Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Wir verwenden Ihre LinkedIn Profilangaben und Informationen zu Ihren Aktivitäten, um Anzeigen zu personalisieren und Ihnen relevantere Inhalte anzuzeigen. Sie können Ihre Anzeigeneinstellungen jederzeit ändern.

Two Options - One Virtual World

565 Aufrufe

Veröffentlicht am

Veröffentlicht in: Bildung
  • Als Erste(r) kommentieren

  • Gehören Sie zu den Ersten, denen das gefällt!

Two Options - One Virtual World

  1. 1. Two Options –One Virtual World: Does it make a difference whether we talk or chat in SecondLife? Gwen Noteborn & Martin Rehm EDiNEB 2010, London
  2. 2. What is Second Life (SL)? •3D Metaverse founded in 2003 by Linden Lab •Login via web-application •Avatars 2
  3. 3. 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
  4. 4. Brand your own product •Brand Management Course •Personal Care Product •160 students •33 groups •SL 4
  5. 5. Maastricht University Campus Island 5
  6. 6. 6
  7. 7. 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
  8. 8. Simulations •“Real-life”experience •Behaviour modeling (Bolt, et al., 2001) •Built-in feedback(Murthy, et al., 2008) •Synchronous communication (de Freitas, 2008)
  9. 9. 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
  10. 10. Setting •Brand Management Course •160 students •Discussion Task •Teams of ~ 5 members •Cohort 1: Text •Cohort 2: Voice 12
  11. 11. Lecture plenary Disc ussi SL on T ask Cohort 1 Cohort 2 text-based voice-based Results plenary
  12. 12. 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
  13. 13. 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
  14. 14. 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
  15. 15. 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
  16. 16. Further Research •Content Analysis •Longitudinal data •Include gestures •Retention rate •Perception of Avatars •… 18
  17. 17. 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