Talk:Virtual world language learning

Semiprotected

Article is currently semiprotected. Apologies to any legitimate IPs who are interested in the subject - please use the {{Edit semi-protected}} template on this page should you wish to make any edits. Elen of the Roads (talk) 12:59, 4 May 2011 (UTC)--Elen of the Roads (talk) 12:59, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Due to persistent vandalism, talkpage is also semi'd. If you are a new user or a legitimate IP who wants to contribute constructively, please contact me or any admin to get the protection lifted. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 14:21, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Archive

Previous content has been archived to Talk:Virtual_world_language_learning/1. The addition of further posts containing apparent legal threats, spam & etc will be reverted. Elen of the Roads (talk) 13:01, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

<Removed edits by blocked editor currently editing on 89.247.151.39 - Wikipedia is not a consumer protection organisation, a licensing body, the EU or a complaints forum. If you have complaints about any organisation featured in this article, TAKE IT UP WITH THEM! Elen of the Roads (talk) 14:19, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Radical editing required

The article is in dire need of radical editing to reflect the current state of approaches to language teaching pedagogy and methodology in virtual worlds. At present there is too much of a focus on the technology and there are a number of irrelevant sections and references that need to be removed. I can undertake some of the work but ideally it is a burden that needs to be shared. Volunteers? GroovyGuzi (talk) 22:40, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

There are numerous links in the article which appear to have no direct relevance to Virtual world language learning. I have removed some of them, but there are many more that need to be checked. GroovyGuzi (talk) 17:34, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Having looked more closely at the links in the article, I would be inclined to say that they fit more appropriately into the general Wikipedia article Virtual world, but they also need to be cleaned up and properly referenced. GroovyGuzi (talk) 17:52, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I have carried out major restructuring of the article, moving sections relating mainly to language education (which what this article is all about) towards the beginning and sections relating to VW technology, organisations and policies towards the end. I have made no major textual changes. The texts of all sections now need to be carefully examined and rewritten in places. There is still a lot of redundant and irrelevant information in the article. GroovyGuzi (talk) 09:15, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I have checked the article down to and including the section on Tandem learning (buddy learning). All the subsequent remaining sections require substantial editing, especially the sections on Alternative 3D worlds and How to pick a virtual platform. So far this has not been an easy job. To a large extent I have tried to follow the outline of the originator of this article, Secondlifelanguageeducator, a well-known expert on language teaching and learning in Second Life. His outline was simple, focusing on the key issues and developments of the time (24 June 2009). A few months after the article was created, another unidentified editor began to make substantial changes, focusing more and more on the technology and political issues and removing references to websites and projects created by individuals with whom he has a personal feud. I began to add my own contributions, adding references to what most language teachers in SL would consider important developments, but they were swiftly removed by the aforementioned editor - who has now been blocked by Wikipedia admin, as indicated above. The article is now beginning to reflect what its title suggests, but contributions from other editors working in the field of virtual world language learning would be most welcome. GroovyGuzi (talk) 13:11, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

The article has been checked and edited down to and including Section 2.14 (Voice chat). Some editing on the following sections has also been undertaken. The main task that remains is to check and edit these sections and to remove irrelevant information. GroovyGuzi (talk) 10:08, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I think we have reached the point where the article is in a reasonable shape, but it would benefit from additional material on language learning in virtual worlds as opposed to the technology. Not that the latter can be completely overlooked, but most of what had been added to the article since its inception focused far too much on the technology and the business of developing and managing virtual worlds rather than pedagogy and methodology. I am aware of numerous conference presentations on virtual world language learning having been made over the last 2-3 years, and some of these presentations will probably end up in printed format or in online journals. But it's difficult to keep track of everything that is going on. Additional editors needed, please! GroovyGuzi (talk) 13:24, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Obsolete Legacy Rollback Fake

"Radical Editing Required" as THE self-proclaimed Grand Wizard?

It's better to call it "Obsolete Legacy Rollback Fake"...

There is no personal feud... What for? Enough straightforward, due diligent, warranted legal factual matter is presented from A-E regarding AVALON EU project targets and actuals (Lancelot School GmbH is expressively mentioned in those EU project targets), and you have avoided addressing any items, thus avoiding your reverse burden-of-PROOF obligations...

Besides, Goethe Institit e.V. is a Non-Profit Association, and not a For-Profit firm requiring a business license, like Lancelot School GmbH (German Ltd). (1) Registration and (2) public agency assessment is compulsory, and independent from the (3) approval step anyway. Any avoidance behavior § 8 Umgehungsverbot is outlawed as well. Demand your tax-payer money back from rogue distance learning grant scams, and demand your money back from non-registered and non-approved distance learning service provider scams.

After cutting out up-to-date conference information and other significant information, you indeed received the appropriate Wikipedia quality assessment feedback you deserve...

> This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

> This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

In spite of your better knowledge about EAQUALS, and even if you cut out their quality management scheme for language learning organizations, you will still need to embrace Wikipedia's quality scheme anyway, which ultimately re-introduces the quality scheme of EAQUALS and their conference information. Thus, you would still need to "cut out the illegalese" contained in your LANCELOT/AVALON recommendations...

>> Legal requirements: EAQUALS inspectors check that accredited members have met all the relevant legal requirements. EAQUALS members are committed to exceeding minimum standards in all areas, including client welfare, health and safety, and staff pay and conditions.

Promoting holodeck textures is merely a nice sideline technical feature, whereas a mixed reality CAVE technology approach structurally changes the configuration of language learning approaches... EUROCALL and CALICO are two leading professional associations that promote language learning with the aid of new technologies...

How do you incorporate structural and configuration change in your Cybergogy? Beyond your means-driven, lack of roadmap, and bike-pedaling process focus?

How can you keep stressing cherry-picking Teaching Means without addressing important Learning Ends (AVALON did the same, btw)?

E.g. Language Learning for your job market CV - Manual for eELP European Language ePortfolio? European language levels - Self Assessment Grid?

The Objective of Education is Learning, Not Teaching... Your editing approach, your Cybergogy recommendations and endorsed EU projects do not address and fail in the face of this statement!

Your editing is not even fully and completely and adequately outlined... Your radical legacy and rollback editing has produced yawning state-of-art gaps to tangible and up-to-date conference presentations and results... not to mention, that no outlook chapter is included...

What's the Grand Wizard's action plan to improve Wikipedia's quality assessment?

--89.247.149.245 (talk) 01:57, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

---