Can learners improve their knowledge of accounting by using a 3D interactive model of the accounting equation in Second Life? Will students learn more working in small groups or alone? Will students experience greater anxiety reductions if they work in small groups or alone?

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