Virtual Environments: Issues and Opportunities for Researching Inclusive Educational Practices

Part of the Human-Computer Interaction Series book series (HCIS)


This chapter argues that virtual environments offer new research areas for those concerned with inclusive education. Further, it proposes that they also present opportunities for developing increasingly inclusive research processes. This chapter considers how researchers might approach researching some of these affordances. It discusses the relationship between specific features of inclusive pedagogy, derived from an international systematic literature review, and the affordances of different forms of virtual characters and environments. Examples are drawn from research in Second LifeTM (SL), virtual tutors and augmented reality. In doing this, the chapter challenges a simplistic notion of isolated physical and virtual worlds and, in the context of inclusion, between the practice of research and the research topic itself. There are a growing number of virtual worlds in which identified educational activities are taking place, or whose activities are being noted for their educational merit. These encompasses non-themed worlds such as SL and Active Worlds, game based worlds such as World of Warcraft and Runescape, and even Club Penguin, a themed virtual where younger players interact through a variety of Penguin themed environments and activities. It has been argued that these spaces, outside traditional education, are able to offer pedagogical insights (Twining 2009) i.e. that these global virtual communities have been identified as being useful as creative educational environments (Delwiche 2006; Sheehy 2009). This chapter will explore how researchers might use these spaces to investigative and create inclusive educational experiences for learners. In order to do this the chapter considers three interrelated issues: What is inclusive education?; How might inclusive education influence virtual world research? And, what might inclusive education look like in virtual worlds?


  1. Adamao-Villiami N, Wright K (2007) SMILE:an immersive learning game for deaf, hearing children. ACM SIGGRAPH I. Conference on Computer Graphics, Interactive TechniquesGoogle Scholar
  2. Babu S, Suma E, Barnes T, Hodges LF (2007) Can immersive virtual humans teach social conversational protocols? IEEE Virtual Reality Conference March 10–14, NCGoogle Scholar
  3. Bailenson J (2008) Why digital avatars make the best teachers The Chronicle of Higher Education Accessed 29 July 2009
  4. Batterson J G, Pope AT (2003) Converging technologies: A K-12 education vision. In: Roco M C, Bainbridge W S (ed) Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nano-Technology Biotechnology Information Technology, Cognitive Science. Kluwer, Dordrecht, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  5. BBC (2005) Call for special schools review. Accessed 1st June 2009
  6. Best S, D Kellner (2001) The Postmodern Adventure. Guilford Press, NYGoogle Scholar
  7. Biever C (2007) Web removes social barriers for those with autism. New Scientist 2610:26–27Google Scholar
  8. Brooks T, Camurri A, Canagarajah N, Hasselblad S (2002) Interaction with shapes, sounds as a therapy for special needs, rehabilitation. Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Disability Virtual Reality, Associated Technologies Hungary 205–212Google Scholar
  9. Capturatalk (2009) Capturatalk. http://wwwcapturatalkcom. Accessed 1May 2009
  10. Carr D (2008) Learning in virtual worlds for inclusion. In: Selwyn N (Ed) Education 2.0? A commentary by the Technology Enhanced Learning phase of the Teaching and Learning Research Programme, TLRP-TEL, LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. Cassell J, Tartaro A (2007) Intersubjectivity in human-agent interaction. Interaction Studies 8(3):391–410Google Scholar
  12. Cobb S V G, Sharkey P M (2007) A decade of research, development in disability virtual reality, associated technologies: Review of ICDVRAT 1996−2006. The International Journal of Virtual Reality 6(2):51–68Google Scholar
  13. Cole M (2006) Education Equality, Human Rights: Issues of Gender ‘Race’ Sexuality Disability, Social Class. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Colwell C, Petrie H, Kornbrot D (1998) Haptic virtual reality for blind computer users. Paper presented at the Assets ‘98 Conference Los Angeles CA. http://phoenixhertsacuk/sdru/pubs/VE/colwellhtml. Accessed 1 Aug 2008
  15. Cooke P, Laczny A, Brown DJ, Francik J (2002) The virtual courtroom: a view of justice. Project to prepare witnesses or victims with learning disabilities to give evidence. Disability & Rehabilitation 24(11–12):634–642Google Scholar
  16. Daniels H, Porter J (2007) Primary Review Research Report 5/2 Learning needs, difficulties among children of primary school age: Definition, identification, provision, issues. Accessed 29 July 2009
  17. Delwiche A (2006) Massively multiplayer online games (MMOs) in the new media classroom. Journal of Educational Technology and Society 9(3):160–172Google Scholar
  18. Ferguson R, Sheehy K (2010) Breaking down the barriers between learners, teachers. In: Sheehy K, Ferguson R, Clough G (Eds) Controversial Issues in Virtual Education: Perspectives on Virtual Worlds. Nova Science, NYGoogle Scholar
  19. Futurelab (2008) Augmented Reality: A New Approach to Learning. http://wwwfuturelaborguk/resources/publications_reports_articles/web_articles/Web_Article496. Accessed 1 August 2008
  20. Galton M, Hargreaves L, Pell T (2009) Group work, whole-class teaching with 11- to 14-year-olds compared. Journal of Education 39(1):119–140Google Scholar
  21. Goldiez BF (2004) Techniques for Assessing, Improving Performance in Navigation, Way Finding Using Mobile Augmented Reality. University of Central Florida, Orlando FLGoogle Scholar
  22. Herring P, Jones R, Sheehy K (2009) Investigating a ‘virtual tutor’ approach for improving the communication skills of children with autism. ALT-C 2009 16th International Conference of the Association for Learning Technology. University of Manchester England 8–10 SeptemberGoogle Scholar
  23. Howe C, Mercer N (2007) The Primary Review: Research Survey 2/1b Children’s Social Development Peer Interaction, Classroom Learning. Cambridge University, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  24. Kaye HS (2000) Computer, Internet Use Among People with Disabilities. Disability Statistics Report. US Department of Education National Institute on Disability, Rehabilitation Research, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  25. Kellner D (2000) Technological Transformation, Multiple Literacies and the Re-visioning of Education. Accessed 29 July 2009
  26. Morgan M, Gibbs S, Maxwell K, Britten N (2002) Hearing children’s voices: Methodological issues in conducting focus groups with children aged 7–11 years. Qualitative Research 2(1):5–20Google Scholar
  27. Open University (2005) Researching Inclusive Education: Values into Practice. The Open University, Milton KeynesGoogle Scholar
  28. Ravenscroft A, McAlister S (2006) Digital games, learning in cyberspace: A dialogical approach. E-Learning 3(1):38–51Google Scholar
  29. Ravenscroft A, Wegerif R, Hartley R (2007) Reclaiming thinking: Dialectic dialogic, learning in the digital age. BJEP Monograph Series II, Number 5 – Learning through Digital Technologies, 1(1):39–57Google Scholar
  30. Richard E, Billaudeau V, Richard P, Gaudin G (2007) Augmented reality for rehabilitation of cognitive disabled children: A preliminary study. Virtual Rehabilitation 9:102–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rose FD, Brooks BM, Attree EA (2002) An exploratory investigation into the usability, usefulness of virtual training of people with learning disabilities. Disability, Rehabilitation 24(11–12):627–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rudd T, Colligan F, Naik R (2006) Learner Voice. http://www.futurelaborguk/resources/publications_reports_articles/handbooks/Handbook132 Accessed 2 June 2008
  33. Rudduck J (2006) The past, the papers and the project. Educational Review 58(2):131–143Google Scholar
  34. Schome Community (2007) The schome-NAGTY Teen Second Life Pilot Final Report: A Summary of Key Findings, Lessons Learnt. The Open University, Milton Keynes: http://knopenacuk/public/documentcfm?docid=9851 Accessed 1 August 2008
  35. Schome Wiki (2008) SCHOME Proposal. http://wwwschomeacuk/wiki/Proposal Accessed 1 August 2008
  36. Sheehy K (2009) RAM-Raiding: Ethics, Freedoms in Virtual Learning Environments. Learning in Virtual Worlds. March CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  37. Sheehy K, Bucknall S (2008) Young people’s visions of future educational systems. Learning Media, Technology 33(2):101–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sheehy K, Ferguson R (2008) Educational inclusion, new technologies. In:Scott TB, Livingston JL (Eds) Leading Edge Educational Technology. Nova Science, NYGoogle Scholar
  39. Sheehy K, Ferguson R, Clough G (2008) Learning in the Panopticon: Ethical, social issues in building a virtual educational environment International Journal of Social Science Special Edition: Virtual Reality in Distance Education 2(2):89–97Google Scholar
  40. Sheehy K (2003) New technology, inclusion: The world (wide web) is not enough. In:Nind M, Sheehy K, Simmons K (Eds) Inclusive Education: Learners, Learning Contexts, David Fulton Publishers, LondonGoogle Scholar
  41. Sheehy K (2005) Morphing images: a potential tool for teaching word recognition to children with severe learning difficulties. British Journal of Educational Technology 36(2):293–301Google Scholar
  42. Sheehy K (2010) Virtual worlds, inclusive education The TEALEAF framework. In: Sheehy K, Ferguson R, Clough G (Eds) Controversial Issues in Virtual Education: Perspectives on Virtual Worlds. Nova Science, NYGoogle Scholar
  43. Sheehy K, Kumrai R (2008) The Upstream Research Project: Evaluation Report of the Experiences of Young People Using the Connexions Service in Milton Keynes. Connexions, Milton KeynesGoogle Scholar
  44. Sheehy K, Rix JRM, Hall K, Nind M, Wearmouth J, Collins J (2009) A systematic review of whole class subject based pedagogies with reported outcomes for the academic, social inclusion of pupils with special educational needs in mainstream classrooms. In: Research Evidence in Education Library London: EPPI-Centre Social Science Research Unit Institute of Education. Accessed 1 June 2009
  45. Sheehy K, Nind M, Rix R, Simmons K (2004) Ethics, Research in Inclusive Education: Values into Practice. Falmer Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  46. Slaughter R (2002) From rhetoric to reality: The emergence of futures into the educational mainstream. In: Gidley J, Inayatullah S (Eds), Youth Futures: Comparative Research, Transformative Visions, Praeger, Westport, CTGoogle Scholar
  47. Slee R (1998) Inclusive Education? This must signify new times for educational research. British Journal of Educational Studies 46(2):440–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Thomas G, Glenny G (2002) Thinking about inclusion. Whose reason? What evidence? International Journal of Inclusive Education 6(4):345–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Twining P (2009) Exploring the educational potential of virtual worlds — some reflections from the Schome Park Programme. British Journal of Educational Technology 40(3):496–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. UNESCO (1999) Salamanca 5 years on: A Review of UNESCO activities in the light of the salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education. UNESCO Special Needs Education Division of Basic Education. Accessed 29 July 2009
  51. Walmsley J (2001) Normalisation, emancipatory research and learning disability. Disability and Society 16(2):187–205Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Open University All rights reserved. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Childhood, Development and Learning, The Open UniversityMilton KeynesUK

Personalised recommendations