Gender differences - capsi

Gender Differences in the Perception and Use of an
Informal Science Learning Web Site
Final Report to NSF
March, 2003
Pamela R. Aschbacher, Principal Investigator
Caltech’s Pre-College Science Initiative (CAPSI)
CAPSI
Mail code 1-98
California Institute of Technology
Pasadena, CA 91125
626-395-3222
This study was conducted by the Research Group at Caltech’s Pre-College
Science Initiative, including researchers Brian Foley, Melanie Jones, and
Cameron Baker McPhee, and consultant Sue Marshall of U.C. Irvine.
This study was funded by NSF (HRD-0086338). The opinions, findings,
conclusions or recommendations expressed herein belong to the authors and do
not necessarily reflect those of NSF.
1
Gender Differences in the Perception and Use of an Informal Science
Learning Web Site
Introduction
In our rapidly changing and increasingly technological world, all citizens need to
understand science and technology and to be able to think scientifically. But research
suggests that girls’ interest and involvement in science and technology fails to last into
adulthood. Although boys and girls in the U.S. are equally interested in science in early
elementary grades (Kahle & Meece, 1994), by sixth grade, girls have grown significantly
less interested in science than boys (Simpson & Oliver, 1990; Baker & Leary, 1995:
Catsambis, 1995; and Jones, Howe, & Rua, 2000). The middle school years appear to
be a critical time for retaining girls’ interest in technology and science (Baker & Leary,
1995), just as it is in math and for school in general (Linn & Hyde, 1989; Brown &
Gilligan, 1992). Computer use among girls drops off dramatically after age 13, perhaps
due to a dearth of games and activities that involve something more than speed, fighting
and competition. By high school, girls’ confidence in studying science has dropped
considerably while boys’ confidence has dropped only slightly (AAUW, 1995). By
college, fewer women enter degree programs in science and technology, and by
adulthood there are far fewer women in science and technology-related positions (NSF,
2000; Furger, 1998; Kahle & Meece, 1994). To address this condition, an array of
research, demonstration projects, and information dissemination projects has been
initiated. Their purposes have been to increase awareness of interests, needs, and
capabilities of girls and women; to promote instructional materials and methods to
increase interest, retention and achievement of girls and women; and to increase the
availability of student enrichment resources (NSF, 2001).
In particular, research on increasing girls’ confidence and interest in science and
technology has taken several paths. While many efforts have aimed at increasing girls’
interest in science by changing the classroom environment (e.g. Kahle, 1987) or the
nature of classroom learning activities, another avenue has been to provide
opportunities for girls to explore science and technology outside the classroom.
Proponents hope that opportunities to interact with scientific ideas in a friendly social
environment may lead more girls to become more interested in science and technology
courses and careers.
The Internet appears to have great potential for providing new opportunities for science
learning outside of the classroom (Pea et al., 1999). For example, on-line science
museums (e.g. the San Francisco Exploratorium: www.exploratorium.edu) can provide
students with opportunities to explore scientific ideas at their own pace and in topics they
select. Educational experiences on the web can be designed to provide more feedback
and guidance than is often possible in a museum or certain other informal settings.
Web-based educational experiences can allow students to be interactive and express
their ideas and understandings (Salomon, 1990; diSessa, 1986), in addition to providing
links to a vast array of information for students with particular interests. Research
suggests that web-based activities that support social interaction, community service
and design have strong appeal among girls (Rubin et al., 1997; Honey et al., 1991).
One of the drawbacks of the traditional web site is that it is typically an individual
experience. Students explore their ideas on their own with little chance to interact with
others while they learn. This can be isolating and discouraging, especially to girls, who
2
often report a preference for working in groups (Baker & Leary, 1995; Turkle & Papert,
1990). Recently, some sites have attempted to become more interactive through the
use of chat rooms and other activities (Lempke, 1999). For example, Schlager, Fusco &
Schank, (1998) have developed TAPPED-IN, a web site for teachers where they can talk
to each other one-to-one and in groups to collaborate on projects.
A great deal of research and effort has been directed towards creating computer
software that appeals to girls (AAUW, 2000). The small number of girls who take
programming classes and the small number of women in high technology positions
underscore this need for girl-friendly software. (Kahle & Meece, 1994). The recent
AAUW report (2000) points out that the majority of computer games are based on
violence and conflict, which many girls find unappealing. Since it is often noted that
gaming is one of the ways boys seem to comfortably enter the technology ‘pipeline,’
providing more games of the type that girls enjoy is seen as a way to encourage girls to
study and consider careers in technology. Girls are more interested in games that
require strategy, interaction and constructionist design. When asked to design their ideal
computer games, many girls focused on the themes of identity play and simulation
(Kafai, 1995).
Our study examined a unique interactive web site (www.Whyville.net) that was designed
to engage students in socially interactive, entertaining and educational activities that
include inquiry science. After some time, the site developers noted that most users were
girls, contrary to what might be expected from a science-oriented program. Our study
was designed to examine why this was happening. Our research questions were as
follows:
1. To document who uses this web site, including what type of girls and boys are drawn
to it;
2. To explore what they do on the site and what seems to attract them;
3. To analyze key opportunities to learn about science on the site;
4. To examine what young girls and boys might be learning about science and
technology on the site; and
5. To discuss implications for future efforts to increase girls’ knowledge and interest in
science and technology.
Brief Overview of WWW.Whyville.net
Whyville is a free and informal learning web site created in 1999, to help students
explore science and social science concepts in an interactive learning environment. The
guiding force behind Whyville’s development has been Jim Bower, a neurobiologist from
Caltech, now at the University of Texas, who has had many years’ experience in handson inquiry science education. Co-founders include Jen Sun, who did graduate work at
Caltech in biology and a post-doctoral fellowship in the usage of the internet in the
classroom; Mark Dinan, a Caltech graduate in physics with extensive programming
experience at Knowledge Adventure and IdeaLab!; and Ann Pickard, a graduate of the
Pasadena Art Center College of Design. They formed a company named Numedeon to
provide an Internet-based alternative to didactic classroom-style education. They try to
engage students in meaningful yet entertaining learning experiences through humor,
curiosity, relevance, and scientific inquiry. According to Bower, “Knowledge attained
through an active process of sorting through data and connecting that to what you
already know is knowledge that sticks.”
3
When visitors log on to Whyville, they see colorful Dr. Seuss-inspired graphics depicting
a 3-D town square surrounded by fanciful cartoon buildings. They click to enter one of
the buildings, and inside are links and instructions to explore a host of activities. Users
may visit various areas, including the town swimming pool, the “Sports-platz,” the
playground, the mall, other users’ houses, and a dozen games that involve science and
math.
Figure 1. Whyville Square
In many locations on the site, cartoon images (avatars) float on the screen representing
the other users who are logged on at the time. At the “Pick Your Nose” site, users can
select a nose, hair, eyes, mouth, clothing and accessories from a menu of parts to
create a cartoon face to represent themselves on the site. As they chat with others, their
avatars spout cartoon balloons in real time, showing their dialog, much like instant
messaging. The visual representation helps users stay aware of who is online at the
moment and quickly recognize their friends or people they have encountered before. A
graphic design interface also lets users create their own face parts and accessories from
scratch.
Users can interact in a variety of ways including one-on-one chatting (“whispering”),
group chat, Y-mail (the site’s own e-mail network), and bulletin board postings with
ongoing threads addressing a variety of topics. In this way, Whyville’s environment is
interactive spatially as well as verbally.
4
When users, known as Whyvillians, enter the site, they can engage in a wide range of
activities including science and math games, chatting with one another, and building
their own virtual homes in Whyville. Participation in science activities earns players a
salary (“clams”), which they accrue in a bank account each time they visit the site. As
they improve their performance on the science games, their salary increases. Users can
also earn clams through creative activities such as writing articles for the site newsletter
(The Whyville Times). Some entrepreneurial users have earned large virtual bank
accounts from creating and selling face parts and accessories (e.g. glasses, jewelry, and
hats) beyond the standard parts offered free by the site. Unofficial businesses, such as
users offering makeovers, also add to the site’s economy. Users can spend their clams,
for example, on new face parts or buy a plot of land, build a house, and furnish it so they
can have friends over for chat fests.
Most science activities on the site are interactive simulations that are done individually
by the users. In the Spin Lab activity, for example, users are challenged to position the
arms and legs of an ice skater in such a way as to make the skater spin as fast as
possible. At the time of the study there were eleven science games available to users.
Figure 2. Spin Lab
From time to time, the site’s designers create new science games, activities or events for
Whyville. For example, at one point mysterious spots suddenly began to infect the
Whyville faces of a handful of the most frequent users. “Whypox” grew from benign
looking freckles to red welts over time. When infected users tried to chat, an electronic
5
“ah-choo” wiped out their words. The site designers posted a memo on the site’s bulletin
board suggesting that users check out “what’s new” at the Whyville version of the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. At the site’s virtual CDC web page, users
found a simulation of how diseases spread, a real-time graph of how many Whyvillians
had been infected, and links to an actual newspaper article about a wave of real,
unexplained rashes affecting students in East Coast schools at the time. The plague was
designed to trigger user interest in learning more about epidemiology and the spread of
diseases, and this “edu-tainment” approach to learning proved to be a terrific motivator.
The web site has grown and evolved over time through the efforts of the users as well as
the site’s creators and managers. Users’ behavior, interactions, and values affect the
norms for the site and make it a reflection of real society, from the serious to the
frivolous. For example, users have created beauty pageants, parties, and weddings
while they also discuss serious issues on bulletin boards and in articles in the Whyville
Times. They have also helped design the site’s justice system, in which those who
swear or annoy others are warned and can be made invisible. Some users even set up a
charity, Grandma’s, to distribute free unwanted face parts to users with few clams.
Since its inception in early 1999, the web site has grown considerably. It has accrued
more than 350,000 registered participants, with about 5,000 users logging in daily.
Because of its large size, Whyville is an exception among the growing number of
educational multi-player environments such as Moose Crossing (Bruckman, 2000) or
Atlantis (Barab, 2002). The managers of the site estimate that about 70% of site visitors
come back at least 5 times, and perhaps 30% come 10 times or more per month for
several months. On average, registered users visit the site three times a week and
spend about 45 minutes per day. The site has no advertising or commercial product
placement and can be accessed for free. However, within its first couple of years it grew
so popular that it became difficult for students to access the site during peak hours. In
November 2001, the site developers introduced Why-Passes, which give pass-owners
priority access to the site at any time of day for a cost of $4.95/month. Currently, about
80% of users who try to log on for free are successful.
Research Activities
This study employed a variety of methods, using both quantitative and qualitative data,
to study the Whyville web site and its users. We interviewed the site’s developers;
analyzed the educational aspects of the site’s science activities; analyzed a sample of
chat on the site; explored the site as a typical user would; and participated on the site as
researchers. Known as “Whyologists” on the site, we chatted informally with users,
conducted an online survey, and facilitated an online focus group. We also recruited a
comparison group of public school students, introduced them to the web site, and
conducted a survey and focus groups with them about their experiences after a couple
months of access. Details about our methods are presented below.
Interview of Site Developers
From the time of the original proposal throughout the course of the study we had many
conversations with the site’s developers at Numedeon Inc. We also formally interviewed
two of the four original design team members. We addressed their goals and motivation
in developing the site, the history and evolution of certain site features and events, the
challenges they faced over time, and their knowledge of user characteristics and
behavior.
6
Researcher Exploration of the Site
Our researchers participated as site users for many hours over the course of several
months to examine the site from the perspective of young people who visit it. We
focused primarily on activities related to science and technology learning and on
differences in the behavior of boys and girls on the site. We played all the science
games, visited various chat locations to observe and chat with other users, visited users’
“houses,” and exchanged “y-mail” with users. We also read examples of user articles
from the site newspaper.
Given the ease with which people can misrepresent themselves on the Internet, we felt it
was important to be honest with the other users about who we were. We identified
ourselves as researchers studying the web site, and with the aid of Numedeon, our
avatars wore special hats that identified us as “Whyologists.” The young people on the
site were interested in our study and seemed quite willing to interact and share their
views and experiences with us. They even provided us help in deciphering their chat
slang and abbreviations so that we could code it accurately. Several times during the
study we discussed our findings with colleagues at UCLA’s Graduate School of
Education and Information Studies, and EDC’s Center for Children and Technology,
particularly to compare the features of Whyville with those of other web sites and
software for girls.
Analysis of Science Games on the Site
To understand the opportunities that the site affords users to learn about science, we
gathered data in three ways. We played all the science games on the site and
discussed their development and features with the designers. We also analyzed the
games and supplementary materials for science and math content, the level of
understanding and inquiry that is called for, and the individual versus collaborative
nature of the activities, with reference to the National Science Standards. We also noted
the incentives for playing games and engaging with supplementary instructional
materials as well as the relationship between the games and the rest of the site.
Online Survey of Whyville Users
We conducted an online survey of Whyville users over the period of August to
December, 2001. The 3-part 86 item survey was designed to obtain information about
the backgrounds and attitudes of the users as well as their opinions about and
experiences with the site. We incorporated three items on science knowledge from the
TIMSS and some attitude and experience items from a survey developed and used by
CAPSI for an earlier study, and we developed new items to tap students’ experiences
and attitudes especially for this study. We discussed over 100 draft items with Dorothy
Bennett, Margaret Honey, and colleagues, and then selected and refined the best of the
items. Survey item formats included multiple choice, Likert scale and free response.
Survey items addressed issues about science, technology, and Whyville itself, a sample
of which are illustrated in Figure 3. The science questions asked users about their past
experiences in science and their attitudes towards science and school in general. A few
science content questions were included to provide a very rough estimate of users’
science literacy. Similarly, the technology questions assessed the users’ experiences
with and attitudes about computers and the internet. Questions about home computer
equipment provided an indication of the economic status of users. Questions about
Whyville asked users about science activities, chatting, face design and other site
experiences.
7
Figure 3. Sample questions used in the survey of Whyville users
Science Questions:
A. How much do you like science in general (not just in school)?
a. A lot
b. A little bit
c. Not very much
d. Not at all
B. What is a lightyear?
Technology Questions
C. Which of these things do you know how to do on a computer: (check anything
you can do all by yourself)
a. Turn the computer on
b. Get online and log on to Whyville
c. Find a file on the computer that someone else saved
d. Install free software (for example Real Player)
e. Make a web page
f. Write a computer program
g. Fix problems on the computer
h. Build a computer from parts
D. How much do you learn about computers from the following sources: (a lot, a
little, hardly anything)
a. School computer classes/lessons
b. Talking to friends and family
c. Trying things myself
d. Reading books or magazines
e. Whyville
f. Other web sites
Whyville Questions
E. Do you and your friends make plans to log in at about the same time?
a. Yes, all the time
b. Yes, some of the time
c. No, I log in whenever I have the time
F. What is your favorite thing about Whyville?
To recruit young people on the site to take this relatively long survey, we arranged with
Numedeon to post the survey on the site and offer a substantial incentive, 250 “clams,”
to users who completed it. (To put this in context, the average “salary” users make per
day based on their game skill is about 20 clams; the typical face part designed by users
costs about 20 clams; and the range of compensation for an article users might write for
the site’s newsletter is about 50-150 clams, depending on length and quality)
8
Three of our researchers created identities for themselves on the site as “Whyologists”
who wanted to study the Whyville community. A special “room” in Whyville called the
“Whyology Center” was created by Numedeon to provide an access point for users to
take the survey. Researchers explained to users that the survey was part of a study of
the site by a group who was independent of the site managers. We also explained that
information provided by the users would be kept anonymous but might be utilized by
Numedeon to improve the site.
Since we expected most users to be minors, we required that they print out a permission
form provided on the site and have their parents read, sign and fax it back to us. The
form required that parents include a phone number and stated that we would call to
verify a portion of the forms. We called parents for about 10% of the forms we received
– in most cases because we suspected that the signatures on the form were not
authentic (e.g. a signature looked more like a child’s writing than a parent’s). We also
asked for the user’s age and gender so that we could compare this to the data that the
site managers had for those users. To maintain confidentiality, the form specifically did
not ask for the real name of the user and only used their Whyville log-in name.
The survey was introduced to the Whyville community via an article in the site
newsletter, the Whyville Times, in which the Whyologists explained the purpose of the
survey, the procedures for parental consent, and the rewards for survey completion.
Users received 50 clams for the permission form, 50 for each of the three parts of the
survey and 50 additional clams for completing the entire survey. They also received a
virtual hat for their avatar that looked like the hat worn by the Whyologists. We hoped
that the hat would start conversations among users on the site, thus promoting the
survey by word of mouth. However, very few of the users chose to wear the special hat,
so its effectiveness was limited. After the article in the Times, users were able to begin
submitting permission forms. Twelve days later we made the survey available to users
who had turned in valid permission forms. The survey was divided into three parts so
users would not have to complete it all in one sitting. When users completed a part of
the survey, a researcher would check to see that it was complete and give the
appropriate clams or send a message to the student that their submission was
inadequate. We continued to accept permission forms and surveys for about four
months (134 days). During this time, two follow-up articles where published in the
Times, and the survey was highlighted in the site’s weekly management email to users.
A total of 349 users turned in permission forms. Of these, 219 young people completed
the survey (160 girls and 59 boys).1 The response rate is about 5% of the “frequent
users,” based on estimates from Numedeon. Over 15,000 different users logged on to
the site while the survey was available2. Of these, Numedeon estimates that about 30%
visited the site at least 10 times, so our response rate was about 5% of these frequent
users (those who might know and care enough about the site and earning clams to
bother to complete the survey).3 While we had hoped for a significantly higher response
rate, it is perhaps not surprising that a relatively small percentage of young people
obtained parental permission and completed all three parts of the survey. We believe the
need for parental permission to complete the survey was an important reason for the low
response. We observed many posts on the site’s bulletin board commenting that users
1
Five adults also completed the survey but their responses are not included in this report.
This represents 15000 different user names. Many young people have more than one identity on the site
(about 60% of girls and 40% of boy users surveyed said they do), so it is not known exactly how many
separate individuals were actually on the site, but 10,000 seems a reasonable estimate.
3
At the time of the online survey, Numedeon had not instituted Why-Passes.
2
9
did not want to ask their parents for permission, could not obtain permission, or
boycotted the survey because they did not think they should have to get parental
permission. Some users complained about the need to provide a parent phone number.
It is also possible that some users did not want to reveal to parents that they were using
the Internet. All in all, it seems likely that the requirement for parent permission led to a
limited sample size and may have skewed our sample of the Whyville population toward
users whose parents are aware of and supportive of their participation in such web sites.
We analyzed the data for gender differences and group differences between the regular
users and the recruited users. We used t-tests of group means for numerical responses
and Chi-squared tests for comparing groups on categorical data.
Survey of Recruited Users
To put the regular Whyville users in context, we introduced some public school students
(“recruited users”) to Whyville and collected both survey and focus group data from them
after they had had a couple of months to explore the web site. The recruited students
also provided us information about how new users react to their first experiences with
Whyville. Recruited users came from 5 classrooms (2 classes each of 6th and 8th graders
and one class of 10th graders) in three local public schools (N = 140). Students were
from diverse economic and ethnic backgrounds, including African American, Asian,
Hispanic, and non-Hispanic Caucasian.
Students in the public school classes who returned parental consent forms (82% of the
students) completed a written form of the survey that the Whyville users took online. A
few questions were omitted as not relevant or were revised slightly for the classroom
respondents. Students completed the questions on background and experience with
science and technology before they began to explore Whyville. Then they were
introduced to the Whyville web site and asked to explore it over the next couple of
months. We arranged with Numedeon to provide free Why-passes for them to facilitate
their access to the site. Two months later we returned to the classrooms and
administered the rest of the survey.
Focus Group of Regular Users
In order to give users a chance to elaborate on their survey responses, we conducted an
online focus group with some of the regular users who had completed the online survey.
We invited all those who had completed the survey to join us in the Whyology Center for
a discussion at a given time. Nine users came to the discussion and spoke for two
hours about their experiences on the site and some of their motivations for participating.
The transcript for the far ranging discussion filled 27 pages. The users’ comments
added to our understanding of the survey data and the Whyville experience in general.
Focus Group of Recruited Users
After surveying the recruited students, we conducted 3 focus groups with 6th and 8th
graders during their lunch break and discussed their thoughts about the site. Since we
asked for volunteers, the majority of the focus group participants had been active on the
web site. Their opinions and experiences provided insight into the features of the site
that attract new users and encourage sustained participation.
Analysis of Site Chat
We analyzed a sample of anonymous chat transcripts from the site on two different days
– one in the summer and one in the fall, one a weekend day and one a week day, of
10
2001. The sample was drawn from all the chat locations on the site taken at several
different times of the day. We coded 6000 individual comments to identify the type of
discussions the users were having.
Research Findings
Our findings are presented below, for each major research question we posed:
1. Who visits Whyville? What kind of girls visit the site? What kind of boys? How
do regular users compare to a more general public school population (recruited
users)?
2. What do young people like to do on Whyville, especially girls? Are there
important gender differences in users’ interests and activities? What has
attracted girls to the site?
3. What opportunities to learn science do users have? What aspects of the
science games seem to appeal to girls?
4. What are users learning about science? How does the experience affect
users’ understanding and attitudes about science and technology?
1. Who Visits Whyville?
Regular Whyville users (WU) who answered our survey ranged from 8 to 19 years old,
and are in 3rd to 12th grade. Most are between 10-15 years old, and 73% are girls.
Among these Whyville users, girls and boys share many traits, including their
approximate age (about 12 years old), background (affluent), and school experience
(successful). They are quite similar in their easy access to, facility with, and avid interest
in computers. Both girls and boys are somewhat interested in science and do well in it,
but are not strongly interested in a career in the sciences. Girl users differ from boys in
their interests in some school subjects, career fields, favorite web sites, and confidence
in their computer ability. Profiles of the typical girl and boy WU are presented below, and
highlights are summarized in Table 1. Note that the left half of the table refers to WU,
and the table as a whole permits comparisons of WU with recruited users from public
schools (RU).
11
Table 1. Summary of regular and recruited users’ background and attitudes
Whyville Users (WU) (n=219)
Background
Average age (mean & sd)
Average grade
% public school
% attend “mostly white” school
% computers at home
% internet access at home
Do “very well” in school
Like school “a lot”
Hobbies –most common
Career Interests—top 3 &
bottom-most choice:
4
(mean & sd on 1-5 scale )
Science Attitudes
Some science interest in general
5
(rated 3 or 4 on 1-4 scale )
Some interest in school science
6
(rated 4 or 5 on 1-5 scale)
How hard is science?
7
(mean & sd on 1-5 scale)
Girls (n=160)
Boys (n=59)
Recruited Users (RU) (n=140)
Girls (n=63)
Boys (n=77)
12.9 years (2.0)
7.8 (1.8)
78%
58%
100%
98%
50%
41%
Sports – 53%
Tech – 18%
Reading- 13%
Web design -3.2 (1.5)
Art/music-3.2 (1.5)
Lawyer -3.0 (1.5)
Engineer -2.0 (1.5)
12.3 (2.0)
7.7 (2.0)
83%
68%
98%
93%
44%
25%
54%
20%
2%
Programmer -3.5 (1.5))
Web Design -2.9 (1.5)
Engineer -2.8 (1.5)
Teacher – 2.3 (1.3)
13.7 (1.4)
7.7. (1.4)
100%
65%
78%
68%
3%
29%
32%
3%
30%
Web design – 3.6 (1.5)
Art/music – 3.5 (1.3)
Doctor – 3.4 (1.5)
Engineer – 2.0 (1.1)
13.4 (1.3)
7.4 (1.3)
100%
58%
71%
66%
12%
25%
40%
21%
12%
Programmer – 3.4 (1.5)
Web design – 3.2 (1.4)
Engineer – 3.0 (1.5)
Teacher 2.1 (1.3)
70%
(27% say “a lot”)
49%
(26% say “ a lot”)
3.7 (.92)
85%
(36% say “a lot”)
59%
(30% say “a lot”)
3.9 (.95)
56%
(19% say “a lot”)
27%
(10% say “a lot”)
3.0 (.79)
53%
(25% say “a lot”)
24%
(14% say “a lot”)
3.0 (.80)
4
Scale: 1=not interested at all; 5=very interested
Scale: 1=not at all; 4=a lot
6
Scale: 1=don’t like at all; 5=like it a lot
7
Scale: 1=very hard; 5=very easy
5
12
Whyville Users (WU) (n=219)
Science Knowledge (TIMSS)
Sun & Moon: Are they the same
size? (% correct)
Photosynthesis definition
Lightyear definition
Technology
>15 hrs/wk on internet
3 Favorite web sites
Like computers “ a lot”
Computers are “very easy”
Used computers > 4 yrs
Computer skills
Know more about computers
than rest of family
Girls (n=160)
Recruited Users (RU) (n=140)
Boys (n=59)
Girls (n=63)
Boys (n=77)
81%
81%
91%
90%
69%
29%
56%
31%
59%
24%
81%
53%
29%
Games –63%
Chat – 59%
Friends – 57%
82%
70%
85%
Install software–
Make web page –
Program –
Troubleshoot –
Build from parts –
28%
37%
Games – 88%
Chat – 59%
TV/movie – 58%
86%
70%
71%
81%
58%
25%
56%
14%
42%
6%
Music – 65%
Chat, games,TVeach
59%
59%
41%
72%
60%
30%
16%
27%
6%
29%
9%
Games – 84%
TV/movie – 53%
Sports, music each–48%
73%
49%
82%
90%
42%
27%
61%
20%
39%
79%
49%
15%
59%
5%
13
What kind of girl regularly visits Whyville?
According to our survey of regular Whyvillians, the average WU is a girl, 12.9 years old,
in 7th grade , who attends a public school with a “mostly white” student population. Her
favorite extracurricular activity is sports, with some interest in technology-related
activities, such as graphics or games, and reading.
She likes school and says she does very well in it. She likes all the school subjects
queried, but likes computers best, followed by English, science, PE, math and history in
descending order.
Asked specifically about science (in general, not just in school), she says she likes it “a
little” and finds it “easy.” She believes studying hard is the most important thing one can
do to become good at science. She feels the school science she has had so far has
been generally positive and says that her family and teachers have encouraged her to
learn science. She has had a number of science-related experiences such as trips to the
zoo, science museum, planetarium, and aquarium. She identified school as the place
where she learns the most about science, but also feels she learns a little about science
from other sources such as Whyville, TV, and trying things for herself. She says she
learns hardly anything about science from web sites other than Whyville.
She got 2 out of 3 TIMSS 8th grade science items correct on the survey. She knows what
photosynthesis is and why the sun is actually larger than the moon even though they
appear the same size in the sky, but she gives an incorrect definition of the term
“lightyear.”
Her family has a computer and internet connection at home, along with a printer,
scanner, and fax machine (suggesting her family is reasonably affluent). She has used a
computer for over four years and spends between 5 to 15 hours a week on the internet.
At least once a month she visits sites involving games, chat, and her friends’ own sites,
but she seldom visits other educational web sites besides Whyville. She likes computers
“a lot” and feels they are very easy to use. She learned to use computers by trying things
herself and asking friends. She feels the best ways to learn to use computers are at
school and from friends or family. She can do many of the functions we asked about:
find electronic files made by others, log on to the internet, download and install free
software from the web, trouble shoot, and make her own web page. However, she
cannot write a computer program or build a computer from parts by herself. She feels
she knows more about computers than some in her family but less than others, and thus
is somewhat less confident in her knowledge than the typical boy user.
Of the career possibilities we inquired about, she is most interested in a career in web
design, art, music, law or teaching. She is least interested in becoming an engineer or
astronomer. She is slightly uninterested in the remaining four career choices we asked
about, three of which are science or technology-oriented fields (doctor, biologist,
computer programmer, and business executive).
What kind of boy regularly visits Whyville and how is he different from the girl?
The typical WU boy is like the average WU girl in many respects. He is also in 7th grade
but is slightly younger (12.3 years old), and also attends a “mostly white” public school.
Like the girl, his favorite extracurricular activity is sports, with some interest in
technology-related activities but, unlike the girl, he has virtually no interest in reading.
14
Like the WU girl, he likes school, although a little less than the typical girl user, and he
says he does fairly well in school. He likes all the school subjects queried, with
computers best, followed by PE, science, and math. He likes English and history less
than the girl user.
The typical WU boy is much like the WU girl in terms of science attitudes and
experiences. He also likes science (in general) “a little,” finds it easy, and believes that
studying hard is the most important thing one can do to become good at science. He
also feels the school science he has had so far has been generally positive. He has had
the same science-related experiences as the girl, such as trips to the zoo, science
museum, and so forth. And he got the same 2 out of 3 TIMSS 8th grade science items
correct as the girl did.
However, unlike the girl, the typical WU boy says he does not feel that people encourage
or discourage him from learning science. He identified school as the place where he
learns the most about science, as did the girl. However, the boy is slightly more likely
than the girl to learn a little about science from a variety of other sources including
friends and family, TV and movies, Whyville and other web sites, and trying things
himself.
Like the girl, the boy’s family has a computer and internet connection at home, along
with other technology. Like her, he also has used a computer for over four years and
spends 5-15 hours a week on the Internet. At least once a month he visits sites involving
games and chat, as does the girl. However, the boy is much more likely to visit game
sites than the girl. He is also more likely than she to visit sports sites and TV or movie
related sites, whereas she is far more likely than the boy to visit friends’ sites and
fashion or shopping sites.
The boy’s attitudes and experiences with computers are also very much like the girl’s.
He says he likes computers “a lot,” and also feels they are very easy to use. He learned
to use computers by trying things himself and asking friends. However, he is slightly
more likely than the girl to have learned a little about computers by reading about them.
Similarly, both the girl and boy feel that trying things for oneself and asking friends are
the best ways to learn about computers. But the boy is slightly more likely to view
reading about computers as a good learning strategy, whereas the girl is slightly more
likely than the boy to see taking a class as a useful method.
The boy reports that he can do the same functions with the computer as the girl.
However, of these functions, he is slightly more likely than the girl to feel able to make a
web site, and she is slightly more likely to feel able to fix problems on the computer.
While the average WU boy, like the average girl, cannot program or build a computer
from parts, there are more boys who have these skills than girls. When asked how his
knowledge of computers compares to that of his family members, he is more confident in
his knowledge than the girl. He is more likely to believe that he knows more about
computers than anyone else in the family, whereas she is more likely to believe that she
knows more than some people but less than others.
The boy, like the girl, is quite interested in a career as a web designer, but his other
career interests are rather different from the girl’s. He is very interested in a career in
computer programming, followed by engineering. He is somewhat uninterested in the
remaining career choices we asked about, with teacher and biologist at the bottom of his
list.
15
How do regular Whyville users compare to a more general public school
population (our recruited users)?
In general, the longtime users of Whyville are slightly more affluent, like school, science,
and computers better, and spend more time on the internet than the public school
students of the same grade we recruited to try Whyville for the first time. The groups
were roughly equivalent in the length of time they said they had used computers, their
interest in sports and careers, and their knowledge of TIMSS science items.
Background. The Whyville users (WU) who responded to our survey are about a year
younger than the students we recruited from local public schools to try Whyville (RU)
(see Table 1), but both groups were in 7th grade on average. While the majority of WU
go to public school, about 20% of them go to private or religious schools. Most of the
WUs (60%) attend schools they say are “mostly white,” but 40% report their school
student bodies are “mixed.” The RU’s public schools are mostly Hispanic with a mix of
other ethnicities.
WUs probably come from more affluent families as they have more technological
equipment at home than most RUs. For example, virtually all the WU have computers,
internet access, and printers at home, whereas just 2/3rd to 3/4ths of RUs do. Over half
the WUs have fax machines and scanners, whereas less than half the RUs do.
WUs reportedly do much better in school than RUs. About half the WUs say they do very
well in school, far more than the RUs (only 3-12% of them do very well). Both groups of
users tend to like school “a little” rather than “a lot,” and the WU girls particularly seem to
like it more than the boys. Students in both groups like math about the same amount;
about 30-40% like it “a lot.”
Both groups also like to do sports outside of school, although the WUs like it more than
the RUs do. RU girls like reading far more than both WU and RU boys. On the other
hand, the RU girls like technology-related activities far less than everyone else does.
There were few differences between the two user groups’ interests in careers. Web
design was at or near the top of the list for all students, whereas biology and astronomy
were not very interesting to any of them.
The significant differences in career interests were between boys and girls, not between
WU and RU. For example, at the top of boys’ lists in both groups were the same three
technology-related careers in the same order: computer programmer, web design, and
engineering, while teaching was at the bottom. For girls in both groups, web design,
art/music, and law or medicine were at or near the top of the list, while engineering was
at the bottom.
Science. WUs tended to be more interested in and confident about science in general
than the RUs. About 81% of WU but only 54% of RU said they like science. Asked
whether they found science hard, 62% of WU said science was easy or very easy,
compared to only 20% of RU. When asked to rate how much they like school science,
again more WU than RU said they like it (26-30% say “a lot” vs. 10-14%). Thus it
appears that students who are attracted to Whyville like science somewhat more than
those in the more general population.
Despite the fact that WUs say they like science better and do better in science in school,
they did about the same or worse than RUs on the three TIMSS science knowledge
16
items on our survey. On two of the items, the RU boys outperformed the other three
subgroups (RU girls, WU girls, and WU boys).
Both WUs and RUs said they learn science primarily in school and only a little from other
sources such as trying it themselves, watching TV, and reading. In both groups, girls felt
slightly more encouraged by family and teachers to learn science than boys did.
When asked what one can do to become good at science, both groups most often said
“study hard” but more WUs than RUs felt this way (about 45% compared to about 25%).
Technology. Both groups were quite enthusiastic about technology, but the WU group
was even more so, with 83% of WU and 70% of RU reporting they like computers “a lot.”
Interestingly, boys and girls in both groups said computer science is their favorite school
subject, although the WUs’ ratings were higher than the RUs (mean ratings of 4.3
compared to 3.9 on a 1-5 scale, 5 high).
The WU girls liked computers about as much as the WU and RU boys (all three in the
range of 73-87%) whereas the RU girls liked computers somewhat less (59%). More
strikingly, RU girls almost never pursue technology-related activities outside school (3%
for RU girls vs. 18-21% for all others). This result suggests, not surprisingly, that the girls
who regularly go to Whyville have much stronger interests in technology than girls in the
more general population, in fact about equal to that of boys on Whyville and the
population at large. Their interest in technology may thus reflect self-selection and/or
some positive effect of their experiences on the web site.
Not surprisingly, WUs say they spend much more time on the internet each week than
RUs do, probably reflecting both access and interest (30-37% of WUs spend over 15 hrs
a week compared to only 6-9% of RUs). The two groups shared somewhat similar
patterns in the types of web sites they visit besides Whyville, with favorites for both boys
and girls including games, chat, TV/movies, and music. Girls also tend to like friends’
web sites, and boys tend to like sports sites. Despite the high amount of internet use
among WUs, most do not regularly visit other educational or science oriented web sites;
e.g. only 13% of WU girls reported visiting another science sites compared to 22% of RU
girls. Thus Whyville seems to be the primary web-based source of informal science
learning for many of these girls.
Both groups have used computers for 4-10 years and feel they are very easy to use,
although recruited users were slightly less confident. Both groups say they learned
more of what they know about computers from teaching themselves and learning from
friends than from school or reading about computers. However, when asked what they
think is the best way to learn about computers, they responded differently. WUs tend to
favor trying things out for themselves, whereas the RU boys said trying things for
yourself and learning from others were equally good, and the RU girls favored learning
from others.
The two groups differ slightly in their self-reported computer skills. The RUs boys tend to
say they are the same or just slightly better than WU boys say they are at all the queried
skills, except building a web page. Boys were consistently better than girls in both
groups, except that WU girls were as slightly better than WU boys at trouble shooting.
The WU girls are much more likely than RU girls to be able to install free software, fix
problems on the computer, and make a web page. In both groups, boys are more likely
than girls to say that they know more than their families members about computers,
however we do not know whether this indicates real capacity or simply greater
confidence.
17
The recruited users varied greatly in their reaction to Whyville. Some RU logged on only
once or twice during the trial period, while others became very engrossed in the site.
Many logged on several times, tried the games, explored the site and chatted a bit, but
in general the RU did not get so involved in the chatting, social life, adornment of
avatars, and playing of games as the WU. The 6th grade recruited users seemed to
enjoy the site a bit more than the 8th graders. Some quotes from our focus groups
illustrate the RU’s reactions:8
I don’t go that often anymore because I can’t get back on. But when I used to go it was
probably every day like right after I got home from school. I had a very big social life. So at
first I would go on and see my thousands of little messages and then I reply. And then I go
and look for people I knew. (girl, 8th grade)
My [younger] brother, he liked it. He sorta played on mine for a little bit and he decided to
get his own. Now he’s like always on it, whenever he gets time. (boy, 8th grade)
I had a hard time trying to figure out how to do it at first. Then I asked my friend and he
taught me how to do it because it’s kind of confusing at first and my computer, it’s kind of
a slow computer because there’s so much going on -- it like takes a long time. I like being
social. (boy, 6th grade)
[the people in our class who don’t like it] say it’s boring and there’s nothing to do after you
play all the games and stuff…and they say they’re so ugly and no one ever wants to talk to
them. So they never go on. (girl, 6th grade)
2. What Do Young People Do and Like on Whyville, Especially Girls?
Whyville has several features that appeal to young people, particularly girls, according to
our surveys and focus groups: chatting and social interaction, modifiable avatars and
other design opportunities, a simulated community with creative and entrepreneurial
opportunities, and science games. These same aspects of the site were mentioned over
and over regardless of how we framed the questions about what appealed to them (e.g.
what interested them about Whyville; their favorite aspects of the site; what their own
web site would be like). When asked what they typically do when logging on to Whyville,
an 8th grade girl’s response sums up many girls’ interests in communicating and being
with others, enhancing her self-image, participating in simulated aspects of real life, and
playing science games:
I go on Whyville like 3 times a week and I check my mail and I go to that little mall
place and buy parts for my face. And then I like sell parts and stuff in that little auction
to get more clams. Then I try to find the little alien and the ship [play a science game]
but they all land in weird places and I can never finish that. And oh, then I go to that
little slide place with the pool and I talk to different people. (girl, 8th grade)
8
Note that all quotes in this report are recorded as spoken or written, including mistakes in spelling and
grammar, without each being marked [sic].
18
Chat and other social interaction
Whyvillians love to chat! Both boys and girls who are regular users strongly enjoyed the
chatting and social aspects of the site according to focus group and survey data (see
Table 2). When asked in the focus groups where they preferred to go on the site and
why, both boys and girls often said they like to go to places where they can chat with
others (see Figure 4). Other types of social interaction are also popular, including
sending and reading Y-mail and just “hanging out” with others. Several users said they
posted messages to the bulletin boards, but not very often. Very little discussion seems
to take place on the boards
Figure 4. Whyvillians chatting at the pool party
19
Table 2. Regular and recruited users’ survey responses: What they like and learn on Whyville.
Whyville Regular Users (WU)
Girls (n=160)
Recruited Users (RU)
Boys (n=59)
Girls (n=63)
Boys (n=77)
What attracts users
Favorite thing about Whyville
•Chatting, meeting people
•Science or other learning
•Design (face, house)
•Simulates real world
39%
8%
23%
8%
41%
17%
7%
3%
11%
21%
14%
3%
10%
23%
5%
1%
Participation in Whyville
•Donated to Grandma’s (charity)
•Created & sold face parts
•Posted on discussion boards
•Own a house
•Wrote articles for Whyville Times
•Multiple identities on site
89%
43
33
23
16
60
81
41
34
17
10
41
24
14
6
5
0
na
23
17
8
9
5
na
Do certain activities most or every
login
•Chat
•Y-mail
•Science games
•Design face parts
•Petitions, polls
72%
63
24
16
20
75
67
37
12
15
16
11
22
8
6
21
10
31
5
8
59%
61
13
18
14
12
2
7
58
78
24
25
Importance of friends on site
•Plan to log in when friends do all
or some of time
•Usually hang out w/ friends
•Important or ok to have
boy/girlfriend, “spouse” on site
20
Whyville Regular Users (WU)
Girls (n=160)
Recruited Users (RU
Boys (n=59)
Girls (n=63)
Boys (n=77)
What users learn on site
“Expert” at science games:
•Ice Skater Spin
•Object Spin
•Great Balloon Race
•Smart Cars
•Solstice Safari
•Zero Gravity
•Rocket Design
•House of Illusions
•Dance Creation
•Alien Hunt
•SunSpot
66%
28
6
11
7
3
16
46
21
41
35
68
49
20
17
3
7
27
70
37
44
34
16
8
2
3
2
2
3
3
2
3
5
22
12
10
10
4
7
12
17
12
9
12
Current salary (from science games)
42 clams
46 clams
19 clams
67 clams
How learned to do science games
•Read instructions
•Practice – tried over & over
•Chat w/ others on how to do it
71%
13
10
64
17
9
38
10
10
26
21
9
Where learned a lot of science:
•School
•Whyville
•TV
•Try by self
•Read
•Friends, family
70%
49
24
25
24
14
58
33
44
34
31
24
51
na
22
30
25
13
64
na
30
23
31
10
Has Whyville changed how you think
about computers or science?
•Positive change
•No change
50%
36
53
31
29
32
22
42
21
Contrary to the typical stereotype, girls were reportedly no more involved in chatting than
the boys who regularly use the site. About 63% of WU boys said they chat every time
they logon, whereas only 47% of girls said so. However, boys who are regular users are
self-selected and seem to be more interested in chatting than typical boys are. Chatting
and meeting people were cited as their favorite aspect of Whyville by about 40% of both
WU girls and boys, but by only 10% of RU girls and boys. Interestingly, focus groups of
both WU and RU seemed to hold stereotypical views that girls like to talk more than
boys, yet the survey data suggest little gender difference. The real difference is between
regular users and the more general population, represented by recruited users.
The big difference between regular and recruited users in how often they chat and how
much they enjoy it may be due to several factors. As mentioned, regular users are a selfselected group who were attracted to the site as it is, with a strong emphasis on chat.
Also, recruited users were not on the site long enough to develop a social network to
chat with comparable to that of the regular users. About 25% of WU girls and boys have
a particular group of people they typically hang out with on the site compared to only 515% of RU. Also, the majority of WU (85%) came to the site because friends or a relative
suggested it, and most of them (76%) have friends on the site who know their login
name. Many of the WU (60%) report planning to log in at the same time as their friends
at least some of the time. Regular users who participated in our online focus group
underscored the importance of their online friendships. The one improvement they would
make to the site is a search function to quickly see if their friends are on the site and
where they are located.
Most of the chat on Whyville is not intellectually deep, but it seems to serve an important
social/emotional purpose. When we examined the content of a sample of chat from the
regular users, the majority of it (nearly 60%) consisted of exclamations, stock phrases or
slang with little substantive content (e.g. “doh!” “LOL”). (See Table 3.) About 10% of the
chat were statements of greeting (How are you?), and another 10% were about social
relationships (“Do you have a girl friend?”). Less than one percent of the chat related to
science or science activities on the site. Thus chatting seems to provide an opportunity
to practice interacting with their peers in a safer context than school, as evidenced by
some quotes from the online focus group:
It’s not that I don’t know HOW to be cool. Just people at my school, they don’t count me as
cool, because I don’t do things their ways. … [my screen avatar] isn’t that much different
[from the real me], just better looking and more open… I’m quite quiet in real life. … cause
if anyone of you were to see me at my house, then at school, you’d think I was a whole
different person. …Because on here, if I make a mistake, it doesn’t matter, I won’t get
teased for it the next day. (girl)
I’m not cool at school and I find that every girl on Whyville practically wants to talk to me
or date me. …It’s like you can have a double life. It gets you away from life. …I am shy
and this site helped me build up the confidence to ask a real girl out. Well, I’d say yes, this
is a good place for an unpopular person, because they can be anyone they want to be. (boy)
22
Table 3: Types of comments in Whyville chat transcripts.
Type of Comment
Greetings (e.g. “How are you?”)
Social Relationships (“Do you have a girl friend?”)
Discussion of faces and face parts
Discussion of the site activities other than science
(newspaper, dances, clams)
Requests for charity
Discussion of science or the science activities on the site
Other (e.g. “doh!” “LOL”)
Frequency of
Observation
10%
11%
6%
3%
3%
<1%
58%
Some Whyvillians use chat on the site as an extension of their real lives. They use it as
an alternative to phones, pagers, and instant messaging to keep in touch with friends.
But Whyville has its own sense of community and has its own social groups. There are
social complexities in the Whyville community, as noted by an 8th grade RU girl in one of
our focus groups:
R: What do you think of the people on Whyville?
G1: At first when you can’t talk to people [a convention of the site for the first few visits] it
seems like everyone’s just hanging around, and then when you actually see what people
are saying and learn how to whisper, it’s like this whole social puzzle. It’s like a school
there.
Only about 25% of the users described themselves as being a part of a group. A few of
the groups that users described were theme-oriented like “bikers/dirtbikers” or “friends
from school”. But they more commonly described their groups as “a bunch of people
that look kind of like me” or “a group of kind people that I like to talk with”.
Some of the users have boyfriend or girlfriend relationships on the site, and a few even
have “spouses,” although some think these relationships are “stupid” or “creepy.” In
general, the WU were open to such relationships (59% of the WU boys and 47% of the
WU girls picked “good for some people—not for everyone”). The RU boys and girls
(16% and 21%) were far less likely to pick that moderate response. Very few WU boys
thought it was “stupid” (5%) whereas nearly a third of RU boys thought it was (31%).
About one in five girls, both RU and WU (19%), felt it was stupid.
One of the interesting social distinctions that has evolved on the site is between
experienced and novice users, known as Oldbies and Newbies. The Oldbies often
complain in the newspaper and bulletin boards that the Newbies are a nuisance because
they frequently beg for help to understand things on the site and for gifts of clams.
Oldbies in the online focus group said they really resented the Newbies’ begging. The
Newbies complain that they are ignored by the more established users. Some Oldbies
invented a kind of charity on the site. They donate unwanted face parts and accessories
to “Grandma’s” – a location where Newbies can get the “used” parts free.
Inappropriate behavior, such as abusive or overtly sexual comments, is a serious
concern for minors on the internet. Numedeon has instituted several features on
Whyville to minimize inappropriate behavior, including a warning system. Any user can
warn another, causing a yellow X to be put over their face for a time. While most of the
users in our survey had experiences with inappropriate behavior, relatively few (14%)
23
saw it as a serious problem on the site. Interestingly, we did not see significant gender
differences in responses concerning inappropriate behavior on Whyville.
Avatars and self-image
Whyvillians obviously enjoy the avatar aspect of the site and say that it’s a lot more fun
than a regular chat room with just text showing on the screen. Users can change the
screen look of their cartoon avatar at will, and this function seems to appeal to the girl
users in particular. Selecting and changing face parts and accessories for their avatars
are popular activities for both sexes, but WU girls are nearly twice as likely as boys to do
so every time they login (44% compared to 27%). Many users have learned to use the
design function on the site to create their own unique parts and accessories, and some
have even begun small businesses in creating and selling them for clams (see Figure 5).
Whyvillians appreciate the opportunity to experiment with the appearance of their
identities. Over two-thirds of users (with little difference between recruited and regular
users and no difference between girls and boys) reported they had Whyville faces that
did not look like their real ones. The majority strive for an appearance they consider
attractive, while a few adopt an unconventional appearance, such as an animal head
(boys more often than girls chose these – 17% vs. 4%). Some people change their
appearance to express their feelings; others follow fashion fads. Figure 6 presents a
sample of quotes from our focus groups with regular and recruited users, which reveal
these gender differences:
24
Figure 5. Sample of user-designed accessories from Akbar’s Face Mall
Figure 6. Gender differences in selection of screen identities
Girls
G1: First I tried to find things that sort of matched what people would describe me in real life, and
then I started following the fads in Whyville. Like for awhile everyone was wearing huge
earrings, and so I bought some big earrings and then I didn’t want those any more. And I
keep on deciding if something looks pretty, then I get it.
G2: I bought what I thought was just, like, attractive.
R: In what ways? Like, who defines that attractiveness for you?
G2: The boy that I met [on the site]. Well, he thought I looked nice.
G3: I wear whatever I feel like that day. Like if I’m sad and stuff, I make myself look like a
gothic person. If I’m happy, I put myself in white.
R: Do your faces look like you?
G4: No, it’s like all the nice stuff. I got long blonde curly hair.
G5: I try to wear different clothes or something that you don’t see very often.
G6: It’s the person I’ve always wanted to look like: blond hair blue eyes u know.
G7: Well, I have dirty blonde hair, brown, eyes, zits, braces, and a weirdly perprotioned body,
like most teenagers! (LOL)
G8: I don’t think I’m that pretty as I am on whyville.
Boys
B1: Mine [face] looks like a bird.
R: Why?
B1: Because I love animals
B2: I just put cheap stuff on my face. I just go for the bargain basement and Grandma’s (location
for free parts donated by others)
B3: [It depends on ] how much money you have.
B4: I couldn’t find anything I really liked.
B5: I have some weird ass evil hair. It’s like black with red highlights and a nose ring.
B6: I try to make myself look goofy.
B7: 1st of all I don’t have blue hair. The Whyville face is what I want to look like but my mom
won’t let me.
Given their age (most users are 10-15), the emphasis on self-image is not surprising.
The importance of self-image, even when anonymous, is revealed in their responses to
many different questions we asked. When we asked one 8th grade focus group of
recruited users, “What kind of people go to Whyville?” a boy mentioned intelligence first,
but the girls in the group returned to the theme that appearance is very important.
B1: Girls. Kind of smart.
G1: I think they’re totally different.
R: In what way?
G1: They always claim that, ‘oh yeah, I’m like hot’ if they meet a guy.
G2: It’s probably not true.
G1: I think people go to Whyville to get acceptance.
G2: I agree. I think they overexaggerate who they are to make people like them more.
R: Why do you think they do that?
25
G2: Appearances matter. People just don’t approach you because they know your
personality. They approach you because you’re attractive, because of your looks. So
they don’t go, ‘I think they have a nice personality’ and go talk to you, they go ‘Oh,
they’re cute, nice smile.’
Both boys and girls noted that Whyville gives them the opportunity to alter their
appearance so as to increase acceptance by others. But they also suggested that even
in Whyville, they run the risk of being rejected for their looks. Since about three-fourths
of the regular users have friends on the site who know their login name, it is not as
anonymous or safe as one might at first think.
B1: You can be the ugliest person in the world on the outside, but when you go to
Whyville, you can make yourself look like you’re a different person. [other users
murmur in agreement.]
…
B2: They all base you on how you look.
G1: But it’s cool because you can be someone different online.
R: Does it bother you that it’s all based on how you look? …
B2: They don’t give you a chance sometimes.
G2: I walked into the disco once and someone said, ‘You’re such a freak.’
…
R: What do you think of the way people look on the site?
B3: Cool. Some people do, except if they look kind of weird.
G3: There’s a million blondes on the site!
G4: Everybody wants to be blond.
R: Do you find it hard to, like, make yourself look like…
B4: I find it hard for me to actually be one of the crowd. I still haven’t gotten to the part
where I actually have a real face, not like a circle drawn with sunglasses.
Multiple identities. Many of the users, especially the girls (60% of girls vs. 41% of
boys), have more than one identity on the site (i.e. they registered a second time with a
different login name). On our survey, about one-fourth of regular users said they have 3
or more identities (28% of the girls, 19% of the boys). They gave various reasons for the
multiple identities including sharing them with school friends, getting on the busy site
(Newbies have some priority over other users without passes), using them to earn more
clams, and just trying out different identities from day to day. Multiple identities could
also offer greater anonymity since friends might not know all of ones logins. One regular
user we interviewed said she had been on the site about two years and had developed
about 10 identities including some that were male. She spoke about her motivation:
R: Why so many?
G: I share them with my school friends, and I like to have a few backup people. That’s
what [my current identity] was. Now she’s #1… In [class one day] we all went on
Whyville and we talked to each other so the prof couldn’t hear us.
R: Are any of them boys or all girls?
G: I have a few boys… [names several]
R: So why all the boys?
G: At first I wondered how hard it was to be a boy on here. I mean, the girls chase them
around asking for dates and stuff. It must be annoying, and I was right, and plus, it is
easier to make friends on a boy face.
A girl with 5 identities spoke about enjoying dressing her avatars as if they were dolls:
26
I have one boy. I don’t know why. I just wanted to dress him up cuz like a lot of the stuff
was for the girls and I found some cute boy stuff so I wanted a boy. He came out looking
like a gangster. (girl, unknown age)
Design opportunities
About a quarter of the girls said the design aspects of Whyville were of greatest interest
to them (significantly more than the 7% of boys who felt this way). These findings
support prior research by Honey et al. (1991) that design opportunities appeal to girls.
Since the design aspect is one of the key features that sets Whyville apart from other
web sites, it is not surprising that the site captures the interest of many girls. The most
common things to design on the site are faceparts and accessories for the avatars and
houses and their furnishings. There was little difference in how often boys and girls said
they actually designed something.
An equal proportion (31%) of both WU boys and girls said they earn clams from selling
face parts, but more girls said they spent time designing face parts every time or most
times they log in (16% of girls compared to 12% of boys). In our online focus groups,
several girls said it made them feel good to see other users' avatars wearing their
creations. Girls tended to mention designing realistic and attractive clothes (e.g. “a little
flower clip”) whereas boys tended to design somewhat wilder things (e.g. animal faces or
“hair with brown streaks and stuff”).
Whyvillians can purchase plots of “land” on the site at a fixed price on a first come-first
served basis and then build houses with bricks and other components (see Figure 7).
They can also decorate the rooms with furniture, plants and art, which are more
expensive than house designs. Currently, about 8000 house plots have been distributed,
although many more users wish to buy a plot than there is space available. Houses
ranged in size from small (one block with a window) to large "apartments" of 8-10 units.
Those users with few clams appear to have the least elaborated houses, while those
who are wealthier are able to buy parts for the home or even create a virtual castle. Not
a single house was identical to another. Even the small, less-elaborated homes were
differentiated by color or placement on the one-inch plot of virtual grass. Similarly, the
rooms were filled with objects from as few as one plant to several items such as a bed,
table, chairs, rugs and sofas. Users said they like to visit other people’s houses to get
ideas for their own designs.
27
Figure 7. Examples of Whyville Houses
Science games
Regular users said chat was their favorite activity on Whyville, and more so than science
games, while recruited users tended to enjoy the science games more (see Table 2).
This finding probably reflects the economical and social structure of the site. Clams are
necessary for participation in various site activities, and newcomers obtain clams
primarily through playing the science games to raise their salaries, which allows them to
purchase face parts, buy houses, and do other things on the site. Regular users have
already played the games a lot, and after awhile the science games are less interesting
to them, because they have either mastered them or given up in frustration. Meanwhile
those who continue to come to Whyville have developed a social network there and
become more involved in the community.
Most regular users do not spend a lot of time playing the science games on the site.
Only about 10% of WU said they do so every time they log in, and only about a fifth of
them tended to play a science game on a typical day. Girls were less likely than boys to
do science activities frequently (i.e. most or every time on the site -- 37% of boys vs.
24% of girls). Among WU, girls were also less likely than boys to name science activities
as their favorite aspect of Whyville (only 8% of girls said so vs. 17% of boys.) However,
average salary, an indirect measure of science game mastery, was rather similar for
boys and girls (46 clams for boys vs. 42 clams for girls.)
Both girls and boys said they enjoyed the science and seemed to appreciate the virtual
hands-on nature of the science games on Whyville as illustrated in this excerpt from a
focus group with 6th graders:
R:
B:
G1:
R:
G1:
R:
B2:
B1:
R:
B1:
G2:
R:
G3:
Do you like science?
Well, it depends on what you do in science.
I like science on Whyville.
Why?
Because it’s different subjects. It’s like earth science is about volcanoes and the ocean,
and on Whyville you learn about how gravity can effect blah blah blah, you can make
things spin faster.
What do you think?
You play games. You’re learning through games and it keep your attention more,
instead of “turn to page 320”…You know, just read from a book.
What I like is you can actually experiment on your theory or whatever about so and
so, but at school you just read about and you never get a chance to really see, oh is this
really true or is this a bluff?
What do you mean, you can experiment with your theory?
Well, see you can, uhm, right now you can say, oh a person can spin faster if they’re
in a line. But do you really know that? Are you positive about that? You see in
Whyville you can go to the Spin Lab and you can actually try it, you know. Put them
in a straight position. Oh wow, they spin really fast. Now let’s put them in an open
position. Oh, okay, he’s right. So you actually know what he’s talking about.
I think it’s interesting how you can have a hands-on science on a computer. It’s hard
to explain, but all you are is clicking a mouse, but it still allows you to experiment
with spinning as [B1] just said. You can theorize and test it.
Is there anybody who doesn’t like science but still likes the site?
I don’t like science, but I like science on Whyville.
28
But some recruited users said they were confused by the games or frustrated that they
could not quickly master them.
G1: I used to play the games but then I stopped because it got confusing. And now I just
chit chat.
…
R: Can you talk about your favorite game and why?
G2: I like the skater game because I’ve mastered it, and it’s really easy so it makes me feel
really good about myself, and the other games I really stink at.
G3: I like the spin game because it’s the easiest.
B1: I really like the balloon game.
R: That’s a really hard game.
B1: I know. I’m still on level 3. I ran out of fuel.
R: [to a girl] What’s your favorite?
G4: I don’t have a favorite. I suck at all of them.
B2: The balloon game. It’s challenging.
..
R: Have you mastered a game? Do you still play it?
B3: Because I’m trying to beat it over and over again. It’s easy now you know how to do
it. Kinda like beating your own record.
B4: It challenges you.
R: [to girl] You keep playing the skater game.
G5: That’s because when I try to play the other games it gets me really depressed and
frustrated so when I go back to the other game it’s sort of an encouragement, like I can
do this.
Some of the recruited and regular users we interviewed said they thought that boys
might prefer video style games with more adventure and speed, and less thinking, as
this quote suggests:
Well, I tried to get my brother on and he thought it was like a kiddie thing and there was
like no action into it. And he’s like, it’s for smart people because you have to play games
that take actual thinking to do. So I think there’s like not a lot of boys. (girl, 8th grade)
Simulated community
Beyond chatting, designing, and playing games, users can participate more deeply in the
simulated Whyville community through activities such as the bulletin boards, the
Whyville Times, house building and sharing, and signing petitions or participating in
polls. One user compared Whyville to the popular simulation software game “The SIMS.”
The vast majority of regular users earn their clams through a salary obtained from
playing science games, but about a third earn additional currency from designing and
selling face parts. About a fourth obtain clams as gifts or charity from others
(“clamgrams”). The users we recruited tended to rely almost exclusively on salary to
obtain clams, perhaps since most were not on the site long enough to develop their
design skills or a social network to obtain gifts from more affluent friends.
The various community-related activities range in degree of engagement and skill
required to participate. The simplest community activity is to donate unwanted face parts
to Grandma’s. Most of the users in this study had done this recently. Building a house or
writing for the newspaper are more demanding activities.
Houses and rooms designed in Whyville are central to participants' representations in
this virtual community. Some users appear to have furnishings that are more prestigious
29
to own than others. Items are sometimes stacked on a shelf, on the floor or hanging on
the walls of a person’s room. Whether it is a tennis racket, a Christmas tree or ice
skates, possession and display of such items is clearly a way of demonstrating that the
user has wealth, status, and long participation in Whyville. There was a substantial
difference between longtime players from the online survey and the short-term players
from the focus group who had been part of Whyville for only two months. About half
(52%) of the regular users spent time every login at the pool or at houses compared to
only 12% of recruited users in the focus group. As a newcomer to the site, recruited
users did not know many others and thus did not have access to houses. Houses and
rooms are not only important because they are a representation of long-term
engagement within this community but also because they offer private places in which
users can 'whisper' chat privately with each other.
Only a few of the regular users have written for the paper to date (16% of girls and 10%
of boys), but almost half of the users said they intended to write something (47% of both
boys and girls). Some are prodigious writers. One who participated in the online chat
said she has written 37 articles for the newsletter. This suggests a significant
involvement in the community, because the Times could be considered the voice of the
community. Only 14% of the recruited users said they planned to write for the Times.
Relatively new users say they are less aware of the options and less comfortable trying
them at first. This may account for their lower level of involvement in and commitment to
the community than those who have participated longer and/or were drawn to the site for
this type of interest.
3. What Opportunities to Learn Science Do Whyvillians Have?
Overview of science and math content
Games provide the primary context for learning about science and math in Whyville. Ten
games that were on the site at the time of this study address important areas of science
learning that are called for by the National Science Education Standards (1996). (Since
data was collected for this study, two additional science-based games have been
added.) The games expose users to three key subject matter areas from the standards:
physical science, life science, and Earth and space science. To varying degrees, the
games also engage users in different aspects of understanding and doing scientific
inquiry. Additionally, many of the games expose users to the use of mathematical tools
for working with scientific problems by providing graphic and/or quantitative
representations of game-relevant data.
Typically, the interactive games engage an individual user in observing and/or
manipulating a simulation to achieve a particular objective or to answer a question that
has been posed. Figure 8 shows an example from the Great Balloon Race. (Of the
science games discussed in this study, only the Solstice Safari game provides a
collaborative game-playing environment.) In most cases, a game provides the user with
feedback about his/her success at reaching the desired objective. Repeated game
participation at successive levels of difficulty results in earning more clams (the Whyville
currency). Table 4 provides a brief summary of each game’s objectives and the
underlying science and math content.
30
Figure 8. The great balloon race science game.
Table 4: Science and math content in Whyville games
Topic: Physical Science - Motion and Forces
Game(s): Spin Lab Ice Skater Spin and Object Spin
Game Objectives:
Underlying Science/Math Principles:
Manipulate the position of an ice skater’s arms
• Angular and linear momentum of moving
and legs to make the skater spin as fast as
objects
possible, or manipulate the position and center
• Conservation of momentum
of rotation for a variety of objects to make each
• The relationship between angular
spin as fast as possible.
momentum, rotational velocity, and
moment of inertia
Game: Zero Gravity
Game Objectives:
In an environment that simulates zero gravity
(no friction), propel one’s avatar to hit an object
on a wall by launching (throwing) a projectile in
the opposite direction. Use angles (degrees) to
identify the direction in which the projectile
should be launched. The user must use
his/her clams to purchase projectiles to use in
this game.
Underlying Science/Math Principles:
• Newton’s third law: every action has an
equal and opposite reaction
• Measurement of angles in degrees
31
Game: Rocket Design
Game Objectives:
The user manipulates several variables on a
rocket (fuel volume, mass of cargo load, nozzle
size, and type of rocket) to meet different
objectives of distance and speed.
Underlying Science/Math Principles:
• Change in an object’s position, direction,
and speed when acted upon by a force
• Describing motion in terms of altitude,
velocity and acceleration, each of which
can be represented on a graph
Topic: Physical Science - Motion and Forces & Properties of Matter
Game: Great Balloon Race
Game Objectives:
Underlying Science/Math Principles:
The user navigates a hot air balloon to reach a
• The relationship between temperature and
particular target within a time limit, and with a
density of a gas
safe landing speed. The factors that the user
• Effect of directional forces (e.g. wind) on an
controls are a burner to heat air in the balloon
object
and a valve to release hot air from the balloon.
• Representing an object’s position and
The factors that the user cannot control are
position change on a coordinate graph
different wind directions and speeds at different
altitudes.
Topic: Physical Science – Transfer of Energy
Game: Smart Cars
Game Objectives:
Place lights on a racetrack in order to design a
path for a light-sensitive car to navigate from a
starting point to a finish line. Manipulate factors
to control the relation between intensity of light
source and car speed, as well as direction of
movement toward or away from the light
source. Users can also challenge others to a
smart car race.
Underlying Science/Math Principles:
• Energy as a property of many substances,
associated with both light and mechanical
motion
• Transfer of energy
• Use of a graph to represent the relationship
between energy source intensity and
responsiveness of object using the energy
• Use of positive and negative values to
represent forward and backward directions
of motion
Topic: Earth and Space Science – Earth in the Solar System
Game(s): Sun Spot Alien Rescue and Solstice Safari
Game Objectives:
Underlying Science/Math Principles:
Alien Rescue - Identify a particular city (and its
• The regular and predictable motion of
latitude and longitude) when given some
objects in the solar system
combination of clues about an alien’s
• Relations between the position of Earth (its
whereabouts including date, time of sunrise
tilt) and its rotation around the sun and
and sunset or number of daylight hours, and
explanations for phenomena of days,
geographic information. Use simulation tool
years, seasons, global temperature, and
(the “sun tracker tool”) to test the solution by
changes in number of daylight hours
visually representing the path of the sun during
• Identifying a location on Earth by latitude
daylight, relative to the horizon, for the chosen
and longitude
location and date.
Solstice Safari – Users collaborate to collect
sunrise and sunset times at given locations and
then post and graph data on the Whyville web
site.
32
Topic: Life Science – Structure and Function
Game: House of Illusion
Game Objectives:
Observe a collection of optical illusions that fall
into three different categories of visual
perception: impossible figures, ambiguous
figures, and those for which context information
in the drawing distracts perception. Each
illusion poses a question for the observer;
however, the game does not provide a means
for responding with an answer.
Topic: Mathematics – Graphing Skills
Game: Dance Creation
Game Objectives:
User creates a dance by specifying the
movements as a set of graph coordinates for
each step. The user must use his/her clams to
purchase any dance lessons.
Underlying Science/Math Principles:
• Relationships between different organs that
function together, e.g. the brain processing
visual information from the eyes to create
visual perception
• Understanding the properties of different
geometric shapes that can be applied to
analyzing an optical illusion
Underlying Science/Math Principles:
• Represent movement and direction using a
series of points (x and y coordinates) on a
graph
Note. The science topic headings in this table are taken directly from the subject matter categories in the
National Science Education Standards.
Opportunities for deeper scientific understanding
Each game has a set of underlying scientific principles from physical science, life
science, or Earth and space science; however, a user’s experience with a game may or
may not lead to any awareness or understanding of those principles. Simply completing
a simulation task in a game often demands only a superficial level of interaction. It is
possible for a user to complete the steps of a game and advance without engaging in
complex thinking such as the following: a) providing a rationale for particular strategies
or solutions; b) proposing or revising an explanation based on evidence from the game
or other experiences; c) using scientific principles to explain phenomena or solutions; or
d) being exposed to scientists’ use of scientific principles to explain phenomena.
However, the Whyville games do provide rich opportunities for developing deeper levels
of scientific understanding and explanations when the user makes use of game-relevant
supplemental resources designed to support and expand learning opportunities. These
same supplemental resources also provide the primary means of engaging Whyville
users in authentic scientific inquiry processes (as recommended by the National Science
Education Standards). It is important to note, however, that game players can choose to
read and engage in the suggested activities of the supplemental resources for a given
game, but this is not necessary for successful game completion, and the user earns no
additional clams for doing so. Whyville’s supplemental resources, which have been
provided for some but not all of the Whyville games, take several different forms:
Whyville Times columns by Dr. Leila. Dr. Leila’s columns in the Whyville Times
(reprinted from a set of articles in the Los Angeles Times) provide the most extensive set
of supplementary resources for encouraging deeper engagement and understanding of
the underlying science in the games. At this time, Whyville provides a series of Dr. Leila
columns for the two Spin Lab games (Ice Skater Spin and Object Spin), and for the Sun
Spot games (Alien Rescue and Solstice Safari). In each series of columns, Dr. Leila
33
starts with a focus question generated by a student, such as, “How do ice skaters get
spinning so fast?” Then, she uses it as a context to guide the user through a series of
investigations. In the process, users have opportunities to observe and collect data,
generate explanations, revise explanations based on new data, consider alternative
explanations from other students and scientists, and learn about the underlying scientific
principles associated with the driving question.
Lab manual. In some cases a game has a lab manual that prompts the user with
additional questions and/or activity suggestions to encourage exploration of patterns and
relationships based on game observations and other data.
Geek Speak Notes. The Geek Speak Lounge in the Whyville location of a given game
might also provide some documentation about scientists’ explanations for particular
game-related science phenomena.
We compared the opportunities for science understanding provided by game play and by
supplemental resources, using the following scheme:
Game play (GP): User demonstrates how
The game itself demands that the user manipulate variables or features of a
system to reach a desired objective. In this way, the user is demonstrating a
strategy for how to produce a particular outcome related to a scientific
phenomenon in a game.
Supplemental resources (SR): User explains why
Suggested activities in the supplemental resources (typically Dr. Leila’s column)
lead a user to collect and use evidence to construct an explanation about why
particular strategies result in particular outcomes related to scientific phenomena.
Supplemental resources (SR): Documentation explains why
The supplemental resources include explanations about why particular strategies
result in particular outcomes, with reference to scientific principles.
The comparison in Table 5 reveals that the four games for which there is an
accompanying newspaper series by Dr. Leila provide the most potential for users in two
areas. In them, users have the opportunity to build a deeper understanding of scientific
phenomena and to construct explanations based on evidence (provided a user elects to
participate in the suggested activities). Explanation construction is one of several
important scientific inquiry practices that students should understand and develop during
their middle and high school years. In the next section of this analysis of science
content, we take a closer look at the kind of inquiry practices that are fostered by the
learning activities and prompts in Dr. Leila’s columns.
34
Table 5: Supplemental resources and opportunities for science understanding
Games
Skater Spin
Object Spin
Alien Rescue
Solstice
Safari
Zero Gravity
Rocket
Design
Great
Balloon Race
Smart Cars
Dance
Creation
House of
Illusion
Availability of supplemental
resources that promote deeper
science understanding
Geek
Dr.
Lab
Speak
Leila’s
Manual
Notes
Series
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
Opportunities for constructing
science understanding
SR: User
SR: Doc.
GP: User
explains
explains
demos
why
why
how
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
Note. The games have been listed in order from more to less complete opportunities for building science
understanding, based on entries in the last three columns.
Opportunities for engaging in the scientific inquiry process
The National Science Education Standards have placed a strong emphasis on engaging
learners in activities that promote scientific inquiry, which is characterized by the
following types of practices:
• Posing, investigating, and analyzing researchable science questions
• Planning and conducting investigations over extended periods of time
• Using evidence and strategies for developing explanations
• Reflecting on evidence and the investigation process to refine explanations
• Applying the results of experiments to scientific arguments and explanations
• Communicating science explanations and publicly communicating student
ideas and work to peers
In the context of science games in Whyville, users are exposed to each of these
important inquiry practices when they read and participate in activities suggested by the
Dr. Leila series in the Whyville Times. The following descriptions of Dr. Leila’s two
series provide some examples of each of the inquiry practices listed above. The first
series (six different articles originally posted over a six-week period) poses the driving
question, “How do ice skaters get spinning so fast?” Suggested investigations include
the Whyville ice skater game and object spin game, as well as other off-line
investigations to collect relevant evidence for answering the driving question. Dr. Leila
suggests different experiments and contexts for making observations (e.g. observing ice
skaters, or observing what happens when you spin on a chair or when air is released
from a balloon), and also invites the user to think of other experiments that he/she might
do. As different sources of evidence are explored, Dr. Leila introduces scientific
35
concepts of angular and linear momentum, conservation of momentum, inertia, and
rotational velocity that users can apply to their explanations for observed phenomena.
Dr. Leila shares evidence and explanations that have been y-mailed to her by members
of the Whyville community, as well as from different scientists, as a way to reflect on
alternative arguments and continually build on ideas that will help to answer the driving
question. New questions emerge as the series continues with new investigations. It is
important to note that Dr. Leila asks students to come up with their own explanations for
the phenomena they observe, rather than giving them an explanation up front. Because
the newspaper columns are presented in a series, users can benefit from scaffolding
that helps them to build their understanding over time, using information gained from
each new activity, investigation, or discussion of results.
The second Dr. Leila series (eight different articles originally posted over an eight-week
period) poses the driving question, “Why are the days getting longer?” Students are
encouraged to use the sun tracker simulation tool (the main tool used in the Alien Hunt
game and Solstice Safari), and to construct their own tools for gathering evidence to
answer this question. Over the course of the series, Dr. Leila guides users to apply their
sun-tracking data to their developing understanding of the relationships between: a) the
movement of Earth around the sun and the tilt of the Earth, and b) scientific phenomena
such as days, seasons, patterns of change in the length of daylight hours, and
comparisons of the length of daylight hours between different locations on the globe.
There is a great deal of similarity between the pedagogic strategies employed to foster
inquiry in this column series and the first “spinning” column series. However, one
desirable new feature was added to this second series that was not part of the first:
users are encouraged to post the data they collect to the jigsaw puzzle map at Whyville’s
Sun Spot, thus making data public and usable by other users in the web community.
On their own, the Whyville games are limited in their ability to provide opportunities for
users to understand and engage in scientific inquiry processes. Without supplemental
resources, the games do not typically provide the same kind of scaffolding offered by the
Dr. Leila series to guide users through the inquiry process. As a result, it is more difficult
for users to construct and reflect on scientific understanding from observational and
other data sources. While the games offer some useful and engaging tools for
simulating and visualizing scientific phenomena in real-world contexts, the games often
lack supports that would foster the building of inquiry skills. Some examples include: a)
methods for systematically collecting, organizing and reflecting on data; b) ways to share
and discuss data, explanations, and questions with peers and with scientists; c) explicit
references to the scientific principles that guide the phenomena in question; d) models
for constructing evidence-based explanations; and e) offering a more comprehensive set
of related activities centered around one or more driving questions, and aimed at
building understanding over time and multiple investigations. (It should be noted that the
lab manual for the Sun Spot area attempts to accomplish example (e) by suggesting that
users visit several different games and other related activities in order to “explore what
the sun has to do with telling time, from day to day, from season to season, even from
place to place.”)
4. What Are Whyvillians Learning About Science and Technology?
Since users must play science games to earn clams, virtually everyone does play them
at least a little. Almost a third of the regular users (24% of girls and 37% of boys) said
they participate in science activities most of the time or every time that they log in.
According to our focus groups, there is significant variation in how much science is done
and how it is viewed. Some, particularly those who choose to stay on the site for many
36
months, say they love the games and spend lots of time trying to improve their scores.
Most users play and enjoy the games somewhat but do not become experts in them all.
They seem to be as (or more) interested in social, creative and/or entrepreneurial
aspects of the site. Some are confused by the science games and do not attempt very
much. A tiny minority are not even aware of the science theme of the site or are totally
uninterested in it.
All but one of the 11 science games on the site (Solstice Safari) have been tried by a
majority of the users who completed our survey. A majority of boys are expert at two
games (Skater and Illusions), and a majority of girls are expert at only one (Skater).
Another game (Illusions) has many experts, but far more boys (70%) than girls (46%).
There were slightly more girl experts at Solstice Safari than boys (7% vs. 3%), but the
numbers trying that game so far are quite low. For most of the games, there is relatively
little difference between the proportion of boys and girls who consider themselves
experts.
As with interest, there was a wide range in what users felt they had gained from their
interaction with the science games in Whyville. Users ranged from those who did not feel
expert on any activity (18%) to a pair of users who where expert on every activity (1%).
On average, users felt they were expert on 2.9 out of 11 science activities. This figure
represents a significant amount of science learning from an informal learning
environment. In most informal learning situations, users rarely sustain their interest in an
activity nearly as long as on Whyville (Crane, Nicholson & Chen, 1994). The Spin lab
(Ice Skater and Object Spin, 38%) and WASA (Zero Gravity and Rocket Design, 23%)
were named as the activities from which users learned the most. Most users learned to
be experts on science games through written instructions provided (69%). Relatively few
relied on trial and error (14%) or got help from other users (12%). Some of the users’
survey comments describe what they learned from playing the science games:
I havn't learned much but experimenting with the spin lab taught me about
spinning things, like in what positions would things spin faster (girl, 14)
The nozzel size at the WASA rocket center really does make a difference since
the smaller it is, the more power the rocket gets since it is under more
preassure (girl, 13)
If things are gathered to the center it will go faster(skater game) (girl, 11)
How skaters spin thay spin by getting as thin as thay can so thars not much
frichon (girl, 10)
I learnd about angles and when we started that last month [in school] I already
knew lots. (girl, 11)
That sometimes it requires many attempts before you master a concept (girl, 15)
Girls felt expert on 2.6 activities while boys listed 3.6 activities (t (217) = -2.81, significant
at p=.005). This difference may reflect the boys’ greater interest in science and
increased time with the activities. The one activity that girls were more engaged with
than boys was the Solstice Safari. This activity is the only one in which users
collaborate to solve a problem. This finding corresponds to research that suggests girls
are more comfortable working collaboratively with others (Kahle & Meece, 1994).
However, since this activity requires a group, users have to wait for a safari to be formed
37
by the site managers. This happens relatively infrequently, so most users (59%) have
not yet tried the safari.
A review of some of the survey data prompts some interesting questions about girls’
participation in Whyville games compared with boys, and their opportunities for learning
science. As noted, girls described themselves as an expert for an average of 2.6 out of
11 different games surveyed. The percentage of girls in the study who described
themselves as expert for a given game ranged from 3% to 66%. While the
corresponding percentage of boys who described themselves as expert was consistently
higher for a given game (with the exception of the Solstice Safari game), an interesting
similarity between boys and girls emerges. The same games were ranked by both girls
and boys in the top five in terms of percentage of users who described themselves as
expert,. Those five games were:
•Ice Skater Spin
•House of Illusion
•Alien Hunt
•Object Spin
•Dance Creation
(66% girl experts; 68% boy experts)
(46% girl experts; 70% boy experts)
(41% girl experts; 44% boy experts)
(28% girl experts; 49% boy experts)
(21% girl experts; 37% boy experts)
Closer inspection of the percentages also reveals that the gap between girls and boys is
very small for two of these games: Ice Skater Spin and Alien Hunt. Interestingly, these
are the same two games that have accompanying documentation in the form of lab
manuals and Dr. Leila’s series in the Whyville Times, the combination of which provides
more support for science inquiry and opportunities for constructing science
understanding (refer to Table 5). Is it possible that the availability of more extensive
documentation and supplemental resources contributed significantly to the narrowing of
the expertise gap between girls and boys? We do know that girls and boys reported that
the written instructions were the most helpful in learning to become an expert. Is it
possible to narrow the gap for other games by providing more extensive written
instructions, and if so, what type of instructions are best?
Evidence of a narrowed gender gap for game expertise raises a host of questions
related to girls’ participation in Whyville science games and the comparison with boys.
These questions may warrant further investigation:
•
•
•
•
•
What factors are leading girls to participate and become expert in some Whyville
games more than other games?
Is the provision of extensive written instructions (such as the supplemental
resources provided for the Ice Skater Spin game and Alien Hunt game) a
significant factor in promoting game participation and expertise for both girls and
boys, such that the gender gap in percentage of experts is greatly narrowed?
What types of help did users access most from available written instructions
(including game instructions, lab manuals, Geek Speak notes, and Dr. Leila’s
series)?
Are there gender differences in what boys and girls consider to be “expertise,”
and are their definitions associated with perceived science understanding, actual
science understanding (as measured by some external criteria), ability to meet
game objectives, and/or frequency of play?
For the games for which girls and boys perceive themselves to be expert (in
particular the Ice Skater Spin and the Alien Hunt), what exactly have users
learned about science phenomena and/or the process of inquiry, and did they
learn it from game play or supplementary resources?
38
Some users have been inspired by a game or event on Whyville to develop some
expertise on their own. For example, site developers accidentally left out the description
of a rock in one of the games by mistake, resulting in a "mystery rock." One of the users
submitted an articles to the Times filled with new information about the rock for the sake
of other interested users:
I was looking for rocks the other day at one of the geo dig sights and after finding a few I
went back to idneify them. Much to my suprise while I was looking at the drop down list of
names of the different rocks I found that there was an extra rock that was not listed in the
list of all the different rocks and thier discripions. Gneiss is the name of the mistrey rock.
After talking to some of my friends about this rock that wasent there my cerosity got the
better of me and I desided to research it to see if it was even a real rock. So after searching
for ages on the net I finily came up with this: Gneiss is a high grade metamorphic rock
(witch is basicly saying that it has been subject to more heat and pressure than schist or
other metamorphic rocks) it is also corser than schist. The rock has bandings that go around
the rock, these bandings are formed by the different menrils that make up the rock such as
quartz, mica, feldspar and hornblende. gneiss can be formed by a sedmintry rock such as
sandstone or shale or it can be formed from the metamorphism of grantite. Gneiss is mainly
used as a paving or building stone. If any one had found this rock at the geo dig sights, I
would love to know, intill thin this is javagirl going to look for her.
As noted above, users tend not to chat about science or science games. Less than 1%
of the comments we sampled and analyzed were related to science activities or science
in general. However, many of the articles that users write for the Times have to do with
science in some way. For example, articles include tips for Newbies in playing the
games, background information about the scientific phenomena in the games,
encouragement to others to combine their social interests with the science games such
as challenging others to race smart cars. There were also quite a few articles written
about the Whypox epidemic (see below). Future research might do a formal analysis of
the science learning that is revealed in science-related writing on the site.
Users can learn about science not only from the games but also from special events on
Whyville initiated from time to time by its creators, such as the “Whypox” epidemic.9 This
mysterious “infection” caused ugly boils to appear on a user's Whyville face. While
chatting, phrases were periodically replaced by "Achoo" due to uncontrollable sneezing.
The Why-Pox spread throughout the community, and the citizens were all very
concerned. The Whyville CDC (Centers for Disease Control & Prevention) was
established, with simulations that modeled the spread of infection linked to discussion
threads on a bulletin board system. The quality of the discussion was surprisingly high
and revealed that users were thinking about how to control variables during an
investigation, how to organize data to understand their observations, and how to make
claims backed by evidence. Below are some excerpts from Times articles provided by
Numedeon:
We do that because it makes the expeirament more accurate and it makes the
graphes work properly because if you try comparing 5 people who get infected from
day 2 to day 6 with 3 people infected from day 4 to day 5, you cannot compare
something that has basiclly nothing in common. Also, it helps us understand whats
9
Whypox actually occurred after our study’s formal data collection period, but we include some information
about it here as it was such an interesting event on the site and resulted in significant user engagement in
scientific inquiry and reflection.
39
happening by showing us differences step by step so we can understand all the
factors.
I did not get the same results each time. It surprised me how different they all were.
I did 9 trials and here is what i got: i am showing this by using #infected/#days.
1)4/5 2)3/4 3)7/8 4)7/8 5)5/6 6)6/7 7)13/14 8)2/3 9)13/14 So basically this data
that i have collected is sayibng that ya never know how far this disease could go.
The infection patterns were definitely different each time you run the simulation.
Just because a disease is infectious doesn't mean that everyone is going to get it
which partly explains why the patterns are different. Also how infectious the
disease it makes a difference – for example if you had a mild cold you wouldn't
necessarily pass it on to everyone but if you had a severe case of chicken pox it is
more likely that more people would get it. Another thing is that people recovered
and became immune to the disease pretty quickly.
According to our survey, users felt that they learned a great deal from Whyville. When
asked how much science they learn from different sources, Whyville was ranked second,
behind school, but before television, trying things by themselves, books, and friends and
family. Clearly Whyville has made a powerful impression on some of the users.
A third of the users said they are more interested in science after their experiences on
Whyville (another 38% said that they were already interested in science when they first
came to Whyville). Only one in five of the users remained uninterested in science.
Thus, Whyville not only engaged users in science activities to the point that some felt
they had developed some expertise, but it also encouraged a large percentage of users
to be more interested in science, as illustrated by the excerpts below from submissions
to the Whyville Times:
Well, I am officially hooked! Rocks aren't as boring as I used to think they
were! I am actually beginnign to think that rocks can actually be interesting,
although I'm not quite there yet. I actually understand it, and
I am meeting lots of new people at the dig sites!
There are lots of ways to incorporate science in whyville with chat, so you can get
the best of both worlds. I used to hate science, but now I'd like to be on a forensics
unit because I have learned about science and that I don't have to fall asleep during
it.
So, now I know what Whyville means when they say that they want to make
education fun! It really can be! So that's about all. I just thought that some
people need to hear about stuff like that, especially new citizens.
Here's what I think. We need to learn on whyville, not only science and not only
subjects in school. We need to learn about life, and how we should respect people,
and learn about other cultures. Have you ever thought that the war going on right
now could be caused by an ignorance of other cultures?
As important as science learning is to the mission of the site, engaging young people,
especially girls, in technology activities is also worthwhile. Reports show that girls
continue to be less likely than boys to pursue courses and careers in technology
(AAWU, 2000). By attracting girls to a web site, Whyville has already achieved an
important step towards encouraging girls to explore technology. Significant learning
happens in simply getting on the internet, finding a site and registering. On Whyville, not
40
only do users have to negotiate the internet, but participation (beyond chatting) requires
a fair amount of technical understanding. Some of the activities may be familiar to users
(y-mail and the drawing tool for creating face parts) while others are likely to be new and
require greater fluency (e.g. flying a balloon, creating a track for a smart-car to follow).
These types of interaction with technology are likely to lead to more advanced computer
fluency and confidence. About a quarter of the girls and over a third of the boys on the
site (24% and 36% respectively) said they learned “a lot” about technology from
Whyville.
Nearly half (49%) of the users said they were already interested in technology when they
first came to Whyville. Almost all of the other users (45% of girls and 41% of boys) said
they grew more interested in computers as a result of Whyville; less than 2% of the
users said they were still not interested. This finding suggests that Whyville may
important potential for engaging many young people, especially girls, in technology
activities.
Conclusions and Implications for Future Development
Whyville.net, a science-oriented web site, has attracted a large audience (350,000 users
in four years) of primarily 10-15 year olds, a large majority of which are girls. Several key
features seem to account for this outcome. The unique form of chat and social
interaction on the site seems to be the primary draw --cartoon avatars that represent the
user, whose “look” can be changed at will so that users can play with their own identities
while chatting and interacting with peers in an environment that can be as anonymous
as they wish. Many users arrange to login when friends are there too, using the site as a
kind of virtual mall for hanging out and shopping. Whyville seems to have something for
everyone. Those who are entrepreneurial can create small virtual businesses. Those
who are creative can design face parts, houses, accessories and furnishings. Those who
like to write can send articles to the site newspaper. Those who are interested in science
can play science games and may choose to delve deeper into the issues by examining
supporting documents or getting involved in science-related events on the site like the
Whypox epidemic. Life on the site remains interesting to users over several months or
even years because it continually evolves. The users themselves create new situations
(e.g. have weddings and beauty pageants), respond to needs with requests or petitions
(ask for ways to warn others to reduce obnoxious behavior), and engage in
investigations, writing, and other responses as the site developers introduce new games
and events.
Our data suggest that while some users are quite interested in science, for many,
playing the science games is more of a means to an end than an end in itself. Since
many of the favored activities, such as accessorizing ones avatar or building and
decorating a house require ”clams,” and they are obtained primarily through the science
games, users must at least try the games. But 5 of the 11 games have been mastered
by less than a fifth of users.
Our findings suggest several avenues toward further enhancing the educational aspects
of the site while retaining its appeal to girls: increasing social and other incentives
(besides clams) to engage in science games and science-related special events,
supporting games and other science activities with additional informational resources,
and increasing the science involved in at least some of the design opportunities.
Whyville developers might consider using a broader variety of incentives, particularly
social incentives, to encourage users to engage in scientific thinking and investigations
41
to solve virtual “real life” problems. Motivation researchers have long noted that use of
extrinsic rewards can reduce the intrinsic motivation that once existed for certain
behaviors (Lepper & Green, 1975). Site developers might consider ways other than
clams to encourage involvement in science games and scientific investigations. The
Whypox epidemic on the site was a good example. It mildly “threatened” something very
important to users – their appearance and chat – so they were motivated to find out what
was going on and to do something about it. Some users took good advantage of this
opportunity and learned about the nature of epidemics, how diseases are spread, and so
forth. They also shared their knowledge with others so this aspect of the site was more
collaborative than the games. Developers might also do more to structure or encourage
the kind of social learning environments known to attract girls, such as group discussion
and teaming. They might also capitalize on desirable goals and roles that historically
have appealed to women, such as contributing to the general welfare of the society, not
just to individual members.
In terms of science learning, different Whyville games and supplemental resources offer
varying levels of opportunity for developing understanding about scientific phenomena
and about the inquiry process. Judging from the development of new Sun Spot activities
and resources, it is promising to see: a) the addition of the second Dr. Leila series to
foster inquiry, and b) an attempt to develop a more a comprehensive set of related Sun
Spot activities and games that, taken together, help to answer an overriding set of
researchable questions. However, if engaging in multiple related activities over a longer
period of time and engaging in the activities suggested by supplemental resources (Dr.
Leila’s series) are going to have an impact on science learning opportunities, users must
be motivated and have incentives for putting in the extra effort and time. The Whyville
developers might consider the pros and cons for providing incentives (clams or other
benefits) for participation in other kinds of suggested activities that promote inquiry, such
as posting data, explanations, questions, and other comments in spaces for
collaborative discussion. It will be necessary to devise ways of making these socially
valued activities and practices that are motivating and fun for girls and that appeal to
their interest in collaboration.
The design opportunities on the site were very interesting to girls and present another
avenue for engaging girls in science, math and engineering. For example, our data
suggest that science activities were not a key feature in the current process of house
design unless one counted them as the means to purchase construction and decoration
materials. To achieve a better integration of science and virtual representation in home
designs, the construction of the house could be connected with application of science,
math, and engineering knowledge, such as structural design to protect against
earthquakes or noise insulation for privacy. Curriculum activities around house insulation
developed in the Middle School Mathematics through Applications Project (John, 2001;
MMAP, 1997) illustrate the kind of tools useful to support learners in these
investigations. It might also be possible to have Whyvillians build science labs and tools
themselves rather than have the site designers provide these science activities for
earning income. A related research effort by Resnick, for example, has investigated
such approaches with the design of tools using Lego/Logo physical construction kits
(Resnick, Berg, & Martin, 1999). As with the suggestions for games, some design
functions could be enhanced for girls by including supplementary resources and team
structures for collaborative problem solving.
In considering these suggestions, it is important to recognize that the site is a complex,
organic social system, so making apparently simple changes may not yield the intended
result or could have unintended outcomes. Users are crucial to the site’s nature and
evolution. Their collective motivation and reaction to events may not be as easily
42
manipulated by developers as might be expected or hoped. For example, the
“Whyologist” hats given out by researchers (as accessories for users’ avatars) were
never considered as fashionable by users so they did not wear them, and the hats did
not serve as an incentive for participating in the survey as intended. Changing the
opportunities on the site could change the behavior of the users in unpredictable ways
as well as change the population that is attracted to it. However, some changes could
easily be introduced in small ways or as a pilot, and their effects monitored. It is also
important to acknowledge that while not all users are much involved in the science
aspects of the site, their being on the site in such numbers probably provides some
stability so that the site can continue to exist and offer its science opportunities to those
who are interested. Whyville.net is a unique site with many opportunities for further
development and fascinating facets to study in future.
References
American Association of University Women (2000). Tech-Savvy: Educating Girls in The New
Computer Age. Washington, DC: AAUW.
American Association of University Women (1995). Growing Smart: What's working for Girls in
Schools. Washington, DC: AAUW.
Baker, D., & Leary, R. (1995). Letting girls speak out about science. Journal of Research on
Science Teaching, 32(1), 3-27.
Brown. L.M. & Gilligan, C. (1992). Meeting at the crossroads: Women’s psychology and girls’
development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Catsambis, S. (1995). Gender, Race, Ethnicity and science education in the middle grades.
Journal of Research on Science Teaching, 32(3), 243-257.
DiSessa, A. (1986). Models of Computation. In Norman, D.A. & Draper, S.W. (eds.). UserCentered System Design: New Perspectives in Human-Computer Interaction. Hillsdale,
NJ: LEA.
Furger, R. (1998). Does Jane compute? Preserving our daughters’ place in the cyber revolution.
New York: Warner.
Honey, M., Moeller,B, Brunner, C., Clements, P, & Hawkins, J. (1991). Girls and design:
Exploring the question of technological imagination. CTE Technical Report, #17. NY:
Center for Technology in Education, Bank Street College of Education.
John, A.S. (2001). Generalizing in interaction: Students making and using
generalizations in design projects. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University
of California, Berkeley.
Jones, M. G., Howe, A., & Rua, M. J. (2000). Gender differences in students' experiences,
interests and attitudes toward science and scientists. Science Education, 84, 180-192.
Kafai, Y. B. (1995). Minds at play: Computer game design as a context for children's learning.
Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
43
Kahle, J.B. (1987). SCORES: A Project for Change? International Journal of Science Education,
9, 325-333.
Kahle, J. B., & Meece, J. (1994). Research on gender issues in the classroom. In D. L. Gabel
(Ed.), Handbook of Research in Science Teaching and Learning (pp. 543-557). New
York: Macmillan.
Lempke, J. (1999). Discourse and organizational dynamics: website communication and
institutional change. Discourse & Society, 10(1), 21-47.
Lepper, M.R. & Greene, D. (1975). Turning play into work: Effects of adult surveillance and
extrinsic rewards on children’s intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 31, 479-486.
Linn, M. C., & Hyde, J. S. (1989). Gender, mathematics, and science. Educational Researcher,
18(8), 17-19, 22-27.
MMAP, 1997) Middle School Mathematics through Applications Project. The Guppy Unit. Palo
Alto, CA: The Institute for Research on Learning.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington,
D.C.: National Academy Press.
National Science Foundation (2000). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science
and engineering: 2000. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. NSF 00-327.
National Science Foundation (2001). NSF’s program for gender equity in science, tehcnology,
engineering, and mathematics: A brief retrospective, 1993-2001. Arlington, VA: National
Science Foundation. NSF 02-107.
Pea, R.T., Linn, M., Means, B., Bransford, J., Roschelle, J., Hsi, S., Brophy, S., & Songer, N.
(1999). Toward a Learning Technologies Knowledge Network. ERT&D-Educational
Technology Research and Development, 47(2), 19-38.
Salomon, G. (1990). Cognitive Effects with and of Computer Technology. Communication
Research, 17(1), 26-44.
Schlager, M., Fusco, J., & Schank, P. (1998). Cornerstones for an on-line community of
education professionals. IEEE Technology And Society Magazine, 17(4), 15-21.
Simpson, R.D. & Oliver, J.S. (1990). A Summary of Major Influences on Attitude Achievement in
Science Among Adolescent Students. Science Education, 69(4),511-526.
Turkle, S., & Papert, S. (1990). Epistemological pluralism: Styles and voices within the computer
culture. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 16(1), 128-157.
Valian, V. (1999). Why so slow? The advancement of women. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
44