Engaging students in blended and online collaborative courses at university level through Second Life: comparative perspectives and instructional affordances

Students' opinions about the degree of impact, status, and socio-cognitive viability with the utilization of the emerging three-dimensional (3D) computer-generated technologies may vary. Indisputably, 3D technology-enhanced environments have provided considerable benefits and affordances to the contemporary e-Education. In these circumstances, virtual worlds (VWs) like second life (SL) have generally intensified with an extensive perpetuation and penetration of innovative performances that encapsulated or enacted from the vast majority of higher education fields. At the same time, there is growing widespread recognition of reasons affecting the high or low degree of students' engagement in online and blended course delivery methods held in 3D VWs. Notwithstanding that most notable studies have disclosed SL functional capabilities from a plethora of pilot case studies, however, it is still lacking an experiential-based research approach to determine the degree of students' engagement in blended and online courses at university level through SL. The present comparative study explores students' engagement overall as a multidimensional construct consisting of emotional, behavioral, and cognitive factors. One hundred and thirty-five undergraduate and postgraduate students in almost identical blended and online instructional conditions held in SL took part in this project. Preliminary results have decoded students' satisfaction for both methods, despite the fact that the voluntary sample composed of different educational disciplines. The quantitative analysis showed that postgraduate students of the online course had more positive results and the degree of engagement significantly increased compared to those who enrolled with the blended course delivery method. The instructional affordances from the utilization of SL were the collaborative climate between users (instructor and students) who eliminated various intractable boundaries which were predominantly observed by several conventional methods. Specifically it was revealed that the online course delivery method engaged more students with the collaborative activities. Educational implications and recommendations for future research are also included.

[1]  Abbas Zare-ee,et al.  UNIVERSITY TEACHERS' VIEWS ON THE USE OF INFORMATION COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES IN TEACHING AND RESEARCH , 2011 .

[2]  Janette Grenfell,et al.  Virtual Worlds to Enhance Student Engagement , 2010 .

[3]  George D. Kuh,et al.  Adding Value: Learning Communities and Student Engagement , 2004 .

[4]  Michael J. Stahl,et al.  Effectiveness of Combined Delivery Modalities for Distance Learning and Resident Learning , 2001 .

[5]  Donna F. Bobbitt-Zeher,et al.  Black American Students in an Affluent Suburb , 2004 .

[6]  Stelios Daskalakis,et al.  Assessing the Acceptance of a Blended Learning University Course , 2011, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[7]  G. Priestnall,et al.  Learner immersion engagement in the 3D virtual world: principles emerging from the DELVE project , 2009 .

[8]  Tracy C. Davis.  How College Affects Students (Vol. 2): A Third Decade of Research (review) , 2006 .

[9]  Mervyn Flecknoe,et al.  How can ICT Help us to Improve Education? , 2002 .

[10]  E. Skinner,et al.  Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. , 1993 .

[11]  P. Lachenbruch.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) , 1989 .

[12]  C. Suárez-Orozco,et al.  The Significance of Relationships: Academic Engagement and Achievement among Newcomer Immigrant Youth , 2009, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[13]  Thrasyvoulos Tsiatsos,et al.  Fostering collaborative learning in Second Life: Metaphors and affordances , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[14]  Barney Dalgarno,et al.  Implementing Web 2.0 technologies in higher education: A collective case study , 2012, Comput. Educ..

[15]  Kultar Singh,et al.  Quantitative Social Research Methods , 2007 .

[16]  Martin Oliver,et al.  Student engagement and blended learning: Portraits of risk , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[17]  Stefan Hrastinski,et al.  A theory of online learning as online participation , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[18]  Pellas Nikolaos.  Towards a Theoretical “Cybernetic” Framework: Discovering the Pedagogical Value of the Virtual World “Second Life” , 2013 .

[19]  Nikolaos Pellas,et al.  An Innovative “Cybernetic” Organization Improvement Plan through Participatory Action Research in Persistent “Open Source” Virtual Worlds , 2013 .

[20]  James J. Appleton,et al.  Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. , 2008 .

[21]  David J. Shernoff,et al.  Engagement in After-School Programs as a Predictor of Social Competence and Academic Performance , 2010, American journal of community psychology.

[22]  Bridget Somekh,et al.  Pedagogy and Learning with ICT: Researching the Art of Innovation , 2007 .

[23]  Avani Trivedi,et al.  Instructional design best practices for Second Life: a case study from a college-level English course , 2011, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[24]  Michelle E. Alvarez,et al.  Promoting Academic Success through Student Engagement , 2012 .

[25]  Jennifer L. Glanville,et al.  The Measurement of School Engagement , 2007 .

[26]  Michele D. Dickey.  Brave new (interactive) worlds: A review of the design affordances and constraints of two 3D virtual worlds as interactive learning environments , 2005, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[27]  A. McMahan.  Immersion, Engagement, and Presence: A Method for Analyzing 3-D Video Games , 2013 .

[28]  Vuyisile Theophilus Msila.  The International Journal of Technology, Knowledge, and Society , 2011 .

[29]  Ioannis Kazanidis,et al.  Virtual communities of inquiry (VCoI) for learning basic algorithmic structures with open simulator and Scratch4OS: a case study from the secondary education in Greece , 2013, BCI '13.

[30]  Jia Shen,et al.  Intentions to use Virtual Worlds for Education , 2009, J. Inf. Syst. Educ..

[31]  Hyungsung Park,et al.  Effects of collaborative activities on group identity in virtual world , 2013, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[32]  Peter W. Wood,et al.  Book Review: Motivate Me , 2002 .

[33]  M. Weiss.  Developmental sport and exercise psychology: A lifespan perspective , 2004 .

[34]  Erman Yükseltürk,et al.  Team shared mental model as a contributing factor to team performance and students' course satisfaction in blended courses , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[35]  Ren-Hung Hwang,et al.  Development and evaluation of a Web 2.0 annotation system as a learning tool in an e-learning environment , 2012, Comput. Educ..

[36]  J. Finn.  Withdrawing From School , 1989 .

[37]  David M. Antonacci,et al.  Envisioning the Educational Possibilities of User-Created Virtual Worlds. , 2008 .

[38]  Bolanle A. Olaniran,et al.  Culture, learning styles, and Web 2.0 , 2009, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[39]  Yves Punie,et al.  Towards a Mapping Framework of ICT-enabled Innovation for Learning , 2012 .

[40]  George D. Kuh,et al.  Being (Dis)Engaged in Educationally Purposeful Activities: The Influences of Student and Institutional Characteristics , 2002 .

[41]  Yael Kali,et al.  The role of design-principles in designing courses that promote collaborative learning in higher-education , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[42]  Otto Petrovic,et al.  Pervasive learning games: A comparative study , 2007, New Rev. Hypermedia Multim..

[43]  Punie Yves,et al.  Innovating teaching and learning practices: Key elements for developing Creative Classrooms in Europe , 2012 .

[44]  Atul Sajjanhar,et al.  Virtual Worlds for Student Engagement , 2012 .

[45]  Terry Poulton,et al.  Evaluating a Second Life Problem-Based Learning (PBL) demonstrator project: what can we learn? , 2014, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[46]  Anna M. Harrington,et al.  Problematizing the Hybrid Classroom for ESL/EFL Students , 2010 .

[47]  Jacquelynne S. Eccles,et al.  Parental Influences on Youth Involvement in Sports. , 2004 .

[48]  David Bell,et al.  Learning from Second Life , 2009, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[49]  John R. Slate,et al.  Teaching and learning in Second Life: Using the Community of Inquiry (CoI) model to support online instruction with graduate students in instructional technology , 2010, Internet High. Educ..

[50]  Tiziana Catarci,et al.  Accessible e-learning material: a no-frills avenue for didactical experts , 2004, New Rev. Hypermedia Multim..

[51]  David Hinds,et al.  Engaging E-Learning in Virtual Worlds: Supporting Group Collaboration , 2008, Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2008).

[52]  Lourdes Rey,et al.  Predicting academic burnout and engagement in educational settings: assessing the incremental validity of perceived emotional intelligence beyond perceived stress and general self-efficacy. , 2006, Psicothema.

[53]  Sue Gregory,et al.  Second Life: Harnessing Virtual World Technology to Enhance Student Engagement and Learning , 2010 .

[54]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[55]  Peter Shea,et al.  Learning presence: Towards a theory of self-efficacy, self-regulation, and the development of a communities of inquiry in online and blended learning environments , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[56]  Pellas Nikolaos.  A Conceptual “Cybernetic” Methodology for Organizing and Managing the E-Learning Process through [D-] CIVEs: The Case of “Second Life” , 2013 .

[57]  Steve Wheeler,et al.  Second Life: an overview of the potential of 3-D virtual worlds in medical and health education. , 2007, Health information and libraries journal.

[58]  Joke Voogt,et al.  A 'blended' in-service arrangement for classroom technology integration: impacts on teachers and students , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[59]  Jennifer C. Richardson,et al.  The Role of Students' Cognitive Engagement in Online Learning , 2006 .

[60]  Ernest T. Pascarella,et al.  How College Affects Students: A Third Decade of Research. Volume 2. , 2005 .

[61]  Mark Childs,et al.  “This above all: to thine own self be true”: ethical considerations and risks in conducting Higher Education learning activities in the virtual world Second Life™ , 2012, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[62]  John C. Hayek,et al.  What Matters to Student Success: A Review of the Literature , 2006 .

[63]  Jennifer A. Fredricks,et al.  School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence , 2004 .

[64]  Sasha A. Barab,et al.  Virtual worlds, conceptual understanding, and me: designing for consequential engagement , 2009 .

[65]  John K. Burton faculty member.  Second Life in education: A review of publications from its launch to 2011 , 2012 .

[66]  D. Leidner,et al.  Stepping into the internet: new ventures in virtual worlds , 2011 .

[67]  Stephen Brown,et al.  From VLEs to learning webs: the implications of Web 2.0 for learning and teaching , 2010, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[68]  Qiping Kong,et al.  Student engagement in mathematics: Development of instrument and validation of construct , 2003 .