Maastricht University Campus Island 5
    • 6
    • Bridging the gap between theory and practice “ social laboratory where role-playing, a simulations, exploration, and experimentation can be tried out in a relatively risk-free environment” (Graves, 2008, p. 50) 9
    • Simulations •“Real-life”experience •Behaviour modeling (Bolt, et al., 2001) •Built-in feedback(Murthy, et al., 2008) •Synchronous communication (de Freitas, 2008)
    • Perceived Gaps in Current Research •Findings & evidence remain anecdotal and descriptive (Livingston & Kemp, 2006) •Differentiation between text- & voice- based communication •Impact of preferences & motivation on communication patterns
    • Setting •Brand Management Course •160 students •Discussion Task •Teams of ~ 5 members •Cohort 1: Text •Cohort 2: Voice 12
    • Lecture plenary Disc ussi SL on T ask Cohort 1 Cohort 2 text-based voice-based Results plenary
    • Instruments •Expectations & Goals (Giesbers, et al., 2009; Rehm, 2009; Rienties, et al., 2006) •Academic Motivation Scale (Giesbers, et al., 2009; Rienties, et al., 2008; Vallerand, et al., 1992) •Perceptions (Giesbers, et al., 2009; Rehm, 2009; Rienties, et al., 2006) 14
    • Expected Results •Communication: –Voice > Text (Giesbers, et al., 2009) •Academic Motivation will influence: –level of communication –preferred type of communication è Intrinsic à text-based Extrinsic à voice-based 15
    • Expected Results (cont.) •Enthusiastic •Challenging •Resembles “ real-life” •Enjoyable “ think that the second life project was a great way I of applying and ‘ playing around’ with the knowledge we gained during the course.” 16
    • Limitations & Issues of Concern •Experiment has not yet taken place •Chosen parameters –Other factors more important? •Focus on descriptive statistics •Experimental Setup –“one-shot” –face-to-face contact cannot be prohibited 17
    • Further Research •Content Analysis •Longitudinal data •Include gestures •Retention rate •Perception of Avatars •… 18
    • Contact Information Gwen Noteborn Martin Rehm Researcher Program Manager e-Learning Educational Research and Development Research Fellow School of Business and Economics Maastricht Graduate School of Governance gcm.noteborn@maastrichtuniversity.nl martin.rehm@maastrichtuniversity.nl 19