To achieve a clear and usable definition of a virtual world, this article begins by examining the current literature, highlighting the importance of the user experience within the rationales given for using virtual worlds in education, whilst popular definitions such as Bell’s focus on the technical aspects of the technology. Thus a definition needs to encompass these many possibilities and be sufficiently flexible to future developments, whilst maintaining its distinctiveness from other technologies. Each time we re-engage with a technology as part of our everyday social experience, we encounter it afresh, re-establishing and reformulating its use in terms of both function and functionality. Therefore, a definition of a technology needs to take into account the activities and practices when using it, as well as the social arrangements and organisational forms surrounding its use. As a result, definitions have implications from the purchasing of technology in a school, to the expectations we have around its use.Īny technology is an artefact within a wider milieu. For instance, practitioners learning about the potential of virtual worlds for education may be unable to provide the experiences for their learners that they had expected, due to investment in technologies incorrectly labelled as virtual worlds. While it is important to accurately define what is meant by virtual world in order to guide research in the area (Schroeder 2008), it is equally important for educational practice and policy making. This inconsistency is not uncommon in the field of educational technology, but as Oliver (2005) notes, a concept that is allowed to drift and become ambiguous, risks becoming analytically worthless. It also raises questions as to whether research conducted in one is relevant to the others and to what extent there is a natural overlap. The inconsistent use of terms and descriptors means that it is unclear as to whether these terms are synonymous or refer to subtle differences between applications. However, solely focusing on the experience is equally insufficient as we might consider that such definitions could equally be used to describe the experience of learners using a range of collaborative eLearning tools. For example, it is unclear how Bell’s ( 2008) definition of a virtual world could not as easily be applied to a MMORPG, whilst at the same time others argue that virtual worlds are not games. The propensity towards a techno-centric definition has its advantages as it allows for a myriad of user experiences, however it results in confusion between technologies with similar technical features, most likely because a virtual world, much like a smart phone, relies on a combination of different technologies. Thus far, definitions of virtual worlds lack an essential conceptualisation of what a virtual world is. For the first time the relationships between commonly confused terms and technologies are identified to provide a much needed conceptual clarity for researchers and educators. To address these issues, this paper presents a new framework for the definition of virtual worlds, arguing what it is for a world to be virtual, the user experience that is a necessary part of this and the technical features which afford this. While the lack of a clear and common understanding of a term is not uncommon, there are implications for researchers and practitioners. At the same time there has been a resurgence of interest in the potential of virtual reality which further muddies the conceptual waters. Instead there is confusion in the literature, with the introduction of new terms which are at times used to classify the type of virtual world and at others are used synonymously with the term. Yet over the past ten years, there has been little development of the term. In 2008, articles by Bell and Schroeder provided an initial platform from which to develop a coherent definition of the term ‘virtual worlds’.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |