The purpose of this review was to explore how Second Life (SL) has been discussed, investigated and applied in education from its launch to present. Two research questions guided the review: (1) what are the annual publication number and its percentage of empirical studies?; (2) what are the characteristics of the empirical studies regarding the academic levels, subject areas, pedagogical frameworks, evolution of research foci, research methods and sample sizes? A total of 107 papers from 68 refereed journals were reviewed. The findings of the review indicated that SL research has outgrown merely envisioning SL for educational purposes and switched to empirical explorations. Most of the empirical studies were conducted in college settings. The research had been most frequently carried out in teacher education, language education, business, hospitality and tourism and computer disciplines. The most recent research focus was to find out issues, problems and factors that might affect SL‐based learning as well as the relevant solutions. This study can contribute to the discussion on the instructional use of SL by providing researchers with a summary of previous attempted studies. Several recommendations for future research are provided based on the findings. Practitioner Notes Second Life (SL) is currently the most mature and popular virtual world being used in education. SL has been used by educators to teach and supplement classes. There are rich anecdotal stories, conference presentations and scholarly publications concerning what educators have been doing in SL. An overview of the development and evolution of SL‐related research in education from its launch to present. Answers to questions, such as “is the educational implementation of SL still in its infancy?,” “what were the subject areas and academic levels that have been explored by researchers?” and “has the research foci evolved throughout the years?” Assistance to researchers for identifying and locating areas for future explorations. There are studies, reports and stories that exemplify how SL can be used for language teaching, business, hospitality and tourism, computer studies and so on. Educators and researchers in K‐12 and adult education can pay more attention to using SL as an instructional tool. Educators and researchers in the fields such as chemistry and mathematic can explore more about the instructional use of SL.

No abstract

Rooted in behavioral theory, particularly the radical or selectivist behaviorism of B.F. Skinner (1953B.F. Skinner ( , 1954B.F. Skinner ( , 1966B.F. Skinner ( , 1968B.F. Skinner ( , 1974, the direct instruction (DI) (see, e.g., Skinner, 1953(see, e.g., Skinner, , 1966, the direct instruction (DI) of Siegfried Engelmann (Bereiter & Engelmann, 1966) is now well into its third decade of influencing curriculum, instruction, and research. It is also in its third decade of controversy (c.f., Gersten, Baker, Pugach, Scanlon, & Chard, 2001).To begin, we offer a definition and our stance related to DI-which has become the whipping post in some pedagogical camps, while the panacea in others. For clarity, DI is not a lecture approach (e.g., Freiberg & Driscoll, 2000). It is an instructional model that focuses on the interaction between teachers and students. Key components of DI include "modeling, reinforcement, feedback, and successive approximations" (Joyce, Weil, & Calhoun, 2000, p. 337). Joyce and colleagues specified the instructional design principles, which include the framing of learner performance into goals and tasks, breaking these tasks into smaller component tasks, designing training activities for mastery, and arranging the learning events into sequences that promote transfer and achievement of prerequisite learning before moving to more advance learning. Essentially, DI is "modeling with reinforced guided performance" (Joyce et al., p. 337).Our intent in this article is to explicate the genesis, components, and permutations of DI as it has evolved in practice, and describe how it is being used in instructional technology. 41comprehensive educational program. The research indicates its usefulness in maintaining time on task, the learning of skilled performance, and high rates of success when designed correctly (e.g., Fisher et al., 1980;Slavin, Madden, Dolan, & Wasik, 1996). Therefore, we believe that instructional designers, software designers, teachers and the like ought to know its foundation, essential components, historical and current uses, and potential for designing instruction that promotes student success for particular instructional objectives. (b) Second, and related to the first, our experience with lay faculty (and some instructional technology practitioners) who design instruction, especially online education, indicates a dearth of knowledge regarding the research and application of DI. Over the past two decades, DI has been overused by some, maligned by others, and frequently been wrongly equated with a pure lecture approach. DI is not for all uses, objectives, or learners; no approach is. DI is a useful tool for the appropriate purpose, objectives, and context, and the appropriate learners. (c) Finally, while DI has maintained its core principles over time, it has evolved in response to new understandings about learners and learning. We will elaborate on these variations (e.g., expository teaching) and the research that indicates their utility.The DI model was created by Engelmann an...

No abstract

No abstract