Article published in:
Australian Review of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 44:1 (2021) ► pp. 6581


Alahuhta, P., Nordbäck, E., Sivunen, A., & Surakka, T.
(2014) Fostering team creativity in virtual worlds. Journal For Virtual Worlds Research, 7(3), 1–22. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bandura, A.
(2006) Guide to the construction of self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (Vol. 5, pp. 307–337). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.Google Scholar
Canto, S., de Graaff, R., & Jauregi, K.
(2014) Collaborative tasks for negotiation of intercultural meaning in virtual worlds and video-web communication. In M. Gonzalez-Lloret & L. Ortega (Eds.), Technology and tasks: Exploring technology-mediated TBLT (pp. 183–212). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chen, J. C.
(2016) The crossroads of English language learners, task-based instruction, and 3D multi-user virtual learning in Second Life. Computers & Education, 102, 152–171. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chen, J. C., & Kent, S.
(2020) Task engagement, learner motivation and avatar identities of struggling English language learners in the 3D virtual world. System, 88, 102168. Crossref.Google Scholar
Clark, G. B.
(2009) These horses can fly! and other lessons from Second Life: The view from virtual hacienda. In R. Oxford & J. Oxford (Eds.), Second language teaching and learning in the Net Generation (pp. 153–172). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, National Foreign Language Resource Center.Google Scholar
Clarke, J., & Dede, C.
(2005, April). Making learning meaningful: An exploratory study of using multi-user environments (MUVEs) in middle school science. Paper presentation at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Coffman, T., & Klinger, M. B.
(2007) Utilizing virtual worlds in education: The implications for practice. International Journal of Social Sciences, 2(1), 29–33.Google Scholar
Cooke-Plagwitz, J.
(2008) New directions in CALL: An objective introduction to Second Life. CALICO Journal, 25(3), 547–557. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009) A new language for the Net Generation: Why Second Life works for the Net Generation. In R. Oxford & J. Oxford (Eds.), Second language teaching and learning in the Net Generation (pp. 173–180). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, National Foreign Language Resource Center.Google Scholar
Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. L.
(2008) Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coughlan, T.
(2014) Enhancing innovation through virtual proximity. Technology Innovation Management Review, 4(2), 17–22. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dawley, L., & Dede, C.
(2014) Situated learning in virtual worlds and immersive simulations. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), The handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 723–734). New York: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C. J., & Long, M.
(2003) Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7(3), 50–80.Google Scholar
Dede, C.
(1995) The evolution of constructivist learning environments: Immersion in distributed, virtual worlds. Educational Technology, 35(5), 46–52.Google Scholar
(2005) Planning for Neomillennial learning styles. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 1, 7–12.Google Scholar
(2012) Customization in immersive learning environments: Implications for digital teaching platforms. In C. Dede & J. Richards (Eds.), Digital teaching platforms (pp. 119–133). New York: Teacher’s College Press.Google Scholar
Deutschmann, M., & Panichi, L.
(2009) Talking into empty space? Signalling involvement in a virtual language classroom in Second Life. Language Awareness, 18(3/4), 310–328. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2013) Towards models for designing language learning in virtual worlds. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments (IJVPLE), 4(2), 65–84. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dornyei, Z.
(2007) Research methods in applied linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Downey, S., Mohler, J., Morris, J., & Sanchez, R.
(2012) Learner perceptions and recall of small group discussions within 2D and 3D collaborative environments. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(8), 1405–1419. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ganem-Gutierrez, G. A.
(2014) A sociocultural theory approach to the design and evaluation of 3D virtual world tasks. In M. Gonzalez-Lloret & L. Ortega (Eds.), Technology and tasks: Exploring technology-mediated TBLT (pp. 213–238). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
González-Lloret, M.
(2015) A practical guide to integrating technology into task-based language teaching. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Harvard University
Hobbs, M., Brown, E., & Gordon, M.
(2006) Using a virtual world for transferable skills in gaming education. Innovation in teaching and learning in information and computer sciences, 5(3), 1–13. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J.
(1986) Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 125–132. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, N.
(2006) The educational potential of Second Life. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, Digital Union.Google Scholar
King, J.
(2013) Silence in the second language classrooms of Japanese universities. Applied Linguistics, 34(3), 325–343. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krashen, S. D.
(1985) The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Lave, J., & Wenger, E.
(1991) Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Linden Lab
(2013, June 20). Infographic: 10 years of Second Life [Press release]. Retrieved from http://​www​.lindenlab​.com​/releases​/infographic​-10​-years​-of​-second​-life
(2015, November 20). Avatar [Second Life Website]. Retrieved from http://​go​.secondlife​.com​/landing​/avatar/
Mackey, A., & Gass, S.
(2016) Qualitative research. In Second language research: Methodology and design (2nd ed., pp. 215–237). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mayrath, M., Sanchez, J., Traphagan, T., & Heikes, J.
(2007) Using Second life in an English course: Designing class activities to address learning objectives. In C. Montgomerie & J. Seale (Eds.), Proceedings of the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications (pp. 4219–4224). Chesapeake, Va.: AACE.Google Scholar
Merriam, S. B.
(2009) Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation: Revised and expanded from qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Franscisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Ortega, L., & González-Lloret, M.
(2015) Staking out the territory of technology mediated TBLT. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Domains and directions in the development of TBLT: A decade of plenaries from the international conference (pp. 59–86). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pellas, N.
(2014) The influence of computer self-efficacy, metacognitive self-regulation and self-esteem on student engagement in online learning programs: Evidence from the virtual world of Second Life. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 157–170. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, M.
(2010a) Learner participation patterns and strategy use in Second Life: An exploratory case study. ReCALL, 22(3), 273–292. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2010b) Massively multiplayer online role-playing games as arenas for second language learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(5), 429–439. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) EFL learner collaborative interaction in Second Life. ReCALL, 24(01), 20–39. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2016a) The use of massively multiplayer online role-playing games in CALL: An analysis of research. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(7), 1181-1194. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2016b) Virtual worlds and language learning: An analysis of research. In F. Farr & L. Murray (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language learning and technology (pp. 308–319). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Prensky, M.
(2005a) Engage me or enrage me: What today’s learners demand. EDUCAUSE Review, 40(5), 60–65.Google Scholar
(2005b) Listen to the natives. Educational Leadership, 63(4), 8–13.Google Scholar
Sadler, R.
(2012) Virtual worlds: An overview and pedagogical examination. Bellaterra journal of teaching and learning language and literature, 5(1), 1–22. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sadler, R., & Dooly, M.
(2013) Language learning in virtual worlds: Research and practice. In H. R. M. Thomas (Ed.), Contemporary computer-assisted language learning (pp. 159–182). London, UK: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Schroeder, R.
(2002) Social interaction in virtual environments: key issues, common themes, and a framework for research. In R. Schroeder (Ed.), The social life of avatars: Presence and interaction in shared virtual environments (pp. 1–18). London, UK: Springer-Verlag. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wang, C. X., Anstadt, S., Goldman, J., & Mary, L. M.
(2014) Facilitating group discussions in Second Life. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 139–152.Google Scholar
Wang, F., & Burton, J. K.
(2013) Second Life in education: A review of publications from its launch to 2011. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3), 357–371. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wenger, E.
(1998) Communities of practice: Learning as a social system. Systems Thinker, 9(5), 1–8.Google Scholar
(2000) Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7(2), 225–246. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wenger, E. C., & Snyder, W. M.
(2000) Communities of practice: The organizational frontier. Harvard business review, 78(1), 139–146.Google Scholar
Wigham, C. R., & Chanier, T.
(2015) Interactions between text chat and audio modalities for L2 communication and feedback in the synthetic world Second Life. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(3), 260–283. CrossrefGoogle Scholar