-
Website
http://scienceoftheinvisible.blogspot.com/ -
Original page
http://scienceoftheinvisible.blogspot.com/2009/09/virtually-useless-fote09-fote09vw.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
I happen to have a lot of sympathy with much of what you say above but the extreme posturing strikes me as unhelpful and will likely just result in "you're a Luddite", "no, you're an idiot" type of debate.
You seem to be as guilty as the extreme pro-Second Lifers were about 2 years ago of assuming that your personal preferences must be the right answer for everyone else. Yes, some uses of SL are very unimaginative - others aren't? So what? I'm sure that lots of uses of the 'lecture' are pretty unimaginative... and Eluminate (which I happen to hate by the way but I appreciate that others quite like it) doesn't exactly push any barriers?
You also appear to accept that virtual worlds (in some form) have some pedagogic possibilities in some contexts? On that basis it doesn't strike me as too much of a leap of faith to assume that some people will learn something useful by experimenting in SL - they might even move forward our understanding of what is effective - even if what we've aiming towards is something different?
Google Lively more promising that SL? Are you sure? I would have thought the evidence spoke for itself - with or without Google dropping the ball. Just cos you can embed it in a web page doesn't make it better?
I think you are absolutely right to question our collective 'focus' w.r.t. what we are doing in SL and with virtual worlds more generally but if this is the level of the debate I'm afraid I'll be getting an early train home. I've got better things to be doing. Sorry.
A pity, as some of your points - were you to word them in a mature, adult, manner - are quite pertinent and worthy of further consideration. Though your comment about Google Lively being better than SL is beyond bizarre. At that point I started to wonder if you are just baiting everyone for some reason?
I agree that virtual worlds (in some form) have pedagogic possibilities, but not SL - the barriers/defects are just too great. And I don't think Google's commercial interests overlap much with pedagogy - they've dropped a number of 20% time projects which seemed to have potential but which, presumably, didn't fit into the Google roadmap. As you know, Google acquires but Google never divests.
Thanks for joining the debate, hope you caught your train.
Honestly, I've tried... and periodically I put my 'I'm going to give this a chance' head on and try again, but... to be frank, it's rotten.
BUT
I think there are scenarios where virtual worlds can play a role - for example in simulation.
However
Second life is too difficult to use.
I would be interested to see what happens if a "portal" opened between World of Warcarft and Second Life - let teh games begin!
All above statements have a thread of truth within them if taken as a snapshot of whatever time frame it was written in, but alas the author has not considered like all formats of new technologies and even web tools, there is a natural evolution based on the communities needs.
I shall declare my vested interest in this as we at virtually-linked London indeed did create a mirror of the conference room of The Royal Geographical Institute and no we did not charge for it.
The reasoning behind it was as we do believe the evolution continues and as the greater community whether education, or business it would be in everyone's interest to involve said communities in what we see as proof of concept events, and yes maybe they are clunky unwieldy and even in some cases a waste of time, but is that not the way with all experiments in their truest form ?
I will not go as far as to say "I love secondlife" but would gladly say "I love being part of any evolution in any sphere of endeavor in this short time we have on this planet"
Looking forward to FOTE09 where there will be many such ideas expressed, and I am sure many who will be inspired to take up the challenge to push for even more adventurous ways to pass on knowledge.
Julius Sowu Virtually-linked London
It is also the space in which the next generation in the convergence of technology,education, communications and a plethora of other uses will converge, and as such even if just to acclimatize ourselves to this space secondlife with all its faults is still the market leader in this space especially as it is not task specific, and gives you opportunity to expand horizons in any direction, be it fantasy or reality.
perhaps you used the word hate as a throw away comment or even to court controversy, it matters not, for it is the open debate that is important, so whether you love it or not you have made a contribution to this debate , and as such I personally thank you.
Julius Sowu Virtually-Linked London
Until the code writers get IT and government gets IT and education gets IT we just have to wait for all the imperfections in ICT to be sorted out, then we will have tech that works for us, the people...
...we all need to improve. But that is life innit? Our Life.
I wonder if lack of imagination is what is stopping you get value out of Second Life? I'll agree that there are plenty of unimaginative creations in Second Life however I could find plenty of example of the same on the internet and in real life. Bad use of a tool doesn't mean that it isn't worth using that tool.
Second Life is certainly not perfect and I could easily write a list of things that I would like changing/improving. One of its real values is that you can create whatever you want in there. Other virtual spaces are great for different uses but there are restrictions. You can't use World of Warcraft to create a hospital or engineering simulation. You can use WoW for some interesting learning activities but they are not going to be the same as Second Life.
I'm sure that when the telephone was first invented that many people thought it was a waste of time, an instrusion into their lives, expensive and they probably wondered why people couldn't just write a letter. If you had suggested to them that the phone would evolve into an object that allowed connectivity, collaboration, learning and more they would probably have carted you off to the funny farm.
I can clearly remember an academic telling me (about ten years ago) that the internet was a waste of time and that there wasn't anything out there. It won't catch on.
There will be other virtual worlds, there will be better virtual worlds, the way we interact with them will change, it will become easier to connect as internet speeds increase. But virtual worlds won't go away and I for one love being involved in a technology which has so much to offer.
Looking forward to continuing this skirmish on Friday!
Pauline Randall @virtualewit
However, once the issues around access had been ironed out, our midwifery students found their learning experience in SL to be really valuable.
I very strongly believe that one way to approach the expense issue is to be a lot more collaborative about development. In other words, in midwifery I would like an international approach so we're not all re-inventing the wheel - that we share resources and develop a strategy for utilizing what we have all developed in SL.
"poor user interface" - there are open source alternatives available to download and use on all platforms; 3D, 2D and text only.
"every time I try to use it I have to start by downloading an installing a new version of the client software" - please don't complain that LL release bugfixes and security updates every so often. "By that time..the event I'm supposed to be attending is over." - like any event, try turning up a few minutes early :)
"almost every project feels it has to build a representation of the real world" - that isn't a fault of Second Life, LL or the protocol. The 3D space is created entirely by users, and that is the lack of imagination of the users you're spending time with. Find new friends or build something original. SL is packed with private islands and all sorts that blow the lid off real world recreations. Set up your own land and let students create and build.
"If I want to train students in genetics, do I need to build a laboratory with trees outside the window? Get real!" .. No, stop asking and start building. Get unreal! There's plenty of unreal in SL. It takes patience and time to find the locations and people of value in SL.
"Sub-contracting pedagogy by employing firms of developers to build "stuff" for you because you can't use the tools you are expecting students to use is about to become socially unacceptable." - stop sub-contracting. Buy/rent virtual land (its not expensive) and let your students go wild. There's nothing more exciting than 2 acres of grass and the build tool.
"I want to spend my time teaching/learning, not fiddling about with a cartoon representations of myself, or worse, paying someone else to do it for me." - then create a welcoming environment for your students to pick up avatars/clothing for free. There are millions of freebies on SL. Making a virtual representation of yourself is part of the experience and shouldn't take long. If you're obsessed with hopping between locations looking for the right hairstyle, that's your problem.
"Data portability - in Second Life? Don't make me laugh." - there are third-party tools to backup your SL character and inventory. The environment you explore is easily readable by open source clients for cloning (a big blow against commercial outlets) and data is easily thrown into and out of the SL world over HTTP.
"Sleaze" - at every corner, I agree. LL offer private land and walled gardens which are ideal for learning environments. Or even better try OpenGrid.
"Second life is too difficult to use." - not really. It takes maybe an hour to get to grips with, but months to find locations and people of value. If you're an educator then you should be providing that to your students making it quick and easy. I'd love to help, but don't sub-contract :)
"Horrible interface, clunky, awkward" - there are many clients available, not just Linden Lab's.
"I hate a lot of stuff that damages education!" - better block Wikipedia then, maybe unplug computers. Shit, go back to blackboards.
"90% of the physical land mass is too far from exchanges and can't receive enough bandwidth to try them out [in the UK]" - where the hell did you get that statistic. I believe a good proportion of the UK has ample bandwidth to support Second Life, unfortunately SL is hosted in the US and thus very slow. If you repeatedly visit the same SL locations, chunky downloads are cached on your PC and thus faster the next time you visit. Alas SL is slow. Saying only 10% of the UK can use SL is laughable (and I did).
"You seem to be as guilty as the extreme pro-Second Lifers were about 2 years ago of assuming that your personal preferences must be the right answer for everyone else." - I suspect I'm falling foul of this :) To put my opinion simply - SL is a great tool when used appropriately. If things don't suit you, adjust the open source tools to meet your requirements. Use it, write it or find something else. There's no point ranting how crap it is.
If you still decide Second Life is a waste of time, I hope you agree that it is a step in the right direction. And if you're trolling heck I fell for it.
I have a problem reading about how much money is spent (wasted) on something that can only be introduced to PHD STUDENTS through the medium of physical supervision (i.e. someone needs to watch them on the computers while they use it incase they violate ITS rules and regulations)
I think you should do a study of second life researchers in education. Stats on how many of them use it beyond the work place, how many teach (successfully) using it - and some interviews measuring the discourse of defense when talking about their magical wurld.
>
> It is also the space in which the next generation in the convergence of technology,education, communications and a plethora of other uses will converge, and as such even if just to acclimatize ourselves to this space secondlife with all its faults is still the market leader in this space especially as it is not task specific, and gives you opportunity to expand horizons in any direction, be it fantasy or reality.
>
> perhaps you used the word hate as a throw away comment or even to court controversy, it matters not, for it is the open debate that is important, so whether you love it or not you have made a contribution to this debate , and as such I personally thank you.
>
> Julius Sowu Virtually-Linked London
For some reason Julius Disqus isn't showing your comment, So I'll post it (with a response).
I'm not arguing about what SL is, I'm only interested in whether it has any significant educational value at this time. I'm convinced better virtual worlds will come along in time.
I'd like to see people who teach as their primary income source rather than work in edtech and who have not had large grants to work with SL defending it - so far, I don't see any.
Well, that would be me for one. However, the attitude towards SL here has never been conducive to serious debate so, as you know, I sadly gave up on you a long time ago. Some may want to construe that as acting defensively but they should also reflect on how aggressive their stance frequently appears.
Here's some: http://bit.ly/xrGbz
Money saved and better pass rate on exams.
http://bit.ly/CjvaN
I can't remember all the details but the Loyalist College presentation was a highlight for me and really exploited the medium by involving the audience in a highly amusing demonstration of their simulation.
They also had data from the second cohort that were even better than the first. Moreover, they seemed to have largely overcome the commonplace observation that 25% of students don't "get" virtual worlds (as judged by pre- and post-session questionnaires). Of course, that could be down in part to the increased confidence of the instructors as well as tweaking the experience and may not translate to all students and subject areas. Encouraging though.
Of course, their development cost money but it sounds like it was probably a good investment. "Education costs money. Ignorance costs more" as someone once opined.
Anyway, having earned my own post ("Disgusted of Liverpool") for attempting to add value to this conversation, I consider my job done and am reverting to radio silence. Not so much apoplectic or over-sensitive as time-poor.
A couple of points. Lively didn't die, Google killed it. Who knows what it could have become with more development.
As I said to people over wine last night, if anyone can give me a practical SL solution to a educational problem I have, I'm more than happy to use it. What I'm not happy to do is pour massive effort into a proprietary platform that almost certainly won't be around in a few years time. Quite why the VW community has jumped on SL rather than pushing an open source pathway is beyond me, and very shortsighted.
I'm not interested in wasting my time discussing SL applications with you given your general attitude. You say you are not against "virtuality" per se (whatever that is) but I see little evidence of constructive engagement.
The VW community went with SL because it was the best option at the time and the fact that LL offered hosting was a major plus for pilot-level projects. There is, of course, an SL-like open source option now and many educators are doubtless considering their options in the medium- and long-term. And yes, it can run in a web browser.