"Hi! I am very excited that I had to write to you right away. I have never thought that I was going to feel so good by entering a MOO. I did it with some kind of eskepticism but it has turned into a beautiful experience. I really believe that this media can function as a wonderful teaching resource, but at the same time you have to learn to control yourself because it truly can *swallow you up*." (Rodriguez, 1994)
 
 

What is MOO?

A MOO is a program running on a machine. It is also the type of online community that Licklider and Taylor (1968) predicted thirty years ago: one "not of common location, but of common interest." It is an ever-growing virtual space created solely through the lines of text and programming contributed by its inhabitants. It is a place where imagination, individual power and sociability blend; it transforms and is transformed by its creators.

Sherry Turkle, Professor of the Sociology of Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, states, "The writing on MUDs, because it is spontaneous and alive, is often rich in texture and emotion. Unconstrained and unconventional, it is a writing through which one encounters the self. MOOs blur the boundaries between self and game, self and role, self and simulation." (Turkle, 1998, p. xi)

You already understand all this:

• playing board games
• socializing in your favorite bar or café
• typing lines of text to others in a virtual community
• going to a special environment to communicate in a second language
• using learning theories and technology in your teaching

MOO as MUD as role-playing game (RPGs)

• RPGs based on board games
• RPGs raise stress levels but user feels safe
• RPGs as optimal experience (see Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p. 71)
• MOOing as optimal experience (see Hughart, 1995, and Rodriguez, 1994)

MOO as social environment

• You can describe your favorite social environment
• You can meet your friends there
• You can do things with the people you meet there
• You can manipulate objects there
• You can have fun there!

MOO as virtual community

• As in email forums, conversations with distant, unseen participants take place
• Users of MOOs are generally rather like-minded
• Users can climb in the ranks of the community
• Simple lines of text convey meaning, from the sublime to the ridiculous
• Users return repeatedly because they can rely on the community to be there
• Users report a sense of place or "presence" (read: context) when using MOO - a shipboard mentality" develops (see Falsetti, 1995)

Language learning in MOO

Educational MOO

…the essence of the coming integrated, universal, multimedia, digital network is discovery-the empowerment of human minds to learn spontaneously, without coercion, both independently and cooperatively. The focus is on learning as an action that is "done by," not "done to," the actor. (Perelman, 1992, p. 23)
 
 

Five working hypotheses

Omaggio familiarizes us with "five working hypotheses" (Omaggio, 1986, pp. 44-53) which have been the building blocks of proficiency-oriented language curricula for nearly two decades. We will have ample opportunity to refer back to these hypotheses:

• You know the value of an immersion experience
• Learners usually have to go to a different geographical location to have one
• MOO provides a virtual location where the target language is spoken
• The target language is used for authentic purposes
• Learners solve problems and feel good in the target language

• Social constructivism (Hall, 1998)
• Situated learning: learners who use tools actively within a culture, build a richer understanding of the world in which the tools are used and of the tools themselves.
• Teaching/learning paradigm
• Affective considerations of learning in community
• Power dynamics in MOO/CMC

• the communicative approach
• learning styles: Learning styles: Visual-Spatial, Bodily-kinesthetic, Musical, Interpersonal, Intrapersonal, Logical -Mathematical, Linguistic (Gardner, 1993)
• self-directed learning (Hiemstra, 1994)
• lifelong learning, just-in-time learning
• proficiency-oriented classrooms

• Reading
• Writing
• Speaking
• Listening

• Novice – greetings, leave-taking, descriptions
• Intermediate – basic conversations, object-creation, @messages
• Advanced – advanced conversations, programming, web integration

Janet Swaffar et al state that "L2 teachers who want their classes to interact with texts have to be facilitators of the reading process rather than monitors of performance." (1991, pp. 70-71) Also, that they must:

• activate reader schemata
• guide students to an awareness of text structure
• assist in strategy development
• promote relaxed interaction between students and text
• choose tasks for different students’ backgrounds and language competencies

• Find someone to talk to and ask three questions
• Interview a native speaker at some length
• Gather information from other users or from items in the MOO and write a report
• Log and print out a conversation, highlight new vocabulary or idiomatic expressions
• Build rooms in response to an in-class reading
• Hold a party on the MOO, invite other online friends
• Start a MOOmail correspondence with someone met on the MOO
• Design their own tasks, as individuals or in groups
• Keep a journal of MOO activities
• Write a simple program that helps others learn the language

• Contexts built around classroom themes, real-life or fanciful
• Student control of skill-using time
• Inclusion of MOO experiences in classroom activities
• Start with MOO as the text

• "Completion of the task should be the test." (Hall, 1998)
• The classroom is a skill-getting environment, the MOO is a skill-using environment.
• MOO encourages use of higher-order thinking skills
• Assess ability to use skills in interaction with other MOO users
• Assess ability to achieve functional and language learning goals
• Using real logged MOO conversations, assess learner’s ability to:
i) recognize macro- as well as micropropositions
ii) conjecture about what happens next (after the sample ends)
iii) uncover patterns of discourse structure
iv) compare MOO discourse with real life discourse
v) describe the sequence of events

• technical
• psychological
• pedagogical

Notes from other sources

Interaction with text

L2 teachers who want their classes to interact with texts have to be facilitators of the reading process rather than monitors of performance. They have a fourfold task: (1) to activate reader schemata, (2) to guide students to an awareness of text structure, (3) to assist in strategy development, and (4) to promote relaxed interaction between students and text. Beyond these four functions, the teacher’s challenge is to choose tasks for different students’ backgrounds and language competencies." (Swaffer et al, 1991)
 

The "flow" experience

We have seen how people describe the common characteristics of optimal experience: a sense that one's skills are adequate to cope with the challenges at hand, in a goal-directed, rule-bound action system that provides clear clues as to how well one is performing. Concentration is so intense that there is no attention left over to think about anything irrelevant, or to worry about problems. Self-consciousness disappears, and the sense of time becomes distorted. An activity that produces such experiences is so gratifying that people are willing to do it for its own sake, with little concern for what they will get out of it, even when it is difficult, or dangerous. (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p. 71)
 

A learner of Spanish on the addictive nature of MOO

I'm really enjoying the Moo. I haven't figured out all the commands, but I keep playing with it. When I first started I was hooked. I almost forgot to go to class and another time I was late to a class because I was on Moo. Whenever I get into a good conversation I like to stay and chat. Its great to see how fluent Spanish speakers speak or in this case write. I had to cut down my time on it just because its so addictive!!! I could easily spend an hour on it a day, but I have four other classes to think about! Sorry I was late! (Hughart, 1995)
 

The "shipboard syndrome"

…If any of you have exchanged email or actively participated on an electronic list, you may have anecdotally noticed that confidences are exchanged much more readily than in face-to-face relationships. This tendency toward increased intimacy was documented in a study done by Hiltz and Turoff entitled The Network Nation: Human Communication via Computer. This is even more apparent for the inhabitants of a virtual space such as a MOO. Because of the perceived proximity, a type of 'shipboard syndrome' develops and for the time they are logged on, the MOO becomes a virtual community. In a modern world where even children make play dates, this is an important factor for our students, especially those who are studying English in a country other than their own.

Although being on a MOO is disinhibiting, it does not mean that chaos reigns. Like a real life community, people on MOOs are enmeshed in a web of social rules and regulations. These rules are formulated by the MOO inhabitants. For example, one does not go to another player's room without sending a message requesting permission. Foul or abusive language will quickly lead to shunning by other members of the community. Conversely, being helpful and friendly will raise one's status. (Falsetti, 1995)
 

Anonymity and the affective filter (Lonnie Turbee)

It is desirable to have the affective filter as low as possible. One way this is accomplished on MOO is through user anonymity. While many educational MOOs require that users be easily identifiable, such as through use of their RL (real life) name or the display of their email address every time other users use the "finger" command (see Haynes, 1998, p. 163 for some very good reasons for this), at MundoHispano we do our best to maintain that anonymity so that it is not the language learner who is the one making all the errors necessary for language acquisition, but rather, in effect, the learner's "playing piece," his or her online character.

When first entering a foreign language MOO, the experience can be less than pleasant for some. In terms of language learning, the "affective filter" can be high.

The affective filter hypothesis states that comprehensible input can have its effect on acquisition only when affective conditions are optimal: (1) the acquirer is motivated; (2) he has self-confidence and a good self-image, and (3) his level of anxiety is low. When learners are "put on the defensive" …, the affective filter is high and comprehensible input can't "get in." (Omaggio, 1986, p. 30. See also Krashen, 1982, pp. 9-32)
 

References

Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. (1990). Flow: the Psychology of Optimal Experience. Harper Collins Publishers. New York.

Falsetti, Julie. (1995). What the Heck is a MOO? ESL in Higher Education Newsletter, 14(2)

Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

Hall, Cathy. (1998). "Constructing" Language at MundoHispano. Unpublished paper. George Mason University, Fairfax, VA. (Also available online: http://www.angelfire.com/ma/CasaDax/MHpaper.html [March 4, 1999])

Hiemstra, Roger. (1994). Helping Learners Take Responsibility for Self-Directed Activities. In Hiemstra, R., & Brockett, R.G. (Eds.). Overcoming resistance to self-direction in adult learning (No. 64) Jossey-Bass. San Francisco.

Hughart, Victoria. (1995, September 30). Re: your opinion needed [e-mail to Lonnie M. Turbee], [Online].

Krashen, Stephen. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. New York : Pergamon Press.

Licklider, J.C.R., & Taylor, Robert W. (1968). The computer as a communication device. Science and Technology. (Also available online: http://memex.org/licklider.html [August 25, 1998])

Omaggio, Alice C. (1986). Teaching language in context: Proficiency-oriented instruction. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers, Inc.

Perelman, Lewis J. (1992). School's out: Hyperlearning, the new technology, and the end of education. New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc.

Rodriguez, Maria. (1994, August 12). Re: MundoHispano [e-mail to Lonnie M. Turbee], [Online].

Siembieda, Kevin. (1995). How to Play a Role-Playing Game. In Carlos J. Martigena-Carella, (Ed.), Nightbane, a Complete Role-Playing Game. Palladium Books, Inc., Taylor, MI (p. 31)

Swaffar, Janet, Arens, Katherine, and Byrnes, Heidi. (1991) Reading for Meaning: An Integrated Approach to Language Learning. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Towell, John and Towell, Elizabeth. (1997). Presence in Text-Based Networked Virtual

Environments or "MUDS". Presence, 6(5) (pp. 590-595).

Turkle, Sherry. (1998). Foreword: All MOOs are educational - the experience of "walking through the self". In C. Haynes and J.R. Holmevik, eds. High wired: On the design, use, and theory of educational MOOs. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

Turbee, Lonnie. (1997). Educational MOO: Text-based Virtual Reality for Learning in Community. ERIC Digest, ERIC Clearinghouse on Information & Technology, Syracuse, NY. (also http://ericir.syr.edu/ithome/digests/turbee.html).

Warschauer, Mark (Ed.). (1995). Virtual Connections. Second Language Teaching and
Curriculum Center. University of Hawaii at Manoa, Manoa, HI. (pp. 229-244).