Archive for year 2007
Current Research Directions
Aug 13th
My current research direction is this . . .
I’m considering a multi-case study of 4-5 institutions at varying stages of implementing Second Life; the study of each institution will be conducted concurrently over a six month period. The purpose of the study will be to explore three questions:
- What is the current state of institutional engagement of Second Life? To what extent are institutions facilitating the use of Second Life? How might institutional integration of Second Life be accomplished more efficiently, particularly in light of existing literature regarding models for the diffusion of learning technologies?
- Do current practices by institutions in the process of integrating educational technologies (Second Life, in this instance) confirm the RIPPLES model described by Surry et al (2005)? Is adoption more successful and widespread within institutions engaging all elements of that model? Do successful instances of technology integration further clarify the RIPPLES model by suggesting specific procedures or systematic approaches to the diffusion and integration of new learning technologies?
- Are there elements of the innovation-decision process that may be further clarified by conducting (a) a qualitative study, (b) over a period of time, (c) nearer to the initial point of adoption (Meyer, 2004; Rogers, 2003)? Those three design study elements address weaknesses within the diffusion of innovation research literature identified by both Meyer and Rogers.
Meyer, G. (2004). Diffusion Methodology: Time to Innovate? Journal of Health Communication, 9(1), 59-69.
Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press.
Surry, D.W., Ensminger, D.C., & Haab, M. (2005). A model for integrating instructional technology into higher education (Electronic Version). British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2), 327-329.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...Institutional Engagement of Second Life
Aug 12th
This last week, I have been working on my dissertation proposal which, as currently planned, will include some of the data from the survey completed earlier this summer: Engagement of Second Life by Educational Institutions.
Naturally, the response rate was lower than hoped with only 57 total respondents; given that limited response, however, the most interesting result was that of the 19 respondents indicating they were currently using Second Life with learners:
- Roughly half of those are using locations not affiliated with their institution.
- Better than 75% are funding their instructional use of Second Life.
- More than 30% suggest their instructional leaders are not aware of or have not taken a specific position regarding the instructional use of Second Life.
- More than 40% indicate the information technology services group within their institution is not aware of or has not taken a specific position regarding instructional use of Second Life.
- More than 40% are not aware of their institution having begun developing a strategic/organizational plan regarding the use of Second Life.
- More than 55% are not aware of any effort by their institution to develop standards regarding the quality of instruction via Second Life.
I recognize that this is a very small sample size; these numbers may not be representative of all institutions in which Second Life is being used by faculty. Also, I fully understand that those currently using Second Life in learning spaces are professionals that Rogers (2003) labeled innovators and early adopters, and many of them are “lone rangers” as described by Bates (2000). And, I know that early uses of technology must begin in small pockets in a decentralized fashion.
With all of that said, I do believe the increasingly rapid, evolutionary pace of technology (Kurzweil, 2005) requires that organizations be more cognizant of leading edge technology. At the very least, the innovators, early adopters or “lone rangers” should be sought out and leveraged as a resource for organizational decisions regarding the technology. If that’s not necessary for every technology, I believe it is, at the very least, true for a potentially disruptive, educationally relevant technology like Second Life. It is not beneficial for innovations to remain in relative obscurity within an organization.
If you’re an administrator or educational technologist, are there technologies your faculty are using of which you are unaware? Would those technologies benefit the broader institutional audience? Are there mechanisms by which technology support personnel are systematically able to discover within and to support the diffusion of innovations throughout the institution?
Bates, A. (2000). Managing technological change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5th Ed.). New York: Free Press.
Kurzweil, R. (2005). How technology’s accelerating power will transform us. Retrieved August 12, 2007, from http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/38.
(No Ratings Yet) Loading ...In Reply to the "Four Slide Contest"
Aug 6th
Dan Meyer, who writes dy/dan, suggested a Four Slide Contest of which the purpose is
to see how well you can sell yourself in four (4) picture-only slides. No audio, no video, no hyperlinks, no multimedia miscellany. Just pictures and text. Make us want you. You have a week.
My thought is, “Why take four slides to say what could be said in one?” My contribution to define what I am and what I do . . . (the terms Daddy and cakedecorator explain the icing-dyed tongue ;-)
(No Ratings Yet) Loading ...Helping Andre
Aug 6th
Miguel Muhlin, who authors Around the Corner v2, posted a note he received from one of his readers, Andre:
I’ve been reading your blog for several weeks now – not too long ago, I became interested in the field of education and education technology. I recently graduated from college with an undergrad degree in Public and Community Health and I’ve been working in health communications for about 2 years. Now I’m 25 and I’m really putting alot of thought into my career direction.How did you get into this line of work and what would you suggest I do in this situation to get more familiar with the field? I’m a tech fan and I love how social media as well as “hard” technology can be used to educate and spread knowledge.
Miguel asked, “What would your response to Andre be?” So, my answer to Andre is/would be . . .
Certainly, there’s more than one path into this field career ranging from establishing expertise through a professionally related blog to completing a formal graduate degree. I’ll describe my path which I believe is the most structured and, perhaps, most direct.
There are graduate programs – Master’s and Doctorate – focused on educational technology; those programs could be labeled in many different ways: instructional design, instructional technology, educational technology, e-learning, new media, or distance learning. I’ve encountered a number of even more subtle names like educational psychology, cognitive psychology, curriculum & instruction, curriculum development or adult education with a noted “specialization in learning and technology.” Each label may suggest a slightly different philosophical approach to the field; for example, a cognitive psychology program could perahps focus on learning and technology with a slant toward understanding the biological characteristics of the human brain that impact how learning occurs and how technology may facilitate learning given that information. I’m sure there are many other possible labels as well.
If I were exploring the field to determine my level of interest, I would read several online and print resources describing the field or explaining concepts within the field and begin looking at course descriptions from graduate programs in the field. “Shooting from the hip” – consider reviewing:
- Educational technology per Wikipedia
- Encyclopedia of Educational Technology maintained by San Diego State University
- How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School by Bransford et al
- A Primer on the Latest in the Field of Instructional Design by the Borough of Manhattan Community College, City University of New York.
- A snapshot of everything I’m reading and writing on the web via an Educational Technology PageFlakes pagecast.
Also, I’ve recently jumped off into the literature focused on the Diffusion of Innovation(s); Everett Rogers (2003) has written prolifically about the general field of diffusion research; that may be of interest to Andre as well. The 5th edition of his book summarizes a great deal of research. There are several researchers in educational technology working to apply those principles more systematically to the integration of technology in learning spaces.
Most universities will have a graduate program in instructional technology, in some flavor; the focus of the program will be the key. Also, many of the relevant graduate programs are available 100% online. The two programs I’ve attended, I believe, are both available entirely online; the direct links to the specific educational technology program websites are Texas A&M University and University of Houston Clear Lake. Some of the more prominent instructional design and technology graduate programs in the country are (again, these are direct links to the program websites): Florida State, Indiana, Penn State, Penn State Online, and Utah State.
Those are the materials I’d review if I were 25 and considering a career related to educational technology; when I was 25, though, the internet was not widely available (gulp/grin). Of course, this is only a beginning; I’m more than willing to field additional questions about where to find information about the educational technology field.
(No Ratings Yet) Loading ...People Tagging
Aug 5th
I encountered an activity similar to this one at the NMC Summer Conference: People Tagging. The ice-breaker activity at the conference’s opening reception, attendees were asked, optionally in exchange for a chance to win free “stuff,” to list several tags describing themselves and then find others who had used the tag. It was an enjoyable activity that created a lot of conversation about the terms different people were using. In this instance . . .
———————————
I’ve been tagged by Stephanie Sandifer for this “8 Random Things About Me” meme.
The rules are:
1) Post these rules before you give your facts
2) List 8 random facts about yourself
3) At the end of your post, choose (tag) 8 people and list their names, linking to them
4) Leave a comment on their blog, letting them know they’ve been tagged
Here are my “random facts”:
1. I’ve played fantasy baseball for more than 10 years.
2. A banana shake is my favorite dessert.
3. I grew up in one school system, kindergarten through graduation.
4. I rewind on the Tivo to watch Sonic commercials.
5. I follow the UFC (Ultimate Fighting Championship) and mixed-martial arts.
6. My wife, two daughters and I like to go geocaching as TheGreatFinders.
7. I learned all the skills I’ve needed in competitive academic speech & debate (HS & College).
8. My wife and I met on a blind date.
Alrighty — enough about me… let’s hear from:
Angela Thomas
John Curry
Katie Beedon
Vince Hamilton
Miguel Guhlin
Karen Fasimpaur
Sarah Robbins
Mark Bell
———————————
(No Ratings Yet) Loading ...Experiencing Voice -and- Not So Much
Aug 4th
The Sloan-C group I mentioned yesterday represented the first group meeting I’ve attended since voice was implemented in the standard Second Life viewer. Now that voice is really, truly here and I’ve had a chance to experience it in a group setting, I have a few thoughts and reactions.
For now at least, voice presents some interesting difficulties for group communications in terms of hardware. Not everyone may have the equipment available to participate. That’s what happened with the Sloan-C group; some had the requisite mic; others did not. That left us trying to communicate via audio and text – splitting the conversation(s). Ultimately, the solution was to do everything through text to allow inclusive participation, but that certainly slowed things down a bit.
I know several individuals which have said they prefer to continue using text. I’m not entirely sure that’s going to be possible. Even for this meeting – only a few days after voice became a feature of the standard viewer – there was an expectation for voice participation. Will the education community be understanding and accepting of those that choose not to participate via voice? Will individuals truly have a choice? What will the community’s perception of those individuals be?
I believe there’s no question that voice creates an additional level of complexity which makes technical difficulties more likely and/or adds another learning curve for new users as they begin participating in Second Life. At the very least, voice adds another “moving part” that can break or cause problems on the grid; will the benefit of voice outweigh the distractions it may cause? I’m an experienced SL user, and I consider myself fairly tech savvy; I can learn new applications quickly by trial and error. Exactly how difficult will the voice setup be for users that are new to SL or are not very tech savvy? How is a new SL’er supposed to understand what “hear audio from: camera position or avatar position” actually means and be able to make a choice between the two?
And speaking of hearing from camera or avatar position, what does that option do to privacy in world? Do we not carry certain meatspace expectations into Second Life with us? If a friend and I choose to walk away from a face-to-face group for a private exchange, because the risk of us being covertly surveilled is terribly low, we know there’s no “flies on the wall” listening to our conversation. In Second Life, flies can be on every wall. Using the “hear from camera position” option and the delimited camera options, it’s possible to listen to conversations from half a sim away. Is everyone aware of that? How long will it take for SL’ers to adjust their conceptions of privacy regarding their spoken word? While it’s likely to never happen in the physical world, in Second Life, my neighbor can sit in his house and very easily listen to what is being said in mine – without ever being seen. Imagine the implications for education. Will a faculty member needing to have a private conversation with a learner know or remember to switch to private conversations and/or text rather than simply walking away from the group?
Everyone speculated or knew voice would bring entirely new pedagogical concerns to Second Life. I experienced two of these concerns in the Sloan-C group. Small groups may need to be smaller than they’ve ever been face-to-face, online or in Second Life. A group of 8-10 can function via text chat; we’ve accomplished that in synchronous and asynchronous communication for some time now; plus the ability to track back through the conversation log makes it easy to catch up when behind. When communicating by voice in a face-to-face environment, it’s possible to work with groups of 8-10 as well; we have a number of established conventions and non-verbal communications that facilitate smooth transitions between individual participation in the conversation. However, in a virtual environment, those conventions don’t exist and the non-verbal signals to indicate one’s interest in speaking are unavailable. To reduce the confusion, Second Life groups using voice to communicate may need to be as small as 3-5 people. And, I’m not confident that we’ll ever get use to the lack of those smooth, non-verbal cues; when’s the last time you and a colleague/friend stumbled through that transition on the phone – unintentionally speaking over one another, both of you stopping for silence, both of you starting again at the same time and then both saying “Go ahead” at the same time? Ever have the same experience in a videoconference when you can actually see each other?
The second pedagogical concern focuses on the lack of a text-based log of the conversation. Voice communication in Second Life is more synchronous than the text is. I enjoy the flexibility of text-based chat, of being able to walk away for a few moments if needed but not missing anything because I can track back through the conversation. In terms of distance learning, Second Life with voice is a little less flexible than it used to be.
Finally, and I’ll only cover this one with a question and a short comment. Does voice in Second Life re-establish all of the social inhibitions and heirarchies of the physical world? I found that I was hesitant to speak in this group – just like I am when in similar situations in the physical world.
With all of those regarding voice in Second Life, I have to admit that voice is still an incredibly powerful tool within Second Life for one-to-one networking and conversations. While trying to capture the picture/icon for this blog post, I stumbled upon Thursday and had a conversation about the work he’s doing on his thesis which is directly related to what I do on a day-to-day basis. Fantastic opportunities loom in spite more than a few concerns . . .
(No Ratings Yet) Loading ...Sloan-C Effective Practices in Second Life
Aug 3rd
The Sloan Consortium (Sloan-C) works “to help learning organizations continually improve quality, scale, and breadth of their online programs, according to their own distinctive missions, so that education will become a part of everyday life, accessible and affordable for anyone, anywhere, at any time, in a wide variety of disciplines.” Over the past several weeks – from my perspective at least – members of that organization have worked to begin Sloan-C’s involvement with and support of teaching and learning in virtual environments, Second Life in particular.
Tonight, I attended a SL-NET, as it’s been dubbed, meeting to begin discussions on how Sloan-C might best support RL education in SL. The turnout was impressive and quite exciting: 22-25 participants. After introductions and an overview of the potential groups, we separated into smaller, personally selected interest groups. Of course, the group in which I was most interested focused on effective practices in Second Life.
The conversation was definitely interesting, and with the concerns I’ve expressed in this space previously, it’s encouraging to be involved with a group of individuals concerned with defining, demonstrating and promoting effective teaching and learning in Second Life. It’s not that others are not concerned, but I’ve not yet encountered many conversations or individuals explicitly attempting to define what does or does not constitute effective, quality use of Second Life as a formal learning environment. Somewhat expected for a first meeting, we spent much of our time focused on the logistics of the group – how to maintain communications in the future, who the designated chair or co-chairs for the committee may be – but we did spend some time talking about the concepts of quality teaching and learning and how to collect and communicate examples of effective practice.
The idea for the committee is to (paraphrased/librally-quoted from a summary email by Ragitake/SL):
lead a research, gathering, and dissemination initiative. The idea is to build upon the Sloan-C Effective Practices Library, with an additional (or separate) section for Second Life. The committee will draw from the methodologies used by Sloan-C to establish a critical mass of effective practices in online education to establish the same information for teaching and learning in Second Life. The committee proposes to initiate discussions on effective practices as well as survey Sloan-C members (and perhaps others) who are or are planning to teach in Second Life and gather successful methods, activities, approaches and participant-submitted case studies.
I think the process begins with defining and vetting criteria that identify effective teaching and learning in Second Life. That’s a tremendous task, but after several conversations about the definition I’ve offered previously, I think it presents, at least, a start to the conversation. With that task complete, it becomes possible to collect samples and build a portfolio of effective teaching practice.
The event was well organized and effectively facilitated; it was a fantastic job by Floria. It’s certainly an exciting project with which to be involved. If you have interest in this project or any other Sloan-C related SL activities, contact me at topher (at) muveforward (dot) com. I’ll get you in touch with the appropriate individuals (rather than posting their information here). And, there’s a few more pictures here >
(No Ratings Yet) Loading ...Combined Campus & Museum Build?
Aug 2nd
With the number of campuses established in Second Life, is anyone familiar with any that are combined, collaborative builds between a College/University and another organization? Is there a campus that represents multiple organizations? (I’m assuming that the answer is an obvious one to which I’ll respond, “Really!? I’ve been there and didn’t remember that it was a combined build.”)
With our Second Life project temporarily on hold while we revisit funding issues, I began “sketching out ideas” for the layout and design of a Second Life campus for my institution. I didn’t do any serious sketching or prototyping, just dabbling for now until the funding questions are answered. However, as I thought through how to design a campus that addresses a number of needs – not the least of which are marketing/branding and the challenge of designing a single Second Life campus that represents multiple physical campus identities – I kept coming back to the same idea: a local monument and battlefield are the clearest symbols of our institution’s name and origin. My institution is named after a historical battle and battlefield; that historical influence pervades the area and has contributed greatly to the identity of the community over the years. Leveraging that identity in Second Life is important.
Naturally, a monument, museum and historical park occupy the site of the battlefield, and two different groups maintain those facilities and facilitate events and activities related to the history of the area. If including the symbols of the monument and battlefield in our campus build is important, why not engage the museum and historical association to develop a Second Life site that represents the entire area? Rather than simply using the monument as part of our campus, why not collaborate on a larger project that includes our College, the museum and the battlefield in a manner to support formal and informal education along with virtual tourism?
While that adds a layer of complexity to the project and likely extends any development timeline we may have had in mind for our institution, it seems like a worthwhile community collaboration. So, my question, again, “Is anyone familiar with any Second Life builds that are combined, collaborative builds representative of a College/University and other organizations or interests?”
(No Ratings Yet) Loading ...Twitter Uniqueness: Ambi-Synchronous?
Jul 30th
Since I jumped off headlong into Twitter, as I mentioned two days ago, I’ve been trying to figure out what makes Twitter different and, seemingly for me, so much more engaging than a few other tools.
I’ve never used text messaging on a regular basis; my wife and I actually use it for emergency communications since I can get text during meetings, classes etc. I’ve not used instant messaging on a consistent basis; it’s served a purpose from time to time, but it’s always been nothing more than a tool. I’ve used discussion boards but not consistently, though RSS feeds do make them more useful and accessible. I’m trying to get better at participating in the blogosphere by commenting more on others’ blogs. I’ve not used groups (Usenet; anyone else remember FidoNet?) tremendously; I typically search them for answers to questions or trouble issues. I’ve used listservs but often feel overwhelmed by the traffic of busier lists (SLEDList anyone?). I have a MySpace profile but don’t use it; I have a Facebook profile which I’m using more frequently.
Given all of that, why do I feel “hooked on Twitter?” Why and how is it apparently so enthralling?
Darren Draper commented on his blog, Drape’s Takes:
Even I know that Twitter’s weird.So I’ll ask the question again, this time with a better idea of my answer. What in the Web 2.0 is Twitter?
I’m convinced that Twitter is about community. Twitter is about people.
Twitter’s ability to connect me with a network of like-minded people is huge.
With Twitter, the news has added meaning for me. Like when I learned about the steam explosion that happened in New York a few weeks ago. It brought the news home to me knowing that one of my colleagues was so close to the actual event.
John Pederson commented on his blog, iJohnPederson:
I try out new tools on a weekly basis and 98% of them don’t make more than a week. Twitter has stuck.Twitter is about the network. Twitter is just the tool.
That’s why I like Twitter. It’s my network, a little more refined. And real
So, I’m not the only one wondering what makes Twitter interesting. I understand that Twitter is about the network; it’s about people. But why is it so much more about people than other communication tools? What makes “it stick” more than other applications? What makes it more capable of facilitating, for me, interpersonal communication than IM, discussion boards, blogs, comments, listservs, user groups, social networks?
I think there’s three reasons.
First, all social networks are about people, but Twitter draws people into more in depth, personal communication – along the lines of “life blogging.” Just in the last week of using Twitter on a regular basis, I’ve learned:
- Fleep is remodeling her house: replacing light switches and grouting tile.
- WillRich went swimming with his kids in the Delaware and ran more in one day than I have in a month.
- Intellagirl gets unmotivated just like I do when there’s a ton of work to be done.
- CogDog has a new puppy.
- SPeters is helping family through a stressful time and sharing the stress.
- JUtecht’s on his way to China.
- SSandifer just started a new job and was recently assigned to do a presentation on Web2.0
- sorry_afk doesn’t mind traffic nearly as much as I seem to ;-)
- Typewriter went for a haircut.
- iJohnPederson didn’t clean his coffee pot before leaving school for the summer.
- Kenny Hubble’s headed for some white water rafting.
Oh… wait.. I learned all of that in the last 18 hours! Sure, I may have eventually read some of that on blogs, discussion boards, or listservs etc, but chances are, I doubt it. I seriously do not think I would have ever heard any of those details from this group of people in spaces – social networks and otherwise – where they typically focus on more serious discussions. Twitter’s all about people and the networks, but it’s more than that, it’s all about learning WHO people behind the titles and professions really are in more depth and in a more casual environment than other online environments.
Second, in Tweets with Angela Thomas, I suggested that Twitter is different because, to me, it’s ambi-synchronous. It possesses the immediacy and capabilities of synchronous messaging in which there’s greater immediacy of interpersonal communication, but it also creates a persistent, asynchronously available record of communication that allows you to catch up on what you missed while offline. It can do both. What other tools enable both types of communication?
Finally, and quite simply, Twitter converges SMS and web-based tools to facilitate one to many communication.
Is Twitter the first to be ambi-synchronous? Is it the first tool that encourages a lifeblogging of sorts? Is it the first web-based tool that facilitates interpersonal communication via mobile convergence? If not, is it the first to do all three?
(No Ratings Yet) Loading ...Birds-of-a-Feather Sessions Meet Web2.0 at Xpanity
Jul 28th
I have NO idea what the origin of the name may be, but Xpanity.com offers an interesting new browser add-on. It’s currently in Beta and issuing delayed invites to those who submit their email address. Once I receive my invite, am able to install and experiment with it, I’ll add more details to this blog post.
What is it?
The Xpanity Suite currently contains two applications: LiveChat and SharedBoard. In short, I think it’s “birds-of-a-feather-sessions meet Web2.0.” According to the website . . .
Xpanity LiveChat, “allows you to see the other browsers currently on the same web page as you are viewing. It provides you with the opportunity to interact with them on all levels. You can do all this anonymously. There is no need to register or provide any of your private information.”
Xpanity SharedBoard, “for each web page on the Internet . . . provides a Shared board for permanent comments that can be viewed by all Xpanity users.”
How does it work?
More on this once I’m able to install and use the application. Generally, clicking on an Xpanity button on your toolbar activates the Xpanity browser extension which enables participation in LiveChat with other users or on the persistent SharedBoard
What’s cool about it?
With Xpanity installed, every website seems to have an interactive component. It’s no longer incumbent upon a website to offer a chat tool; users with Xpanity visiting the same website can chat with one another regardless of the sites capabilities or available tools.
Of course, it’s dependent upon a broad volume of users actually adopting the technology, but assuming that requirement is met, Xpanity dramatically increases my ability to network and communicate with others of similar interests. What used to be invisible – other users accessing the same website at the same time as I am – now becomes visible and interactive.
I’m wondering if this may not be an influential Web2.0 application; consider the characteristics of it. It provides a contextualized browsing and micro-blogging experience. Rather than posting a link to Twitter or sharing it via Facebook to engage a social network regarding a specific site, Xpanity constructs a social network around a specific page or site.
How can it be used in the classroom?
Just off the top of my head, without having yet been able to install or use the application, I can imagine several applications.
Shared browsing. If not familiar with it, shared browsing is a tool which enables a group of users to view the actual browser on a facilitator’s desktop – ostensibly as the topic of a discussion or part of a training session. Although not as cohesive a solution, Xpanity may offer a substitute for shared browsing tools seen in other collaboration tools that support group discussion. As long as a user has Xpanity installed and knows which site to visit at a given time, it serves the same function.
Contextualized discussions. Rather than visiting a website and documenting thoughts in a course discussion board, learners can post their thoughts on a particular website to the Xpanity SharedBoard for the URL. Those comments are persistent which means there’s a lasting record of discussions by which participation can be measured, and the learners and the class as a whole engage the larger web-browsing community regarding that site. That leverages the community and encourages participation by others – much like public blogs and wikis do.
I originally stumbled across Xpanity at Jane’s e-Learning Pick of the Day
(No Ratings Yet) Loading ...
Hot Topics