Learning in Virtuality Archived Session
Access the archived Horizon Wimba session go to Blackboard>Course Design Institute>Communications>Live Classrooms>Learning in Virtuality Archive.
[slideshare id=485368&doc=virtua2-1214409150287338-9&w=425]
Avatar Design for non-designers
When I first looked seriously at Second Life, it was self-evident that the avatar was the essence of the entire experience. This may be more the case in world-building environments than in gaming environments. It’s not only that learning is an embodied and social endeavor, turned topsy-turvy now that we can control avatars in a shared space, sitting thousands of miles apart from one another. It’s that selfhood and identity in these spaces becomes wildly complex.
In Meez and Spore Creator Creator we can create avatars. We can create selves, characters, personas; it’s all completely open. One of the initial critiques of QWAQ has been the lack of avatar customization.
There’s also been some research looking into avatar design from a functional perspective. What does an avatar need to be able to do to be an “effective avatar” in a given virtual situation?
I’m personally enamored with the aesthetic of Second Life avatars, it makes being there visually rich. I redesign my avatars more than anything else in SL. They are my playground. And in one sense, this might be a good entry into 3D design for non-designers.
What’s a virtual world & how should we pay attention to them?
Thanks Cathy! Great summary. I was going to comment, but since I can post, 
I thought I’d do that and extend the discussion.
I think we need to refine the term “virtual world” for our audience and context and extend the conversation to include cultural, organizational and pedagogical perspectives.
Improving student learning is our main goal and it’s easy as technologists, to take a somewhat instrumentalist approach to achieving that.
Here are my In-a-nutshell attempts at refining the notion of virtual worlds for our audience and context.
Cultural: Children are growing up playing in virtual playgrounds like Habbo, Neopets, Club Penguin,etc. Read more from BBC Tens of millions of adults spend an estimated 10-20 (See footnotes) average hours per week in MMOGs and commercially available virtual worlds. The majority are white and middle class. These are not neither culturally nor socially neutral locations of play. They have emerging cultures of their own. In adult environments, there are legacy cultural mores and practices from MUDs, chatrooms, instant messaging and online communities.
Organizational: At the organizational level, these should be considered first as educational technologies. As a public institution we have students, faculty and staff from diverse cultural, SESs and technological backgrounds. We make decisions about human and technological resources to support learning.
Pedagogical: Tools are pedagogical means not ends. At the same time, there is currently more evidence of learning through play, than there is of learning through pedagogy in these environments. I DO believe people learn in them. The first questions are what, how and why. The second are: are faculty ready to change what they do, how and why.
1 Ortiz dxe Gortari, A. (2007, September). Second life survey: User profile for psychological engagement & gambling. Paper presented at The Virtual 2007 Conference: Interaction, Stockholm, Sweden.
2 Yee, N. (2006b, June). The demographics, motivations, and derived experiences of users of massively multi-user online graphical environments.
Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 15(3) 309-329.
What Exactly Is A Virtual World?
Pop quiz: What is a Virtual World?
a) A shared space
b) Avatar-based chat room
c) 3D collaborative experience
d) All of the above
e) Or something else?
With new Virtual Worlds being announced almost weekly, the question bears asking.
The Virtual Worlds Review, for example, a pioneering effort in describing the development of Virtual Worlds, suggests six features common to all Virtual Worlds:
- Shared Space: the world allows many users to participate at once.
- Graphical User Interface: the world depicts space visually, ranging in style from 2D “cartoon” imagery to more immersive 3D environments.
- Immediacy: interaction takes place in real time.
- Interactivity: the world allows users to alter, develop, build, or submit customized content.
- Persistence: the world’s existence continues regardless of whether individual users are logged in.
- Socialization/Community: the world allows and encourages the formation of in-world social groups like teams, guilds, clubs, cliques, housemates, neighborhoods, etc.
However, with more companies and institutions jumping on the VW bandwagon, I begin to wonder if the term is becoming more broadly defined.
Case in point: Weblin.
The Weblin website describes their virtual world as follows:
Weblin “turns the web into a virtual world. Your personalized weblin avatar surfs the web with you, enabling you to see friends and meet new ones on the same site as you. Weblins can chat, move, show emotion, visit lounges, and trade stuff with other weblins.”
Wow! The whole web! Sounds interesting, yes? I thought so and quickly created a weblin for myself. I chose my avatar and decided to surf the web right away.
So.. IS Weblin a Virtual World? Or maybe Virtual World lite? Yes, it allows a shared social space, communication, immediacy. However, is it persistent? Does it allow any level of meaningful user customized content? Not really.
Why is this important? For a couple of years now, educators have been using Second LIfe as the standard by which to evaluate instruction and learning in a virtual world. But not all Virtual Worlds ARE Second Life. They each have unique capabilities and characteristics that must be carefully evaluated.
Does this make Weblin and other platforms “bad”? No. But it does make them different. And a wise educator will take the time to evaluate those differences in light of what s/he is attempting to accomplish with his/her students - and then make the most appropriate choice.
Learning in Virtualities on June 24
