Inquiry Based Learning and

Second Life

Sheila Webber

Information School

University of Sheffield

December 2010

Introduction

• This draws on a presentation given last month by

Professor Philippa Levy and me. I have acknowledged

her on slides she authored

• Phil was Academic Director of the Centre for Inquiry

Based Learning in the Arts and Social Sciences (a

Centre for Teaching & Learning) and I was a CILASS

Academic Fellow (small % buyout of my time)

• CILASS funded the purchase & year 1

rent (2007/8) on our SL island

Structure

• Identify how we view IBL

• Present a framework of IBL for learners derived

from longitudinal research study

• Also have created version of this in 3D in SL

• Identify how activities with first year students fit this

framework

• Discussion about what aspects of IBL can be

supported/ pursued in SL

What is IBL?

• A cluster of related pedagogies in which student

inquiry or research drives the experience of learning

and building knowledge

‘inquiry n: the action of seeking, especially (now always) for

truth, knowledge or information concerning something;

search, research, investigation, examination’ (COD)

Philippa Levy

• investigate questions & problems that often are

open-ended

• apply the principles and practices of scholarship or

research in their academic or professional area

• explore a knowledge-base actively, critically and

creatively

• participate in building new meaning and knowledge

Designed around students engaging in

a process of inquiry: they …

6

http://www.shef.ac.uk/ibl

for the ‘Sheffield Companion’

and other follow-up resources

students/tutors establish question,

problem, theme

students draw on their existing knowledge and, with support, decide on

the direction and methods of their inquiry

students explore evidence, interrogate

texts, conduct experiments etc, interacting with

information via a range of sources

students reflect, discuss, critique, analyse,

conceptualise, synthesise, create, receive feedback

students communicate

and share results of

their inquiry

Philippa Levy

8

Modes of IBL

Philippa Levy

Levy & Petrulis (2012)

Planning IBL

StudentsLearning outcomesInquiry themeInquiry processTasksAssessmentsInformationSpacesTechnologiesTutoringPeer-to-peerDissemination

From: The Sheffield Companion to IBL

Transition and inquiry

“Approaches to supporting transition are linked to improving preparedness for HE, easing integration into the university environment - both academically and socially - and encouraging the development of the independent learner.” (Whittaker, 2008: 3)

“Curriculum design should have a greater focus on the interactive dimensions of learning and the social experience of students, for example working in small groups and more enquiry-based and project work. It should also provide a more challenging learning experience to encourage greater engagement and the development of independent learning and high-level critical skills.” (Whittaker, 2008: 8).

Selected IBL elements: Level 1

BSc Information Management

Sheila Webber, 2010

Problem: Is the “Google

gen” really info illiterate?

(Group work/Presentation)

Learning about interviewing, data

analysis & research ethicsSemester 1

Data collection and

analysis: interview on

critical incident

E-portfolio on IL

Identify research question,

carry out mini research

project, group work

Bibliography on IM topic Report on IM

Support /

supervision/

guests

Semester 2

Steps in

research

process

exercise

Poster

session &

report

E-portfolio

NB does not cover all elements in teaching, learning & assessment!

W

e

e

k

1

W

e

e

k

1

2

Cox et al

(2008)

Webber

(2010)

Use of key technologies

• WebCT: repository for knowledge base,

interim store for knowledge creation,

crude research tool (discussion board),

crude tool for research project

management

• Second Life: site for pursuing new

questions, stimulus to question their own

conceptions, object of research, starting

to be repository for knowledge base

• Web: site(s) of existing knowledge; tools

for collecting data (e.g. surveymonkey)

• Facebook: (likely) informal tool for project management, host for survey instruments, object of research

• Mobile phones & IM

“Initially we simply handed out phone numbers and communicated via text messaging, with some use of instant messaging conversations…” (student blog 2008, talking about working on their assessed mini-research project)

Sheila Webber, 2010

Short lecture and

handout about

interviewingPractice interviews

in triads (interviewer,

interviewee, observer)

Practice interviews

in triads in SL

Research

interviews

in SL

WebCT

module

Revised

interview

schedule

Lecture, exercises,

readings on

information behaviour,

data collection, ethics

Individual feedback

/communication: email,

F2F, SL .

FAQs etc

Student‟s

Assignment

Assignment

briefing

Email, IM etc used to

communicate with interviewees

Handouts

Discussions

Presentations

15

Sheila Webber, 2010

„Identifying‟: Students explore a knowledge-base (KB)

actively in response to questions, problems, scenarios

or lines of inquiry framed by teachers (“what is the

existing answer/response to this question?”)

– Exploring: extent of KB in SL depends on

discipline (& chance)

– Information Literacy for SL needed

(as for other modes)

– Presenting findings

(whether found in SL or not)

FSU Holocaust

Mansourian‟s

information

visibility model

Muinjij native American island

Sheila Webber, 2010

„Pursuing‟: Students explore a knowledge-base

actively by pursuing their own questions, problems,

scenarios or lines of inquiry (“what is the existing

answer/response to my question?”)

– Locating existing disciplinary information within SL is

problematic

– May be particularly challenging (even harder for novice

to identify a feasible question)

– Can still be environment for parts of the process

Sheila Webber, 2010

„Producing‟: Students explore open questions, problems,

scenarios or lines of inquiry, framed by teachers or others such as an external „client‟, in interaction with a knowledge-base (“how can I answer this open question?”)

– Providing problems and questions for inquiry

– Potential for joining research community (but mostly research students)

– Environment for data collection

– Tools to manipulate data (crude)

– Analysing data through representation in SL?

– Dissemination

Sheila Webber, 2010

Structuring

inquiry

Students observing“model” structure, toreflect on/ discussin relation to their own inquiry

– 3D model of research steps in Second Life

Students carrying out their own inquiry, but guided by a structure (i.e. they interact with and populate the structure)

Sheila Webber, 2010

„Authoring‟: Students explore their own open questions, problems, scenarios or lines of inquiry, in interaction with a knowledge-base (“how can I answer my open question?”)

– Again, discipline/specialism-specific in terms of whether could support students in identifying valid research questions/ problems

– If students forming their own questions with significant use of SL, implies existing SL competence/ knowledge

– Could be particularly useful at certain stages e.g.

• Question formulation (engaging with SL research community)

• Data collection (just as use Web 2.0 channels like Facebook)

• Testing emerging results with international audience

• DisseminationSheila Webber, 2010

Concluding points

• Framework as means of

– thinking when and why SL can be valuable in IBL e.g. as part of blended learning

– identifying areas for development

– clarifying course design & approach to T, L & A

• Thinking of students as researchers from level 1

– most research communities in SL focused around postgrad researchers (not unique to SL!)

– however constructivist/ PBL/ IBL tendencies of SL educators world seem fertile ground for developing community

Sheila Webber, 2010

Sheila Webber

s.webber@shef.ac.uk

Twitter & SL: Sheila Yoshikawa

http://information-literacy.blogspot.com/

http://www.slideshare.net/sheilawebber/

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/23396182@N00/

Netvibes: http://www.netvibes.com/sheilawebber

References etc.• Centre for Inquiry Based Learning in the Arts and Social Sciences. (2008)

Inquiry-based Learning: a conceptual framework. Sheffield: CILASS. http://www.shef.ac.uk/cilass/resources

• Cox, A. et al. (2008) “Inquiry-based learning in the first-year Information Management curriculum.” Italics, 7 (1), 3-21

• Healey, M. & Jenkins, A. (2009). Developing Undergraduate research and Enquiry. York: Higher Education Academy.

• Khan, P. and O´Rourke, K. (2005). “Understanding Enquiry-based Learning”, In: Barrett, T., Mac Labhrainn, I., Fallon, H. (eds), Handbook of Enquiry and Problem Based Learning. Galway: CELT.

• Levy, P. & Petrulis, R. (2012). How do first-year students experience inquiry and research, and what are the implications for the practice of inquiry-based learning? Studies in Higher Education, 37(1).

• Webber, S. (2010) “Investigating modes of student inquiry in Second Life as part of a blended approach.” International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 1 (3), 55-70.

• Whittaker, R. (2008) Quality Enhancement Themes: The First Year Experience: Transition to and during the first year. Glasgow: QAA Scotland

Sheila Webber, 2010