Disruptive Nature of Second Life: Education Style

As we begin to examine closely the properties of why particular technologies are considered “disruptive”, I found myself not quite understanding the rationale of why Second Life was placed into this particular category. In my mind’s eye; the progression of virtual worlds within the realm of technology for social interaction is one of a natural evolution of events.
The Internet has opened multiple opportunities for social interaction: The AOL, Yahoo, and Windows Live Messenger Services provided real-time social interactions with individual or groups; venues that were instituted before the Pre- Second Life era. We herald this advent of technology as one that affords us the ability to communicate with our global neighbors; opening avenues of information that were not possible decades earlier. The Internet has become our best resource for collaboration and cooperation amongst ourselves: for the sharing of information, insights, and understandings with ourselves, our communities, and our world. Why wouldn’t an individual devise a program with a way for others to socially interact within a centralized location via virtual worlds?

Phillip Rosedale, the creator of Second Life, in his discourse began to open my understanding. His premise is that individuals desire the ability to organize and experience information that is being received: virtual worlds provide that avenue. His second premise is the experience of this creation and interaction with information is “implicitly and inherently social”. (Rosedale, 2008) Fascinating! What is more fascinating is that this premise has its roots in Dewey’s Theory of Experience. The idea that learning activities should be designed in such a way the student interacts with the information, experiences the information, thereby constructing their own knowledge is constructivist approach at its best. Knowledge generation begins with knowledge creation. Learning is a social event. Second Life provides this freedom to create.

As I began to make these connections, I found myself understanding how Second Life, within the realm of K-12 education, would definitely be considered as “disruptive technology”. Second Life revolutionizes the way the student interacts with the information given. This concept is not well understood among those who would drive educational policy. Students must actively experience information and construct their own tree of knowledge in order for knowledge retention to occur. Learning outcomes increase when students are active participants in their own learning. Passive learning: no such animal.

The teacher would abandon the role of “know it all” to the role of facilitator: a co-creator of the knowledge experience. It takes a certain amount of guts to be an educator, yet not sit in the seat of the “driver of knowledge”. Second Life’s very nature disrupts traditional teaching/learning continuum. What a pleasant disruption.

I premise that by the time an emerging or another disruptive technology replaces Second Life, the educational arena will have understood it full value in the quest to enhance student learning outcomes. The tendency for educators to jump on the technology wagon is an arduous process.

Rosedale, P. (2008). Phillip Rosedale on second life. http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/the_inspiration_of_second_life.html

Dewey, J. (1938/1997). Experience and education. Touchstone: NY.

Module 1: Blog Responses

I have responded to the following blog posts:


Lewis Chappelear

Video conferencing is definitely "new age" technology within the school district I currently work: at least among teacher and local administrative colleagues. It is interesting to note how many other industries are more receptive to new technologies in efforts to enhance efficiency. Yet, the very institution that is entrusted to equip students for future endeavors on a professional level is lagging in its adoption of "new technologies".

Cathy Marziali

It has been a push of mine for several years within my building to update current technologies. The interactive response system is one of those technological pushes. The students become so engaged until it is not realized that learning is actually taking place.

Module 2: Blog Responses

I have responded to the following blog posts:

Lewis Chappelear

The evolution and progression of the smartphone never ceases to bring amazement. Not only is the current technology becoming a combined communication and pda, it is also becoming an entertainment system in one small device. My daugthers use their Android phones as Amazon Kindle Readers, Netflix receivers, as well as pda and communication devices. Fascinating...


Cathy Marziali

It has become so interesting how our current technologies were once only imaginations within the world of entertainment. Remember the fliphones from Star Trek? I premise that you only have to look to the entertainment world to realize the future technologies.

Module 3: Blog Responses

I have responded to the following Blog Posts:


Lewis Chappelear

Your analogy of how Second Life serves as present-day theatre entertainment on the internet is one that I had not considered until this present discussion. The fact that virtual worlds allows one to enjoy an alternate reality is indeed similar to the theater. It is interesting that the Second Life concept has been extended to the realm of video conferencing. I ponder as does Cathy, the social, political, economic, and psychological implications of the immersion of virtual worlds. The Rhymes of History have certainly given us food for thought.


Cathy Marziali

I concur with Mr. Chappelear; your transition from Module 2 to 3 is interesting indeed. What is more interesting is the fact that many individuals depend on GPS navigation apps to assist them in gettng to their destination; yet many of those same individuals may have not been too keen on the concept of utilizing the paper map version.

Module 3: Rhymes of History - Google Upward

As I viewed Kevin Kelly’s 2007 discourse, “Kevin Kelly on the next 5000 days on the Web”, over the TED network, I found fascinating his analogies of the progress of the web, and where we will be heading in the future.

Kelly introduces the concept of “co-dependency” on the web. His example of this is eloquently illustrated on his no longer having to know a number: what he does not know he simply Google’s the number to obtain it. Yes, I do that now. I don’t keep any information: I simply find Google search engine on my Blackberry to locate the information I believe I need. It is simple, quick, and since I am in possession a Blackberry, just plain simple to access. I no longer need Directory Assistance (at almost $2.00 per call, I can certainly live without DA).

Upon first hearing this discourse, I was shocked at how accurate his analogy had become. This co-dependency is the main purpose for the rise in smart phone and their respective applications. There is an application for everything, and our co dependent nature has lead us to the need for such applications. “There is an app for that” is now the most commonly used phrase one hears with respect to mobile devices.

I was further shocked to liken this “co-dependency” on the internet to the co dependency we currently have on the technology of alphabet and the written word: we simply cannot exist without it. Funny, I never thought of alphabet and writing as being co-dependent within the realm of human existence, yet we are hampered by our very communication with members of our community, society, and world this essential form. How thought provoking his analogies.
Hmm…I wonder will it be an app in the future for that…

Kelly, K. (2007, December). Kevin Kelly on the next 5,000 days of the Web [Speech]. Speech delivered at the EG 2007 Conference, Los Angeles. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/kevin_kelly_on_the_next_5_000_days_of_the_web.html

Tetrads: Evolution of Smart Phone Technologies

I appreciated this assignment as it afforded the opportunity to take a look back at how far Celluar Phone Technologies have evoluted within such a short period of time. Although the first mobile phone was invented in 1947, the first sale occurred in 1983.

The Mobile Phone has enjoyed a rapid evolution of appearance, style, and capabilities in less than a 30-year timespan. Can anyone remember when the phone was so bulky until it was impossible to place in your pocket? Or remember the costs incurred in purchasing "airtime"? Now, Everyone owns these devices, with the threat of making landlines obsolete within the near future: Smart Phones are becoming the communication device of choice for both home and work. What a difference a few decades make...