Despite the importance of distance-learning for its ability to reach a wide audience, easiness to access materials, and its lower cost compared to traditional learning, architecture education has not been well served by distance education. This is because it has a higher level of learning objectives, it is taught by coaching methodologies, and involves nonverbal forms of communication. One of the most common learning methods used in the design studio is the Criticism/Critique, which is a graphic and oral type of communication between the tutor and the students. In this investigation, Second Life, a massive multi-user online 3D environment that offers three-dimensional spatial capabilities via Avatars impersonation, is used as a computer-mediated tool for graphical and oral communication.
This paper builds upon previous research in the fields of virtual design studio (Kvan, 2001), computer-mediated communication (Higgins, 1991), (Berge and Collins, 1995), SecondLife as an educational tool (Conklin, 2006), (Johnson, 2006), and distance learning in architecture (Stover, 2004), and describes a demonstration experiment where students had to display and describe their projects in a purposely designed criticism space in SecondLife.
The main objective of this paper is to observe and document the effects and the use of SecondLife virtual environment as an online 3D graphical-based tool of computer mediated communication in a distance-learning situation (virtual criticism). The study also answers some questions: How well did the students use the tools of the medium provide? Was there a sense of personal communication and realism gained through using Avatars in the virtual environment? Did SecondLife provide a successful means of graphic and oral communication for a graphic-based context? What are the students’ opinions about the learning environment? To what extent can SecondLife be used as a computer-mediated tool for communication in a distance-learning situation in architecture education?
Using multiple methods of data collection, mainly based on observation of the experiment, questioning the participants before and after the experiment, and document analysis, the study presents the results of the experiment, discusses positive aspects, as well as limitations. Proposals for modifications of the experimental design and tools are made for future replications.