SciEthics Interactive: science and ethics learning in a virtual environment
- 692 Downloads
Learning in immersive 3D environments allows students to collaborate, build, and interact with difficult course concepts. This case study examines the design and development of the TransGen Island within the SciEthics Interactive project, a National Science Foundation-funded, 3D virtual world emphasizing learning science content in the context of ethical dilemmas. The 2 year development process is examined through the lens of the rapid prototyping instructional design model, following the project from conceptualization to implementation of a 3D simulation. Through expert interviews, focus groups, and working groups, we were able to determine critical scientific and ethical issues to present to learners in the virtual world. We collected data on 53 students using the simulation at universities in the United States and South Africa and evaluated their experience using qualitative and quantitative methods. Results showed that student participants were engaged and motivated by the simulation. The students reported an increase in science knowledge and ethical understanding, but individual experiences varied.
KeywordsVirtual environment Science Ethics Rapid prototyping Instructional design Opensim
This research was supported by the National Science Foundation EESE Program Award No. 0932712.
- Alperstein, N. (2011). Can you develop virtue in a virtual world? Teaching advertising ethics in second life. In ICERI2011 Proceedings (pp. 2533–2542).Google Scholar
- Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy (CSEPP). (2009). On being a scientist: A guide to responsible conduct in research, 3rd ed. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- Dorsey, L., Goodrum, D., & Schwen, T. (1997). Rapid collaborative prototyping as an instructional development paradigm. In C. Dills & A. Romiszowski (Eds.), Instructional development paradigms. Englewoods Cliffs: Educational Technology Publications Inc.Google Scholar
- Hannah, S., Avolio, B., & May, D. (2011). Moral maturation and moral conation: A capacity approach to explaining moral thought and action. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 663–685.Google Scholar
- Hollander, R. (2009). Ethics education and scientific research: What’s Been learned? What should be done? Report of a workshop. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- Houser, R., Thoma, S., Coppock, A., Mazer, M., Midkiff, L., Younanian, M., et al. (2011). Learning ethics through virtual fieldtrips: Teaching ethical theories through virtual experiences. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 23(2), 260–268.Google Scholar
- Mayer, T., & Steneck, N. (2012). Promoting research integrity in a global environment. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.Google Scholar
- McArthur, V. (2008). Real ethics in a virtual world. In CHI’08 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 3315–3320). ACM.Google Scholar
- McCabe, D. (2005). It takes a village: Academic dishonesty. Liberal Education, 91(3), 26–31.Google Scholar
- Piskurich, G. (2011). Rapid instructional design: Learning ID fast and right. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Rappert, B. (Ed.). (2010). Education and ethics in the life sciences strengthening the prohibition of biological weapons. Canberra: ANU E Press.Google Scholar
- Rest, J. (1979). Development in Judging Moral Issues. University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
- Second Life. (2012). Destination guide: Science and technology. Retrieved August 13, 2012, from http://secondlife.com/destinations/science.
- Smith-Doerr, L. (2006). Learning to reflect or deflect? U.S. politics and graduate programs’ ethics training for life scientists. In S. Frickel & K. Moore (Eds.), The new political sociology of science: Institutions, networks and power (pp. 405–431). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
- Steneck, N. (2004). Standards of ethical standards of conduct: Introduction to the responsible conduct of research. Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Research Integrity.Google Scholar
- Steneck, N. (2009). The ORI introduction to the responsible conduct of research. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Research Integrity.Google Scholar
- Tice, D. (1992). Self-concept change and self-presentation: The looking glass self is a magnifying glass. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 659–669.Google Scholar
- Weston, T., Seymour, E., & Thiry, H. (2006). Evaluation of science education for new civic engagements and responsibilities (SENCER) project. Prepared for SENCER/National Center for Science and Civic Engagement.Google Scholar
- Wimpenny, K., Savin-Baden, M., Mawer, M., Steils, N., & Tombs, G. (2012). Unpacking frames of reference to inform the design of virtual world learning in higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(3), 522–545.Google Scholar