Second Life (SL) is a disruptive technology because it replaces the need for face-to-face (f2f) role playing with a virtual reality world that can be accessed anywhere in the world with internet access. A disruptive technology is defined by Thornburg as “new technology with the same function as an existing technology but it functions more efficiently and then obsoletes that technology (2009).
What SL has done is change the course of cooperative learning
where individual reservations may inhibit a person from fully participating and allow them to create a virtual self free from specific identity. The need for classrooms and teacher prepared roles to support this type of learning (which is touted as a preferred method of expressing understanding of the subject matter) has diminished to the point of virtual extinction. The specific disruption is the technology investment to brick-and-mortar classrooms, including the myriad of electronic technology for f2f support. With SL and similar programs, the school’s electronic support is minimized as the instructor and students typically provide their own computers and internet access with the school providing a portal to work in (even this can be established outside of the school’s resources).
SL may continue for many years but it will likely change forms as technology improves the capability and quality of its digital processing. If they do not change rapidly enough, then another technology could replace it such as one with a three dimensional, holographic ability. I would guess that these changes are between five and ten years away.
What SL has done is change the course of cooperative learning
where individual reservations may inhibit a person from fully participating and allow them to create a virtual self free from specific identity. The need for classrooms and teacher prepared roles to support this type of learning (which is touted as a preferred method of expressing understanding of the subject matter) has diminished to the point of virtual extinction. The specific disruption is the technology investment to brick-and-mortar classrooms, including the myriad of electronic technology for f2f support. With SL and similar programs, the school’s electronic support is minimized as the instructor and students typically provide their own computers and internet access with the school providing a portal to work in (even this can be established outside of the school’s resources).
SL may continue for many years but it will likely change forms as technology improves the capability and quality of its digital processing. If they do not change rapidly enough, then another technology could replace it such as one with a three dimensional, holographic ability. I would guess that these changes are between five and ten years away.
The social benefits, as related above, are that people who may be timid when participating f2f will likely participate with less caution because they will feel more anonymous. An example of this affect is people who are mascots for sporting events. It is often the case that these people are reserved or even shy until they put on the mascot costume. Even though people may know who they are, their costume hides their identity so they feel free to act out more than they normally would. In my area of education, students tend to enjoy opportunities to utilize computers as part of the classroom experience, and being able to create virtual representations of themselves (called avatars in SL and similar programs) gives them the chance to fulfill a fantasy of being someone else.Web Resources:
Examples of some disruptive technologies: http://moneyterms.co.uk/disruptive-technology/
Article discussing Second Life as a disruptive technology: http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20080117162121373
Reference:
Thornburg, D. (2009). Disruptive technology. (Vodcast). Emerging and Future Technology DVD produced by Laureate Education, Inc. Baltimore.
Stephen,
ReplyDeleteI agree that SL can replace f2f interaction but I also find this to be the problem. I agree that it offers an alternative for those who might not interact, but I also feel that this can create a false sense of security where people live more in their virtual world than the real world.
Although it adds benefits, I think it could be detrimental to society if to much is relied on with virtual worlds.
Mike,
ReplyDeleteAll of these electronic communication venues (with maybe the exception of video conferencing over skype or similar web-site) do perpetuate a false sense of social interaction and awareness. I believe that to some extent it explains the violence in youth because they don't know how to handle negative people when they are right in front of them. They also don't respect other people's opinions, because in electronic media you can mock or ignore them, and they lose any empathy so they just want to beat or kill them not caring about the person or their family's feelings
Stephen,
ReplyDeleteI never thought about it being a holographic technology...do you think that people would still use avatars? I think avatars are really the key behind the draw and success of this technology. This has really sparked my interest and I would love to see the outcome of this...