On the 7th of October, I am giving an invited talk at Linköping University in Sweden on my work and research with pedagogical agents. I will also be meeting with Agneta Gulz, Magnus Haake, and their colleagues whom I haven’t yet met (but really looking forward to meeting) to discuss various projects and future directions. Below is my presentation for attendees and for those who may be interested.
Category: sharing Page 39 of 41
I’ve been away from my RSS reader a couple of days, and when I came back to it today I saw these two interesting articles. The first one looks at avatar design with respect to perceived interactivity and immersion, and although implications for education are not explored, it’s easy to see how this work applies to the increasing importance of pedagogical agent’s visual aesthetics. While I may not completely agree with the second article, it does a good job delineating the complexity of our work.
Enjoy.
Avatars Mirroring the Actual Self versus Projecting the Ideal Self: The Effects of Self-Priming on Interactivity and Immersion in an Exergame, Wii Fit
in CyberPsychology & Behaviour by Seung-A Annie, Department of Communication, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts
Abstract: As exergames are increasingly being used as an interventional tool to fight the obesity epidemic in clinical studies, society is absorbing their impact to a more intense degree. Interactivity and immersion are key factors that attract exergame consumers. This research asks, What are the effects of priming the actual self versus the ideal self on users’ perceived interactivity and immersion in avatar-based exergame playing? and What are important moderators that play a role in exergame users’ self-concept perception? To answer these research questions, this study leveraged the Wii’s avatar-creating function (Mii Channel) and exergame feature (Wii Fit) in a controlled, randomized experimental design (N
=126). The results of a 2×2 factorial design experiment demonstrated the significant main effect of self-priming on interactivity and the moderating role of the actual-ideal self-concept discrepancy in influencing immersion during exergame playing. Game players who created an avatar reflecting the ideal self reported greater perceived interactivity than those who created a replica avatar mirroring the actual self. A two-way ANOVA demonstrated the moderating role of the actual–ideal self-concept discrepancy in determining the effects of the primed regulatory focus on immersion in the exergame play. The underlying theoretical mechanism is derived from and explained by Higgins’s self-concept discrepancy perspective. Practical implications for game developers and managerial implications for the exergame industry are discussed.
Technology-supported learning innovation in cultural contexts
in Educational Technology Research and Development by Jianwei Zhang, University at Albany, SUNY Department of Educational Theory and Practice
Abstract: Many reform initiatives adopt a reductionist, proceduralized approach to cultural change, assuming that deep changes can be realized by introducing new classroom activities, textbooks, and technological tools. This article elaborates a complex system perspective of learning culture: A learning culture as a complex system involves macro-level properties (e.g., epistemological beliefs, social values, power structures) and micro-level features (e.g., technology, classroom activities). Deep changes in macro-level properties cannot be reduced to any component. This complex system perspective is applied to examining technology-supported educational change in East Asia and analyzing how teachers sustain the knowledge building innovation in different contexts. Working with the macro–micro dynamics in a learning culture requires a principle-based approach to learning innovation that specifies macro-level changes using principle-based instead of procedure-based terms and engages teachers’ deep reflection and creative engagement at both the macro- and the micro-level.
You are in your first scheduled session at the University. Your prof says:
“You must buy these X books for the semester”
(on some level, that’s ok, i guess)
“Copyright laws don’t allow you to photocopy more than 10% of the book”
(this is getting a bit weird)
“You should bring all your books to class”
(….)
“If I don’t see you with your own copy of the book, I won’t like it, and you don’t want that to happen”
(huh?!?)
(… you then realize that the author of the books is the instructor, and the build up to the threat makes sense)
As a student at the university, what do you do? What can you do without risking failing the course, and risking your career at the university? Remember that in the background is the fact that throughout your educational career, you were being treated as an empty jar waiting for knowledge to be poured into you (at least that’s what the system and those that support it had you believe). Can you speak up?
More importantly, let’s shift our focus to the academic. How on earth can this behavior be reconciled with the goals of the university that employs you? As stated on the manual (available through the university’s website), the university, through research and teaching, aims to:
inspire and develop the values of intellectual freedom, free movement of ideas and dialogue, and tolerance to new or opposing views.
I placed this post under the “open” category because it’s anything but. I don’t have a category for closed and opportunistic. The problem of course isn’t just the individual instructor, but (s)he does keep oiling the cogs that keep the system going.
Throughout my career, students have come first. I spend hours upon hours, often taken from my leisure time, to work with them, to advice and help them, to ask more questions and to avoid providing simple answers. This kind of thing, student exploitation masqueradeing as education, not only frustrates me, but reinforces my belief in putting humanity at the center of education, regardless of discipline and level/grade.
This is another one of those mini posts related to the changing nature of the work that academics do; specifically, publishing. I wrote this after being directed to the Public Library of Science site from Tony Hirst‘s tweet:
If you visit the website mentioned (here) you will see that the Public Library of Science will be making available a number of metrics intenting to evaluate the reach of published articles (I played with a similar concept here). These metrics (which will accompany each article) include reader notes and comments, ratings, social bookmakrs, citations in the academic literature, and so on. Not only is this a step toward transparently assessing the value of a publication, it provides another impetus for academics to seriously consider engaging with and participating in social media spheres. In an age where ongoing debate, collaboration, interaction, participation, and engagement are daily buzz words when envisioning improved education, shouldn’t the same ideas apply to our publications? If you are interested in these issues you may like to look at this cloudwork (and especially the comments made by Giota on the credibility, resistance, legitimacy, and power structures). It’s an interesting conversation.
Your thoughts?
During the month of September,
- Two tuition free universities were launched: Peer-to-Peer University and the University of the People
- A massively online course (Connectivism and Connective Knowledge 2009) opened its virtual doors for the second year in a row for anyone interested in participating (massive = hundreds of learners)
- EC&I 831: Social Media & Open Education also opened it’s virtual doors to anyone who wishes to participate: more than 180 people have so far signed up.
- Harvard University announced a tuition-free Doctor of Education Leadership program.
- Talis announced angel funding for projects relating to open education
- ….[and it’s only September 15th]…
- [update 1: Sept. 15] Five US universities have pledged support to openness by figuring out ways “to pay open access journals for the articles they publish by the institutions’ scholars”
Can you see a trend?
My colleagues and I just published a paper on the design and evaluation of an online learning environment titled Geothentic:
Doering, A., Scharber, C., Miller, C., & Veletsianos, G. (2009). GeoThentic: Designing and assessing with technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [Online serial], 9(3). http://www.citejournal.org/vol9/iss3/socialstudies/article1.cfm
In short, Geothentic is an online environment that provides problem-based learning modules for the teaching and learning of geography. The student side of the environment is based on the idea of scaffolding. The teacher side of the environment is based on the idea of Technological Pedagogical And Content Knowledge (or TPCK or TPACK). The paper discusses the evolution of the environment through a design-based research lens and highlights three technology-based ways to visually assess teachers’ TPACK.If you have any questions about the paper, feel free to get in touch.
The CITE journal is an open access publication and focuses on technology and teacher education.
For those of you that missed the announcement, the first courses at the Peer to Peer University started on September 9, 2009. The Peer to Peer University is an “online community of open study groups for short university-level courses”and it’s an exciting development for the changing nature of the educational landscape. While there’s lots of issues to resolve before such initiatives become widespread (accreditation being an important one), it’s great to see this come to life. To celebrate the launch, I have enrolled in the Introduction to Cyberpunk Literature course :). I am interested in the topic from lots of angles, and since I am interested in improving universities and their role in society I can also act as a participant-observer.