Concerns about Virtual Reality and the Second Life Phenomenon

There are several positive reasons to recommend using Second Life (SL).  It offers students an opportunity to experiment with business models, test strategies and learn effective tactics.  Lessons learned in the classroom can be applied in a Virtual World environment. SL can be used as a supplement to classroom teaching and in support of instructional goals.  Case studies can be presented and potential business solutions implemented and evaluated.  It allows for social engagement and encourages asynchronous learning. An instructor does not have to be present for students to participate in projects.

The risk with VR programs such as Second Life is that one becomes entranced with the method of delivery and looses sight of what is to be delivered. VR in simulation based training, (for example flight instruction), can enhance skill acquisition such as eye hand coordination or visual spatial organization, but at higher levels of educational integration there is little empirical support establishing the benefits of VR over other delivery methods. The epistemological evidence for implementing VR has not been adequately investigated. Can the knowledge constructed and integrated in a virtual world be effectively translated and implemented in the real world? In SL, Avatars can learn to fly and teletransport, activities which can not be accomplished in the real world.

At the pedagogical level one must ask, if learning in a virtual world offers clear and measurable advantages over more traditional learning environments?  Do students sitting in a virtual classroom watching a PowerPoint presentation have the opportunity to engage in active learning anymore than students sitting in a real world classroom?   Even tasking students with a problem that requires joint effort and team work may not be as effective as implementing the task in the real world, where there is an immediacy of interaction and an opportunity for comprehensive communication. We know that 80-90% of communication is not based on words but rather on tone of voice, gestures, and body language. How does this get translated in a virtual world? One of the essential questions is, “Can a virtual world teach students to perform more effectively in the real world”? Shouldn’t we use the real world to help students engage the real world?  One can encourage students to participate in SL and build virtual houses, for virtual people, in a virtual world, or motivate students to participate in Habitat for Humanity and build real houses, for real people, in a real world. 

Although SL requires a modest learning curve - students conversant with using PCs, moving objects about on a screen and accessing drop down menus can quickly learn the basic skills required to interact in SL - professors attempting to create learning environments, facilitating group projects and utilizing the full potential of VR would require a significant amount of time to achieve mastery. 

Finally, two other issues need to be addressed.  First, the legal ramifications of a college supporting educational experiences incorporating the SL paradigm need to be carefully reviewed.  Does the college’s in loco parentis role expose it to an actionable event if a student engages in untoward behavior?  Second, establishing a virtual presence in SL can cost several thousand dollars. A cost/benefit analysis might demonstrate that SL does not warrant this type of expenditure and a college may be better served by focusing its resources on continuing to enhance the teaching skills of its faculty.