CSCL Techniques in Collaborative Virtual Environments: The Case of Second Life - Teaching through Multi-User Virtual Environments - page 154

Finally, in the third phase, students returned
to form their initial Jigsaw groups. Again, after
studying for a week, each team had to present
their work from within the SL environment, in
the form of the Fishbowl collaborative learning
technique. At the end of this phase, each group
had to hand in its final deliverable, and each
student had to answer a questionnaire recording
his/her experience and suggestions.

approaches (i.e., face to face), existing features
must be augmented, and absent ones developed.
Case studies, such as the one presented in this
chapter, can aid researchers in identifying the
weak spots of collaborative learning platforms and
enhancing their pedagogical applicability based
on user suggestions, comments and requirements.

ReFeReNCeS

Aronson, E., & Bridgeman, D. (1979). Jig-
saw groups and the desegregated classroom:
In pursuit of common goals. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin , 5 , 438-446.
doi:10.1177/014616727900500405

CONCLUSION

In general, and based on the evaluation results,
we can surmise a positive reaction regarding the
overall experience of the collaborative learning
techniques by the majority of the participating
students. With regard to distance computer sup-
ported collaborative learning, we can conclude
that SL improves upon previous approaches in the
context of facilitating collaboration and commu-
nication. The evaluation results reveal an increase
in student interest, participation and amusement.
However, the students are divided regarding the
benefits of the SL approach in contrast with the
traditional face to face method.
Furthermore, based on the evaluation of the
features we implemented with respect to avatar
representation, we can surmise a beneficial impact
to the communication, interactivity and usability
capabilities of the SL platform. Also, avatar ges-
tures were highly commended by the majority of
the students for their usefulness. Finally, regarding
the potential educational use of the SL platform
by our department, most of the students: a) would
like to see more collaborative learning techniques
being implemented, and b) would be interested
in participating in online lectures.
We can conclude that the SL platform combines
a rich feature set, improving upon performance
levels as set by previous distance learning meth-
ods. In other words, SL can effectively be incor-
porated as the on-line part of a blended learning
approach. However, in order for SL collaboration
to be competitive in comparison to traditional

Aronson, E., & Patnoe, S. (1997). The Jigsaw
Classroom: Building Cooperation in the Class-
room (2nd ed.). Longman.

Barab, S., & Duffy, T. (2000). From practice
fields to communities of practice . Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.

Barkley, E., Cross, P., & Howell, C. (2004). Col-
laborative Learning Techniques: A Handbook for
College Faculty . New York: Jossey-Bass.

Bedford, C., Birkedal, R., Erhard, J., Graff, J.,
& Hempel, C. (2006). Second Life As An Edu-
cational Environment: A Student Perspective. In
Proceedings of the First Second Life Education
Workshop (pp. 25-27) Fort Mason Centre, San
Francisco, Ca., August 20th, 25-27.

Bouras, C., Giannaka, E., & Tsiatsos, T. (2008).
Exploiting Virtual Environments to Support
Collaborative E-Learning Communities. Inter-
national Journal of Web-Based Learning and
Teaching Technologies , 3 (2), 1-22.

Bransford, J. D. (1990). Anchored instruction:
Why we need it and how technology can help.
In Nix, D., & Sprio, R. (Eds.), Cognition, edu-
cation and multimedia . Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
Associates.