This document summarizes Marianne Riis's PhD defense presentation on avatar-mediation and the transformation of practice in the 3D virtual world Second Life. The summary includes: 1) Riis's research questions focused on how students respond to avatar-mediation and transformation of practice in Second Life, and how design can facilitate meaningful participation and reification for students. 2) Her methodology involved research-led action research over four cycles from 2007-2011 using grounded theory-inspired coding of qualitative data from observations, interviews, and documents. 3) Key findings included that a respectful remediation strategy alone was not effective, and that alignment with curricular goals, supporting identities, and in-world

1. Avatar-mediation and
Transformation of Practice
in a 3DVirtualWorld
- Meaning, Identity, and Learning
Marianne Riis
PhD defence, AAU-CPH, January 26th, 2017

2. Agenda
• Research interest
• Methodology
• Theory
• Empirical work
• Selected findings
• Challenges
• Conclusions
• Future research

3. Research interest

4. Research question 1
How do students in a pedagogical Community of
Practice respond to avatar-mediation and
transformation of practice in the 3D virtual world,
Second Life?

5. Research question 2
How can design for learning be conceptualized and
implemented to facilitate meaningful participation
and reification for students in the 3D virtual world,
Second Life?

6. Methodology

7. Design of the study
Research-led Action Research (AR)
o 4 action research cycles (from 2007-2011)
o Reflection just as central as action
• The dual imperative ofAR
o Research interests and Problem-solving interests
• Insider research in collaboration with other
insiders
• Grounded theory-inspired

8. Methods and data
- researcher-generated (Rapley, 2007)
Method Duration
(total in 4 cycles)
Data material
Offline lectures/workshops 12 hours Post-fact reflections,
teaching materials
Online evaluation survey - Written answers, statistics
Online group interview -
synchronous
1 ½ hour Field notes, interview guide
Online participant
observation in FC -
asynchronous
26 weeks 1.104 online postings, field
notes, teaching materials
Online participant
observation in SL -
synchronous
26 weeks
130 hours of scheduled
inworld teaching
Numerous hours of
unscheduled observation
Field notes, teaching
materials, inworld objects

9. GroundedTheory-inspired approach
Characteristics
• An inductive approach
aimed at minimizing
preconceived ideas
(received theory)
• Grounded in data
• Verification through
saturation
• Used where little is already
known
My coding process
1. Open coding (generating
concepts)
2. Selective coding
(generating categories)
3. Theoretical coding
(generating new and
integrating old theory)

Two main stories to tell

10. The role of theory (in GT)
Highly debated, but consensus on some kind of
review – typically on extant literature after data
collection and (preliminary) analyses
• State-of-the-art review (Grant & Booth, 2009)
o Understand the phenomenon of VWs MUVE
ecology
o Understand previous research as of 2.Q 2016
Recommendations for design for learning in SL

11. Previous educational research
inVWs/SL
• Evolved from exploratory and descriptive
studies to more evaluative and change-
oriented studies
• Publications peaked in 2009, but SL continues
to be used and researched
• Focus on adult, professional learners still
limited
• Focus on many different pedagogical
theories, but CoP frameworks still limited

12. Theory

13. Virtual as proxy for the material
(Friedberg, 2006)
• The virtual is a substitute – a proxy for the
material
• A virtual object has a materiality and a reality,
but of a different kind
• Functional sameness, but not identical
• Psychological relativity (Blascovich & Bailenson, 2011)

14. VirtualWorld design
(Bartle, 2009)

15. Multi-userVirtual Environments

16. A socio-cultural perspective
(Dissertation, p. 118; Riis, 2002 – inspired by Dysthe, 2001)
General characteristics of learning in a socio-cultural perspective
Learning is constructed A socio-cultural perspective on learning builds on constructivist theories
wherein learning is seen as a process of knowledge construction as opposed
to a process of knowledge transfer.
Learning is social A socio-cultural perspective on learning emphasises learning as a social
process where knowledge first is constructed socially and then internalized.
Learning is situated A socio-cultural perspective on learning focuses not only on the participants,
but on the context (time, space, situation, culture) in which they interact as
well.
Learning is mediated A socio-cultural perspective on learning focuses on the tools participants use
for their interaction, and language is considered the most important tool.
Learning is distributed A socio-cultural perspective on learning sees knowledge not only as
something that is located in the individuals, but also in between participants
and artefacts.
Learning is coming to be In a socio-cultural perspective, learning is seen as more than mere epistemic
construction. Learning is a process of becoming, of forging identities in
activities in the world.

17. Communities of Practice framework
- a multifaceted, developing story

18. My foci within the CoP framework
Legitimate
peripheral
participation
Participation
and
reification
Rhythms
Interaction
Identities
Technology
stewardship
7 Design principles
Learning as doing
Learning as belonging
Learning as becoming
Learning as experience

19. Remediation strategies
(Dissertation, Riis, 2010;Tringham,Ashley & Mills, 2007
– inspired by Bolter & Grusin, 1999)
Respectful
• Main objective is to reproduce
prior practice with no apparent
critique – often focusing on a
quantitative outcome.
• In general, this type of remediation
enhances the authenticity and
enforces the authority of the
original media and practice.
• Tradition, familiarity, and certainty
are keywords in this strategy.
• Changes are experienced as
minor, evolutionary
modifications and typically only
involve change in modality, not
specific activities.
Radical
• Main objective is to reinvent prior
practice based on critical review –
often focusing on a qualitative
outcome.
• In general, this type of remediation
challenges both authenticity and
authority of the original media and
practice.
• Innovation, alienation, and
uncertainty are keywords in this
strategy.
• Changes are experienced as major,
revolutionary transformations,
and typically involve change in
both modality and activities.

20. A conceptual design model

21. Empirical work

22. Master in ICT and Learning
• 53 MIL students, several guest teachers and
visitors
• MIL courses:
o 3 X “Educational design, ICT based learning
products and virtual learning environments:
theory and analysis”
o 1 X “SL and Dialogic Didactic Design”

23. Action research cycles
Interests MIL07 MIL08 MIL09 MIL10
Research interest
(RI1)
How do students in a pedagogicalCommunity of Practice respond to avatar-mediation and
transformation of practice in the 3D virtual world, SL?
Research interest
(RI2)
How can design for learning be conceptualized and implemented to
facilitate meaningful participation and reification for students in the
3D virtual world, SL?
Problem solving
interests (PSIs)
How can design of
inworld activities
solve the problem
with lacking
engagement and
participation in SL?
How can design of an
inworld assessment
method solve the
problem of
discrepancy between
participation and
reification in SL?
How can design of
the MIL course
focused on
enhancing the
domain-practice
relation solve the
general problems of
transformation of
practice in SL?
Design strategy

24. Stories from the field
1. Student responses to the avatar phenomenon (linking
A, AA and AAA concepts and categories)  Chapter 6
2. Student responses to the pedagogical design (linking
all B and C concepts and categories)  Chapter 5

28. Selected findings

29. Findings related to course design
• A respectful remediation strategy is not recommendable
• 7 original design principles were good, but insufficient
• Alignment with curricular purpose and goals and the SL
environment, practice
• Reification should be both verbal and materialized
• Time is crucial
• Roles need to be reconsidered

Conceptual design model, design of activities and a new
assessment method and 5 new design principles

30. From 7 to 12 Design principles
8. Support avatar and identity exploration
9. Promote inworld participation
10.Promote inworld reification
11.Support newbies through inworld
stewarding
12.Promote domain-practice alignment

31. Findings related to the avatar
In general students obtained a sense of being
present (as self) and of co-presence
o Sometimes embodiment, sometimes immersion
• Acknowledge the importance of the avatar
and different perceptions hereof
• Allow time for avatar-acclimatization
• Design activities targeted avatars and for
avatars

32. Design framework
- for avatar-based 3D virtual worlds

33. Challenges

34. Insider research
- in a research environment
• Positionality - epistemological and
methodological biases
• My dual role – teacher, then researcher!
power relations

• Different inquiry strategies – voices
1. person (field notes, memos, 195 blog posts)
2. person (dialogue and interaction)
3. person (peer-review, papers and dissertation)

35. Change-oriented research?
“Looking through this dissertation as it is presented here (…) I
cannot help but notice the similarities my study shares with
the DBR approach.” (Dissertation, p. 271)
DBR (Anderson & Shattuck, 2012)
• Situated in a real educational context
• Advancing theory
• Focus on design and testing of a significant intervention
• Using mixed methods
• Iterative
• Collaborative partnership between researchers and practitioners
• Evolution of design principles

36. The use of learning theory for
pedagogical design
(Fenwick, Jensen, Nerland, 2012; Hughes, Jewson & Unwin, 2007)
• Learnification? (Biesta, 2010)
• Anthropology vs. psychology and pedagogy
• Apprentice and master vs. learner and teacher
o LPP vs. ZPD
o Reproduction vs. innovation
o Social vs. personal
o Domain vs. subject matter (purpose and goals)

37. VirtualWorlds Research
- a tale of different stories

38. Conclusions

39. Meaning, Identity, and Learning
It is through the avatar students respond to design
• Participation and reification depended on mastery of
the avatar (otherwise a barrier)
• Through the avatar the students negotiated their
presence and the meaning of it all, incl. their identities
• Reflections on professional identity, the role of the
teacher
• Embodied understanding of theoretical concepts
• Acting and reflecting pedagogical design

40. Future research

41. Future points of interest
Study the 3D space-place duality
o When, why, and how is place experienced as embodied
relationship with theVW – not just as space
Further study of the resident-user duality
o When, why and how in terms of differences – e.g. between
immersion-augmentation
Further study of the materialized-verbalized reification
duality
o When, why, and how do different types make sense, break or give
meaning?

42. Back to the future 
“As those of you working inVR charge
off to build your worlds, heed the
lessons from your forebears: from
whence you came, so shall you be; the
future is, still, MUDdy.” (Koster, 2016).
• Sansar – desktop, e.g. Oculus Rift (HMD and
touch motion controllers)

• vTime – mobile, e.g. Google Cardboard
VWs ,VR, AR
- all part of a MUVE ecology

43. Thank you for listening!

44. Thank you for your generosity!
Lone, Janni,
Elsebeth,
Birgitte,Oluf
& Bo
Etienne
Wenger-
Trayner
53 MIL students
Roland & Inge
AAU /AAU-CPH
Dept. of
Communication
and psychology
SL community
UC Berkeley –
Dept. of Anthropology
RuthTringham
COMBLE - Maria
Curie Sklodowska
University
AAU – ELL &
MIL
communities
Innovation Center
Denmark, CA
Søren, Lars &
Henrik (Stanford)
Metropolitan
University
College
Friends &
family

45. References

46. References
• Anderson & Shattuck, (2012). Design-Based Research. Educational Researcher 41(1):16-25 · February
2012.
• Bartle, R.A. (2009). Alice and Dorothy play together. Harrigan, P. &Wardrip-Fruin, N. (eds.).Third
Person. Authoring and exploring vast narratives.The MIT Press. pp. 105-117.
• Biesta,G.J.J. (2010). Why ‘what works’ still won’t work. From evidence-based education to value-based
education. Studies in Philosophy and Education 29(5), 491-503.
• Blascovich, J. & Bailenson, J. (2011). Infinite reality. Avatars, eternal life, new worlds, and the dawn of
the virtual revolution. HarperCollins Publishers.
• Bolter, J. D. & Grusin, R. (1999). Remediation. Understanding New Media. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
• Dysthe,O. (2001). Sociokulturelle teoriperspektiv på kunnskap og læring. Dysthe, O. (red) (2001). Dialog,
samspel og læring. pp. 33-72. Abstrakt forlag.
• Fenwick,T., Jensen, M. & Nerland, K. (2012). Sociomaterial approaches to conceptualising professional
learning and practice. Journal of Education andWork. Volume 25, 2012 - Issue 1: Reconceptualising
Professional Learning in a Changing Society
• Friedberg,A. (2006). The virtual window. From Alberti to Microsoft.The MIT Press.
• Grant, M.J. & Booth,A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated
methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26, pp. 91-108.
• Hughes, J., Jewson, N. & Unwin, L. (eds.) (2007). Communities of Practice: Critical perspectives.
Routledge.

47. References – cont.
• Koster, R. (2016). History ofVirtualWorlds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rW-LiNcNSwI
• Lave, J. &Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge
University Press.
• Rapley,T. (2007). Doing converstation, discourse and document analysis. SAGE Publications.
• Riis, M. (dissertation).Avatar-mediation andTransformation of Practice – Meaning, Identity, and
Learning. PhD dissertation from Aalborg University. Denmark.
• Riis, M. (2010). MonWenger har en avatar? Observationer og refleksioner over remediering i Second Life.
Bang, J. & Dalsgaard, C. (red.) Læring i videnssamfundet – om vidensformidling, videnskonstruktion og
vidensdeling. Læring og Medier (LOM) nr. 5. pp. 1-23
• Riis, M. (2002). Virtuel dialog som læringsværktøj. Upubliceret 1. års Masterprojekt, Aalborg Universitet.
• Tringham, R.; Ashley, M. & Mills, S. (2007). Senses of Places: Remediations from text to digital
performance.
https://chimeraspider.wordpress.com/2007/09/19/remediated-places-final-draft/
• Wenger, E.; White, N. & Smith, J.D. (2009). Digital Habitats – stewarding technologies for
communities. CPsquare.
• Wenger, E.; McDermott, R. A. & Snyder,W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: a guide to
managing knowledge. Harvard Business School Press.
• Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice. Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University
Press.

48. Re: background pictures
All background pictures are from either my own place in SL, where I
put up art installations created by Bryn Oh, or
From Bryn Oh’s island: Immersiva
(SLurl: http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Immersiva/16/103/31 )
or
From Rose Borchovski’s island: Two Fish, Cariacou
(SLurl: http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Cariacou/195/79/171)
or
From Chouchou’s island: Chouchou
(SLurl: http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Chouchou/162/140/21)

49. Let’s connect!
English
• Research blog: https://mariis.net/
• Twitter: @MariisMills
• SL main avatar: Mariis Mills
Danish
• Research blog:
https://iktogtransferieud.wordpress.com/
• Twitter: @mariisdk