This paper has been reviewed and is now being revised. If you’d like to discuss contact the author.

Technology, Inclusion and Social Practices in Virtual Worlds

Diane Carr

London Knowledge Lab, IOE

23. 4. 2009




When educators and e-learning researchers have debated issues of accessibility and technology, particular concerns have predominated. These include issues of legislation and compliance, and the design and adaptability of tools (software and hardware for example). These issues will be considered in this article. However, it will also be argued that it does not make sense to consider a technological feature’s relationship to disability or accessibility, without also considering the social practices that will shape the reception and implementation of any such tool. 


 Here, again, are Linden Labs comments on deaf people, the introduction of the voice feature and education: ‘While a deaf Resident may find him or herself excluded in some social contexts, their ability to communicate in SL, has not been diminished from a technical viewpoint.’ At the crux of this statement is recognition that exclusion is socially determined in online worlds – although various degrees of accessibility will be supported or undermined by different technological features. It might well be the case that ‘Most educators would agree that learning is better facilitated between individuals with voice’, as Linden Labs have claimed. It may be, also, that new technical features will become available, equipping us to counter-act the potentially exclusionary practices found in various social, educational and professional contexts within Second Life (such as classes, seminars and conferences).


The research described in this paper has shown that deafness as disability is reproduced in virtual worlds, through discourse and practice. This suggests that identity within online worlds should be regarded as collaboratively constructed, and that the dynamics and resources that underpin and impact on these constructions are carried into virtual worlds from our everyday lives. There is nothing new about the exclusionary practices experienced by disabled residents in Second Life. However, online worlds and their various communities do demonstrate in new, clear ways, just how pervasive inequitable practices and discourses can be, and how difficult it can be to articulate and hence resist the power relations that are embedded within, and disseminated by, these same practices. Educators with an interest in equality, online learning, inclusion and technology cannot afford to overlook the implications.  




[1] The probject blog is online at

[2] See the article at

[3] This project’s website is online at

[4] For more information on Dungeons & Dragons, go to



Addison, A. and O’Hare, L. (2008) How Can Massive Multi-User Virtual Environments and Virtual Role Play Enhance and Embed with Traditional Teaching Practice? Paper presented at ReLive08 Conference, Open University, UK, November 2008.


Alt-J Special Issue: Disability, technology and e-learning. Vol 14 no 1 March 2006


Boellstorff, T. (2008) Coming of Age in Second Life: An Anthropologist Explores the Virtually Human Princeton University Press


Carr, D, Oliver, M and Burn, A. (2008) ‘Learning, Teaching and Ambiguity in Virtual Worlds’, Paper presented at ReLive08 Conference, Open University, UK, November 2008. Online at  Accessed April 2009.


Carr, D and Oliver, M (2009) ‘Tanks, Chauffeurs and Backseat Drivers: Competence in MMORPGs’. Eludamos. Journal for Computer Game Culture. Vol 3, No 1 Online at  Accessed April 2009


Carr, D. and Oliver M. (in press 2009) ‘Second Life, Immersion and Learning’ in Social Computing and Virtual Communities, edited by P. Zaphiris and C. S. Ang. London: Taylor and Francis


Charmaz, K. (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory London: Sage


Cooper, M. (2006) Making online learning accessible to disabled students: an institutional case study. Alt-J Special Issue: Disability, technology and e-learning. Vol 14 no 1 March 2006


Correll, J. and Maruyama, T. (2005) ‘Deaf People: Fact Sheet No. 3’ Project Output. Deaf People and the Internet: Has the Internet Changed Deaf People’s Lives? University of Leeds, Loughborough University, University of Sheffield. Project Website:  Accessed April 2009


Davis, L. J. (1995) Enforcing Normalcy: Disability, Deafness and the Body. London: Verso


Ess, C. and the AoIR ethics working committee (2002) ‘Ethical decision-making and Internet Research. Recommendations from the aoir ethics working committee’, online at  Accessed April 2009


Goodfellow, R. (2008) ‘New Directions in Research into Learning Cultures in Online Education’ Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Networked Learning. Halkidiki, Greece. May  Accessed April 2009


Oliver, M. (1990) The Politics of Disablement. Basingstoke UK. Palgrave Macmillan.


Rutter, M. (2006) ‘Tutorial Chat: a case study of synchronous communication in a learning environment’ ALT-J Research in Learning Technology. Vol 14 no. 2, June pp 169-182


Seale, J., Drattan, E.A and Wald, M (2008) Exploring disabled learners’ experiences of e-learning. LEXDIS Project Final Report. University of Southampton. December 2008.  Accessed April 2009


Sharpe, R., Benfield, G., Lessner, E., & De Cicco, E. (2005) Learner Scoping Study: Final Report
Online at  Accessed April 2009


Sheehy, K. (2008) ‘Virtual Environments: Issues and opportunities for developing inclusive educational practices’. Paper presented at ReLive08 Conference, Open University, UK, November 2008.


Wittel, Andreas (2000) ‘Ethnography on the Move: From Field to Net to Internet’, Forum: Qualitative Social Research Vol 1 No 1, Article 21 January 2000. Online at  Accessed April 2009