The Story of My “Second Life”

It’s Christmas Eve here and I’ve found a quiet moment to blog for the first time in a while. Have been following a few twitters and blog posts about virtual worlds lately and Carl’s recent comment was the catalyst I needed to pull it all together. (N.B.: I’m still searching for a WordPress plugin to allow me to cite references at the end of my blog posts; the ones I’ve found so far don’t do what I need, please let me know if you come across anything.)

First, a little bit of background. I’ve always been amazed and amused by the people who feel “pressured” to explore Second Life (or blogging, or twittering, or any sufficiently new, cool technology with educational potential). Sure, no one likes being left behind, and any self-respecting geek owes it to themselves to at least maintain a passing familiarity with various cutting-edge emerging technologies, but I honestly don’t understand the reaction people have sometimes. It’s as though they feel obligated to go out of their way to explain why they are not interested, or, why/how some particular application is a “fad,” or point out its myriad limitations, as if they can single-handedly defuse the hype bomb. Perhaps they are just reacting to what they perceive as pressure from the passionate supporters of these various technologies, the techno-evangelists, who can be seen standing on soapboxes and podiums at conferences extolling the virtues of The Next Big Thing, particularly for education.

Topher Zwiers (RL: Chris Duke) is a good man and a great blogger, and is not someone suffering from the predilection I describe above. Nonetheless, he asks the question, Should Educators Be Focusing on Second Life? In his post, he links to this neat graphic from KZero (a UK-based SL consultancy with a heavy-duty set of RL clients):

I find this image fascinating – I am in awe of intellects that can develop graphic illustrations of complex, interrelated data sets like this – but his question, should we be focusing on Second Life (presumably at the expense of other virtual worlds [or even other educational technologies]), is, I think, not one that can be answered by looking at data alone, no matter how well presented.

Linden Lab reported their metrics for October and November indicating a drop in overall Logged In User Hours, attributable, they say, to unplanned service outages. I strongly encourage you to look at the data for yourself (click here for the Excel file). Outage impacts aside, the trend is unmistakable, growth does appear to be slowing, the exact extent to which however I can’t pretend to understand from anything other than a layman’s perspective. A simple chart of Total Hours, below, tells the tale (click to expand):

Numbers are great, tangible things that can help us grasp abstract concepts but there’s much more to Second Life than population size and growth trajectories. While one could argue that a technology’s mindshare is a direct function of its pure value to large numbers of people, one is reminded of the crass expression, “Eat —-, 50 billion flies can’t be wrong.” Are we, those 10 million Second Life users, the virtual flies buzzing around a digital dungheap? Where is the value? The mandate for use in education? The slam-dunk use case?

This is where Carl’s recent comment comes into play for me. He presented Online Virtual Environments in Education at the TIES 2007 Education Technology Conference in Minneapolis earlier this month. (Note the handouts linked on the left hand side.) Carl is, like me, an educator charged with helping others utilize technology effectively in their teaching. He concludes that for his use, and in his opinion, Active Worlds is a superior environment because: “It is inexpensive, easy to build, and students are not likely to waste hours customizing their avatars.” Read his handout on Second Life here.

While low cost and ease of building are definite plusses, I see hours customizing avatars not as a waste of time, but rather, a critical activity and expression of identity that is central to student engagement in a virtual space. When Peggy Sheehy’s students did their body image unit, avatar design wasn’t a distraction, it was the LESSON itself. Customization of student avatars made the lesson possible, and the great variety of possibilities (essentially limitless) means that students in Second Life can express themselves virtually unlike any other environment. This variety makes the entire environment more engaging, as students are impressed and amazed by the appearance of others in-world, encouraging them to experiment with their own look, to design clothing, change body shape and composition, etc., at will.

Dr. Angela A. Thomas, a friend of mine and a researcher at the University of Sydney, is an authority on avatars and recently published her book, “Youth Online: Identity and Literacy in the Digital Age.” In it, she explores how young adults experiment with virtual identity as a means of communication and a way to find their place in a broader communities. I vividly recall Lindy McKeown, another Aussie researcher, explaining how she had her adult RL students “wrestle” in Second Life as a means to foster RL relationships. To hear her tell it, there’s nothing like a good wrestling match to facilitate bonding between total strangers. I don’t believe this would be possible (or as effective) in a world with less avatar design flexibility.

Carl’s writeup about Second Life also includes a pet peeve of mine, and that is, FUD about Main Grid adult areas in the context of Second Life as an educational tool. He does not mention that the Teen Grid is physically separate from the Main Grid and totally devoid of these influences. This is a critical and egregious omission, as there are many educators currently using the Teen Grid in exciting, innovative ways (e.g., Ramapo Islands, Schome Park, Pacific Rim Exchange, Global Kids, Eye4You Alliance). Yet, when it comes to sheer numbers, Stan Travena at PacRimX points out that there are only 5,000 users on the Teen Grid. So we have the opposite effect – not millions of users – but a mere fraction, comprised almost exclusively of early-adopter teens and in several cases, their teachers. People just like you and me.

So where does this leave us? Growth rates are slowing, other environments are appearing, pedagogies are just coming into focus … should educators be focusing on Second Life? I don’t think this question has a yes or no answer. It’s going to be right for some districts, after-school clubs, and individuals, and less so for others. Second Life has the advantage of being the most sophisticated and powerful platform, but does your class need that sophistication and power? It all begins with an understanding of what you are trying to accomplish in terms of learning goals and the limitations of your infrastructure (ActiveWorlds is, incidentally, PC-only). From there, decide which platform meets your needs, and go for it.

Whatever you do, don’t just sit on the sidelines!

-kj-