It's clear from this article in the Chronicle of Higher Education that the lines are continuing to be blurred between "pedigrees" and that Web 2.0 tools like Second Life level the playing field and emphasize the "what have you done lately" not what brand is on your diploma.
The only mistake that educators have made that I can see is spending way too much money to buy entire islands and lavishly building them using high-priced programmers and designers. They could get a fraction of the land and spend a fraction of the cost and still get value. Of course, if you spend the roughly $10,000 to get a private island and pay the maintenance fees for a year, you have more control, it’s like buying your own network and servers for a small office.
There’s a simple explanation for the bitter nastiness of a post like Navin’s, which isn’t encumbered with much experience in Second Life: it’s not a platform that requires MMORPG gaming skills or pedigrees — they are irrelevant. And it’s not a platform that needs IT guys to hold your hand all the time — it’s pretty simply to use after the initial steep ramp-up, not always made easier by a gaming background in fact.
This comment indicates that we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water. Just like we didn't need to learn to program computers to use them, we don't have to know how to design and build in Second Life. While it works well for those incorporating student hands-on projects, it's not as necessary for those in higher education looking for a different type of experience in Second Life. Look how fast designing webpages evolved - now Contribute and even the web publishing features in Office are SO different from having to utilizing programming languages or even command line code.