1 / 33

Using SL and Linden Lab as Case Studies to Problematize the Social Impact of New Technologies

Using SL and Linden Lab as Case Studies to Problematize the Social Impact of New Technologies. DR. BO BRINKMAN MIAMI UNIVERSITY COMP. SCIENCE. Key goal. General: Teach students to think critically about technology Specific: Predict impacts of new technology. Key challenges.

dessa
Download Presentation

Using SL and Linden Lab as Case Studies to Problematize the Social Impact of New Technologies

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. Using SL and Linden Lab as Case Studies to Problematize the Social Impact of New Technologies DR. BO BRINKMAN MIAMI UNIVERSITY COMP. SCIENCE

  2. Key goal • General: Teach students to think critically about technology • Specific: Predict impacts of new technology

  3. Key challenges • Computers/web are normal • Gut/naïve reactions feel trustworthy • Result: Myth formation, critical thinking short-circuits

  4. Key measures of success • Students should … • …realize that gut reactions are often wrong • …realize that myths tend to form around new technologies • …be willing to critically analyze own assumptions about technology • The “Ah-ha! Moment” – “I don’t know as much as I thought I did …”

  5. Previous approach: Historical precedent • Question: Can “video games” be art (or literature)? • Legal implication: Art often exempt from obscenity laws. • Student opinion: Games are just games … I wouldn’t go to a museum to see a game!

  6. Historical precedent approach • Works okay, but… • …studying SL seems to work better.

  7. My approach: Study Second Life • Students… • …try SL • …exposed to common perceptions/myths of SL • …with help of instructor • Deconstruct myths • Foster cognitive dissonance • Problematize unacknowledged contexts • …transfer analytical skills to another tech or context

  8. Main contribution • Not new: • Using cognitive dissonance to encourage critical thinking • New in this talk: • Using SL gets to the “A-ha! moment” very quickly • Using SL works for a larger percentage of the class

  9. Talk/Paper contents • Talk: High level view • Terms • Why SL? • Transfer • Example discussion • The pedagogical patterns • Paper • Formal pedagogical patterns • Many more example topics

  10. Myth • In my usage • Do NOT care about truth/falsity • DO care about quality of arguments for/against • Many common myths about technology are assumed to be self-evident • Def: Widely held belief that is unproven

  11. Cognitive dissonance • Def: Person holds two conflicting beliefs • Use: Motivates critical thought (if properly managed!) • Application: • Student reactions to SL – 1st belief • Contrary information introduced by instructor (or peer) – 2nd belief • Rejection rare: Low stakes due to SL context

  12. Problematize • Def: Challenge belief if dependant on unacknowledged context • Use: Challenge student feelings of comfort with technology • Example: My friends know I am a responsible person, so posting drunken party pictures on Facebook won’t negatively impact me • Key error: Context assumes only friends will see it

  13. Why SL? • Tech analyzed must be… • …mostly unfamiliar to students. • …well understood by instructor. • …relatively immature (as a technology). • Learning to address cognitive dissonance… • …is easier when stakes are lower • …can be transferred to other contexts later

  14. Transfer • Critical thinking skills learned in SL must be pulled up/across to other contexts • Else, no useful learning

  15. Context: My class • Title: Social and Ethical Implications of Technology • Audience: Sophomores/Juniors of any major • Viewpoint: Technology inherent in the definitions of “human” and “social” • Relevant course objective: • The student should be able to analyze and predict the effects of a new technology on jobs, class structures, globalization, or other social concerns.

  16. At first sight…

  17. At first sight…

  18. At first sight…

  19. At first sight…

  20. At first sight…

  21. At first sight…

  22. Pattern 1: Blog-drama == common (mis)conceptions • Problem: Need a topic • Audience: Instructor or advanced student • Solution: • Track discussions relevant to your field in blogs, forums • Look for drama • Example proposition: In Second Life you can be whatever you want.

  23. Pattern 2: Reflective writing • Widely used, enough said • Example: Critique or defend the proposition.

  24. Pattern 3: S(L)afe cognitive dissonance • Problem: Students must learn constructive ways to cope with dissonance. Denial is common with familiar technology topics. • Solution: Induce dissonance with a topic that is… • …likely to be poorly understood • …unlikely to have high emotional investment

  25. Step 1: Introduce a proposition, get student predictions • Student predictions: In Second Life, you can be whatever you want. Choose your own: • Race, gender, level of attractiveness, height, weight • Designer clothes, fancy house • Character’s personality, back story, etc

  26. Step 2: Introduce dissonant beliefs • Have best “clothes” • Look any age • Judged purely on ideas • Be attractive (female) • It is not real • Meetings in jammies • Daryth’s dragons • Kid avie controversy • Avie birth-date matters • Hit on all the time • People really get upset • How should avie look/act? Unacknowledged context: Assumes that there is no social pressure or external control in SL

  27. Step 3: Critical writing • Thesis-driven paper, usually with research • Example topics: • What was the origin of anti-weapon and/or anti-particle policies in SL? What does this tell us about how new technologies create new cultural norms? • Should crimes motivated by hate of an SL characteristic be deemed “hate crimes?” • What types of avatars should be banned, and why? • Interview 5 long-time residents. How do they use their avatar to communicate their (self-)identity to others?

  28. Pattern 4: Back to RL • Problem: Students do not always realize a skill learned in one context (SL) applies in other contexts (other techs, and non-tech life) • Solution: Instructor (or peer) constructs parallel/linked question about RL

  29. Example: Moving dissonance into RL • How does email style affect your perceptions of the sender? • Collect 20 emails • Annotate with your assumptions about the sender • Write thesis-driven analysis • Most people act differently around “real friends” than they do around “co-workers.” Facebook presents the same profile to everyone you friend. • Is extensive use of Facebook compatible with professionalism?

  30. Outcomes assessment • Problematizing student perceptions was even easier than expected – Plenty of room for misperceptions/assumptions about SL • Course assessment (not unit assessment): 83% indicated improvement in ability to think critically about impacts of technology • Unit assessment: Almost unanimous agreement by students that they experienced cognitive dissonance (or “were surprised”)

  31. Other lessons learned • Video gaming experience “uncorrelated” with student success • Humanities coursework “correlated” with student success • Explicitly demonstrating transfer to another context is crucial • No surprise: Need multiple SL-related activities … otherwise, time to learn SL is too high

  32. Final thought • From naïve gut reaction to transfer of learning in four class periods (~1.5 weeks)

More Related