The future for (second) life and learning

This paper highlights the potential of three-dimensional multi-user environments such as Second Life (SL) from the perspective of future developments in the service of learning. It notes trends within the SL innovation to date, including the provision of realistic settings, the exploitation of pleasant simulated environments for groups and the links with other learning technologies. It also considers the creativity sparked by SL’s potential to offer the illusion of 3-D ‘spaces’ and buildings, and points to infinite imaginative educational possibilities. It explores aspects of the construction of virtual representations of learners and teachers as avatars, and reveals a wide range of intriguing issues yet to be researched. Introduction A systems approach to creating and constructing the future examines the necessary intertwining of advances in economics, technology, sociology, engineering, biology, pedagogy and many other disciplines (Laszlo, 2006). Futures studies and research use theoretical models and deductive methods for describing the likelihood of an event and the conditions under which it is prone to occur (Bell, 1997). That is not what I am attempting here. But instead to stimulate systematic and imaginative thought about the future of three-dimensional multi-user virtual environments (3-D MUVEs) for learning by examining the intertwining of accessible developments, expectations and options. We need much stronger visions to help us get ready and to point the way to evidencebased research, rather than merely ‘reacting’. Second Life (SL) and other 3-D MUVE worlds have emerged, like many innovations, through combinations of developments coming together in a moment of time. The concept of ‘virtual reality’ has been discussed since the early 1980s (Schroeder, 1997). The critical advances, which have taken us from wearing devices such as ‘headsets’ in order to create personalised virtual reality around ourselves to today’s internetaccessed 3-D MUVEs, converged in the first decade of the 21st Century. They included British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 40 No 3 2009 526–538 doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00967.x © 2009 The Author. Journal compilation © 2009 Becta. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA. the huge increase in computing power, storage, broadband, digital tools, e-spaces and networked applications, the Web 2.0ish wave of desire to do it yourself and the associated drop in access costs. Now we build particularly on social networking, simulation and online gaming. The precise nature(s) of learning, teaching, assessment and knowledge construction through and with 3-D MUVEs cannot be ‘predicted’, but each of us has a role in the construction of what futures do become available through designing and delivering learning, and in sharing experience of successes and failures. We need to contemplate many possible futures, engage in dialogue and undertake evaluation with different stakeholders about choices available to us. In this paper, I focus particularly on SL as the current prime example of a 3-D MUVE in higher education. SL is where I have 90% of my experience to date, like most of the authors in this British Journal of Educational Technology (BJET) special issue. Initial results from my own research projects suggest that SL is low cost and high value for learning—and barriers for entry are relatively easily overcome (Bainbridge, 2007; Carr, 2008; Jiyoon, 2008; Lucia, Francese, Passero & Tortora, 2009; Rosedale, 2007). As always, designing for learning and the training, development and support of university teachers (as SL-moderators) are the key pivot for success and student satisfaction (see Edirisingha et al, 2009, pp. 20–24 in this Journal and Edirisingha, Salmon & Nie, 2009; Nie, Edirisingha & Wheeler, 2009). I acknowledge that many alternative platforms to SL are emerging and will be used and explored for educational purposes in the near and more distant future (de Freitas, 2008; Kirriemuir, 2008a). My spotlight is on the potential of 3-D MUVEs for educational purposes, as well as acknowledging the need to build on e-learning concepts. What is particularly special about SL is its unique brand of avatar control and choice. First, the new avatar needs to acquire basic gestures, movements and camera skills. Soon though, the avatar’s interactivity within the environment and with other avatars aids it’s ‘feeling’ of presence and immersion, dialogue and encounter. I have avoided the ‘if only we had better functionality’ route as I hope to demonstrate that the scalable future for 3-D MUVEs rests on learning design and pedagogical applications. In this paper, I note but three perspectives in my exploration of the future for 3-D MUVEs in higher education: trends and emerging issues, the power of pedagogical imagination and the potential impact of humans as learning avatars. Trends and emerging issues in virtual worlds One way of exploring the future is to examine and build upon known visible trends. We can use aspects of multiple disciplines to identify strong forces and work out how to exploit them. This is best done over a period. For example, the Horizon Reports (EDUCAUSE, 2008) and the Universities and Colleges Information Systems Association (ICISA) reports (Browne, Hewitt, Jenkins & Walker, 2008) examine ongoing trends impacting on emerging technologies relevant to teaching and learning, with web-based The future for (second) life and learning 527 © 2009 The Author. Journal compilation © 2009 Becta. virtual worlds increasing in importance from 2006. Others report on developing the functionality and integration possibilities of MUVEs—see, for example, the account of Simulation Linked Object Oriented Dynamic Learning Environment (SLOODLE) (SL and Modular Object-Oriented Dynamic Learning Environment (MOODLE)) in Livingstone, Kemp and Edmund (2008) or in Kemp, Livingstone and Bloomfield (2009). Westmoreland Bowers, Ragas and Neely (2009) report growing interest from academics and teachers. Extrapolating statistics is one way of looking at trends. Unfortunately, statistics available for SL and other virtual worlds are neither well coordinated nor reliable. Statistics are available from Linden Labs on the SL site and through reports such as Lorica, Magoulas and the O’Reilly Radar Team (2008). The number of registered users (residents) of SL has grown rapidly over the past 4 years, and there is increasing interest from educational institutions (Kirriemuir, 2008a). Gartner Inc. (2007), known for forecasting ‘adoption cycles’, predicted that by the end of 2011, 80% of all active Internet users would have an avatar and would be registered in one or more virtual worlds. They argued that commercial use would dominate as businesses look to enhance market positioning using 3-D MUVEs, but added: The collaborative and community-related aspects of these environments will dominate in the future ... the majority of active Internet users and major enterprises will find value in participating in this area in the coming years. (Gartner, 2007, p. 1). The potential for community-building activities is currently most readily recognised by those with experience in the 3-D MUVE medium (Eduserve Foundation Report, 2008). The longest term forecast I have discovered is from the Metaverse RoadMap study, which looks 20 years ahead and suggests that 3-D MUVEs ‘may become primary tools (with video and text secondary) for learning many aspects of history, for acquiring new skills, for job assessment, and for many of our most cost-effective and productive forms of collaboration’ (Smart, Cascio & Paffendorf, 2007, p. 7). The Metaverse advice is to think about the future for MUVEs, not as the next bit of online development but instead as a junction of physical and virtual worlds. The study’s authors suggest that many of the activities we currently associate with the 2-D Web will develop into 3-D or will become meshed 3-D applications, a conclusion supported by a recent report from the consultancy McKinsey (Manyika et al (2007, p. 5). Similarly, Savin-Baden (2008) predicts the need to integrate real life (RL) and SL learning activities, as well as enable unstructured spaces for interaction. Some futurists make a distinction between trends and emerging issues. Within the exploration of trends, it is important to be aware of emerging issues that could not have been easily predicated. One way is to look at what the first participants in the field actually do. For example, at present, SL offers the most powerful object creation toolset of any 3-D MUVE. The first organisations moving into SL concentrated on its awareness-raising potential, hence the interest from commercial companies (Galagan, 2008). In education, there were numbers of example copies of physical campuses— 528 British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 40 No 3 2009 © 2009 The Author. Journal compilation © 2009 Becta. developed mainly for marketing purposes. Other early adopters of SL chose to replicate lecture halls and classrooms, followed closely by the imitation of museums, arts galleries, hospitals and science laboratories (Prasolova-Førland, Sourin & Sourina, 2006). At present, SL offers the most powerful object creation toolset of any 3-D MUVE. More recently, however, following the user contribution pathways stimulated by Web 2.0 applications, several courses have encouraged the building of artefacts by the learners themselves, with interesting results (Good, Howland & Thackray, 2008). If this trend continues, I agree with Salt, Atkins and Blackal (2008) that all universities will have an SL presence in 5 years, but some of these will be for display and market-positioning purposes. The others are much less predictable. It was probably inevitable that in the early days of SL, people would reproduce the buildings and classrooms they were familiar with in RL. University teachers typic