Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

On the value of Second Life for students’ engagement in blended and online courses: A comparative study from the Higher Education in Greece

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Nowadays three-dimensional (3D) multi-user virtual worlds (VWs) are the most well-known candidate platforms in Higher education. Despite the growing number of notable studies that have presented VWs as valuable platforms for the e-Education, there is still a paucity of a comparative study in order to be determined the degree of the students’ engagement in constructionist-collaborative learning scenarios. Concurrently, it seems imperative the need for educators and scholars to identify how can VWs influence students’ engagement in contemporary and reliable instructional formats, mainly on blended or online settings for university-level courses. In this study the effects of students’ achievements were measured by comparing the degree of students’ engagement from two student groups (graduate and undergraduate) enrolled in two different instructional formats (blended/online) held in Second Life (SL) to become learning content developers. The purpose of the current research is to present results from the comparative study of one hundred twenty-five (125) students that finally attended in order to be measured their engagement overall as a multi-dimensional construct consisting of the emotional, behavioral and cognitive factors. The study findings from the quantitative analysis have disclosed that graduate students who participated in online courses achieved more positive learning outcomes and as a result the degree of their engagement was significantly increased than those who enrolled with the blended. In these circumstances there are raised some fundamental educational implications which are also discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ang, K., & Wang, Q. (2006). A case study of engaging primary school students in learning science by using active worlds. In R. Philip, A. Voerman, & J. Dalziel (Eds.), Proceedings of the first international LAMS conference 2006: designing the future of learning (pp. 5–14). Sydney: LAMS Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Appleton, J., Christeson, L., & Furlong, J. (2008). Student engagement: critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the schools, 45(5), 369–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Attasiriluk, S., Nakasone, A., Hantanong, W., Prada, R., Kanongchaiyos, P., & Prendinger, H. (2009). Co-presence, collaboration, and control in environmental studies. Virtual Reality, 13(1), 195–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, S., Wentz, R., & Woods, M. (2009). Using virtual worlds in education: second life as an educational tool. Teaching of Psychology, 36(2), 59–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beltrán Sierra, L. M., Gutiérrez, R. S., & Garzón-Castro, C. L. (2012). Second Life as a support element for learning electronic related subjects: a real case. Computers & Education, 58(1), 291–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouta, C., & Retalis, S. (2013). Enhancing primary school collaborative learning experiences in maths via a 3D virtual environment. Education and Information Technologies, 18(1), 571–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bulu, S. T. (2012). Place presence, social presence, co-presence, and satisfaction in virtual worlds. Computers & Education, 58(1), 154–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, M., Slate, J., Rojas-LeBouef, A., & LaPraire, K. (2010). Teaching and learning in second life: using the community of inquiry (CoI) model to support online instruction with graduate students and instructional technology. Internet and Higher Education, 13(1–2), 84–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnett, C. (2011). Medium for empowerment or a ‘centre for everything’: students’ experience of control in virtual learning environments within a university context. Education and Information Technologies, 16(2), 245–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, P., Selvarajah, S., & Webster, J. (1999). Engagement in multimedia training systems. Maui: Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, X., Siau, K., & Nah, F. F. (2012). Empirical comparison of 3-D virtual world and face-to-face classroom for higher education. Journal of Database Management, 23(3), 30–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, S., Heaney, R., & Henderson-Begg, S. (2009). The learning gains and student perceptions of a second life virtual lab. Bioscience Education, 13(5).

  • Coffman, T., & Klinger, M. (2007). Utilizing virtual worlds in education: the implications for practice. International Journal of Human and Social Sciences, 2(1), 29–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Contreras-Castillo, J., Favela, J., Perez-Fragoso, C., & Santamaria-del-Angel, E. (2004). Informal interactions and their implications for online courses. Computers & Education, 42(2), 149–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dale, C., & Lane, A. (2007). A wolf in sheep’s clothing? an analysis of student engagement in virtual learning environments. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 6(2), 100–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalgarno, B., Bishop, A. G., Adlong, W., & Bedgood, D. R. (2009). Effectiveness of a virtual laboratory as a preparatory resource for distance education chemistry students. Computers & Education, 53(3), 853–865.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutschmann, M., & Panichi, L. (2013). Towards models for designing language learning in virtual worlds. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 4(2), 65–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickey, M. D. (2005). Three-dimensional virtual worlds and distance learning: two case studies of active worlds as a medium for distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), 439–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickey, M. (2010). The pragmatics of virtual worlds for K-12 educators: Investigating the affordances and constraints of active worlds and second life with K-12 in-service teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(1), 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drossis, G., Grammenos, D., Bouhli, M., Adami, I., & Stephanidis, C. (2013). Comparative evaluation among diverse interaction techniques in three dimensional environments. In N. Streitz & C. Stephanidis (Eds.), Distributed, ambient, and pervasive interactions first international conference, DAPI 2013 held as part of hci international 2013 (pp. 3–12). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dziuban, C., Hartman, J., & Moskal, P. (2004). Blended learning. EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research Bulletin, 4(7), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler, M., & Haruvy, E. (2009). The lab versus the virtual lab and virtual field-An experimental investigation of trust games with communication. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 72(2), 716–724.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Finn, D. (1993). School engagement and student at risk. Washington: National Center for Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fransen, J., Kirschner, P., & Erkens, G. (2011). Mediating team effectiveness in the context of collaborative learning: the importance of team and task awareness. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1103–1113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fredicks, A., Blumenfeld, C., & Paris, H. (2004). School engagement: potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gao, S.S., & Zhang, J.J. (2006) Stakeholder engagement, social auditing and corporate sustainability. Business Process Management Journal, 12(6), 722–740.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Girvan, C., Tagney, B., & Savage, T. (2013). SLurtles: supporting constructionist learning in second life. Computers & Education, 61(1), 115–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Good, J., Howland, K., & Thackray, L. (2008). Problem-based learning spanning real and virtual worlds: a case study in second life. ALT-J Research in Learning Technology, 16(3), 163–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, S., & Lloyd, I. (2010). Accepting choices: To ICT or not to ICT: engagement. In D. Gronn & G. Romeo (Eds.), ACEC2010: digital diversity. Conference Proceedings of the australian computers in education conference 2010. Carlton: Australian Council for Computers in Education (ACEC).

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrington, J., Oliver, R., & Reeves, C. (2003). Patterns of engagement in authentic online learning environments. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 19(1), 59–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2010). Use of three-dimensional (3-D) immersive virtual worlds in K-12 and higher education settings: a review of the research. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 33–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hickey, D., Ingram-Goble, A., & Jameson, E. (2009). Designing assessments and assessing designs in virtual educational environments. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(2), 187–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hornik, S., & Thornburg, S. (2010). Really engaging accounting: second life as a learning platform. Issues in Accounting Education, 25(3), 361–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, S., & Kuht, G. (2002). Being (dis)engaged in educationally purposeful activities: the influences of student and institutional characteristics. Research in Higher Education, 43(5), 555–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inman, C., Wright, V., & Hartman, J. (2010). Use of Second Life in K-12 and Higher education: a review of research. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9(1), 44–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, J., Erkens, G., & Kirscher, P. (2011). Group awareness tools: it’s what you do with it that matters. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1046–1058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarmon, L., Traphagan, T., Mayrath, M., & Trivedi, A. (2009). Virtual world teaching, experiential learning, and assessment: An interdisciplinary communication course in Second Life. Computers & Education, 53, 169–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kali, Y., Levi-Peled, R., & Yudy Dori, Y. (2009). The role of design principles in designing courses that promotes collaborative learning in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(5), 1067–1078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamel Boulos, M., & Maramba, I. (2009). Pitfalls in 3-D virtual worlds health project evaluations: the trap of drug-trial-style media comparative studies. Journal for Virtual Worlds Research, 2(2). doi:10.4101/jvwr.v2i2.669

  • Keller, M. (1997). Motivational design and multimedia: beyond the novelty effect. Strategic Human Resource Development Review, 1(1), 188–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J., & Suzuki, K. (2004). Learner motivation and E-learning design: a multinationally validated process. Journal of Educational Media, 29(3), 229–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, J., Livingstone, D. (2006). Putting a second life “metaverse” skin on learning management systems. In Livingstone, D. (Ed.), Proceedings of the second life education workshop at the second life community convention (pp. 13–18). San Francisco

  • Ketelhut, D. J., Nelson, B. C., Clarke, J., & Dede, C. (2010). A multi-user virtual environment for building and assessing higher order inquiry skills in science. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 56–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J. S., & Gracanin, D. (2012). An approach to comparative studies in CAVE using a virtual black wall. Proceedings of the IEEE Virtual Reality 2012 (pp. 125–126). Washington: IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleinman, J., & Entin, E. B. (2002). Comparison of in-class and distance-learning students’ performance and attitudes in an introductory computer science course. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 17(6), 206–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kong, Q., Wong, N., & Lam, C. (2003). Student engagement in mathematics: development of instrument and validation of construct. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 15(1), 4–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konstantinidis, A., Tsiatsos, T., Terzidou, T., & Pomportsis, A. (2010). Fostering collaborative learning in second life: metaphors and affordances. Computers & Education, 55(2), 603–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotsilieris, T., & Dimopoulou, N. (2013). The evolution of e-Learning in the context of 3D virtual worlds. The electronic journal of e-learning, 11(2), 147–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lapin, K. (2010). A comparison of three virtual world platforms for the purposes of learning support in VirtualLife. In P. Daras & O. S. Ibarra (Eds.), UCMedia 2009, LNICST 40 (pp. 273–278). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loh, C. S. (2013). Improving the impact and return of investment of game-based learning. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 4(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, J., Chiu, M., & Law, N. (2011). Collaborative argumentation and justifications: A statistical discourse analysis of online discussions. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 961–969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo, L., & Kemp, J. (2008). Second Life: exploring the immersive instructional venues for library and information science education. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 49(3), 147–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallan, K., Foth, M., Greenaway, R., & Young, G. (2010). Serious playground: using second life to engage high school students in urban planning. Learning, Media and Technology, 35(2), 203–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansour, S., Bennett, L., & Rude-Parkins, C. (2009). How the use of second life affects e-learning perceptions of social interaction in online courses. Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 7(2), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchand, G., & Gutierrez, A. (2012). The role of emotion in the learning process: comparisons between online and face-to-face learning settings. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(2), 150–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marttunen, M., & Laurinen, L. (2009). Secondary schools students’ collaboration during dyadic debates face-to-face and through chat. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4), 961–969.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minocha, S., & Reeves, A. (2010). Design of learning spaces in 3D virtual worlds: an empirical investigation of second life. Learning, Media and Technology, 35(2), 111–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mount, N., Chambers, D., Weaver, D., & Priestnall, B. (2009). Learner immersion engagement in the 3D virtual worlds: principles emerging from the DELVE project. ITALICS, 8(3), 40–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Northrup, P. (2001). A framework for designing interactivity into web-based instruction. Educational Technology, 41(2), 31–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nteliopoulou, S., & Tsinakos, A. (2011). The Path from First to Second Life». In T. Bastiaens & M. Ebner (Eds.), Proceedings of world conference on educational multimedia, hypermedia and telecommunications (pp. 3807–3814). Chesapeake: AACE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papachristos, N., Vrellis, I., Natsis, A., & Mikropoulos, A. (2013). The role of environment design in an educational multi-user virtual environment. British Journal of Educational Technology. doi:10.1111/bjet.12056.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellas, N. (2012). A conceptual “cybernetic” methodology for organizing and managing the e-learning process through [D-] CIVEs: the case of “second life”. In P. Renna (Ed.), Production and manufacturing system management: coordination approaches and multi-site planning (pp. 278–314). Hershey: Engineering Science Reference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellas, N., & Kazanidis, I. (2013a). The impact of computer self-efficacy, situational interest and academic self-concept in virtual communities of inquiry during the distance learning procedure through Second Life. doi:10.1007/s11280-013-0266-9.

  • Pellas, N., & Kazanidis, I. (2013b). E-learning quality through second life: exploiting, investigating and evaluating the efficiency parameters of collaborative activities in Higher Education. In V. Bryan & V. Wang (Eds.), Technology use and research approaches for community education and professional development (pp. 250–273). Hershey: IGI Global.

  • Pellas, N., Peroutseas, E., & Kazanidis, I. (2013). Virtual communities of inquiry (VCoI) for learning basic algorithmic structures with open simulator & Scratch4(OS): a case study from the secondary education in Greece. In C. K. Georgiadis, P. Kefalas, & D. Stamatis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Balkan conference in informatics (pp. 187–194). Thessaloniki: ACM.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., & Ives, B. (2001). Web-based virtual learning environments: a research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT training. MIS Quarterly, 25(4), 401–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, B., & Read, L. (2009). Total engagement: using games and virtual worlds to change the way people work and business compete. USA: Harvard Business School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinhard, C. D. (2012). Virtual Worlds and Reception Studies: Comparing Engagings. In N. Zagalo, L. Morgado, & A. Boa-Ventura (Eds.), Virtual worlds and metaverse platforms: new communication and identity paradigms (pp. 117–136). Hershey: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rivera, J., McAlister, K., & Rice, M. (2002). A comparison of student outcomes & satisfaction between traditional & web based course offerings. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 5(3), 151–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seddon, K., Skinner, N., & Postlethwaite, K. (2008). Creating a model to examine motivation for sustained engagement in online communities. Education and Information Technologies, 13(2), 17–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shear, L., & Penuel, W. (2002). Putting the ‘learning’ in ‘adventure learning’: design principles for technology-supported classroom inquiry. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 17(4), 315–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siemens, G. (2004). Learning management systems: the wrong place to start learning. http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/lms.htm. Accesed 13 October 2013

  • Singh, Κ. (2007). Quantitative social research methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, N., & Lee, M. J. (2008). Exploring perceptions toward education in 3-D virtual environments: an introduction to “second life”. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 8(4), 315–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sitzmann, T., Kraiger, K., Stewart, D., & Wisher, R. (2006). The comparative effectiveness of web-based and classroom instruction: a meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 59(3), 623–664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sturgeon, T., Allison, C., & Miller, A. (2009). Exploring 802.11: real learning in a virtual world. Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference (pp. 1–6). San Antonio: IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tayebinik, M., & Putch, N. (2012). Blended and e-learning. IMACST, 3(1), 103–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terzidou, T., Tsiatsos, T., Dae, A., Samaras, O., & Chasanidou, A. (2012). Utilizing virtual worlds for game based learning: Grafica, a 3D educational game in second life. Proceedings of IEEE 12th International Conference of Advanced Learning Technologies (pp. 624–628). Rome: IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trindade, J., Fiolhais, C., & Almeida, L. (2002). Science learning in virtual environments: a descriptive study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(4), 471–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tselios, N., Daskalakis, S., & Papadopoulou, M. (2011). Assessing the acceptance of a blended learning university course. Educational Technology & Society, 14(2), 224–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turkay, S., & Tirthali, D. (2010). Youth leadership development in virtual worlds: a case study. Procedia Social and Behavioral Science, 2(1), 3175–3179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vasileiou, V., & Paraskeva, F. (2010). Teaching role-playing instruction in second life: an exploratory study. Journal of Information, Information Technology, and Organizations, 5, 25–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughan, N. (2010). A blended community of inquiry approach: linking student engagement and course redesign. Internet and Higher Education, 13(2), 60–65.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Vosinakis, S., & Koutsabasis, P. (2012). Problem-based learning for design & engineering activities in virtual worlds. PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 21(3), 338–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrellis, I., Papachristos, N. M., Bellou, J., Avouris, N., & Mikropoulos, T. A. (2010). Designing a collaborative learning activity in Second Life: An exploratory study in physics. In M. Jemni, Kinshuk, D. Sampson, & J. M. Spector (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies (pp. 210–214). Sousse: IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky. (1978). Minds in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, F., & Burton, J. (2012). Second life in education: a review of publications from its launch to 2011. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3), 357–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, F., Lockee, B., & Burton, J. (2011). Computer game-based learning: chinese older adults’ perceptions and experiences. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 40(1), 45–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winn, W. (1997). The impact of three-dimensional immersive virtual environments on modern pedagogy. HITL Technical Report R-97-15. Seattle: University of Washington, Human Interface Technology Laboratory.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, J., Du, J., & Fan, X. (2013). Individual and group-level factors for students’ emotion management in online collaborative groupwork. Internet & Higher Education, 19(1), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yam, S., & Rossini, P. (2011). Online learning and blended learning: which is more effective? Proceedings of the 17th Pacific Rim Real Estate Society Conference. Australia: Gold Coast.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, D., Zhou, L., Briggs, R., & Nunamaker, F. (2006). Instructional video in e-learning: assessing the impact of interactive video on learning effectiveness. Information and Management, 43(1), 15–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Product and Systems Design Engineering, University of the Aegean, Konstantinoupoleos 2, Hermoupolis, Syros, Cyclades, PC:GR-84100, Greece

    Nikolaos Pellas

  2. Department of Industrial Informatics, Kavala Institute of Technology, Ag. Loukas, Kavala, PC:GR-65404, Greece

    Ioannis Kazanidis

Authors
  1. Nikolaos Pellas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ioannis Kazanidis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nikolaos Pellas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pellas, N., Kazanidis, I. On the value of Second Life for students’ engagement in blended and online courses: A comparative study from the Higher Education in Greece. Educ Inf Technol 20, 445–466 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-013-9294-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-013-9294-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation