1 / 44

Integrating Second Life into a UT Austin Freshman English Course

Integrating Second Life into a UT Austin Freshman English Course. NMC Conference, November 9, 2006. Michael Mayrath. Educational Psychology Ph.D. student The University of Texas at Austin Graduate Research Assistant Division of Instructional Innovation & Assessment (DIIA). Agenda.

damia
Download Presentation

Integrating Second Life into a UT Austin Freshman English Course

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  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 Austin’s Second Life Island, SL Pilot Project • Research & Evaluation Methodology • Results, Conclusions, Future Directions

  4. Tour: • DIIA • UT Austin’s 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. UT’s 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 building’s 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 • professor’s 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@mail.utexas.edu Questions?

More Related