Virtual Worlds as a Pandora's Box for learners?

[Milton Broome]

I am delighted to have been asked to moderate this week’s discussion. For the discussion I would really like to hear your views on the ‘Pandora’s Box’ of Virtual Worlds. In bringing our students into 3D virtual environments for educational purposes are we introducing them to a potentially harmful influence over and above what they would normally experience? We can protect and regulate our teaching and learning spaces but what happens when students wander off after a virtual seminar into an adjoining virtual-sex garden or adult-themed area in Second Life for example? Should we hold the responsiblity for introducing students to a platform that has such easy access to these influences? Perhaps there is no greater risk than when surfing the web. Many virtual worlds are extremely immersive and interactive, and for some, highly addictive. Should educators take responsibility for introducing them to this ‘potentially harmful’ influence? The potential risks have to be weighed against the benefits. However, I have received some emails and blog comments that reflect the general concern that Second Life, in particular, poses a direct risk to vulnerable people. What steps can we take to minimise that risk; should we take any responsibility for students’ miss-use of the virtual world; and how can we maintain our reputation as educationalists in such a diverse communities?

[Troy McConaghy]

And it also contained hope.

[Milton Broome]

And it contained all the evils of mankind. I wonder if we should be more concerned about this issue. I don't see much discussion of it across the web.

[Troy McConaghy]

Pandora opened the box because she'd been given the gift of curiosity.

[Milton Broome]

Thanks for your intuitive comments Rafi. I have slightly reworded my initial post to reflect all virtual worlds, as many users at RezEd are active across several platforms and I think the issues span virtual worlds.

I feel the issue of addiction is important too. However, I am not sure how far our responsibility to our students stretches to protect them from this risk. The 'buzz' of SL is much different from that on WOW and I wonder if we can realistically compare the two platforms. ‘Serious Games’ can be used to educate to good effect, I think, but what happens when students, or anyone for that matter, come to rely on the virtual world for friendships, community or intimacy?

My experience of talking with people that have been around in SL for a long time is that they invest a very large amount of time to the activity and this is often supported with significant sums of cash, either monthly land fees or buying of in-world currency. These people may be in a minority but then not everyone who tries fruit machines becomes addicted.

Ultimately, I suspect personality type and life circumstances play a large part in the extent to which people engage with virtual worlds. If we as educators use the platform as a tool and ensure we provide adequate information about the potential risks, I think this is sufficient. I wonder though if teaching in virtual worlds adds any risk where it may not have been present. It is a very open question and needs defining of course.

[Rafi Santo]

Hi Milton. I think that you raise some interesting points, but I wonder if there might be some assumptions and frames that you might be using that might limit or misconstrue the idea of a "Pandora's Box" effect in using virtual worlds in learning contexts.

In terms of Second Life, there's a division of grids in terms of age. Those 18 and up use the main grid, where there are explicit locations for mature content, as well as it sometimes popping up in unwanted places. Those below 18 are on the teen grid, where mature content is banned so never there explicitly in public spaces (though sometimes exists in individual resident inventories I imagine).

Any educator working with teens in Second Life would be doing so on the teen grid, and there they have a number of options in terms of level of contact with the public teen grid. Most educational projects there have closed islands that can't be accessed by TSL residents, many have teens use student accounts that can't leave those islands. So in terms of mature content for teens, I would say that using Second Life is 99.99% risk free.

In terms of students in a University setting, those would be above 18 and therefor there would be no legal obligation to protect them from mature content, though perhaps there's an argument for a moral obligation there, depending on one's view on the subject of pornography.

The point that you raise about addiction, actually, is a much more potent one as it applies not just to Second Life but to virtual worlds in general in terms of their uses for education (the issue of mature content doesn't, at least not to my knowledge). I find in my experience that Second Life is potentially more addicting for adults than teens, so this might mean more for University level education and professional training. In terms of teens, there are very few from the general population of teens that are likely to become addicted due to the game-less nature of Second Life (teens are used to quests and tasks that are presented to them in a game format, and often don't know really what to do when presented with something that totally unstructured like SL.)

The questions of addiction become more of a concern, I think, when we consider the use of virtual worlds that are games, such as World of Warcraft, that are potentially highly addictive for a range of ages. I'd be curious to hear from folks that utilized that environment for education about their thoughts on that, as well as from folks using platforms other than SL as many other VW's have stronger game cultures within them either as overarching narratives or as options of something to do while in the VW. (SL has that, but it's not a dominant culture.)

Anyhow, those are my general thoughts on the subject, I'd love to hear others more generally about this idea of pandora's box.