Yea, yea.... I am continuing to read Learning and Teaching in the Virtual World of Second Life, edited by Judith Molka-Danielsen and Mats Deutschmann. I should have known when I saw the title of tonight's chapter/article, "Assessing Student Performance" by David Richarson and Judith Molka-Danielsen, that I was not gonna "enjoy" it as I do most things I read about Second Life (SL). In the words of Cindy Selfe from DMAC, "I'm just not good at it [assessment]." To be perfectly honest, I don't think anyone is "good" at it. I believe it is a necessary evil, and anyone who thinks they are good at it is probably someone I would not want to take a class under.
To be fair, I can see how assessment in SL would be a problem for some. As Richardson and Molka-Danielsen describe it, there are two types of classes in SL: "place of study" and "object of study" (49). If SL is being used as a place of study, then it is basically a substitute for a regular brick and mortar classroom and the fact that it is SL really has nothing to do with anything. As an object of study, SL is a main component of the class. The authors believe that when SL is used as an object of study, like in a composition classroom, then assessment is really nothing new. I would agree with that. I often use SL as an experience for students so that they have something to write about, or as a way for them to critique their own real lives. In this case, assessment is based on the essays they write: nothing new.
So it is when SL is used as a place of study that things become a bit more difficult. And this is primarily what Richardson and Molka-Danielsen discuss. They look at ways to assess language classes in SL. So, if you are considering moving your class into SL as a place of study, and particularly if it is a language class, I would highly recommend you read this article. But as for me..... not much in it that I was really interested in (or, to put it proper, "in which I was interested").
To be fair, I can see how assessment in SL would be a problem for some. As Richardson and Molka-Danielsen describe it, there are two types of classes in SL: "place of study" and "object of study" (49). If SL is being used as a place of study, then it is basically a substitute for a regular brick and mortar classroom and the fact that it is SL really has nothing to do with anything. As an object of study, SL is a main component of the class. The authors believe that when SL is used as an object of study, like in a composition classroom, then assessment is really nothing new. I would agree with that. I often use SL as an experience for students so that they have something to write about, or as a way for them to critique their own real lives. In this case, assessment is based on the essays they write: nothing new.
So it is when SL is used as a place of study that things become a bit more difficult. And this is primarily what Richardson and Molka-Danielsen discuss. They look at ways to assess language classes in SL. So, if you are considering moving your class into SL as a place of study, and particularly if it is a language class, I would highly recommend you read this article. But as for me..... not much in it that I was really interested in (or, to put it proper, "in which I was interested").
RSS Feed
