Between November 2006 and October 2007 I had the pleasure of being involved in a number of interesting discussions about Multi-User Virtual Environments (MUVEs), an online 3D environment in which individuals can interact via human-looking avatars. These discussions were facilitated by JISC (the Joint Information Systems Committee) as part of a larger community exploring the expansion of ‘Next Generation Technologies’: technologies that could be described as moving the web from being more than a content-delivery system by adding a layer of social and participatory services. 

At that time many higher education institutions were buying islands on the Second Life platform, which remains the highest profile of the MUVEs. On closer inspection it became clear that it was this high profile, not the teaching and learning opportunities, that was driving this uptake as most of the islands purchased by institutions were procured for potential publicity purposes rather than for pedagogic reasons. This brought to mind the feverish purchasing of websites in the later half of the 90s which preceded the discovery of what ‘the web’ could usefully provide. While there were pockets of innovation in the use of MUVEs for teaching and learning these were usually driven by early adopter individuals who were not concerned with systematic reflection on or dissemination of their experiments. 

Discussions within the community led to the formation of a cluster of teaching practitioners, developers and researchers who each brought ideas and aspirations from their practice as to how MUVEs could be harnessed for more than institutional publicity. This process was akin to a dating agency for ideas in which individuals from across the board who would not otherwise have come into contact with each other were introduced by JISC facilitator Lawrie Phipps and colleagues. In this way common interests as well as diverse experience and unformed aspirations could be brought together with a view to exploring next generation technologies in a more structured way. So the Open Habitat project was born. 

The project was envisaged as student-centred, exploring effective uses of MUVEs for teaching and learning. It had the advantage of having key ‘users’ on its team in the form of Ian Truelove and Graham Hibbert, teaching practitioners from the art and design undergraduate programme based at Leeds Metropolitan University and both Second Life experts. They had gradually integrated the use of MUVEs into their curriculum and were looking for a structured way to develop their thinking and build on their experience. We also had Marianne Talbot, a tutor from the online distance philosophy programme based out of the University of Oxford. Marianne had organised a Christmas party using the Moodle VLE for her students which had been a great success, and she approached members of the project team to enquire whether Open Habitat might allow her to see how the 3D environment would change the dynamic of her distance teaching. She describes herself as a nontechie and had no previous experience of MUVEs but sensed a potential value. These project members would allow Open Habitat to explore complex aspects of MUVEs whilst ensuring it was sensitive to the practical realities of day-to-day teaching. 

The core of Open Habitat activity centred on a series of pilot teaching sessions with both art and design and philosophy students and was designed to take advantage of what we considered to be the particular potential of MUVE platforms. Underpinning the design of these pilots was a collection of themes or concepts which we hoped to explore. 

The art and design students could be described as traditional undergraduates. Fresh from foundation they were developing an understanding of their emerging practice. These students had the opportunity to meet face-to-face and were keen to be part of an innovative programme of study. The hope was that the MUVEs could provide one of many creative spaces they encounter on their course and become a form of ‘virtual studio’ in which the physical limits and practicalities of the normal art studio would be reduced and in which the relative anonymity provided would allow individuals to experiment and take risks. 

In contrast to this the philosophy students were gathered from a group who had participated in one of the University of Oxford’s online distance philosophy courses. With no feasible opportunity to meet face-to-face and an average age of around 50 they represented a very different type of learner, one experienced in debate and reflection. The project’s aspiration for this group was to provide an online teaching space which went beyond text, allowing a more embodied form of social interaction to suffuse traditional seminar style discussions around a philosophical theme. The tutor’s experience of running social events through online forums had enabled her to see how this interpersonal dimension had benefited the mood and learning on an online course. Could a MUVE provide the ‘next level’ of interaction in this manner, providing a space for debates which had some of the vibrancy of face-to-face philosophical discussions? 

Open Habitat was launched in January 2008. Each of the pilots took place in two stages spread over a period of nine months. One challenge shared by both groups was how to induct students (as well as the philosophy tutor) into the use of Second Life; without the appropriate skills, little learning relating to the subject disciplines would take place. The Leeds Met staff decided to use an additional Virtual Environment, OpenSim, to orientate their students, which allowed them to separate the practical (building skills) from the social in the first instance. (OpenSim allows for one island per student.) This experience convinced them of the benefits of not throwing students in at the deep end when planning to use Second Life in their curriculum. The philosophy students, together with their tutor, attended an orientation session ‘in-world’ in which they acquired some of the basic skills such as sitting, teleporting and getting to know the virtual location. Following each orientation the group then engaged in a more formal philosophy discussion session. 

This diversity of teaching styles, goals, student ‘types’ and aspirations across the two disciplines allowed those involved in the Open Habitat project to experience and analyse a significant cross session of activity in MUVEs. This magazine contains a variety of material which represents our piloting activities, together with our reflections on good practice and the role that teaching in MUVEs can play relative to other forms of pedagogical practice. We have included reactions from students and tutors plus a generous selection of images in an attempt to communicate the character of the project and to emphasise that while using MUVEs can be challenging it can also be vibrant, creative and fun. We hope that this will help you to decide if the risk of using a MUVE for teaching is worth the potential rewards. 

DAVID WHITE