Learning and Teaching in Second Life: Educator and Student Perspectives
Formal off-campus flexible learning has been a feature of higher education since the 19th century. The introduction of various educational technologies over the years has provided additional opportunities for learners to undertake courses offered anytime and in any location, providing greater flexibility for the development of cost-effective learner-centred curricula. With the emergence of 3D virtual worlds such as Second Life in 2003, educators are quick to realise the potential of such immersive environments to extend the flexible learner-centred approaches that have been a feature of off-campus learning over the decades. However, the benefits of technology-enhanced learning can be contradictory and incompatible and can both widen and reduce access to education. Despite the proliferation of articles attesting to the benefits of teaching in virtual worlds such as Second Life, until relatively recently, there has been a lack of empirical evidence reporting on the learning outcomes for students participating in these virtual learning sessions. Good pedagogical practices must be taken into consideration when educating in a virtual world. The case studies presented in this chapter aim to go some way in addressing this perceived gap in the literature. In this chapter, six authors from five Australian Universities provide their accounts of teaching in a virtual world and report on the learning outcomes as well as their students' perceptions of their learning experiences.
Multiple Educational Disadvantage: The research journey continues
The struggle to make equity the key focal point for institutions of higher education and their key stakeholders - even in a climate of the federal government's social inclusion policy - remains a challenge due to many competing pressures. In 2009, a presentation was given at ACU's Learning, Teaching and Social Justice Symposium based on the preliminary findings of research on multiple educational disadvantage, equity issues in higher education, the overlay of equity subgroups, and the finding of a gradient of educational disadvantage in equity overlap. These findings have subsequently been published in a variety of media. Today's presentation continues the story. It will report on the further research journey of work being conducted in the area of multiple educational disadvantage for the purposes of supporting diversity, guiding pedagogy, and promoting inclusive practices within the higher education sector.
Interactive white(board) elephants: A case of change mismanagement
The introduction of interactive whiteboards (IWBs) in secondary schools around Australia is currently being heavily promoted for the purposes of transforming the delivery of education through innovation and technology (Gillard, 2010). In such a climate, the evaluation of case studies exploring the effectiveness of the implementation of new technologies for the purposes of teaching and learning can help guide others contemplating or embarking on this process. While much of the literature reports positive outcomes in the adoption of IWBs in the secondary classroom, this paper provides a balance by exploring a case of change mismanagement which has led to the existence of electronic white elephants. The paper also explores the potential of modified force field analysis (FFA) as a decision-making and evaluation instrument for the process of technological change within educational contexts.
Facing off: Facebook and Higher Education
A social and cultural expectation that Information Communication Technologies (ICT) should be ubiquitous within peoples' daily lives is apparent. Connecting generational groups with a specific set of technological attributes also assumes the ways that particular groups of students should be able/do "naturally" use emergent mobile and social technologies. Moreover, the use of social networking technologies is evident in a number of ways within higher education (HE) pedagogies. As part of the suite of possibilities in Web 2.0, Facebook is used in a number of ways to support communications within and between institutions and their students as well as a mechanism for teaching and learning within specific units of study. The chapter commences with a broad discussion about social sharing software of Web 2.0, specifically Facebook, as a potential teaching and learning tool in HE contexts. We traverse recent exemplars and discourses surrounding the use of social technologies for the purposes of HE. It is clear from the literature that while there is much excitement at the possibilities that such technologies offer, there are increasing anxieties across institutional and individual practitioners, in regard to possible consequences of their use.
Using learning styles data to inform e-learning design: A study comparing undergraduates, postgraduates and e-educators
What are the differences in learning styles between students and educators who teach and/or design their e-learning environments? Are there variations in the learning styles of students at different levels of study? How may we use this learning styles data to inform the design in e-learning environments? This paper details mixed-methods research with three cohorts teaching and learning in e-learning environments in higher education: novice undergraduate e-learners, graduate e-learners, and educators teaching in, or designing for, e-learning environments (Willems, 2010). Quantitative findings from the Index of Learning Styles (ILS) (Felder & Silverman, 1988; Felder & Soloman, 1991, 1994) reflect an alignment of the results between both the graduate e-learner and e-educator cohorts across all four domains of the ILS, suggesting homogeneity of results between these two cohorts. By contrast, there was a statistically significant difference between the results of the graduate and educator cohorts with those of the undergraduate e-learners on two domains: sensing-intuitive (p=0.015) and the global-sequential (p=0.007), suggesting divergent learning style preferences. Qualitative data was also gathered to gain insights on participants' responses to their learning style results.
Students Perceptions: Flexing Pedagogy and Practice
The interlinked terms flexible learning and flexible delivery, in both skills-based and knowledge-based post-secondary contexts, have been conceptualized in a vast number of ways and according to the perspective of the various stakeholders involved. These stakeholders have been identified as the politicians, managers, administrators, marketers, program and product developers, teachers, support staff, and students involved in any flexible-learning program (Willems 2005). My focus is on the perceptions held by the end-users of flexible learning and delivery: the students themselves. This client base is far from homogeneous: like other stakeholder groups, students approach flexible learning with diverse perceptions and desires. In terms of learning, what constitutes "flexible" for one student can be "rigid" for another. To inform pedagogy and practice, this chapter explores some of the many interpretations of flexible learning from a student-centred perspective, reinforcing these viewpoints with case study examples (Willems 2004).