Second Life: Pre-Service Teachers’ Precautionary Tale
PROCEEDINGS
Jase Teoh, Empire State College, United States
Global TIME, in Online, Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)
Abstract
This paper is a report on the findings of a study conducted on a group of eleven secondary pre-service teachers in a Language & Literacy course. The phenomenology method was used to examine pre-service teachers’ lived experiences in Second Life, a simulated virtual world; for evidence of its usefulness for teaching and learning within secondary classrooms. Uncontrolled environment seemed to be the major concern expressed by pre-service teachers in Second Life. Unlike the contained face-to-face or classroom context, participants found the unrestrictive freedom in Second Life daunting. Additional setbacks include a steep learning curve, bandwidth, and computer performance issues. Findings indicate that pre-service teachers did not find simulations useful for teaching and learning with high school students. Educators who are considering using Second Life or other simulations for teaching and learning should take a precautionary approach when adopting the use of virtual environments for teaching and learning.
Citation
Teoh, J. (2011). Second Life: Pre-Service Teachers’ Precautionary Tale. In Proceedings of Global TIME -Online Conference on Technology, Innovation, Media & Education (pp. 283-289). Online,: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 6, 2024 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/37091/.
© 2011 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)
Keywords
References
View References & Citations Map- Foreman, J. (2003). Next-Generation: Educational technology versus the lecture. Educause, 8, 12-22.
- Garris, R., Ahlers, R., & Driskell, J.E. (2002). Games, motivation, and learning: A research and practice model. Simulation& Gaming, 33(4), 441-467.
- Hargrave, C.P., & Hsu, Y. (2000). Survey of instructional technology courses for pre-service teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 8(4), 303-314.
- Herz, J.C. (2002). Gaming the system: What higher education can learn from multiplayer online worlds. Educause, 169-191.
- Idhe, D. (1979). Technics and Praxis. Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel.
- Jenson, J., & Castell, S.D. (2002). Serious play: Challenges of educational game design. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association (AERA) Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA. Retrieved December 14, 2005 from http://www.yorku.ca//jjenson/papers/aera2002.htm.
- Oblinger, D. (2004). The next generation of educational engagement. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 8, 1-18.
- Prensky, M. (2006). Don't bother me mom: I'm learning! St. Paul, MN: Paragon House.
- Shaffer, D.W., & Clinton, K.A. (2006). Toolforthoughts: Reexamining thinking in the digital age. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 13(4), 283-300.
- Schaffer, D.W., Squire, K.R., Halverson, R., & Gee, J.P. (2004). Videogames and the future of learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(2), 104-111.
- Squire, K., & Jenkins, H. (2003). Harnessing the power of games in education. Insight, 3(1), 5-33.
- Strangman, N., Hall, T., & Meyer, A. (2003). Virtual reality/simulations with UDL. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. Retrieved April 19, 2006, from http://www.cast.org/publications/ncac/ncac_vrudl.html.
- Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience. London: The State University of New York Press.-289 DASHDASH
These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.
Suggest Corrections to ReferencesRecording
Slides
- AACE.pptx (Access with Subscription)
