education as killer ap of virtual worlds
I posted the following (not sure why) in another discussion section of this site. But, figured as long as I wrote it (jet lagged) might as well reconstitute it here - in case it is of any interest.
Jim
killer ap for virtual worlds is education ---
why? Because properly constructed and managed (the later especially) virtual worlds reflect the natural way our brains process social and spatial informaton and engage in experiential learning. Our brains work in 3-D, and we 'learn with our hands" in 3-D as well. --
We are primates -- killer ap of primates is learning and education in a social setting. It is what we are designed to do. Virtual worlds are something we have created in our own image - and thus -- the killer ap translates.
This was the fundamental motivation and idea underlying whyville -- which was one of (or depending on your definition) the first virtual world -- certainly the first (and still basically only) virtual world with explicit educational underpinnings -- and the above is why.
Importantly, however (also properly constructed) VWs are scalable and universally accessable (of course not if you accept the gaming industries obessesion with graphics -- given the absense of any real variation in content.)
In education -- think of virtual worlds as breaking the 600 year 'broadcast" mode induced by the invention of the printing press and Universities (centralized education) both themselves invented to handle a scalability (and control) problem.
In marketing -- VWs allow 'customers' to interact with the product itself, rather than the brand (another 'invention" fundamentally linked to the passive reception of a broadcast message).
So, another requirement for killer ap is that it generate revenue to sustain the form. Blend marketing and education. link the billions of dollars in marketing, to the billions of dollars in education -- uniquely in virtual worlds -- then, by definition -- this is the killer ap.
However most virtual worlds constructors don't get it yet -- they are still more obsessed with graphics and functionality, some funny sense of random entrapeneurship, rather than organized society, and most marketers remain fixated on broadcast rather than figuring out how to use the other wire (the one from them to you) as the primary wire. Even this discussion is largely framed in something we know (the success of html) rather than an understanding of the beast itself which is us.
But this will change --
Jim
killer ap for virtual worlds is education ---
why? Because properly constructed and managed (the later especially) virtual worlds reflect the natural way our brains process social and spatial informaton and engage in experiential learning. Our brains work in 3-D, and we 'learn with our hands" in 3-D as well. --
We are primates -- killer ap of primates is learning and education in a social setting. It is what we are designed to do. Virtual worlds are something we have created in our own image - and thus -- the killer ap translates.
This was the fundamental motivation and idea underlying whyville -- which was one of (or depending on your definition) the first virtual world -- certainly the first (and still basically only) virtual world with explicit educational underpinnings -- and the above is why.
Importantly, however (also properly constructed) VWs are scalable and universally accessable (of course not if you accept the gaming industries obessesion with graphics -- given the absense of any real variation in content.)
In education -- think of virtual worlds as breaking the 600 year 'broadcast" mode induced by the invention of the printing press and Universities (centralized education) both themselves invented to handle a scalability (and control) problem.
In marketing -- VWs allow 'customers' to interact with the product itself, rather than the brand (another 'invention" fundamentally linked to the passive reception of a broadcast message).
So, another requirement for killer ap is that it generate revenue to sustain the form. Blend marketing and education. link the billions of dollars in marketing, to the billions of dollars in education -- uniquely in virtual worlds -- then, by definition -- this is the killer ap.
However most virtual worlds constructors don't get it yet -- they are still more obsessed with graphics and functionality, some funny sense of random entrapeneurship, rather than organized society, and most marketers remain fixated on broadcast rather than figuring out how to use the other wire (the one from them to you) as the primary wire. Even this discussion is largely framed in something we know (the success of html) rather than an understanding of the beast itself which is us.
But this will change --
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by AC on
-
It's clear that education, training, events and meetings are all natural applications of virtual worlds. The immersing socialisation that virtual worlds facilitate via 3D graphics, avatars, VOIP etc... break down the rigid, linear, 2D barriers of current online applications. Thus a more natural environment for human interaction will allow the internet to fulfil its promise in the education sphere.
-
Permalink Reply by John Carter McKnight on
-
Yes!
The "Metanomics" course in SL has been a perfect example of this. It uses the medium well to deliver a first-rate educational product to an open, global audience. That's terrific, and by breaking the walls of the university, democratizes and globalizes access to education.
But, it's that 600 year old broadcast model. What they've failed to capitalize on, what I suspect most Ivy League professors are incapable of even seeing, is the networked, multilateral education among the audience afterwards. The speakers have been interesting, but I've learned the most by talking with fellow attendees afterwards. I've got a string of graduate degrees, but the best intellectual discussions I've had have been with the general, non-student SL audience after these events - and the course and its sponsors have failed to acknowledge and capitalize on that.
The next question is, of course, how do we? What does the *next* paradigm look like?
-
Permalink Reply by tom abeles on
-
Here are some of the issues that I have puzzled on, though, in principle, i agree with Jim:
1) in the world where I live, work and play, I need information or knowledge which I am able to find on my own either for my pleasure or for a specific need, such as learning a language or learning about water quality. We do this all the time, unstructured. On the other hand, sometimes it is easier to "take a course" because I can download knowledge from the instructor more quickly and efficiently than stumbling around in a controlled random walk., so to speak. I don't care about being evaluated by the instructor and where tasks are involved, I care about fulfilling my obligation with the knowledge.
2) On the other hand, for many, the job at hand is getting certified and while learning may be of great value, the real bottom line is the grade, the credits and the certification. Even in a "constructivist" experience, no one pays, at a post secondary institution, the 15-60K/year and not be concerned with the certification which advances one and also permits one to stay for the next round
I do not see how virtual worlds change this except to provide a potentially more rewarding experience.
-
Permalink Reply by Diana Brauhn on -
Interesting connections and concepts you bring up. I am an instructional designer, working on my phd, planning my dissertation on instructional design and Second Life. What you mention "most virtual worlds constructors don't get it yet" goes multi-fold for educators. It is amazing to me that so many educators who have pioneered and embraced online learning disparage or mistrust virtual reality learning.
I do not know what v-world constructors need, but most educators want research. So I happily plan to give them some, and hopefully steer research in the direction of SL and other education related VR worlds.
Enjoy the journey ~
-
Permalink Reply by Liam O'Donnell on -
I agree with you on much of this Jim. Education can definitely flourish in vws, especially for kids who are currently being forced to learn in the only unwired location in their lives: school. And while I agree that vw's need to make revenue, I'm wary of blending marketing and education. I like a lot of what you do in whyville, but some of it does trouble me. If we are going to market to kids while we teach them in vws, then we must teach them to critically engage with the worlds their learning in and the marketing messages they are receiving and that pay the bills that keep these worlds available.
Virtual Worlds London
Chat
Loading Chat...
Virtual Worlds News
© 2008 Created by Chris Sherman
