Applying media synchronicity theory to distance learning in virtual worlds

Int. J. Innovation and Learning, Vol. X, No. Y, xxxx

Applying media synchronicity theory to distance learning in virtual worlds: a design science approach Andrea North-Samardzic Department of Management, Faculty of Business and Economics, Monash University, Sir John Monash Drive, Level 7, Building N, Caulfield, VIC, 3145, Melbourne, Australia E-mail: [email protected]

Alessio Maria Braccini* Dipartimento di Economia e Impresa (DEIM), La Tuscia University, Via del Paradiso, 47, Viterbo, 01100, Italy E-mail: [email protected] *Corresponding author

Paolo Spagnoletti and Stefano Za Centro di Ricerca sui Sistemi Informativi (CerSI), LUISS Guido Carli Univeristy, Viale Pola, 12, Roma, 00198, Italy E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: The use of 3D virtual world platforms in learning is growing in popularity. While there are many learning affordances for such environments, including the possibility of doing things impossible in reality, there are some noted drawbacks. In particular the way they can be used for distance learning deserves consideration. In this paper, we focus on the issue of synchronicity and on how it limits the flexibility that distance learning affords. We use e-learning theory and media synchronicity theory to propose an explanatory design theory for distance learning using 3D virtual world to address the problem of synchronicity. Keywords: 3D virtual worlds; learning; media synchronicity theory; MST; design science research; innovation. Reference to this paper should be made as follows: North-Samardzic, A., Braccini, A.M., Spagnoletti, P. and Za, S. (xxxx) ‘Applying media synchronicity theory to distance learning in virtual worlds: a design science approach’, Int. J. Innovation and Learning, Vol. X, No. Y, pp.000–000.

Copyright © 200x Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

1

2

A. North-Samardzic et al. Biographical notes: Andrea North-Samardzic is a Lecturer in the Department of Management at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia. She received her PhD in Organisation and Management from the Australian School of Business, University of New South Wales. Her research traverses multiple disciplines, having published on various topics including gender equity, employment relations, environmental sustainability and non-profit organisations. Her current research focus is virtual learning environments and their use for blended learning in business education. Alessio Maria Braccini is an Assistant Professor of Business Organization and Information Systems at the La Tuscia University. He received his PhD from the LUISS Guido Carli University, where he also currently cooperates with the CeRSI Research Centre. His research interests concern the application and the impact of information technology on organisations, the study of organisational behaviour for digital native generations, and the assessment of organisational benefits of IT infrastructure investments. His research appeared in international journals such as Communications of AIS, VINE: The Journal of Knowledge Management Systems, Journal of Cases in IT, LNBIP, LNISO and in conference proceedings. Paolo Spagnoletti is an Assistant Professor at LUISS Guido Carli University where he coordinates the Research Centre on Information Systems (CeRSI). He received his PhD in Information Systems from LUISS and has been a Visiting Fellow at the London School of Economics and at Georgia State University. His research regards the interaction of IT and organisations, methods of IS design and development, and security of IS. He has authored several research papers in internationally refereed journals and books such as Communications of AIS, International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics, Journal of Information System Security, LNBIP, LNISO and in conference proceedings. Stefano Za is a Postdoctoral Fellow and Adjunct Professor at LUISS Guido Carli University, Department of Business and Management. He performs research activities at the Research Centre on Information Systems (CeRSI) of LUISS. He received his PhD in Information System from LUISS and a Master degree in Computer Science from La Sapienza University of Rome. His research interest is on organisational aspects related to the technology adoption in several contexts such as e-gov, education, and e-services. He has published research papers in internationally refereed journals such as IEEE Wireless Communications, and in conference proceedings such as EGOS, ICONS, ItAIS.

1

Introduction

The study of the application of 3D virtual worlds in e-learning and education has garnered increasing attention in recent years. As a matter of example, the query for papers published in sources indexed in Scopus with the keywords ‘3D virtual worlds’ AND ‘learning’ OR ‘education’, returns 485 papers published from 1995 to 2011, with a growing trend as shown in Figure 1. Scholarship points to the benefits of using of 3D virtual world platforms for learning and education (Dickey, 2005; Jarmon et al., 2009). The main benefits reported include the opportunity to provide learners with a distance learning experience which embeds a great sense of presence and belonging (Edirisingha et al., 2009; Omale et al., 2009; Salmon, 2009; Warburton, 2009; De Lucia et al., 2009).

Applying media synchronicity theory to distance learning in virtual worlds Figure 1

3

Trends of papers published on 3D virtual worlds and education (see online version for colours)

Amongst the many existing 3D virtual world platforms, Second Life (SL) is reported as the one used most for learning (Warburton, 2009), especially in the context of high education (Inman et al., 2010). 3D virtual world platforms are used with different purposes in education and in business settings, with learning in organisational contexts aimed at addressing organisational performance issues (Garcia-Morales et al., 2006). It has been argued (Inman et al., 2010; Savin-Baden et al., 2010) that 3D virtual worlds are used to: •

run distance learning strategies

•

perform games or simulations-based training or learning

•

foster teamwork or team building in distance contexts

•

run problem solving-based learning strategies

•

use 3D technologies for virtual objects constructions and simulations

•

create or stimulate the birth of virtual communities

•

promote and encourage communication and cooperation in teams or groups of people.

4

A. North-Samardzic et al.

Virtual worlds go beyond traditional three-dimensional technologies (Gomez-Campos et al., 2011), and their practical applications vary in scope and content. For example the Nanyang Technological University in Singapore uses a 3D virtual campus for foreign students to acclimate before going to Singapore. At the Faculty of Medicine of the Imperial College of London a 3D virtual world simulation is used to support the teaching of child psychiatry to medical students as a means to bypass the obvious ethical constraints (Livingston et al., 2011). There are also some companies (like VLC Global – http://www.vlcglobal.com) specialised in creating 3D virtual world content for specific customers’ training needs. However 3D virtual world technologies also have drawbacks for learning and education. These technologies are reported to have a steep learning curve, both for students and for teachers (Andreas et al., 2010; FitzGibbon et al., 2008; Jarmon et al., 2009; Luo and Kemp, 2008; Petrakou, 2010), and require a certain amount of time and experience to users to properly master them (Delwiche, 2006; Gaimster, 2008; Salmon, 2009; Warburton, 2009). They are also reported to be unfeasible when used to let users freely navigate through the 3D virtual world with their avatars in search of facts or information (Petrakou, 2010). Finally they are mainly suited to support synchronous communication but fail in allowing asynchronous interactions among participants, and are not easily interoperable with external technologies (for example wikis) that could allow such asynchronous interaction (Andreas et al., 2010; Keskitalo et al., 2011; Petrakou, 2010). It is on the latter issue, synchronicity, that we concentrate our attention to develop further insight into the design of 3D virtual worlds that effectively support distance learning. Synchronicity is an important issue when implementing learning strategies, with both synchronous (allowing deep learning, communication, and meaning formation) and asynchronous (stimulating critical thinking) interactions being necessary (Barab et al., 2001). The inability of virtual worlds to handle asynchronicity is thus, a significant problem for distance learning design involving such technologies. We seek to address the field problem of designing 3D virtual worlds platforms for distance learning by exploring the relationship between synchronicity/asynchronicity requirements and the characteristics of these technologies. The main theoretical contribution of this paper is a prescriptive theory for the design of 3D virtual worlds that effectively support distance learning. The proposed theory also explains the mutual relationship between the inner characteristics of 3D virtual worlds and the e-learning strategies supported. We draw our conceptual analysis on constructs and models grounded in on the literature on media synchronicity theory (MST) and e-learning strategies, and we provide two examples of applications that instantiate the generalised theory. The structure of this paper is as follows. In Section 2, we introduce the synchronicity problem in distance learning and analyse the extant literature on the application of virtual worlds in this context. In Section 3, we describe the research approach. In Section 4, we define the key elements of a design theory for the application of 3D virtual world platforms for distance learning. In Section 5, we present two examples to support the proposed theory. The paper concludes with a discussion in Section 6.

Applying media synchronicity theory to distance learning in virtual worlds

2

5

Literature review

2.1 Media synchronicity theory According to DeLuca and Valacich (2005), MST suggests that selection of communications media for tasks may be more effectively addressed if the tasks are approached by the communication processes involved; that is, the twin processes of conveyance (conveying information) and convergence (convergence on shared meaning). It has been argued that “synchronous settings are more suited to reach a shared understanding (convergence), whereas asynchronous settings are better for the exchange of information (conveyance)” [Kerres and De Witt, (2003), p.107]. For conveyance, media of low synchronicity (group e-mail, bulletin board, file sharing) will lead to more effective communication, whereas for convergence, media of high synchronicity (face-to-face, video conference, telephone, and chat) are preferred (DeLuca and Valacich, 2005). Media synchronicity is therefore defined as “the extent to which the capabilities of a communication medium enable individuals to achieve synchronicity” [Dennis et al., (2008), p.581]. Dennis and Valacich (1999) argue that MST addresses the difficulties with media richness and social presence theories, identifying several limitations to the latter frameworks: no one communication medium is always richest; a medium’s communication capability may vary by how it is used; and a medium’s communication capability may vary by the context in which it is used. To address these limitations, Dennis et al. (2008, pp.853–892) put forward several principles of MST: P1

Communication performance will depend on the fit between a medium’s synchronicity and the fundamental communication processes being performed. Successful convergence requires higher synchronicity whereas conveyance requires lower.

P2

Transmission velocity improves shared focus, which will have a positive impact on a medium’s capability to support synchronicity.

P3

Parallelism lowers shared focus, which will have a negative impact on a medium’s capability to support synchronicity.

P4a Media with more natural symbol sets (physical, visual, verbal) have a greater capability to support synchronicity as compared to media with less natural symbol sets (written or typed). P4b Using a medium with a symbol set better suited to the content of the message will improve information transmission and information processing, and therefore will have a greater capacity to support synchronicity. P5

Rehearsability lowers shared focus, which will have a negative impact on the medium’s capability to support synchronicity.

P6

Reprocessability lowers shared focus, which will have a negative impact on a medium’s capability to support synchronicity.

6 P7

A. North-Samardzic et al. Although individuals working together on tasks will benefit from both high and low synchronicity media, their need for media synchronicity will depend on their level of familiarity with each other, with the task, and with the media. That is, the higher the familiarity, the lower the need for synchronicity.

Kerres and DeWitt (2003) have examined the relevance of MST to learning. Learning tasks typically involve both conveyance as well as convergent processes. In conveyance processes, knowledge is created and distributed, whereas in convergent processes, communication establishes a common ground for sharing knowledge and therefore influences possible interpretations of information. A high degree of synchronicity in communication (high feedback and low parallelism) is necessary to create such a shared understanding, whereas asynchronous settings (low feedback and high parallelism) are best for making knowledge available [Kerres and DeWitt, (2003), p.108]. The dilemma is thus: virtual worlds are designed for high synchronicity and convergence, however the attractiveness of distance learning is its low synchronicity and flexibility. As mentioned in the introduction several scholars have argued that one of the limits of 3D virtual worlds is that there is no support for asynchronous interaction and information sharing in between the sessions, particularly without file sharing (Andreas et al., 2010; Keskitalo et al., 2011; Petrakou, 2010), nor a seamless interface with other web products or software (Andreas et al., 2010) to facilitate asynchronous interaction. These concerns beg for a revision of virtual worlds as learning environments from a design science research perspective using MST as a conceptual foundation. Admittedly, MST was not specifically developed for learning environments. However, it can be argued that the limitations of the theory noted by Kerres and DeWitt (2003) do not necessarily apply to virtual worlds. For example, while they contend that MST favours face-to-face interaction, the virtual world essentially combines the two. Kerres and DeWitt (2003) also state that it ‘neglects the influence of context and user characteristics in media selection’ with some learners preferring asynchronous communication. In addition, Dennis et al. (2008) have not included virtual worlds as one of the media covered by MST. While their conceptualisation includes facets of the virtual world, for example avatars can communicate face-to-face with audio chat, it has not addressed virtual worlds specifically as a unique form of media that combines other forms. In this sense, using MST as a conceptual foundation makes a significant contribution, as to the authors’ knowledge, it has yet to be used for exploring virtual worlds as tools of communication and learning platforms. While the aim at present is to design a solution for distance education, as there is empirical support for conveyance and convergence varying in importance according to task (Dennis et al., 2008) there is scope for the results to be relevant to virtual worlds as learning platforms in general. Indeed, as DeLuca and Valacich (2005) argued, the freedom and focus of asynchronous electronic communication media often override synchronous media.

2.2 Synchronicity in virtual worlds Dickey (2003) and Kamel-Boulos et al. (2007) point to the pedagogical potential and usefulness of virtual worlds in distance education. It has been argued that for distance education learners, realistic representations of their institutions may help to engender a sense of ownership and belonging to the institution (Minocha and Reeves, 2010). Even if


7

this may not be vital for face-to-face courses, it does appear to help those on distance programmes to feel more engaged with peers and what is being learned on the course (Savin-Baden et al., 2011). Minocha and Morse (2010) agree, with the users in one of their case studies preferring to use the learning spaces on university’s SL islands even though the instructors had suggested quieter places on other islands. Another important concern is distance learning and synchronicity. Savin-Baden et al. (2010) pointed to this problem with the concern of distance learners not being able to access the scenarios when necessary. In addition, it has been argued by several scholars that the main reasons people choose distance learning formats due to the flexibility afforded by control over space and timing of learning (Bouhnik and Marcus, 2006; Roblyer, 1999; Sonnenwald and Li, 2003; Wilson and Whitelock, 1998). When scenarios require a facilitator at all times, because of the complexity of the technologies being used in SL, it was argued that virtual worlds are obviously not ideal for distance learners. There is also merit to this argument when examining the nexus between synchronicity and learning outcomes. Synchronous communication allows for immediate feedback and it has been shown that learners feel more like participants rather than as isolated individuals (Hrastinski, 2006, 2007). However, asynchronous communication may provide learner control and flexibility in the course content during the learning process (Hrastinski, 2007). Livingstone and Kemp (2006) specifically highlight the utility of virtual worlds for synchronous communication and collaboration. However, Lu (2010) stated that one of the main challenges for teaching and learning in virtual worlds are found in designing synchronous or asynchronous activities by taking advantage of the features and diminishing the limitations of the technology. Barab et al. (2001) also imply that asynchronous interaction facilitates critical thinking since learners have the opportunity to reflect on and revise their work. Another important reason for facilitating asynchronous communication is to provide those learners with information who are unable to participate in the synchronous meetings. In a case study by Petrakou (2010) a course website and a blog were created in addition to the SL activities to support the learners’ information needs and encourage asynchronous interaction in between the meetings. However the learners did not actually use these facilities to have a discussion with the teacher and with fellow learners. Instead, they used e-mail for asynchronous communication. Yet it is also argued that an environment that enables informal synchronous communication with fellow classmates also supports the learners’ social needs (Hrastinski, 2006). Other concerns have also been raised. Petrakou (2010) argued that it might be impractical for the learner to log onto a virtual world and navigate an avatar in order to simply search for information. While the graphically rich and socially dynamic virtual world may be well-suited for synchronous interactivity and collaboration, it can be distracting when learners look for simple facts. A more relevant question then is if asynchronous interactivity should be embedded in the virtual world or if it should be managed with the help of a separate, two-dimensional e-learning environment. As such, complementary web applications are required to address a number of issues. Kemp et al. (2009) have made a case for SLOODLE, a hybrid of SL and MOODLE, the latter of which is an open source e-learning platform frequently used for web-based education (Braccini et al., 2010). It gives the ability to facilitate both synchronous, or asynchronous communication. However, it also raises the issue of interactivity for distance learners,

8


particularly when taking the collaborative learning approach discussed in a proceeding question. There has been some worthwhile attention given to SLOODLE as an effective platform to address issues of asynchronicity by integrating the MOODLE learning management system to SL (Livingstone and Kemp, 2006; Kemp et al., 2009; Yasar and Adiguzel, 2010). SLOODLE has bridged the divide between LMSs and 3D virtual worlds by introducing a number of integrating features such as a web-intercom to archive and store discussions; a registration booth to synchronise avatars and record learner progress; and a 3D assignment drop box that is linked to a MOODLE grade-book. However a conceptual framework to explain the efficacy of SLOODLE for learning outcomes is still needed. In addition, there also exists the opportunity to approach the design of a virtual world for learning from a theoretical grounding whilst taking a holistic approach rather than integrating two existing systems.

3

Research approach

The problem of providing prescriptions for the design of distance learning making use of 3D virtual world technologies belongs to the domain of design theory building. In accordance with the design science research tradition a design theory comprises a design product and a design process (Walls et al., 2004). The design product is composed of kernel theories, meta-requirements, meta-design, and a set of testable design hypothesis. The design process is composed of kernel theories, design method, and a set of testable design process hypothesis. These concepts have been further developed and widely adopted in the design science research stream for developing new models and methodologies that provide guidance to the researcher (Hevner et al., 2004; Peffers et al., 2008). Following a comprehensive framework which has been recently proposed by Spagnoletti and Tarantino (2012), kernel theories consist of the justificatory knowledge (Gregor and Jones, 2007) and are at the core of the entire design research effort. Such knowledge is grounded in natural, social, or design sciences, and both informs and is enriched through the design effort. Clarifying and identifying the role and the nature of kernel theories in a design effort is thence a necessary intermediate step for the definition of a design theory. Given the aim of this research paper, we recognise to kernel theories the role of informing the explanation of the functional relationship between synchronicity requirements in distance learning and 3D virtual world platforms components. To this end, we refer to the explanatory design theory concept as introduced by Baskerville and Pries-Heje (2010). The final goal of an explanatory design theory is to provide insights on why a generalised set of requirements is satisfied by a generalised set of object components. The essence of an explanatory design theory can be captured by representing the general requirements, which can be conditions or capabilities, the general components and the relationships between them in the form of testable hypotheses. This leads us to develop a prescriptive theory for the design of 3D virtual worlds in distance learning that also explains the functional relationship between synchronicity requirements and system components.


9

Previous work on the application of 3D virtual worlds as a support tool for the implementation of e-learning strategies are analysed. The e-learning theory serves as kernel theory for informing the requirement definition. The MST provides the explanation for the functional relationships that lead the designers to select the most appropriate system components. Once the requirements of a learning strategy are identified and classified, MST allows to construct a contingency link between requirements and system components. We then focus on the role of a particular type of 3D virtual world platform as a holistic learning tool that can encompass the limitation of traditional 3D virtual world platforms and modular approaches. Two practical examples of applications of the design theory will be provided as expository instantiation. According with Gregor and Jones (2007) an expository instantiation can serve as an expository device and for purpose of testing. This conceptual operation is called projection and it has a fundamental role for strengthening the internal validity of the theory and for deriving principles of implementation in specific contexts.

4

An explanatory design theory for distance learning

4.1 Requirements As reported by Cassidy (2004), e-learning theory identifies several models to classify learning styles. For this paper we consider social interaction perspective, following the classification adopted by Reichman and Grasha (1974) (independent/dependent, collaborative/competitive, and participant/avoidant). We have considered three established strategies covering the methods showed before, whereby technologies for distance learning can be applied to practical contexts. In each of these three different strategies, the roles of the actors and the different characteristics of the underpinning learning process change. These three learning strategies are: open and flexible learning (autonomous), distributed learning (dependent), and learning communities (collaborative) (Dabbagh, 2005). These strategies are in a hierarchical but inclusive relationship where distributed learning encompasses open and flexible learning, and learning communities encompass both distributed learning, and open and flexible learning. The open and flexible strategy describes an individual’s distance learning process. In this strategy the objective is to create a learning environment that is immediately available and that is tailored on the needs of specific learners, on the basis of a specific curriculum. This is a mainly learner-centred model focusing more on learning rather than teaching. The distributed learning strategy is based on the possibility of providing training at any time and at any place, thanks to the usage of an appropriate mix of different technologies (Knowledge, 2000). Within this context, learners can complete courses and study programmes at home, at their workplace, or in the place that better suits their needs. Learners have the possibility to communicate with lecturers and with other colleagues via different media like e-mail, forum, and videoconference. Finally, in a learning community-based approach there are groups of people supporting each other in their learning activities, by working together on collaborative projects or in solving problems (Frondigoun and Jones, 2011; Laxman, 2012). Learners

10


learn from each other through a collective socio-cultural experience where participation leads to learning (Ke and Hoadley, 2009). In learning communities, participants have the opportunity to develop experiences on interdisciplinary topics by promoting connections between learners and lecturers and the different subjects involved. Thus it can be said that in learning communities, the emphasis shifts from teaching to learning. Learning communities can be further described as communities of practice and knowledge building communities. Communities of practice are groups of people who are united by the sharing of experience and passion for a common task (Wenger and Snyder, 2000). Such communities are common in academic and business environments where knowledge is seen as an intellectual capital (Mouritsen et al., 2002). Knowledge building communities are learning communities where communication is perceived as a transformation (meaning a new learning experience) through knowledge sharing. Participants share a common goal to build and share knowledge through activities, projects, and discussions. Within this setting the lecturer and the tutor are active participants in the learning process.

4.2 Components According to Dickey (2005), 3D virtual worlds typically share three important features: the illusion of 3D space, avatars that serve as visual representations of users, and an interactive chat tool for users to communicate with one another. Hew and Cheung (2010) added a fourth feature, the ability for the user to act on the world. Such worlds have been used for learning across many disciplines, however Savin-Baden et al. (2010, p.125) identified three specific learning contexts that utilise virtual worlds: 1

social constructivist approaches to learning, which have predominantly utilised the ‘building’ functions of virtual worlds

2

situated learning perspectives, many of which utilise Kolb’s experiential learning cycle and develop role-playing scenarios

3

a simulated space such as a ‘virtual classroom’ providing a collaborative and social environment, particularly when used in conjunction with blended distance-learning courses.

Given that SL is the most commonly used 3D virtual world for learning in higher education, we have chosen to focus on this platform. There are many learning affordances of SL, particularly the possibility to do things that might be difficult or even impossible to do in real life (Savin-Baden et al., 2011; Salmon, 2009; Twining, 2009). For example, learners can explore different cultures by going to locations that are otherwise difficult to visit in reality (Savin-Baden et al., 2011); make mistakes without real-world consequences (Savin-Baden et al., 2010); explore, construct and manipulate virtual objects, structures, and metaphorical representations of ideas (Dalgarno and Lee, 2010); and the lowering of social inhibitions and increasing interactivity and engagement through the use of customised avatars (Meadows, 2008; Salt et al., 2008). As such, SL provides great opportunities for experiential inquiry, and authentic learning (Jarmon et al., 2009; Salmon, 2009; Warburton, 2009).


11

There are many noted limitations to the use of SL for learning, including a steep learning curve for instructors and learners who may lack the technical skills (Andreas et al., 2010; FitzGibbon et al., 2008; Jarmon et al., 2009; Luo and Kemp, 2008; Petrakou, 2010), the time needed to become acquainted with the environment (Delwiche, 2006; Gaimster, 2008; Salmon, 2009; Warburton, 2009), and a lack of learner acceptance of virtual worlds as an educational tool or environment, with learners questioning its value and legitimacy in education (FitzGibbon et al., 2008; Jarmon et al., 2009; Vogel et al., 2008). However these limitations can largely be remediated by the user, i.e., problems are to do with ‘how’ the platform is used rather than the platform itself (see for example, Andreas et al., 2010). Indeed, Minocha and Reeves (2010) have put forth a number of recommendations about how this can be achieved. The one issue we focus on in this paper is one that cannot be readily addressed without integrating another platform: the need to support asynchronous interaction and information sharing in between sessions (Andreas et al., 2010; Keskitalo et al., 2011; Petrakou, 2010). This presents significant concerns for distance learning in particular. Inman et al. (2010) found several patterns in the use of SL in higher education. In only two of the studies (Chow et al., 2007; De Lucia et al., 2009) were learners engaged in activities in SL that can be characterised as the traditional lecture-based, teacher-centred form of education. In all of the other studies, with the exception of FitzGibbon et al. (2008) where learners responded to a survey, learners were engaged in learner-centred forms of education such as engaging in role-play, exploring the surroundings of SL, and using SL to collaborate or communicate on group projects. Inman et al. (2010) grouped these activities as follows: facilitating role-play activities; distance education; simulations and games; group work and group projects; learner-centred teaching and learning strategies based on constructivist principles such as problem-based learning; to build/create virtual communities; to foster and encourage learner communication, collaboration, and social interaction. It can therefore be argued that while virtual worlds are useful for learning communities, virtual worlds such as SL fail to account for the important antecedents of learning communities, that is flexible learning and distributed learning discussed in the previous section. These earlier stages in the e-learning model can only be satisfied in virtual worlds by integrating a mix of technologies to include asynchronous activity to provide the immediacy necessary (Knowledge, 2000). Thus, virtual world learning environments must include media that has the capacity for both the asynchronous conveyance and synchronous convergence of information depending on the e-learning strategy adopted. Each learning strategy needs a specific learning platform to support the underpinning learning processes. Accordingly the requirements for an e-learning platform are as follows: for the open and flexible strategy the platforms shall be a content management system. In distributed learning strategies, learning management systems (LMS) capable of managing learning objects and connect them in learning paths are employed. Finally with learning communities, a collaborative learning paradigm is used with the platform allowing the exchange of knowledge and experience among participants, working largely as a knowledge management platform. The results of such analysis are depicted in Figure 2 where the design theory for 3D virtual world learning environment is illustrated by linking requirements, components and functional explanations.

12 Figure 2

A. North-Samardzic et al. Design theory for a 3D virtual world learning environment (see online version for colours)

4.3 Testable hypotheses According with the design theory framework adopted in this paper (Spagnoletti and Tarantino 2012), the justificatory knowledge plays a twofold role. On the one hand it explains the functional relationship between the purpose and scope of the design theory (requirements) and the principles of form and function of the artefact (components). On the other hand the justificatory knowledge itself is enriched by further analysing the interaction between the artefact and the environment. Such iterative process constitutes a feedback loop that is described by the means of a set of conceptual statements representing the testable hypotheses of a design theory. In the light of theories discussed in the previous sections, we put forward a set of conceptual statements related to the design of 3D virtual world platforms for effectively supporting e-learning strategies. These are divided in two subsets as summarised in Table 1. Three prescriptive statements provide the input for the designers of 3D virtual worlds supporting different e-learning strategies while three explanatory statements serve as theoretical propositions by specifying the antecedents of effective learning processes supported by digital media. In both cases, further empirical validations will strengthen the external validity of our design theory by the means of existing guidelines and evaluation methods (Hevner et al., 2004). We consequently argue that platforms supporting e-learning strategies shall rely on the combination of the following components: a content component that makes learning material available to a learner, a communication component offering interpersonal exchange between learners or learners and tutors, and a construct component that facilitates and guides individuals as well as cooperative learning activities to actively


13

operate on learning tasks (or assignments) with different degrees of complexity (from multiple choice to projects or problem-based learning). Table 1

Testable hypotheses for a design theory of 3D virtual world for distance learning

Prescriptive statements

Explanatory statements

• When supporting open learning, 3D virtual world platforms shall allow asynchronous information/communication exchanges (i.e., file sharing, use of wikis, or blogs) among users

• Convergence and conveyance learning happens through information/communication exchanges among users using both synchronous and asynchronous media

• When supporting distributed learning, 3D virtual world platforms shall allow asynchronous information/communication exchanges AND stimulate social interaction among users located in different places through the usage of avatars

• Convergence learning happens through interaction and experience sharing among learners and teachers using synchronous media

• When supporting community-based learning, 3D virtual world platforms shall allow synchronous AND asynchronous information/communication exchanges AND stimulate social interaction among users located in different places through the usage of avatars

• Conveyance learning occurs when information and knowledge is stored and available for later reflection

Furthermore, a 3D virtual world platform which can holistically support the three learning strategies shall have both synchronous and asynchronous interaction subsystems in order to support both conveyance and convergence processes. In fact a traditional 3D virtual world with synchronous communication capabilities does not fit with the hierarchical but inclusive relationship among learning strategies. Therefore the resulting holistic 3D virtual world platform shall rely on the following components: 3D virtual world sub-system (virtual spaces manager, avatar manager, learning objects manager), a learning paths sub-system (learning paths creation, maintenance and management, invite users to learning paths, track users progresses on learning paths) and an asynchronous interaction sub-system (information/knowledge store, search, and retrieval). The 3D virtual world sub-system is necessary to manage the 3D virtual spaces where users interact, information/communication is exchanged, and both conveyance and convergence learning shall take place. Each sub-system shall allow for users’ avatars to be invited to join virtual spaces and manipulate learning objects in the virtual worlds. The learning path sub-system shall allow for the management of learning objects into paths, inviting and assigning users to join such paths, and tracking users progresses on learning paths). Finally the asynchronous interaction sub-system shall support asynchronous communication processes necessary for conveyance learning through knowledge storing, search, and retrieval features. Specifically the latter two sub-systems are commonly not addressed by 3D virtual world platforms, highlighting the need for future research on this point. Although an empirical validation of the presented results is out of the scope of this paper, we provide in the next section two illustrative examples that support the design theory and serve as a conceptual tool for strengthening the validity of our theory.

14

5


Application of 3D virtual world platforms for learning: two brief examples

This section illustrates two potential applications of 3D virtual worlds technologies to the e-learning domain. The first example reports a potential application in the domain of learning and training on the workplace, while the second is build around a more traditional learning initiative.

5.1 Learning and training on the job A potential application of 3D virtual world technologies for the learning and training on the job could rely on the interaction among avatars in virtual environments that reconstruct real physical existing spaces. Such scenario could be used to foster teamwork or team-building by large organisations working in international and multi-cultural environments with different locations and employees coming from different places around the world. 3D virtual world technologies have an advantage in these kinds of scenarios as it was reported to be really difficult for the employees to develop team relationships out of traditional text-based interaction technologies (Savin-Baden et al., 2010). The reproduction of physical facilities of the organisation (i.e., offices, factories) would for example allow new employees to interact and get acquainted with a virtual representation of the physical locations prior to their effective arrival in the location on their first working day. This could be the case, for example, of an employee that usually works in Italy and that has to work for one month in the US branch of the same company. By navigating in the 3D virtual world representation of the US branch, from Italy, the employee would have the chance to discover the new location. Using communication facilities he would be able to interact with avatars of the local employees (see Figure 2), to share ideas, information, and values, and to start building a sense of community with his future work team. Moreover, while navigating in the 3D scenario, the employee could also use the content components (Figure 1) to be able to access documents and information stored in specific locations and pertinent to the location visited. As mentioned in the introduction, real life applications similar to the one described here already exist, like in the case of the Technology University of Singapore, and of the aforementioned VLC Global company specialised in the virtual reproduction of real environments in virtual worlds.

5.2 Collaborative e-learning strategies in virtual worlds The 3D virtual world technologies could be of use also for traditional e-learning settings. Exploiting the enhanced interaction potential with virtual objects and with avatars, the richness of the medium, and the great sense of presence that these technologies contribute to bring to participants, they can be used in e-learning strategies involving cooperation or role-playing amongst participants. For example, within the context of a blended training course on business organisation, a small group of students could be involved in a simulation of a decision process involving role playing and taking place within the virtual world. The group of students could access, through the content components (Figure 2), a problem statement (i.e., the decision to allocate sales agents on areas), with specific constraints and opportunities,


15

involving different figures and roles (i.e., sales manager, general manager, senior agents, junior agents). The roles of key figures (i.e., sales manager, general manager) could be played either by instructors/tutors, or also by some students who have been given specific instructions by instructors/tutors. By using communication components (Figure 2) the other students could interact among them, and among the avatars playing the roles of the key figures, inside the virtual word, to gather information and to come out with a proposal for the solution of the given problem. Students could be guided through the 3D scenario (construct component, Figure 2) allowing them to access the problem statement, to enter in contact with the other participants, and to meet the avatars played by the instructors/tutors. By interacting among them and among teachers/instructors students could participate in a rich learning-by-doing cooperative process, enriched and empowered by the 3D virtual world technologies and by the sense of the anonymity that they contribute to deliver. For example students could not be aware that the instructors play the avatars of the sales manager or of the general managers, and this could improve their learning experience, being support of tutors and instructor a key factor for knowledge acquisition through e-learning (Sulcic, 2010). In addition, real managers of a company could also play such avatars to heighten the reality of the learning experience. As a matter of example, applications already exist in the field of psychiatry (Livingstone et al., 2011) and medical praxis in general (Diener et al., 2009). This is also the specific context of the learning in virtual extended spaces (LiVES), reference missing for the purposes of blind review) project which aims at building a platform for supporting applications of 3D virtual world technologies to e-learning, like the one described in this section.

6

Discussion and conclusions

In a distance learning arrangement, a mix of different didactical methods and delivery formats must be identified. The appropriate solution has to match didactical parameters like learning strategies, characteristics of the content, the target group and situational/institutional demands. This will result in a learning environment that can be described as consisting of a content, a communication and a constructive component. It should not favour a certain didactical approach or delivery format if they do not address the demands of a given learning situation. This paper proposes a design theory for the adoption of virtual worlds in learning environments. We applied MST and e-learning strategy theory to show that as they currently stand, virtual worlds fail to facilitate the asynchronous conveyance and convergence of information, and thus fail to offer a complete learning solution. It is therefore proposed that an additional asynchronous component must be designed in order to enhance the use of virtual worlds as a learning environment. MST makes a strong case for the introduction of other medias into a virtual world learning environment. From a design research perspective, an explanatory design theory for a 3D virtual world for learning must have a combination of different media that have different capabilities. The principles of MST illustrate that different capabilities are required based on whether the task aims for conveyance or convergence of information;

16


while collaborative learning principles aim for convergence, the transmission of knowledge conveyance is also a key issue. In addition, principle 7 specifically points out that not all groups require a high level of synchronicity to perform successfully. Therefore there is a theoretical basis for including asynchronous media that addresses conveyance. The theoretical significance of this contribution is related to the introduction of a new model for distance learning that can inform the design and selection of 3D virtual world functionalities and tools. Thus a contribution to the generalised field problem of designing distance learning environments is provided in the form of a functional (teleological) model linking requirements to system components and of a set of testable hypotheses. As mentioned in the previous section, the problem space for this study has already been defined by the developers of SLOODLE, which represents a design practice theory based upon similar conclusions about the problem space. The conceptual formulation made in this paper provides a theoretical lens for explaining the relationship between requirements and components when multiple tools can be combined for supporting elearning strategies. Further empirical work can test these hypotheses providing support for a new version of MST focused specifically on learning processes.

References Andreas, K., Tsiatsos, T., Terzidou, T. and Pomportsis, A. (2010) ‘Fostering collaborative learning in second life: metaphors and affordances’, Computers & Education, Vol. 55, No. 2, pp.603–615. Barab, S.A., Thomas, M.K. and Merrill, H. (2001) ‘Online learning, from information dissemination to fostering collaboration’, Journal of Interactive Learning Research, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp.105–143. Baskerville, R. and Pries-Heje, J. (2010) ‘Explanatory design theory’, Business & Information Systems Engineering, Vol. 2, No. 5, pp.271–282. Bouhnik, D. and Marcus, T. (2006) ‘Interaction in distance-learning courses’, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 57, No. 3, pp.299–305. Braccini, A.M., Za, S. and D’Atri, A. (2010) ‘Investigating end users satisfaction of the usage of an e-learning platform: a statistical analysis’, International Journal of Global Management Studies, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp.21–33. Cassidy, S. (2004) ‘Learning styles: an overview of theories, models, and measures’, Educational Psychology, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp.419–444. Chow, A., Andrews, S. and Trueman, R. (2007) ‘A ‘second life’: can this online, virtual reality world be used to increase the overall quality of learning and instruction in graduate distance learning programs?’, in M. Simonson (Ed.): Proceedings of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology International Convention, pp.75–83, Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Bloomington, IN. Dabbagh, N. (2005) ‘Pedagogical models for e-learning: a theory-based design framework’, International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.25–44. Dalgarno, B. and Lee, M.J.W. (2010) ‘What are the learning affordances of 3-D virtual environments?’, British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp.10–32. De Lucia, A., Francese, R., Passero, I. and Tortora, G. (2009) ‘Development and evaluation of a virtual campus on second life, the case of second DMI’, Computers and Education, Vol. 52, No. 1, pp.220–233.


17

DeLuca, D. and Valacich, J.S. (2005) ‘Outcomes from conduct of virtual teams at two sites: support for media synchronicity theory’, Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Delwiche, A. (2006) ‘Massively multiplayer online games (MMOs) in the new media classroom’, Educational Technology and Society, Vol. 9, No.3, pp.160–172. Dennis, A.R. and Valacich, J.S. (1999) ‘Rethinking media richness: towards a theory of media synchronicity’, Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Dennis, A.R., Fuller, R.M. and Valacich, J.S. (2008) ‘Media, tasks and communication processes: a theory of media synchronicity’, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp.575–600. Dickey, M.D. (2003) ‘Teaching in 3D: pedagogical affordances and constraints of 3D virtual worlds for synchronous distance learning’, Distance Education, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp.105–121. Dickey, M.D. (2005) ‘Brave new (interactive) worlds, a review of the design affordances and constraints of two 3D virtual worlds as interactive learning environments’, Interactive Learning Environments, Vol. 13, Nos. 1–2, pp.121–137. Diener, S., Windsor, J. and Bodily, D. (2009) ‘Design and development of clinical simulations in second life’, EDUCASE Australasia Conference, Perth, Australia, pp.1–13. Edirisingha, P., Nie, M., Pluciennik, M. and Young, R. (2009) ‘Socialisation for learning at a distance in a 3-D multi-user virtual environment’, British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp.458–479. FitzGibbon, A., Oldham, E. and Johnston, K. (2008) ‘Are Irish learner-teachers prepared to be agents of change in using IT in education?’, in K. McFerrin et al. (Eds.): Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference, pp.1397–1404, Chesapeake, VA, AACE. Frondigoun, L. and Jones, H. (2011) ‘Learning together: designing effective e-classrooms’, International Journal of Innovation and Learning, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp.248–259. Gaimster, J. (2008) ‘Reflections on interactions in virtual worlds and their implication for learning art and design’, Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp.187–199. Garcia-Morales, V.J., LLorens-Montes, F.J. and Verdu-Jover, A.J. (2006) ‘Organisational learning categories: their influence on organisational performance’, International Journal of Innovation and Learning, Vol. 2, No. 5, pp.518–536. Gomez-Campos, F.M., Rodriguez-Bolivar, S., Lopez-Villanueva, J.A., Godoy, A., Jimenez-Tejada, J.A., Luque-Rodriguez, A. and Carceller, J.E. (2011) ‘Learning in a virtual laboratory: educational applications of three-dimensional animations’, International Journal of Innovation and Learning, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp.325–337. Gregor, S. and Jones, D. (2007) ‘The anatomy of a design theory’, Journal of the Association of Information Systems, Vol. 8, No. 5, pp.312–335. Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J. and Ram, S. (2004) ‘Design science in information systems research’, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp.75–105. Hew, K.F. and 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, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp.33–55. Hrastinski, S. (2006) ‘Introducing an informal synchronous medium in a distance-learning course, how is participation affected?’, The Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp.117–131. Hrastinski, S. (2007) Participating in Synchronous Online Education, PhD thesis, Department of Informatics, Lund University, Sweden. Inman, C., Wright, V.H. and Hartman, J.A. (2010) ‘Use of SecondLife in K-12 and higher education: review of research’, Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, Vol. 12, Nos. 3/2, pp.67–85.

18


Jarmon, L., Traphagan, T., Mayrath, M. and Trivedi, A. (2009) ‘Virtual world teaching, experiential learning, and assessment, an interdisciplinary communication course in second life’, Computers and Education, Vol. 53, No. 1, pp.169–182. Kamel-Boulos, M.N., Hetherington, L. and Wheeler, S. (2007) ‘Second life: an overview of the potential of 3-D virtual worlds in medical and health education’, Health Information and Libraries Journal, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp.233–245. Ke, F. and Hoadley, C. (2009) ‘Evaluating online learning communities’, Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 57, No. 4, pp.487–510. Kemp, J., Livingstone, D. and Bloomfield, P (2009) ‘SLOODLE: connecting VLE tools with emergent teaching practice in second life’, British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp.551–555. Kerres, M. and De Witt, C. (2003) ‘A didactical framework for the design of blended learning arrangements’, Journal of Educational Media, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp.101–113. Keskitalo, T., Pyykkš, E. and Ruokamo, H. (2011) ‘Exploring the meaningful learning of learners in second life’, Journal of Educational Technology & Society, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp.16–26. Knowledge, J. (2000) ‘Distributed learning evolves to meet needs of lifelong learners. E-education advisor’, Education Edition, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.1–15. Laxman, K. (2012) ‘Cognitive learning processes undergirding design-based ill-structured problem solving’, International Journal of Innovation and Learning, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp.60–78. Livingstone, D and Kemp, J. (2006) ‘Massively multi-learner: recent advances in 3D social environments’, Computing and Information Systems Journal, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp.4–10. Livingstone, D., Peachey, A., Callaghan, M. and Hemani, A. (2011) ‘Supporting learning in virtual worlds with virtual learning environments’, JISC Final Report. Lu, L. (2010) ‘Demystifying three-dimensional virtual worlds for art education’, International Journal of Education through Art, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp.279–292. Luo, L. and Kemp, J. (2008) ‘Second life: exploring the immersive instructional venue for library and information science education’, Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, Vol. 49, No. 3, pp.147–166. Meadows, M.S. (2008) I, Avatar: The Culture and Consequences of Having a Second Life New Riders, Berkeley, CA. Minocha, S. and Morse, D. (2010) ‘Supporting distributed team working in 3D virtual worlds, a case study in second life’, Interactive Technology and Smart Education, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp.200–219. Minocha, S. and Reeves, A.J. (2010) ‘Design of learning spaces in 3D virtual worlds, an empirical investigation of second life’, Journal Learning, Media and Technology, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp.111–137. Mouritsen, J., Bukh, P.N., Larsen, H.T. and Johansen, M.R. (2002) ‘Developing and managing knowledge through intellectual capital statements’, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp.10–29. Omale, N., Hung, W.C., Luetkehans, L. and Cooke-Plagwitz, J. (2009) ‘Learning in 3-D multiuser virtual environments: exploring the use of unique 3-D attributes for online problem-based learning’, British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp.480–495. Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M.A. and Chatterjee, S. (2008) ‘A design science research methodology for information systems research’, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 24, No. 3, pp.45–77. Petrakou, A. (2010) ‘Interacting through avatars, virtual worlds as a context for online education’, Computers & Education, Vol. 54, No. 4, pp.1020–1027. Reichman, S.W and Grasha, A.F. (1974) ‘A rational approach to developing and assessing the construct validity of a student learning style scales instrument’, Journal of Psychology, Vol. 87, No. 2, pp.213–223.


19

Roblyer, M.D. (1999) ‘Is choice important in distance learning? A study of learner motives for taking internet-based courses at the high school and community college levels’, Journal of Research on Computing in Education, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp.157–171. Salmon, G. (2009) ‘The future for (second) life and learning’, British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp.526–538. Salt, B., Atkins, C. and Blackall, L. (2008) ‘Engaging with second life, real education in a virtual world e literature review’, [online] http://slenz.wordpress.com/slenz-project/slenz-literaturereview (accessed 20 July 2012). Savin-Baden, M., Gourlay, L., Tombs, C., Steils, N., Tombs, G. and Mawer, M. (2010) ‘Situating pedagogies, positions and practices in immersive virtual worlds’, Educational Research, Vol. 52, No. 2, pp.123–133. Savin-Baden, M., Tombs, C., Poulton, T., Conradi, E., Kavia, S., Burden, D. and Beaumont, C. (2011) ‘An evaluation of implementing problem-based learning scenarios in an immersive virtual world’, International Journal of Medical Education, Vol. 2, pp.116–124. Sonnenwald, D.H. and Li, B. (2003) ‘Scientific collaboratories in higher education: exploring learning style preferences and perceptions of technology’, British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp.419–431. Spagnoletti P. and Tarantino L. (2012) ‘User centered systems design: the bridging role of justificatory knowledge in designing organisational systems: an interdisciplinary discourse’, in Baskerville et al. (Eds.), LNISO vol.1, Springer, Heidelberg. Sulcic, V. (2010) ‘The key factors for acquired knowledge through e-learning’, International Journal of Innovation and Learning, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp.290–302. Twining, P. (2009) ‘Exploring the educational potential of virtual worlds: some reflections from the SPP’, British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp.496–514. Vogel, D., Guo, M., Zhou, P., Tian, S. and Zhang, J. (2008) ‘In search of second life nirvana’, Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, Vol. 5, pp.11–28 [online] http://proceedings.informingscience.org/InSITE2008/IISITv5p011-028Vogel498.pdf. Walls, J.G. Widmeyer, G.R. and El Sawy, O.A. (2004) ‘Assessing information system design theory in perspective: how useful was our 1992 rendition?’, Journal of Information Technology Theory in Practice, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp.45–38. Warburton, S. (2009) ‘Second life in higher education, assessing the potential for and the barriers to deploying virtual worlds in learning and teaching’, British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp.414–426. Wenger, E.C. and Snyder, W.M. (2000) ‘Communities of practice: the organizational frontier’, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 78, No. 1, pp.139–145. Wilson, T. and Whitelock, D. (1998) ‘What are the perceived benefits of participating in a computer-mediated communication (CMC) environment for distance learning computer science learners?’, Computers & Education, Vol. 30, Nos. 3–4, pp.259–269. Yasar, O. and Adiguzel, T. (2010) ‘A working successor of learning management systems: SLOODLE’, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp.5682–5685.