-
Fun @ GCS
e-Learning and Second Life – How viable is it?
e-Learning has evolved rapidly over last decade or so, from being simple PowerPoint presentations to highly interactive games and simulations. Second Life (SL) is yet another addition to the armory of trainers.
I have looked at SL with interest over last year or so. To give a brief to the uninitiated – it’s a 3-D environment where you can create your own avatar, roam around in the 3-D world, interact with other people who are there, create 3-D objects, own land (need to pay real money), and then go on to create your very own virtual world (see snapshots of some properties below).
International Space Museum – Very Good! Wipro Campus
All this throws up some very interesting options for e-learning or training purposes. One can buy a small piece of virtual land, build a training center there, and start offering training classes for free or charge Lindens (money used in SL, which can be exchanged for real money with other users) from the learners. Many universities and corporations have already setup their campuses in SL, and are experimenting with this medium by conducting training sessions there. There are some distinct advantages which SL offers to trainers, some of which are –
- This virtual world is well-equipped to deliver sales training because it can effectively replicate real-life situations by using role-play exercise and simulations.
- I also think that simulation based trainings, such as team work, and communication can be done more effectively vis-à-vis VCR, or other online training methodologies.
- However, for me the greatest advantage of Second Life is that you can create various equipment models and training tools using prims, which is not possible in a real classroom.
However, SL brings its own set of challenges such as – its bandwidth and computing resource hungry; the 3-D environment is perplexing at times and acclimatizing may take time even for technically savvy people; firewall can also pose problems to its proper functioning.
I believe there would be lot of inertia against SL from corporate learners, and for it to work trainers would have to go an extra mile to make learners comfortable. One of the things that trainers can do is pre-build generic avatars for learners (which they can reuse in all the trainings), have them seated in their respective places in their training center in SL, and with this groundwork done just pass on the login information to the learners. Once learners get into SL at appointed time, give them a quick 5-10 minute overview of how to move around, interact with object, and then go on to give the training. This would help learners get started quickly, and get the best out of training without going through the initial steep learning curve.
I think SL is going to survive, provided we (the training industry) are able to offer innovative and effective trainings on it, and keep it simple for our learners to use.
(Manish Gupta is Head – Business Development at G-Cube)
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
3 Responses to “e-Learning and Second Life – How viable is it?”
Leave a Reply
Comments are moderated, and will appear on this weblog only after being approved by the administrator.
January 3rd, 2008 at 11:34 am
As I read through your blog, I realized one common thing that was present when e-learning had just started with powerpoint presentations, then moved on to simple (and now they seem like very stupid) animations, then came the animations that were more refined, then with voice to the animations, then 3D and now gaming is the new in-thing.
The commonality in all of them is that when they started they all had training sessions that were put in to acclimatise the learner to the software. For a first time user, the use of this training session is debatable as I come from a deep-set feeling that learning is best when its left to itself. I can be wrong. Plus, I guess we all would agree that the relevance of such training sessions, if the user already has some basic knowledge of the software, becomes obsolete. At times, these training sessions are ignored, rather than used, especially if the user has a limited time period for the software.
As for Second Life, it is a good software, but again its taking a person off the hands-on experience. I am a member of the second life now for almost a week. It is interesting for sure, but I wonder. I had in the school dissected a frog and a mouse. I agree, it was quite messy and my hands had reeked for the next two-three days. I also have used the simulated dissections available and to tell you the truth, its not as much fun. I believe the unpredictability of the pinned down animal becoming suddenly conscious makes it fun… or call me a sadist.
Another instance is the training modules present in every mobile device. How many of us have even seen them or know of their existence?
What I mean by all of this is that we need to first define what all is towards actual learning? If training sessions are needed then it should be suggested by an ID and even then if the ID has suggested it without doing a real time survey, then I would consider the feedback as dubious. Similarly, the use of a website like second life at present is restricted as we have already used characters and real life buildings and other 3D effects in a 2D environment. Is it old just because we have used it already or is it old as its usage is not providing the required enthusiasm?
January 4th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
No doubt, the hands-on experience is the preeminent way to learn but the SL environment can facilitate us to reduce the complexities that could arise in the real time. Just a week back I saw a program in a Discovery Channel, where a 3-D games developer was developing the games for pilot training. He was developing similar types of software from the last four to five years but in real life he has never flown a helicopter. So, to feel the real-time experience he has decided to fly the helicopter with the help of a trained pilot and the result was incredible. In his first time he flew the helicopter, although the pilot was their, to help him but still… This is just an instance! I didn’t mean here that we can do anything.
So what I feel is that “Real time experience is the best but SL could help us to make things easier and approachable for everyone”.
January 16th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
Interesting perspective Kasturi. I too have my doubts on effectiveness of SL in many kind of trainings – cutting a frog for example . But then there are various situations and business requirements where I believe, if used properly, this kind of environment can be very effective.
Teams now sit thousands of miles apart, trainers are always in short-supply, and providing effective training under such circumstances is always a challenge. We all know that ‘learning by doing’ is always a better mode of training then just ‘telling’ a learner about something. So in such scenario, SL (or similar environments) give us an opportunity to create real-life trainings, and simulations without bankrupting a client! That’s the value it brings to the table in my opinion.