Really you can use the platform for anything you wish - the limits are less on imagining what is possible and more about what is practical -- primarily how much time you are able to spend on training of the simulation specialist behind the scenes. Jamie has used some of our science tasks for teacher professional development, and we have a hunch that the opportunity to practice absent the potential "harm to students" that comes with real teaching is likely just as critical for practicing teachers trying something new as it is for new teachers. Carrie, how many folks do you think are using the platform for PD?

Hi, Alan.  We are currently working with about 10 school districts across the country for teacher PD.  Our largest engagement for reacher PD is with the Department of Defense Education Activity - this is the school district for the armed forces and we work in all of their bases across the world.  Teachers are learning how to include children with autism in classroom instruction as well as how to implement ABA as part of their classroom activities. 

Hi, Shandy, that is certainly possible.  The system allows for recording of any session.  One thing to consider is that there are limitations in the virtual environment - for instance students cannot access manipulatives.  The system is best suited for discussion-based activities.  If you are interested, many sites license the software from Mursion and they might be interested in collaborating with you.

These questions fit well together, Patrick, because I think one of the main affordances of the simulations does lie in the way you prepare the simulation specialist behind the scenes. Each discussion is performed live by a trained simulation specialist who is controlling all five students, but with a significant amount of training in advance. I would characterize is as somewhere in between scripting and improvisation - we tend to describe it as parameterization, where the students each have starting understandings along with change profiles (what combination of ideas presented by others will allow them to change their understandings and how). The simulation specialist is not making it all up by any means, but they are deciding in the moment which parameters have been met and how to shift. Much of the exact wording is improvised, but the core understandings are carefully rehearsed in advance. It also allows us to make sure desirable challenges come up, so that everyone who does the simulation, while they've had a unique teaching experience, has encountered the same challenges. Not everyone wants this level of standardization, but for our work its been important as it allows the teacher educators to see the variability of performances.

Of course everything I've described in terms of training you can do with human role-players too, or you could ask the simulation specialist running the simulation to ad-lib, so its a bit of a false contrast. However, peer role playing the way most folks use it tends to be a lot less structured, and one could argue that peers (assuming by that we mean other pre-service teachers in a class) may not yet know enough about student thinking to enact the role of students with fidelity. There are scholars who prepare human actors quite rigorously (e.g., Shaughnessy & Boerst's work at University of Michigan; Dotger's work at Syracuse), its just not the most common implementation model.

Another benefit often cited is that they look like children, which may help support better engagement from the participant and remove the distraction of the adult actor's physical appearance, and there are folks who study this, although its not a focus of our work.

Thanks for the thorough explanation, Heather. It makes sense that one person (adequately trained) could manage multiple student characters, and that it is a blend of scripted response and improvisation. I can see that preparing that role (and performing it) would be a challenging and rewarding exercise for an experienced teacher.

I can also see how the use of avatars could create a different dynamic for a pre-service teacher than, say, a small group of role-playing peers.

I agree, although I think one nice attribute of seeing the technology is that it could also push us in non-technological ways. One could argue (some have) that finding ways to train your PSTs how to represent student profiles with integrity for role playing might in and of itself have real value for them as well!

Yes, Leigh, we can support teachers in rural settings who do not have access to clinical field experiences.  The system is operated by a simulation specialist who creates a scenario that up to four preservice teachers can sign on to at the same time in a small group.  Small groups typically last 60 to 90 minutes so everyone gets at least one attempt at the scenario with feedback on performance objectives from the host avatar.  Preservice teachers can  also sign on for 30 minute solo practice scenarios to take multiple attempts at the scenario with feedback on performance objectives from the host avatar. The system scales two ways: a) it removes inefficiency by allowing learners to sign on from any where to take part in a virtual experience, rather than requiring learners to come into a location and b) by allowing learners to interact with avatars as Heather mentioned above, which removes the distraction of the adult simulation specialist's physical appearance, supporting better engagement from the participant. 

Hi, Nathan, The feedback protocols can be customized based on what you want to achieve.  It can be as basic as guided reflection ("What went well? What would you do differently?") or you can create a series of questions around tightly defined performance objectives.  Since the simulation specialist who is delivering the scenario is trained to look for specific behaviors related to performance objectives, they are able to recognize and coach around them. 

The feedback is one place we've put a great deal of emphasis. In this project, we take the video records and behind the scenes they are scored (scores don't go to the teachers) and the raters write feedback at the same time. Feedback is mapped to our scoring rubric and includes a lot of specific details including things the psts might try the next time. To give a sense, the paper you see someone flipping through in the video is an example of an actual feedback report, where each dimension of the rubric is addressed one by one and with about a page of information for each - its not a small amount of feedback! It is delivered at a single time point but the whole cycle happens three times so they have a chance to apply their learning. A lot of other folks have approaches that are less back end heavy and involve in the moment coaching by the teacher educator or peers, or in which videos are self-evaluated or peer-evaluated. What I will say is that the participants pay really close attention to the feedback, so its clear that this is one of the primary learning mechanisms. One set of ongoing research questions that we hope to explore in the next project is what form this feedback might optimally take and where we might be able to cut back in service of scalability without compromising learning.

Hi Heather and Carrie,

Thanks for your Responses! That scalability question is one I was thinking about as well. I can see how time-intensive this process would be, but also how productive it could be for teachers both new and experienced!