Integrating Second Life into a UT Austin Freshman English Course

1
Integrating Second Life into a UT Austin
Freshman English Course

• NMC Conference, November 9, 2006

2
Michael Mayrath

• Educational Psychology Ph.D. student
• The University of Texas at Austin
• Graduate Research Assistant
• Division of Instructional Innovation
  Assessment (DIIA)

3
Agenda

• Tour DIIA, UT Austins Second Life Island, SL
  Pilot Project
• Research Evaluation Methodology
• Results, Conclusions, Future Directions

4

• Tour
• DIIA
• UT Austins Second Life island
• SL Pilot project

5
DIIA(Division of Instructional Innovation and
Assessment)

• one DIIA core objective identify, explore, and
  research the technological horizon
• DIIA starts with assessment project criteria
• games at UT Austin?
• pilot Second Life 1 year

6
DIIA support

• Instructional Assessment Group
• Teaching and Learning Excellence Group
• Instructional Technology Group
• technical support

7
DIIA deliverables

• SL island
• account setup
• training sessions
• instruction manual
• instructional consultation

8
Second Life

• Multi-User Virtual Environment (MUVE)
• 1.2 million total SL residents
• Harvard, Tennessee, Pepperdine, Ball State, and
  Central Missouri State

9
UTs Second Life island

• 16-acre private island
• safe for students
• replicas of buildings on UT Austin campus
• freedom for students to build anywhere

10
Instructional setting for pilot

• English course Composition Reading in World
  Literature
• 18 Plan II freshmen
• Fall 2006 Spring 2007
• technology-oriented professor

11
Instructional objectives

• discovery learning
• fall goal personal vision statement
• spring goal leadership vision statement
• develop unity in verbal and visual rhetoric
• compare UT Austin to other universities

12
Instructional activities in SL

• personal roadmap
• campus master plan
• two social hours per week

13
Implementation

• 8/30 - Course started
• 8/31 - Pre-surveys e-mailed
• 9/5 - 1st training
• 9/7 - 2nd training
• 9/12 - 1st SL assignment due (Roadmap)
• 11/30 - 2nd SL assignment due (Campus)

14

• Research Evaluation Methodology

15
Research questions

• Are students more engaged in a course when SL is
  used for instructional activities?
• How does students motivation in the course
  change over the year?
• How do students beliefs, attitudes, and
  self-confidence regarding technology affect their
  desire to complete assignments in SL?

16
Evaluation questions

• How much support is needed to implement SL?
• What types of support are required?
• What do students like and dislike about SL?
• How difficult is it to learn SL?
• What is the future for using SL at UT Austin?

17
Mixed methods approach

• Quantitative methods
• Surveys on 8/30/06 (pre),
• 11/22/06 (mid), and 4/13/07 (post)
• Qualitative methods
• Interviews
• Observations
• Student reaction essays

18
Mixed methods study

• Surveys
• writing confidence
• motivation while writing
• confidence in using technology
• feelings about technology
• Response data analyzed for statistically
  significant gains

19
Quantitative methods Surveys

• Writing Confidence
• Strongly disagree ? Strongly agree
• I am able to
• write using correct grammar.
• write a 20-page term paper.
• write a novel.

20
Quantitative methods Surveys

• Motivation while Writing
• Strongly disagree ? Strongly agree
• When writing a paper for school
• I have a sense of control over what I am
  writing.
• I always start out with a clear goal of what I
  want to write.

21
Quantitative methods Surveys

• Confidence in using technology
• Never done it ? Strongly disagree ? Strongly
  agree
• I feel confident
• searching the Web using Google or Yahoo.
• playing virtual world games such as Second Life
  or SIM City.
• creating/modifying your character in a game.
• creating 3-D images.

22
Quantitative methods Surveys

• Feelings about technology
• Strongly disagree ? Strongly agree
• I would rather use Word to write than paper.
• I like it when my instructor uses PowerPoint in
  class.
• I like playing video games.

23
Qualitative methods Interviews

• five students high/low random selection
• November 2006 April 2007
• interviews recorded, transcribed, and analyzed
• 34 questions

24
Qualitative methods Interviews

• Questions
• How has SL affected your interest in the course?
• Do you feel like you have control over what you
  do in SL?
• What frustrations have you experienced working
  in SL?
• What do you like about working in SL?

25
Qualitative methods

• Observations
• on-going throughout the year
• Student reaction essays
• SL writing

26

• Preliminary
• Results, Conclusions, Future Directions

27
Results

• Writing confidence survey
• Students were very confident in their writing
  ability.
• Motivation while writing survey
• Students believed they had skills to match
  challenges.
• Students reported they had to work to concentrate
  on writing.

28
Results

• Confidence in using technology survey
• Students were very confident in using e-mail, the
  Internet, Word, Excel, and PowerPoint.
• Students were not confident in using graphics
  programs, creating Web pages, and programming.

29
Results

• Feelings about technology survey
• Students liked using technology in the classroom
  and in their work.
• Students expressed mixed feelings about gaming.
• 48 of the students reported not playing computer
  games.

30
Results

• Interviews
• The most frustrating thing is not having a
  Control-Z key to undo what you just did.
• I think the competition is a good thing. It
  pushes a person can do.
• Our class is super competitive.

31
Results

• Observations
• competition for extra credit
• student anxiety and frustration
• training necessary for specific activities
• hand-outs with step-by-step instructions

32
Results

• Student Reaction Essays
• Just as a SL buildings tiny details and
  elements must all add up to a unified impression,
  a piece of writing must be composed from support
  and linked components.
• Having little to no experience in gaming or
  computer programming, SL proved to be a real
  challenge for me. To be completely honest, I
  found the SL project to be more of a nuisance
  than an integral part of my project.

33
Conclusions

• Research questions addressed
• students engagement in course
• students motivation in course
• role of students attitudes on their use of SL
• Evaluation questions addressed
• extent of support needed
• type of support needed
• students frustrations with SL
• students likes concerning SL
• difficulty of learning SL
• future of SL at UT Austin

34
Conclusions

• Research question Are students more engaged in a
  course when SL is used for instructional
  activities?
• Students engagement aided by
• anchoring activities in learning context
• training and support for SL activities
• avoiding too much competition

35
Conclusions

• Research question How does students motivation
  toward the course change over the year?
• SL frustration may arise
• extra credit competition worrisome
• competition may grow too heated

36
Conclusions

• Research question How do students beliefs,
  attitudes, and self-confidence toward technology
  affect their motivation to participate in SL?
• like technology in the classroom
• high confidence in their tech skills
• motivation drops if SL gets frustrating

37
Conclusions

• Evaluation question How much support is needed
  to implement SL in a course?
• Dependent upon
• instructional activity
• students proficiency in SL skills
• professors proficiency in SL skills

38
Conclusions

• Evaluation question What types of support are
  required?
• Dependent upon
• students
• faculty
• independent evaluation

39
Conclusions

• Evaluation question What frustrations do
  students experience using SL?
• ownership and group issues
• building
• activities not anchored in class context

40
Conclusions

• Evaluation question What do students like about
  SL?
• customizing their avatar
• socializing in SL
• reflecting on what they have created

41
Conclusions

• Evaluation question How difficult is it for
  students to learn how to use SL?
• steep learning curve (for our pilot)
• training
• step-by-step handouts

42
Future of SL at UT Austin

• expand SL applications at UT
• year-long course provides an advantage
• community building takes time
• continued assessment
• problem-based learning

43
Future of SL at UT Austin

• student programming in spring 2007
• continue data collection
• design other UT Austin SL opportunities
• extend literature on educational gaming

44

• Michael Mayrath
• mmayrath_at_mail.utexas.edu
• Questions?