These statements come from a blog decrying the current situation of the VLE and are based on the canvassing of the opinion of teenagers in several countries as to what their preferred Web-sites are.Another two statistics on Web-site usage obtained by the Nielsen/Netratings consultancy emphasizes this dilemma.
The first one gathered data from 12-17 year olds in the US of their preferred Web-site (1), and unsurprisingly perhaps the top 10 sites were mainly occupied by social networking sites with Facebook as clear front runner. When asked what they liked most about these sites they stated that they were able to not only customise the interface to make it 'theirs' but also the availability of third-party add-ons providing extra functionality in the form of avatars and 'flashboxes' thus extending the art of communication well beyond typed text.
A related study on young UK females in regards to the fastest growing Web-sites (2) drew a similar picture with social networking sites again dominating the top 10 spots.
Imagine these students entering Higher Education and being confronted with a static, stale interface called Virtual Learning Environment. Do we really believe that this generation will catch onto this? My hunch is that it will alienate them and will most likely be putting them off from online learning in each current form.It is therefore about time that developers take note of this situation and start creating a light-weight, flexible and unimposing online learning 'framework' presented to students who will then customise it to their gusto and subsequently populate it with content, as required for their studies, allowing them to display creativity in the process - surely this is learning at its best.
A simplified version of such a flexible environment is already in existence in the form of Netvibes (http://www.netvibes.com/) which delivers so called Personal Start Pages where components are added in the form of AJAX widgets which can be pulled onto the front page. What is required is an expansion on these principles - and an embedding into the institutional intranet so students have a standardised login (single-sign on). How long will this take?
(1) http://www.nielsen-netratings.com/pr/pr_070920.pdf
(2) http://www.nielsen-netratings.com/pr/pr_071127_UK.pdf
Monday 31 December 2007
e-Learning Fundamentalism
After having read some of the articles relating to the discussion on 'digital natives' versus 'digital immigrants' I have come to the conclusion that most of them have been written with the intent of sensationalism if not pure point scoring.These opinionated briefings bear little resemblence to the real world in the class room, both from the educators and the learners point of view. There is a growing body of evidence (see references below) that although 16-20 year olds may be more IT-literate than an age group 10 years older this literacy is entirely restricted to their private life, in particular towards their social, entertainment and leisure time activities. When it comes to education they are traditionalists who prefer the time-honoured delivery f2f, talk and chalk.I think it is about time that we as technologist take note of this and tread carefully when 'throwing' technology at our 'customers' since otherwise we may run the risk of them loosing confidence in the sector entirely.E-learning will remain a nich market for the foreseeable future, catering mostly for distance learners in a variety of contexts.
1. Garcia and J. Qin. Journal of Online Education (2007)http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=3792. Student Expectation Study (2007) , undertaken by IPSOS MORI on behalf of JISChttp://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/publications/studentexpectationsbp.aspx
1. Garcia and J. Qin. Journal of Online Education (2007)http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=3792. Student Expectation Study (2007) , undertaken by IPSOS MORI on behalf of JISChttp://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/publications/studentexpectationsbp.aspx
Ponderings on Virtual Worlds - the technological future
Being a left-brained scientist I can't resist looking into the technologies which may shape our lives in a virtual-enabled world in years to come.A number of sources have been scoured but the 'Meatverse Roadmap' article by Smart et al. (2007) had the biggest appeal as it is both broad in its scope and bold in its predictions.
The term metaverse originated from the cyberpunk novel Snowcrash (1992) written by Neal Stephenson (as was, by the way the term avatar, derived from the Hindu work avatara meaning 'incarnation'. At the heart of this article lies a 2x2 matrix which places external vs. internal on the x-axis and simulation vs. augmentation on the y-axis. Within the four sectors created it places the various technologies, the familiar Virtual Worlds and the Mirror Worlds in the Simulation arena and the more unfamiliar 'Augmented Reality' and 'Lifelogging' aspects in the Augmentation part.
The article then goes on to explain these Metaverse technologies:
The term metaverse originated from the cyberpunk novel Snowcrash (1992) written by Neal Stephenson (as was, by the way the term avatar, derived from the Hindu work avatara meaning 'incarnation'. At the heart of this article lies a 2x2 matrix which places external vs. internal on the x-axis and simulation vs. augmentation on the y-axis. Within the four sectors created it places the various technologies, the familiar Virtual Worlds and the Mirror Worlds in the Simulation arena and the more unfamiliar 'Augmented Reality' and 'Lifelogging' aspects in the Augmentation part.
The article then goes on to explain these Metaverse technologies:
- Virtual Worlds: here it praises the social participatory aspects of environments such as SL, pointing to a future where webcams will be used to map facial images of PC users onto their virtual world avatars - well here goes your anonymity...
- Mirror Worlds: these are based on open-standards such as the main Geographic Information System (GIS) Google Earth which may be overlaid (mashed up) with other information such as GPS-data, advert videos of shops or the presence of other nearby avatars.
- Augmented Reality: This technology largely depends on the acceptance of radiofrequency identification (RFID) tags to be placed in most consumer products thus providing instantaneous information of these items surrounding you; you will never be able to mislay your glasses or car keys again!
- Lifelogging: This equates to the concept of blogging in the broadest sense to everyday activities and its implementation will be linked to the emergence of wearable computers and Webcams displaying the whereabouts and neighbourhood of the individual to a third party, family member or possibly the state. Applications given in the article are the monitoring of school children or of individuals suffering from dementia.
At this point in time one can only speculated what effect these new tools will have in the education sector, in the next 10-15 years.
J. Smart, J. Cascio and J. Pfaffendorf (2007) Metaverse Roadmap: Pathways to the 3D Web. http://www.metaverseroadmap.org/MetaverseRoadmapOverview.pdf
Ponderings on Virtual Worlds - About Identities
There have been many postings on the discussion board on what it means choosing a particular avatar in a 3d virtual reality multiuser environment, be it in a role-playing game such as World of Warcraft or an environment such as Second Life which allows social interaction and self-expression. Moving on from the default character acquired at 'birth' what makes us choose who we want to be represented by? Do we want to replicate our RW identity as close as possible (a bit younger and slimmer perhaps?), or do we have the urge to improve considerably on our perceived imperfections of our RW bodies?Do we want to be someone else entirely, the other gender, another race, even disabled, or something more playful like an animal? What are we portraying by these choices: our inner feelings, our desires, our talents, our professionalism, our interests ....When we choose avatars do we have a tendency to hide ourselves and remain as anonymous as possible? Why do we want to do that and has this a bearing on our RW identity?
The answers lie of course in the RW and the different representations and identities we take therein. Or as Gee would phrase it: we assume the 'virtual/real/projective in different ways, in different contexts – there is just no fixed selfhood'.
Someone may be a pinstripe suite wearing insurance broker in the city during the working day, transposing into a slob around the house after work, becoming a silly playful entertainer with this children, an eccentric in his hobbies or a pervert in his sex life – same person nevertheless.It's all there and we may play it out – but usually in the absence of anonymity.
The beauty of virtual worlds is that you can change your characer at will, every day, every hour or even every minute, finding new expressions on the way – and remain anonymous throughout. And you may have a sense of owership with every one of these characters, at any particular point in time matching any particular mood expression.
Currently I have three different avatars, the original build which is resembling me most, the second creation being a self-deluded beau, the antagonist of myself and finally a creation which will fall in the category 'identity tourism' – a skin representing something completely different which in RW I would never think of emulating.
Which one of these characters to choose is often a spontaneous decision, dependent on fancy and context. Any particular of these metaphorical embodiments may be interpreted by others as who I am in the RW – whether it concerns me or not.
The answers lie of course in the RW and the different representations and identities we take therein. Or as Gee would phrase it: we assume the 'virtual/real/projective in different ways, in different contexts – there is just no fixed selfhood'.
Someone may be a pinstripe suite wearing insurance broker in the city during the working day, transposing into a slob around the house after work, becoming a silly playful entertainer with this children, an eccentric in his hobbies or a pervert in his sex life – same person nevertheless.It's all there and we may play it out – but usually in the absence of anonymity.
The beauty of virtual worlds is that you can change your characer at will, every day, every hour or even every minute, finding new expressions on the way – and remain anonymous throughout. And you may have a sense of owership with every one of these characters, at any particular point in time matching any particular mood expression.
Currently I have three different avatars, the original build which is resembling me most, the second creation being a self-deluded beau, the antagonist of myself and finally a creation which will fall in the category 'identity tourism' – a skin representing something completely different which in RW I would never think of emulating.
Which one of these characters to choose is often a spontaneous decision, dependent on fancy and context. Any particular of these metaphorical embodiments may be interpreted by others as who I am in the RW – whether it concerns me or not.
Managing students' expectations - or the lack of them?
A discussion was recently held at our institution on the preliminary findings of the Student Expectation Study underaken by the JISC on pre-enrolement students during the spring and summer of 2007 (http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/publications/studentexpectationsbp.aspx).
In many ways this document provides sobering thoughts about the opportunities for e-learning in particular with new tools such as Web2.0 or even Second Life.These prospective students are certainly technologically savvy using several of the Web 2.0 tools for their personal use including social networking or instant messaging, used regularly by 64 and 68% respectively. Also very popular are the downloading of videos from sites such as YouTube, and increasingly online TV, thus putting severe strain on Universities JANET traffic.62% of pre-University students claim to regularly upload videos and photos, testimony to the concept of creating UGC.On the other hand less than 20% maintain their own blog or Web-site higlighting students reservation about writing and sharing text. The concept of a Wiki is also alien to them and Second Life is only relevant to a small proportion of students (about 20%).
What does this mean in regards to using Web2.0 technologies for learning. The answer is that prospective students expect Universities to have an infrastructure in place to support high band-width internet applications and they do take these features into consideration when making a choice for their appropriate University.
However this service is seen purely for entertainment and socialisation; they are largely unable to make any connection between Web2.0 tools and their learning. In fact 79% of students can only see e-learning in a supporting role, mainly relating to access to research sources later on in their studies. This of course does question the hightech approach taken by some Universities (Coventry University's presence in SL as a case in point) at least in the short term.It will require the development of well thought-through 'exciting' applications and examples based on sound pedagogic principles in order to convince students to let the education sector intrude into their private on-line worlds.
If this fails then Universities will need to come together to develop the equivalent of the 'next-generation' VLE which will encapsulate the 'Web2.0 for Education' principle, leaving the traditional Web2.0 tools for students private activities. A mixture or EduSpaces, GoogleDocs and JORUM perhaps with a Facebook-type front-end?
In many ways this document provides sobering thoughts about the opportunities for e-learning in particular with new tools such as Web2.0 or even Second Life.These prospective students are certainly technologically savvy using several of the Web 2.0 tools for their personal use including social networking or instant messaging, used regularly by 64 and 68% respectively. Also very popular are the downloading of videos from sites such as YouTube, and increasingly online TV, thus putting severe strain on Universities JANET traffic.62% of pre-University students claim to regularly upload videos and photos, testimony to the concept of creating UGC.On the other hand less than 20% maintain their own blog or Web-site higlighting students reservation about writing and sharing text. The concept of a Wiki is also alien to them and Second Life is only relevant to a small proportion of students (about 20%).
What does this mean in regards to using Web2.0 technologies for learning. The answer is that prospective students expect Universities to have an infrastructure in place to support high band-width internet applications and they do take these features into consideration when making a choice for their appropriate University.
However this service is seen purely for entertainment and socialisation; they are largely unable to make any connection between Web2.0 tools and their learning. In fact 79% of students can only see e-learning in a supporting role, mainly relating to access to research sources later on in their studies. This of course does question the hightech approach taken by some Universities (Coventry University's presence in SL as a case in point) at least in the short term.It will require the development of well thought-through 'exciting' applications and examples based on sound pedagogic principles in order to convince students to let the education sector intrude into their private on-line worlds.
If this fails then Universities will need to come together to develop the equivalent of the 'next-generation' VLE which will encapsulate the 'Web2.0 for Education' principle, leaving the traditional Web2.0 tools for students private activities. A mixture or EduSpaces, GoogleDocs and JORUM perhaps with a Facebook-type front-end?
The long tail - new opportunities for learning
When reading around some articles detailing Web2.0 applications I was intrigued by the 'long-tail' business approach so successfully applied by Amazon and, to a lesser extent by eBay. Using a combination of sophisticated database management with social networking software it has opened up the low volume (specialist) niche market to these companies which traditional retailers are unable to reach through their normal sales outlets. What is even more impressive is the fact that this 'niche' market actually amounts to about 60% of total sales - quite an impressive 'niche' that is. It occured to me that similar nich markets exist in the education sector with the 'long tail' consisting of adults who have some need or requirement of learning (or just a plain interest therein) but for whom there is no provision in the traditional 'brick-and-mortar instructor-based learning process. These potential learners will be more difficult to reach and in any case will require a quite different, possibly personalised mode of teaching, at a competitive price. In it conceivable that the 'Amazon approach' could be applied to the educational system by a mixture of providing recycled and adapted resources comprising for example of high quality open-source learning objects (as currently funded by JISC as part of the JORUM project), by establishing effective peer-group online learning communities using enthusiastic past students or post-graduate students as 'mentors' and finally by 'outsourcing' the online teaching provision to experienced online educationalists and lecturers who have been unable to secure a tenured position at an HE institution or who have retired but still wish to engage in education, retaining some sort of 'associate lecturer status'. Quality assurance will be maintained by HEFCE in the same way as for traditional courses, with appropriate University 'branding'. This may appear to be a low-cost solution leading to an 'inferior product' - but Amazon has shown that an innovative internet-based approach may be exactly what 'long-tail' consumers require.
Web X.0?
I'm getting confused!Before starting this course I thought Web2.0 consists of little more than MySpace, YouTube, Blogger, Wikipedia and maybe del.icio.us.And now - it's mayhem. Never in my wildest dreams did I expect to come across so many apps which more or less do the same things which the tools above do - with a few extra bells and whistles or possibly with a slightly more amenable interface.I take the view that we are in the midst of what marketing experts would call the 'bowling alley' where developers try to capture the market as early as possible to succeed. With so many tools on offer only a few experts will be able to make rational decisions on their respective performances and features.Who's going to pick the winners? And who will be the winners - the VHSs of this world or the Betamax's?It all reminds me a bit of the dotcom bubble of the late 1990s and its overdue correction in 2000. If any evidence was needed look no further than today's headline (25/10) that good old MS has paid 240 Millionen Dollar to Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg for a 1,6 percent stake in his company, making this enterprise more valuable than most household companies in the UK, trading for tens of years.I think I need to take a deep breath, lean back and let the dust settle - as these are mad times indeed; may the correction come soon.
Social Networking – socially devisive?
The coming week we shall be starting on Web2.0 technology so the comments below may fit quite well with this topc. Many teenagers enjoy networking, as most people do. Beyond the street-wise aspects of this activity there is also the IT-based social networking variety around an online presence on the home computer with an internet connection. Parents are well aware and in some cases concerned about tools such as MySpace where ‘friends’ can be accumulated across the world.Anyone can subscribe to MySpace and make contact with other like-minded individuals. More recently a newer social networking tool called Facebook has been launched the idea of which has been based on making online friends in a college environment in the US; access from outside into this environment has been restricted and membership is by invitation only. It has now accepted that a clear social divide exists between Facebook and MySpace with the latter users originating predominantly from ethnic minorities and lower socio-economic backgrounds. As it now turns out some organisations have decided to ban its members from using MySpace but do permit the continued use of Facebook, an approach which appears to constitute social discrimination based on online activities (unless other reasons are provided such as security issues etc.). It will be interesting to note whether this approach is perceived as being as controversial as it would be in a real-world scenario. For further details see http://technology.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,2111028,00.html
VLEs - how much longer?
Glynis Cousin's articulate paper on the use of technologies and pedagogies and her comments on the use of VLEs made me reflect on my own experience of first WebCT and then Moodle and I started to recognise that I don't really like VLEs - and probably never have.My attitude towards them was probably based more on convenience than on appreciation.
VLEs have been around for a some time and their age is telling. Their design has of course been rooted in the instructivist approach to teaching and the constructivist elements, though continuously expanding give the impression of being 'bolted on'.In fact most academic content developers still only use it in a purely instructivist format.
As Cousins put it '... VLE environments tend to be skewed towards the simulation of the classroom, lecture hall, tutor's office ...'
This to me smacks of 20st century learning, not really forward looking in its scope.
I would advocate that we start letting go of this institution-centric beast with its 'control-freakishness' and move on to something more radical. What is required is a piece of software which has been redesigned from its roots based on the social constructivist model of learning, without the legacy stuff.
Interestingly developers do work on such tools and I have been alerted to one called Ecto (http://www.ectolearning.com/ecto2/Default.aspx) which has been designed with an interface not too dissmiliar to the popular social network application Facebook. It has a personal profile section, a 'Create Groups' section, a IM-tool and a Blog area.Content can be added as the usual file upload but developers may also link directly to YouTube movies or Flickr image files. RSS feed capabilities allow users to pull content from syndicated sites such as online publishers Web-sites or relevant Blogs.And this all from a personalied interface!Currently this is offered as a 'hosted solution' meaning that HEIs will not have any direct control over the management and tracking of their learners. I really wonder whether this is such a bad thing? Just think of all the resources institution could save currently spent on managing and maintaining VLE 'bloatware'.
Whether Ectolearning is succeeding or not is secondary - what is important is that people have recognised there is a problem and do something about it.
VLEs have been around for a some time and their age is telling. Their design has of course been rooted in the instructivist approach to teaching and the constructivist elements, though continuously expanding give the impression of being 'bolted on'.In fact most academic content developers still only use it in a purely instructivist format.
As Cousins put it '... VLE environments tend to be skewed towards the simulation of the classroom, lecture hall, tutor's office ...'
This to me smacks of 20st century learning, not really forward looking in its scope.
I would advocate that we start letting go of this institution-centric beast with its 'control-freakishness' and move on to something more radical. What is required is a piece of software which has been redesigned from its roots based on the social constructivist model of learning, without the legacy stuff.
Interestingly developers do work on such tools and I have been alerted to one called Ecto (http://www.ectolearning.com/ecto2/Default.aspx) which has been designed with an interface not too dissmiliar to the popular social network application Facebook. It has a personal profile section, a 'Create Groups' section, a IM-tool and a Blog area.Content can be added as the usual file upload but developers may also link directly to YouTube movies or Flickr image files. RSS feed capabilities allow users to pull content from syndicated sites such as online publishers Web-sites or relevant Blogs.And this all from a personalied interface!Currently this is offered as a 'hosted solution' meaning that HEIs will not have any direct control over the management and tracking of their learners. I really wonder whether this is such a bad thing? Just think of all the resources institution could save currently spent on managing and maintaining VLE 'bloatware'.
Whether Ectolearning is succeeding or not is secondary - what is important is that people have recognised there is a problem and do something about it.
Salmon vs. Moule: a preliminary (personal) critique
At the end of week three, having experienced both synchronous (WebCT discussion board) and synchronous (Skype Chat) communication tools it feels appropriate to wrap up my perceptions by contrasting two competing models for e-learning which have been mentioned in the debate.There is first the socalled 'five-stage framework and e-tivities', put forward by Gillian Salmon form Leicester University who proposes a sequential stepwise model in order to assist e-tutors in developing an environment suitable for e-learning (G. Salmon, 2003)
In this model the bottom step is occupied by the induction process, followed by (informal) online socialisation, followed by (online) information exchange. Knowledge construction is the second highest step, being obviously a higher order level of learning. The highest step is referred to 'development' where learners are meant to become responsible for their own learning, having mastered the process of learning. At the heart of this model sits the constuctivist learning .Salmon suggests that e-learning activities (e-tivities in her jargon) should be structured around these steps to ensure that learners become and remain engaged.
Pam Moule from the University of the West of England points to some deficiencies in this model apparently taking little account of 'blended learning', which is widely used in campus-based teaching in the UK. In her model she proposes an e-learning ladder which is based on some of her own research in which she puts forward six 'rungs' which at the bottom start of with an instructivist teaching mode leading to a constructivist approach at the top (P. Moule, 2007).At its heart are technology-focused tools employed to reach higher level learning, acting as 'rungs' of the ladder and leading from intructor-led to social community-led learning.In my view the two models serve different purposes: G. Salmon's deals with a predominantly if not exclusively online (distance) learning course, whereas P. Moule describes the situation in a traditional University course where f2f-teaching is complemented by online resources, including communication tools. Therefore the two models are not really comparable and are in fact addressing different issues, they are at best complementing each other.
I personally like the instructivist to constructivist transition of P. Moule's article although I disagree with some of the tools she describes in achieving this, for example the role of video-conferencing and virtual chatroom activities which appear misplaced. It appears to me that she may not be too familiar with the role and purpose of some of these technologies.
Overall in my view the entire debate which of the two models is right is a storm in the proverbial tea cup. It's a bit like asking the questions: what is better, petrol or diesel? The answer is of course it depends what engine your car has.
There are now so many ways of learning (and no one has looked into work-based e-learning for example) and consequently there will be room for several more models in advocating best practice in e-learning.
G. Salmon (2003) “The five-stage framework and e-tivities”, Chap. 2 pp. 10-36 Publisher: RoutledgeFalmer, London)P. Moule (2007) ALT-J, Research in Learning Technology, Vol.15, No. 1. 37-50
P. Moule (2007) ALT-J, Research in Learning Technology, Vol.15, No. 1. 37-50
In this model the bottom step is occupied by the induction process, followed by (informal) online socialisation, followed by (online) information exchange. Knowledge construction is the second highest step, being obviously a higher order level of learning. The highest step is referred to 'development' where learners are meant to become responsible for their own learning, having mastered the process of learning. At the heart of this model sits the constuctivist learning .Salmon suggests that e-learning activities (e-tivities in her jargon) should be structured around these steps to ensure that learners become and remain engaged.
Pam Moule from the University of the West of England points to some deficiencies in this model apparently taking little account of 'blended learning', which is widely used in campus-based teaching in the UK. In her model she proposes an e-learning ladder which is based on some of her own research in which she puts forward six 'rungs' which at the bottom start of with an instructivist teaching mode leading to a constructivist approach at the top (P. Moule, 2007).At its heart are technology-focused tools employed to reach higher level learning, acting as 'rungs' of the ladder and leading from intructor-led to social community-led learning.In my view the two models serve different purposes: G. Salmon's deals with a predominantly if not exclusively online (distance) learning course, whereas P. Moule describes the situation in a traditional University course where f2f-teaching is complemented by online resources, including communication tools. Therefore the two models are not really comparable and are in fact addressing different issues, they are at best complementing each other.
I personally like the instructivist to constructivist transition of P. Moule's article although I disagree with some of the tools she describes in achieving this, for example the role of video-conferencing and virtual chatroom activities which appear misplaced. It appears to me that she may not be too familiar with the role and purpose of some of these technologies.
Overall in my view the entire debate which of the two models is right is a storm in the proverbial tea cup. It's a bit like asking the questions: what is better, petrol or diesel? The answer is of course it depends what engine your car has.
There are now so many ways of learning (and no one has looked into work-based e-learning for example) and consequently there will be room for several more models in advocating best practice in e-learning.
G. Salmon (2003) “The five-stage framework and e-tivities”, Chap. 2 pp. 10-36 Publisher: RoutledgeFalmer, London)P. Moule (2007) ALT-J, Research in Learning Technology, Vol.15, No. 1. 37-50
P. Moule (2007) ALT-J, Research in Learning Technology, Vol.15, No. 1. 37-50
Synchronous communication blues
The 'highlight' of this week has been the Skype 'chat' with a group of six of us (the 'cool' group', chaired by Rory.It did take a fair while to get everybody 'on board', whether this was due to technical issues or just poor timing of some remained unclear. If however everybody adds the others to his/her contact list then this should not happen second time round.This has been my first encounter with such a live event as in the past I stayed well clear of IM and chat rooms assuming that this was more an area for bored teenage girls to hang around.So it is perhaps not too surprising that I found it a dramatically different experience to the discussion board from the previous week; it felt fast and furious, spontaneous and witty, disjointed in places and dialogical in others.It certainly feels like 'speaking' but with a handicap - the typing.Having been through this I'm not so sure about its usabiltiy and effectiveness as a teaching tool.However there are other synchronous communication tools out there which work in a quite different mode.There is of course the 'VoIP' version of Skype where the dialogue could be held in a more traditional way. However the 'phatic cues' will still be missing.Alternatively one could use video-enabled chat as in Skype or MS Live Messenger; here one would obtain visual cues but with some time-delay. This benefit may be offset by the destraction from the conversation coming from the talking head(s) in little windows.Finally there are of course the 'Virtual Worlds' which are essentially chat rooms (or IM comms if one chooses a one-to-one format). The emphasis here is transfered back on the text-side of communication with the avatars providing some but limited destraction.As added bonus though is the possibility of 'role play' or immersionism' which, depending on the context of the particular event, may provide some added impetus.It may be interesting to compare and contrast the perception and experiences of these live commication tools by the group in the coming weeks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)