Teaching and learning in Second Life: Using the Community of Inquiry (CoI) model to support online instruction with graduate students in instructional technology

Abstract

As virtual worlds become more widely utilized in education to deliver instruction, the need to measure learning in this environment will continue to grow. Building upon McKerlich and Anderson's (2008) exploratory study, the researchers of this study utilized the Community of Inquiry's (CoI) Multi-User Virtual Environment Education Evaluation Tool (MUVEEET), and the CoI Survey to measure observational and perceptual data in the multi-user virtual environment (MUVE), Second Life (SL), among instructional technology graduate students. Specifically examined in this study was the existence of the three CoI constructs — cognitive presence, social presence, and teaching presence. Results indicated that the CoI model served as a promising framework to measure all three constructs within MUVEs. Specifically, both the CoI survey and MUVEEET results indicated that the participants and coders experienced a developed community of inquiry during two SL classes.

Introduction

As higher education administrators experience the pressure of tightening budgets and tuition competition across the nation (National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, 2008), one way many higher education institutions are responding is through the implementation of distant courses within academic programs (Fischman & Young, 2008). Even those universities that have been reluctant to jump into distance education too quickly for fear that quality learning would be lessened in the process are cautiously testing the waters with online courses. This process has resulted in many faculty members attempting to develop innovative and effective ways to craft quality online college courses and programs. Learning Management Systems (LMS) such as BlackBoard and WebCT have dominated much of the higher education sector, and are also making their way to K-12 schools who wish to offer classes online (Project Tomorrow, 2008). Both BlackBoard and WebCT offer synchronous and asynchronous tools which allow students to communicate, to collaborate, and ultimately to create communities of inquiry (University of Massachusetts, 2009). Another sort of learning platform that has emerged in recent years, and that offers a three-dimensional, interactive learning experience is multi-user virtual environments, or MUVEs (Dede, 2003). Multi-user virtual environments are 3-D environments that support exploration, simulation, role-play, interaction and experimentation via avatars, or 3-D self-representations (Clarke, Dede, Ketelhut, & Nelson, 2006). Second Life (SL) (Linden Research, 2006) is one such MUVE that touts a user population of over eight million since its beginning in 2003. This virtual environment is created by its residents who have the ability to build objects within their world for such purposes including, but not limited to, entertainment, retail, academia, advertising, and marketing. An added bonus is that a thriving economy also exists within SL due to “Linden Dollar” currency that enables residents to purchase in-world items such as virtual islands, clothing, and furniture.

In an educational context, SL provides a space for constructivist learning, socialization, exploration, discovery, and creativity. The communicative, social nature of virtual learning allows students to demonstrate the skills and strategies they have acquired through utilization of social technology tools. This applied, situated learning environment has great potential — especially in online distance learning. Multi-user virtual environments are starkly different than computer management systems such as WebCT and BlackBoard. Multi-user virtual environments allow synchronous (real time) learning with visual, interactive components which are conducive to constructivist learning (Hornik, 2008). Physical presence (as avatars) in MUVEs also gives students and teachers a feeling of physically (albeit virtually) being there, otherwise known as telepresence (Andler, Casati, Guerry, & Pasquinelli, 2008).

Juxtaposing the above research is the interest from online educators on how to effectively and efficiently measure learning within online learning platforms. Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2000) developed a formal Community of Inquiry (CoI) model designed to aid in identification of specific components that serve as a catalyst for a successful higher educational experience (Garrison et al., 2006, p. 87). The Community of Inquiry framework presupposes that through interaction of three elements: social presence, cognitive presence, and teaching presence, student learning occurs.

Utilization of the CoI model in online learning is well-documented (Cleveland-Innes et al., 2007, Ling, 2007, Akyol & Garrison, 2008, Garrison, 2008, Shea & Bidjerano, 2009), thus it might as a reliable model from which to measure the existence of social presence, cognitive presence and teaching presence in a MUVE. Garrison et al. (2000) contended that the overlapping nature of social, cognitive and teaching presence creates a community of inquiry, rich in collaborative and cooperative learning. Cognitive Presence is the first construct of the CoI model and can be identified through an examination of online discourse (i.e., connection of ideas, sharing of related experiences, curiosity, and application of new ideas). Social Presence is the second construct and is also identifiable through an examination of online discourse among learners (i.e., emotions, expressions, collaborations, and group cohesion). Teaching Presence, the third construct, is essential to the CoI model and may have additional or differing — indicators (Garrison et al., 2004, p. 4) in a MUVE. The role of the instructor in a MUVE is more of a facilitator, coach, or mentor who guides student learning (Collins & Berge, 2008, p. 4). The Berge's (1995) four distinct functions of instructors are present within MUVEs: (a) pedagogical; (b) social; (c) managerial; and (d) technical. However, Collins and Berge (2008) observed the following changes for instructors when teaching in a MUVE.

According to Collins and Berge (2008), a dramatic shift in pedagogy occurs when teaching in a MUVE and instructors would be well-informed to follow these guidelines:

• The responsibility of the instructor is to create an environment that facilitates the expansion of knowledge to students via building and exploring within MUVEs. Students' acquisition of information from virtual worlds should offer various kinds of stimuli and exposure to diverse environments within SL;

• Activities within virtual worlds should be adapted to the ability of the student and the objective of the curriculum within the class;

• Lessons and objectives that can be implemented within a virtual world in lieu of a classroom instruction is encouraged;

• Acquiring knowledge and skills through the use of MUVEs is an effective and powerful instrument for students who are digital natives.

The following social responsibilities are critical to pedagogy within MUVEs:

• Professionalism within the classroom as well as virtual worlds is vital to the success of the student and the activities that are implemented. Language used, physical appearance of one's avatar, and how the class is governed are crucial to the success of all participants;

• Instructors must take responsibility for creating a positive and nurturing environment in which all students feel acculturated to the environment;

• A cooperative learning environment is encouraged for the social and cognitive development of all participants within the virtual worlds;

• Instructors should anticipate griefing or improper or offensive written language from students while participating within virtual worlds. Instructors are encouraged to remind students privately that classroom etiquette is expected when participating in a virtual classroom.

Designing and managing a virtual learning space is quite different from managing a traditional classroom and is even vastly different from managing an online LMS classroom. Organization of the class environment within virtual worlds is imperative to the success of all students. Unlike Blackboard or an in-person classroom, the classroom environment of virtual worlds can be created to simulate any building, or outdoor environment (e.g. a mall, a coffee house, and a restaurant).The following guidelines regarding managing a virtual learning environment will significantly reduce spatial issues that may arise:

• Generally speaking, most MUVEs are not designed to store or upload documents such as articles submitted by students. The use of Internet or email communication is encouraged as a supplement to transfer students' individual or cooperative work;

• Instructors should encourage participation of all students when working in virtual environments, such as SL;

• The instructor's role is to act as facilitator and ensure that all students are given ample opportunity to participate and voice their opinion;

• Within virtual worlds, it is vital that the instructor create environments where all students are given opportunities to be responsible for leading the class discussion and facilitating others in a virtual world;

• The design and implementation of the classes within virtual worlds can be a time-consuming undertaking for the instructor. It is important for the instructor to anticipate this situation and prepare accordingly.

Instructors should be prepared to handle technical difficulties when dealing with virtual worlds. Malfunctions should be anticipated and should be prepared with an alternate plan or agenda (i.e., Blackboard or a traditional classroom). To acknowledge and prepare for technical issues, instructors should be mindful of the following technical responsibilities:

• Instructors should be familiar with technical support within their university and their MUVEs in case technical difficulties occur;

• Instructors are advised to utilize graphic designers or scripters to assist in the building and design of the virtual classrooms;

• Attention to the speed, connection and how information is being processed while linked to the Internet is crucial to the success of teachers and students;

• Evaluations of students' work within virtual worlds should include grading techniques used within traditional classrooms, as well as feedback using virtual world capabilities.

Table 1 illustrates Berge's (1995) Instructors' Roles Model.

Research on the affordances of SL for hybrid and fully online courses has provided preliminary support for its effectiveness (Jarmon et al., 2008, Jarmon & Sanchez, 2008, Mayrath et al., 2007, Nicosia, 2008). With over 200 higher educational institutions with a presence in SL, there has been experimentation with delivering courses online via this medium. An active SL Educators listserv (SLED) serves as a catalyst for best practices in education and offers several resources for instructors interested in utilizing it in the classroom. Another listserv, Second Life Research listserv (SLRL) encourages discussions on current applications in SL, methodologies, measurement and assessment, as well as upcoming virtual conference venues. Use of the CoI model in designing and implementing MUVE learning, especially at the higher education level, will enhance its effectiveness and expand distance learning options for students and instructors alike.

The theoretical framework pertinent to this study is the CoI model (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000). This framework was used to examine the existence of the three specific components that make up a community of inquiry: (a) social presence; (b) cognitive presence; and (c) teaching presence. Prior research utilizing the CoI model has mostly involved asynchronous learning networks (ALNs) (Garrison, 2003, Heckman & Annabi, 2002, Ice et al., 2007, Rourke et al., 1999, Wever et al., 2006). In a MUVE, the instructor's avatar, or digital representation, is representationally present to offer instruction in real time. Grounded in Dewey's (1902) notions of practical inquiry, the CoI framework has served as a solid foundation in ALNs, blended learning and now MUVEs. Both ALN and MUVE instructors would be well-informed to incorporate social, cognitive and teaching presence into their synchronous and asynchronous online instruction. Table 1 below illustrates the three presences, categories of these presences, and examples of respective indicators. It is important to note that the indicators may differ depending on the educational platform used.

The purposes of this study were (a) to examine and observe the extent to which graduate level instructional technology students experienced social, cognitive and teaching presence in class activities held in SL, and (b) to examine the extent to which students perceived themselves to experience social, cognitive, and teaching presence within SL. Two research questions were addressed:

• RQ1: To what extent do graduate level students enrolled in an instructional technology course experience social, cognitive, and teaching presence in activities taking place in the Multi-User Virtual Environment, Second Life?

• RQ2: To what extent do graduate level students enrolled in an instructional technology course perceive themselves to experience social, cognitive, and teaching presence with the Multi-User Virtual Environment, Second Life?