1.
Migrating towards K12 in virtual
spaces: Second Life lessons learned
as higher education meets middle
school students
-- by Eileen A. O’Connor, Ph.D.
-- Empire State College / State University
of New York
-- February 2011
-- eileen.oconnor@esc.edu
YouTube overview of pilot project w/ middle school students in
SER/VE (STEM Exploratory Real/Virtual Environment – 5.45 min.

2.
The STEM Exploratory Real/Virtual
Environment (SER/VE) -- main Science Center

3.
Communication, interactions, &
lessons learned: two themes
• Overview of the interaction & instruction
– The hub: the virtual, the instruction website, and the
interactive, private website
– The instructional interactions themselves
• The controls, motivations, interventions, and
assessments
– Keeping the project on track
• These areas overlap and integrate in this
presentation; please see the paper for all the
details

4.
Background on SER/VE (STEM
Exploratory Real/Virtual Environment)
• Secured private Second Life island
– too much procedural commotion, but worth it
eventually;
– some funding and course release from Empire State
College
• Worked informally with two middle-school
homeschooled students (10 & 13 yr old) for ½ day
per week over 6 months; the clever 13 yr old
made the buildings
• Began the formal pilot in late fall 2010

5.
Research questions
• From the larger goals and objectives that the author is
currently examining from this preliminary work, for the
purpose of this report, the author asked:
– (a.) what were the elements of the instructional and social
environment that provided support for the project-based,
informal-science learning objectives? what aspects needed
to be revised or enhanced to ensure that appropriate
learning was evident?
– (b.) what aspects of the project’s curriculum, instruction,
and design worked effectively and what needed to be
improved to achieve the project’s learning goals?
• Many, many, many other lessons learned and studies
were evident; beyond the scope of this paper

6.
First week: interest, energy . . . and
confusion

7.
Initial communication issues;
fear for project integrity
Disruptive
behaviors
Confused co-
teaching
Limited
communications
within SERVE
The initial student
designer became
personally involved
without
understanding the
project

8.
Ongoing remedies to communication
issues, as will be consider more within
-- Sent weekly
reminder emails
-- Found a work-
around for lack of
headsets –
instruction spoke
/ question &
responses were
typed back
-- Created a co-
instructor animation
& both an external &
a social website
-- Rewarded both
procedural learning
and early
submissions
Were mainly ignored;
since the disruption
was intended with
good humor it was
considered as a
support to motivation

9.
1. The setting for the meetings
2. The first meeting; going over
the instructions on location
3. Improving independent instruction:
placing instructional & interactive
materials on the island
4. Ongoing: making animated tutorials to
teach tech & the adventure & game concept
Tutorial
website put
onto the island
The virtual interactions were clarified

10.
The information website was updated
weekly; emails were sent too

11.
In the final week, the link to the
Judges’ Survey as included too

12.
Website concept was good but . . .
• Too much informal communication; prevented
understanding of the complex ideas
• Insufficient analytics –hard to know the actual
usage
• Lesson Learned: Use of the websites and the
instructional materials need be integrated into
the initial requirements – use Linden $$$ as
leverage

13.
Ongoing insights and adjustments
• Needed more control over the direction of the
complex project – and, to overcome confused
directions from one student
• Needed more ways to integrate directions and
to share / model work
• DaddyDarren Denver was invented

14.
An animated co-instructor helped with the
weekly requirements – AKA, DaddyDarren
Denver

15.
DaddyDarren Denver animations were at the website,
were placed within SER/VE, and were emailed (a link);
he gave tips on the process and the “adventure,” and
directed students to the website for all the tutorials

16.
But there needed to be a place for student-
to-student ongoing project communication
SER/VE – the
virtual island
Instructional
website
Social
website
Came after the
3rd week

17.
Social website created
• Needed a way to extend and network the
ongoing learning outcomes
• Created a private, invited website with Google
Sites
• Uploaded emerging PowerPoint work
– Encouraged competition and sharing
– Not used towards the end  not before the contest (a
competitive group, for sure)
• Lessons learned – needed models for complex
work, however, need to find the appropriate
competition / sharing mix

18.
Later week: now paying more attention (really),
because more assessments had been embedded

19.
Using “contest” to embed assessments
& control project
• Surveys and quests for Linden $$$ (economy
within Second Life)
• Additional Lindens for early work submissions
 ensured preparation & allowed for
individualized feedback
• Lessons learned: need to establish
checkpoints and feedback components for
complex distance instruction

20.
Additional directions were built into the placards to make it
easier to learn if no one was present to explain them

21.
Finally, the final presentations – see the
different ways for viewing & navigating

22.
The students & judges were very engaged
 they came forward to see better

23.
Judging was a serious event for the
students--they emailed anxiously for results
• Two attending “professional” judges; one
additional from review of PowerPoint; from
my teacher education class
• Six of the seven participants voted too
Students Professional: averaged vote Participants: averaged votes Both w/ weighting
Students 1* 19.50 18.9 19.5
Student 2 18.50 15.8 16.7
Student 3 19.00 13.8 16.6
Student 4 18.50 13.8 16.5
Student 5 19.00 12.5 15.5
Student 6 18.00 12.75 15.8
* This was the group that worked together on their presentation

24.
What were the lessons learned?
• Behaviors need to be considered and weighed
• Instructional materials must be multi-layered
and available in many areas
• Assessment must be ongoing and embedded
to ensure understanding and compliance

25.
Behaviors . . . and control
• More school like behaviors needed . . .
– Disruptive texting can go on even when paying
attention
– Motivation needs to be balanced with control
• What are the trade-offs in middle school setting?
• Lessons learned: students are comfortable and
informal in this environment
• Additional development and research: bringing in
more structure and determining the tipping point

26.
Integrated multi-media environment
with embedded assessment
• When creating a “world” with no physical
teacher present, you need:
– Initial assessment of student skills within the
learning environment itself
– Multi-leveled instructional materials
– Sequencing of skill / concept introduction
– Integrated, ongoing assessment – use the
affordances of the environment (Linden $$$)
– Gentle control to maintain motivation &
appropriateness

27.
Learning outcomes were good
• Rich, complex projects / many tech skills incorporated
– Internet search, Google Earth use, some created YouTube
– Higher level thinking and communication
– 21st century skills – virtual / interactive web
• However, these were gained at considerable instructor
intervention
• In the future, more structure and review will occur to make
procure these outcomes more readily . . . Stay tuned
Eileen.oconnor@esc.edu

28.
References
• Ashford, E. (2008, October). Educators find videogames engage students in learning. National School Boards Association
Volume. Retrieved January 7, 2011 from
http://www.nsba.org/HPC/Features/AboutSBN/SbnArchive/2008/October2008/Educatorsfindvideogamesengagestudentsinl
earning.aspx .
• Carnahan, C. (2010). Immersive Learning in K-12 Schools: Success and Limitations. In D. Gibson & B. Dodge (Eds.),
Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2010 (pp. 1848-1852).
Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
• Cooper, T., Carroll, S., Liu, C., Chelberg, D. & Franklin, T. (2009). Using the Virtual World of Second Life to Create Educational
Games for Real World Middle School Science Classrooms. In G. Siemens & C. Fulford (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference
on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2009. Chesapeake, VA: AACE. 2124-2133
• DiPietro, M., Ferdig, R.E., Black, E.W. & Preston, M. (2010). Best practices in teaching K-12 online: Lessons learned from
Michigan Virtual School teachers. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9(3), 10-35.
• Erdoğan, M., Kurşun, E., Şışman, G., Saltan, F., Gök, A., & Yildiz, İ. (2010). A qualitative study on classroom management and
classroom discipline problems, reasons, and solutions: A case of information technologies class. Educational Sciences:
Theory & Practice, 10(2), 881-891.
• Hoag, A. M., Jayakar, K. P., & Erickson, K. (2003). The role of trust in virtual and interpersonal environments: implications for
team learning & case method pedagogies. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 57(4), 370-383.
• O’Connor, E. (2008). Becoming a Virtual Instructor: How Can Higher Education Faculty Prepare for Second Life?. In G.
Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education
2008. Chesapeake, VA: AACE. 1144-1149
• O’Connor, E. A. (2010) Instructional and design elements that support effective use of virtual worlds: what graduate
student work reveals about Second Life. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 38(2), 214 – 234.
• Schiller, S. Z. (2009). practicing learner-centered teaching: pedagogical design and assessment of a second life project.
Journal of Information Systems Education, 20(3), 369-381.
• Steinkuehler, C. & Duncan, S. (2008). Scientific habits of mind in virtual worlds. Journal of Science Education and
Technology. 17(6), 530-543.
• Sullivan, F. (2009). Risk and responsibility: A self-study of teaching with Second Life. Journal of Interactive Learning Research,
20(3), 337-357. Chesapeake, VA: AACE.