Education and Information Technologies

, Volume 21, Issue 5, pp 1007–1032 | Cite as

Bolstering the quality and integrity of online collaborative university- level courses via an open Sim standalone server in conjunction with sloodle

  • Nikolaos PellasEmail author


The contemporary era provides several challenges which extend from the reconstitution of an innovative knowledge domain and curricula to candidate learning platforms that support online course delivery methods. Educators and scholars on these demands have recently started to rethink alternative ways for the assimilation of the experiential knowledge in three-dimensional (3D) technologically advanced environments, like 3D multi-user virtual worlds. In spite the widespread dissemination and proliferation of novel educational implications by utilizing 3D multi-user virtual worlds combined with the 2D interface of LMS (Learning Management Systems) and the assessment of the effectiveness based on the online course delivery method in a long-term usability is still absent from the international academic literature. This study presents interoperability issues focused on the utilization of the virtual world Open Simulator (Open Sim) in conjunction with Sloodle (Simulation Linked Object Oriented Dynamic Learning Environment) as a free plug-in module. The evaluation of this online learning process according to an empirical research method became possible with the assistance of ninety-five (95) students by two different academic sectors that participated in this project and measured the capabilities and instructional affordances of this platform. The evaluation process was focused on four multi-dimensional parameters (psychological-pedagogical, technical-operational, organizational-financial, and socio-cultural). The study findings based on students’ experiences revealed that both platforms could be sufficiently connected as a unique platform which can increase the users’ learning abilities. This “hybrid” platform can adequately convert the ordinary multi-user virtual world of Open Sim and Sloodle in a common “incubator” of knowledge for online courses at university level. At the end, the instructional affordances and implications for future-driven directions are also discussed.


Open Sim Sloodle Collaboration Online learning Efficiency parameters 


  1. Berns, A., Gonzalez-Pablo, A., & Camacho, D. (2013). Game-like language in 3-D virtual environments. Computers and Education, 60(1), 210–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bonfield, A., Burden, K., Cram, A. & Lumkin, K. (2012). Using scenario planning to inform pedagogical practice in virtual worlds: Collaboration and Structure. Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education Conference (pp. 1–10). Wellington: New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  3. Bloomfield, P. (2011). Expanding a VLE-based integration framework supporting education in Second Life. Serious Games and Edutainment Applications, 4, 369–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown, A., & Green, T. (2009). Issues and trends in instructional technology: Web 2.0, Second Life, and STEM share the spotlight. In M. Orey, V. J. McClendon, & R. M. Branch (Eds), Educational Media and Technology Yearbook, 34, 7–23.Google Scholar
  5. Chaney, D., Chaney, E., & Eddy, J. (2010). The context of distance learning programs in higher education: Five enabling assumptions. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 13(5).Google Scholar
  6. Chen, H-J., & Su, C-C. (2011). Constructing a 3D virtual world for foreign language learning based on open source freeware. Edutainment technologies. Educational games and virtual reality/Augmented reality applications. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 6872, 46–63Google Scholar
  7. De Lucia, A., Francese, R., Passero, I., & Tortora, G. (2009). Development and evaluation of a virtual campus on second life: The case of secondDMI. Computers and Education, 52, 220–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dickey, E. (2005). Three-dimensional virtual worlds and distance learning: two case studies of Active World as a medium of distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), 439–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dickey, M. (2011). The pragmatics of virtual worlds for K-12 educators: Investigating the affordances and constraints of Active Worlds and Second Life with K-12 in-service teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(1), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Duncan, I., Miller, A., & Jiang, S. (2012). A taxonomy of virtual worlds usage in education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(6), 949–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gutwin, C.A., Lippold, M. & Graham, T.C. (2011). Real-time groupware in the browser: testing the performance of web-based networking. In Proceedings on CSCS (pp. 167–176). ACM PressGoogle Scholar
  12. Holst, S., & Holmer, T. (2000). Continuous evaluation of web-based cooperative learning: The conception and development of an evaluation toolkit.Google Scholar
  13. Kemp, J., Livingstone, D., & Bloomfield, P. (2009). SLOODLE: Connecting VLE tools with emergent teaching Practice in Second Life. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(3), 551–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Koster, R. (2004). A virtual world by any other name? Retrieved 12 October 2012 from
  15. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, A. & Jochems, W. (2002). The Sociability of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Environments. Educational Technology & Society, 5, 8–23Google Scholar
  16. Lehtinen E. & Hakkarainen K. (2001). Computer supported collaborative learning: A review. Retrieved 12 October 2012 from
  17. Leong, C. (2011). Using virtual world platform for language and critical thinking skills and practice. Retrieved 23 March 2012, from:
  18. Mark, S. & Mark, C. (2011). Virtual team building: Employing Immersive virtual learning environments to facilitate team trust and identity. Retrieved 30 September 2012 from:
  19. Pellas, N., & Kazanidis, I. (2013). Engaging students in blended and online collaborative courses at university level through Second. Life: Comparative perspectives and instructional affordances. New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia Journal. doi: 10.1080/13614568.2013.856958.Google Scholar
  20. Pellas, N. & Kazanidis, I. (2013b). The impact of computer self-efficacy, situational interest and academic self-concept in virtual communities of inquiry during the distance learning procedures through Second Life. World Wide Web Journal. DOI: 10.1007/s11280-013-0266-9
  21. Pellas, N. & Kazanidis, I. (2013c). On the value of Second Life for students’ engagement in hybrid and online university-level courses: A comparative study from Higher education in Greece. Education and Information Technologies. DOI: 10.1007/s11280-013-0266-9
  22. Pellas, N., Peroutseas, E., & Kazanidis, I. (2013). Virtual communities of inquiry (VCoI) for learning basic algorithmic structures with Open Simulator & Scratch4(OS): A case study from the Secondary Education in Greece. In K. Diamantaras, G. Evangelidis, Y. Manolopoulos, C. Georgiadis, P. Kefalas, & D. Stamatis (Eds.), Balkan Conference in Informatics, BCI ’13 (pp. 187–194). Thessaloniki, Greece: ACM Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pellas, N. (2014a). The development of a virtual learning platform for teaching concurrent programming languages in the Secondary Education: The use of Open Sim and Scratch4OS. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 10(1), 129–143.Google Scholar
  24. Pellas, N. (2014b). The influence of computer self-efficacy, metacognitive self-regulation and self-esteem on student engagement in online learning programs: Evidence from the virtual world of Second Life. Computers in Human Behavior. DOI 10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.048
  25. Pfister, H., Wessner, M., Holmer, T., & Steinmetz, R. (1999). Evaluating distributed computer- supported cooperative learning (D-CSCL): A framework and some data (Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on new learning technologies (NLT99) (pp. 234–241)). Switzerland: University of Berne.Google Scholar
  26. Rebmann, S. (2013). A review of literacy frameworks for learning environments design. Learning Environments Research, 16(1), 239–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rico, M., Martνnez-Muρoz, G., Alaman, X., Camacho, D., & Pulido, E. (2011). Improving the programming experience of High school students by means of virtual worlds. International Journal of Engineering Education, 27(1), 52–60.Google Scholar
  28. Ryoo, J., Techatassanasoontorn, A., Lee, D. & Lothian, J. (2011). Game-based Infosec education using Open Sim. Proceedings of the 15th Colloquium for Information systems security Education, Ohio. Retrieved 12 June 2012 from
  29. Rovai, P. (2002). Building sense of community at a distance. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 3(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
  30. Shih, Y.-C., & Yang, M.-T. (2008). A collaborative virtual environment for situated language learning using VEC3D. Educational Technology and Society, 11(1), 56–68.Google Scholar
  31. Twigg, A. (1997). Is technology a silver bullet? Educom Review, 31(2), 28–39.Google Scholar
  32. Wang, C., Caladra, B., Hibbard, S., & McDowell LeFraiver, M. (2012). Learning effects of an experiential EFL program in Second Life. Educational Technology and Research Development, 60(1), 943–961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Yasar, O., & Adiguzel, T. (2010). A working successor of learning management systems: SLOODLE. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 5682–5685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yu, W. (2009). Learning in the virtual world: The pedagogical potentials of Massively Multiplayer Online Role Play Games. International Educational Studies, 2(1), 32–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Product and Systems Design EngineeringUniversity of the AegeanSyrosGreece

Personalised recommendations