Multi-User Virtual Environments - Teaching through Multi-User Virtual Environments - page 288

will be Croquelandia (described in detail in the
section that follows).

the participatory culture and collaborative norms.
Although facilitated by the digital architecture,
it is not the technical platforms that distinguish
one from another, but rather the ways in which
the users co-construct their own experiences.
Understanding this dynamic nature is critical to
our discussion of language learning in MUVEs.
The ways in which these characteristics are real-
ized and co-constructed by users can (and should)
vary even within the same MUVE. Debates sur-
rounding styles of play and appropriate in-world
actions are prevalent (Taylor, 2006; Squires &
Steinkuehler, 2006) and play a large role in the
way users interact with the virtual space. Partici-
pation in these debates can be just as valuable
as the time spent in-world. Research addressing
the ten characteristics in Table 1 should take into
account the ways in which this variance actually
contributes to the value of knowledge construc-
tion within various types of MUVEs, in addition
to the game play itself.

Characteristics of MUVEs

Drawing on research from various disciplines,
including computer assisted language learning
(CALL), second language acquisition, instruction-
al technology, anthropology, and education, Sykes
(2008) presents ten characteristics of MUVEs that
are especially relevant for L2 development with
accompanying resources. While the list presented
in Table 1 is not exhaustive, it presents a general
overview of the potential benefits of MUVEs that
are specifically relevant to language learning.
It is important to note that since it is more
than just the environment that creates the virtual
culture, all MUVEs do not contain the same
characteristics. While the characteristics listed
in Table 1 are inherently part of the participation
mechanism and structure of the majority of virtual
spaces, it is the users themselves who determine

Table 1. Characteristics of MUVEs relevant to L2 learning (Adapted from Sykes, 2008)

Characteristic Sample Resources

(1) Varied task type and occurrence of negotiation of mean-
ing/action

Blake (2000); Fernández-García & Martín-Arbelaiz (2002); Smith (2003a,
2003b 2004); Vick et al. (2000); Zheng et al (2009)

(2) Effective, multilevel, environmental feedback Bryant (2006); Gee (2003, 2005); Prensky (2001); Steinkuehler (2006)

(3) Opportunities to focus on different/multiple aspects of
the language, including discourse functions and syntactic
complexity

Abrams (2001); Belz & Thorne (2005); Furstenberg et al. (2001); Payne &
Ross (2005); Payne & Whitney (2002); Sotillo (2000); Sykes (2005, 2008);
Vandergriff (2006); Zheng, et al (2009)

(4) Different and varied participant roles; the possibility of
creating multiple selves

Abrams (2001); Böhlke (2003); Boellstorff (2008); Darhower (2002); Hung
& Chen (2003); Lee & Hoadley (2007); Payne & Whitney (2002); Sadler &
Nurmukhamedov (2008); Warchauer (1996); Wildner-Basset (2005)

(5) Co-construction of the interaction, environment, and social
networks to fit individual needs

Brown & Alder (2008); Boellstorff (2008); Bryant (2006); de Freitas (2006);
Gee (2003, 2005); Prensky (2001, 2005); Steinkuehler (2008); Taylor (2006);
Thorne & Payne (2005); Zheng et al. (2009)

(6) Individualized, adaptable experience Aldrich (2005); Boellstorff (2008); García-Carbonnell et al. (2001); Gee

(2003, 2005); Prensky (2001); Sykes (2008)

(7) Engaging, meaningful participation de Freitas (2006); Gee (2003, 2005); Mistral (2007); Noëlle Lamy & Good-

fellow (1999); Prensky (2001); Wilcox et al. (2006); Zheng et al. (2009)

(8) Collaborative and social Ducheneaut et al. (2007); García-Carbonnell et al. (2001); Noëlle Lamy

and Goodfellow (1999); Prensky (2001); Steinkuehler (2008); Sykes (2008)

(10) Archiving of interaction for future analysis, feedback,
and assessment

Belz (2003, 2007); Belz and Vyatkina (2005); Noëlle Lamy and Goodfellow
(1999); Sykes (2008)