Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: It's a virtual world (?)

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Small Wars Journal SWJED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Largo, Florida
    Posts
    3,989

    Default It's a virtual world (?)

    It's a virtual world (?)

    By Dr. Marc Tyrrell

    We just had a very interesting briefing on a “new” teaching method which might best be described as a case study method via virtual reality. As with many case study methods, this presented the “facts” of a real world situation. Where the virtual reality played in, was via shifting the sensory input – VR with full sound effects in place of powerpoint. This type of training capability is, on the whole, extremely useful. It is also, potentially, both limiting and limited – as, I must note, is all training.

    Let me pull out some of the limitations and potentials of this “new” type of training.

    First of all, a case study method works best in an interactive environment with a highly skilled and motivated facilitator. Done well, such methods can produce significant learning. But this particular format is being looked at as both an in-class and at-home learning tool. The value of the case study method usually lies in the interaction of different opinions and inputs, a situation that tends to be absent in a stand-alone download form. The lessons aren't “learned” in such a setting since the students perceptions are not challenged. TRADOC might wish to think about deploying these in either a network configuration similar to real-time gaming, a la WarCraft, or they may think about tying it in with an online discussion board.

    Second, case study methods rarely allow one to “game” what they would have done and see the (probable) effects of what their choices would have been. This pedagogical style does not allow people to learn from failure. This is a crucial problem for students, especially when they will be placed in situations where “failure” translates into deaths. Case study methodology, however, can easily be extended based on most likely choice potentials and costs. Again, the prototype for this comes out of the gaming world with the old “pick your path” adventures. Unlike these older games, real world events can be used as the basis for assigning probable consequences for individual choices.

    Third, there are always limitations established within any teaching methodology. Case study methodologies tend to handle this problem via discussion between participants, but the potentials are limited by the knowledge and perceptions of those participants. In order to overcome some of this limitation, there was a very interesting form of case based education started by McMaster University that used learning groups from diverse backgrounds.

    All of these limitations and opportunities became evident to me as I watched the scenario and thought “how am I reacting” and “how would my [civilian] students react?”. Given my own background as an Anthropologist, the questions I was asking at the start of the scenario differed significantly from the questions being asked in the room, here at the TRADOC SLC. What I found quite interesting, was that many of my questions were never asked and yet, if they had been asked, the scenario would have been less likely to play out the way it did in real life.
    Last edited by SWJED; 08-20-2009 at 05:12 PM.

  2. #2
    Council Member MikeF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    1,177

    Default

    Hi Marc. This presentation seems to add to the discussion of seminars that we were discussing yesterday. Regardless of the medium (case study from a book, movie, or video game), this type of interaction is an excellent training tool.

    Couple of thoughts:

    1. Class size. My personal opinion is that one should not exceed ten students. 6-8 is probably the preferred number in order to maximize discussion from the entire group.

    2. Facilitator training. The instructor becomes a facilitator, and he/she must be given specialized training on how to execute in order to maximize the time. I once subbed as a guest facilitator for a "wicked problems" class while my thesis advisor was away. Afterwards, I was struck by how much planning and preparation was required in order to properly conduct 1 x one hour class.

    v/r

    Mike

  3. #3
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Good points, Mike, thanks....

    The sessions are just starting up again, so I'll post more later....

    Cheers,

    Marc
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  4. #4
    Council Member Billy Ruffian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    39

    Default

    hi Marc!

    This is pretty interesting. I lack the proper background and context to comment, I was wondering if you could clear 2 points up for me.

    First: I appreciate how you make the distinction between a group and stand alone training tool. What I am wondering is, do you envision a learning environment where everyone is logged on to a simulation from different locales or are they all in the same room with the facilitator?

    I'm only asking because I've seen people "play" (bitch n' moan seems to be more accurate) simulations like WoW with a teamspeak microphone system built in and I've seen them play much more successfully when they're all in the same room.

    Physical presence, I've observed, tends to be more effective as people are able to intuitively know whose 'turn' it is to speak. Generally, the level of discourse also tends to be higher as participants are less likely to troll each other and generally poison the allegedly team-focused activities. Physical cues are important.

    Secondly: By participating in an group simulation to test 'real-world' events, do you envision that the facilitator actively monitors/runs the simulation, periodically introducing new, unexpected challenges or even impossible scenarios? Or perhaps is this training style more suited to pitting two moderated groups in opposition to one another while a moderator essentially introduces variable ala a D&D style Dungeon Master?

    I was also interested why you selected WoW as an example and not something like America's Army (is it too tactically centred to be of value as a teaching tool?)

    Additionally, I've also observed that no matter how good the AI, nothing can really can compare to a living opponent as AI tends to lack the ability to act illogically and employ ruses IMO. Except maybe DEFCON, but that's not exactly what I would call a realistic Sim.

    I tend to be a mechanics minded gamer myself. I might be missing a key piece of your argument here due to my own blinkers.
    Last edited by Billy Ruffian; 08-20-2009 at 09:15 PM. Reason: My grammar is poor. I added some proper punctuation and cut out unnecessary editorializing.
    "I encounter civilians like you all the time. You believe the Empire is continually plotting to do harm. Let me tell you, your view of the Empire is far too dramatic. The Empire is a government. It keeps billions of beings fed and clothed. Day after day, year after year, on thousands of worlds people live their lives under Imperial rule without ever seeing a stormtrooper or hearing a TIE fighter scream overhead."
    ―Captain Thrawn

  5. #5
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi Billy,

    Excellent points.

    On your first one, I think we need to draw a spectrum from in-class, face-to-face with a facilitator all the way through to an individual downloading their own. The trick, to my mind, is how we can leverage technologies to mitigate the distance from the f2f + facilitator. Could we use online forums? Could we use real-time gaming? Honestly, this is an issue that goes well beyond the military and has some pretty serious implications for any form of education. BTW, any ideas you have would be appreciated - especially since I know where you work and what you're studying !

    The second point is more tricky. The "final product" I would like to see would be a full blown, highly interactive virtual world type scenario - sort of like the gaming machines in Melissa Scott's The Game Beyond if you ever read it. We're not there yet, but what I saw was certainly impressive within its limits. As with most changes in teaching technology, i think it would be useful to start with the version they have now and gradually introduce more interaction and possibilities.

    The problem with introducing radical changes in teaching technology is that you have to teach both the teachers how to use it and the students how to learn from it. The version they have now is a straight exaptation of older case study methods that they use right now, so there's not much of a learning curve. However, the more flexibility that's added into the system, the steeper the learning curve (especially for the teachers!).

    On your last couple of points, and I think they are all related, let me just say that I selected WoW mainly because it is full of real people. The best "map" of a person is a person, so ideally, you would end up not using AIs at all - just people. That was one of the big strengths of D&D when you get right down to it. As long as you had a good DM, you could have a great game.

    Cheers,

    Marc
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  6. #6
    Council Member Ron Humphrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,099

    Post I've always felt that one of the best ways to do something like that

    Would be to coordinate with various institutions internationally and using the basic premise behind the training tool stuff have real live people actually make a living doing exactly that in a 3d environment of some sort.

    WoW and other simply serve as proof of principle for can it be done. The trick would be buy-in from those you'd require to actually make it happen.
    Any man can destroy that which is around him, The rare man is he who can find beauty even in the darkest hours

    Cogitationis poenam nemo patitur

  7. #7
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marct View Post
    On your last couple of points, and I think they are all related, let me just say that I selected WoW mainly because it is full of real people. The best "map" of a person is a person, so ideally, you would end up not using AIs at all - just people. That was one of the big strengths of D&D when you get right down to it. As long as you had a good DM, you could have a great game.

    Cheers,

    Marc
    Quite so, especially the table top RPG comment. I tend to prefer the idea of free play, moderated techniques...with the additional variation that actions by the players can modify their environment (within limits). That's why I always preferred the MUD/MUSH or tabletop setting to a WoW-type setting. Tabletop is of course the easiest to modify on the go, while a MUD can shift quickly due to its text-based nature. But once the engine becomes the end and not the means (which is sort of how I see things like WoW), you lose that flexibility.
    "On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
    T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •