Cite as:
Collins, M. P. & Berge, Z. L. (1996). Mailing lists as a venue for adult learning. Paper presented at the Eastern Adult, Continuing and Distance Education Research Conference, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, October 24-26, 1996.
Mauri P. Collins
mauri.collins@nau.edu
and
Zane L. Berge
berge@umbc2.umbc.edu
ABSTRACT
Online public Electronic Discussion Groups (EDGs) are voluntary associations
of adults where discussion via electronic mail is used for the exchange
of information, thoughts and opinions. Research has been conducted on EDGs
from a communications perspective but there is no indication in the literature
that participants in non-academic EDGs consider them to be a venue for learning.
An exploratory survey of one scholarly electronic discussion group (IPCT-L)
was conducted to determine if a random sample of participants considered
their participation as a learning experience. Results indicate a well-educated
group who joined the list with a general interest in the topic and who get
valuable information that helps them stay updated in their field. All respondents
(who are members of from one to twenty-three other EDGs) agreed that "Increase
in knowledge" is an general effect of participation in EDGs, and 51
of 54 respondents said they learned from IPCT-L incidentally, deliberately,
or both at different times. This would indicate that EDG membership may
enhance self-directed, any time, any place adult learning. This information
can provide instructors with a rationale for decisions concerning the use
of electronic discussion lists in their classes.
INTRODUCTION
There are over 10,000 public electronic discussion groups (EDGs) on the
Internet where people "come together" asynchronously to discuss
topics of mutual interest. These EDGs provide a forum in which participants
can exchange, via electronic mail (email) information, argue, articulate
ideas more clearly, try out new ideas, reflect on the inconsistencies in
their own logic and in the observations of others, and discover multiple
or varying perspectives on issues of interest to their group (Berge. 1994,
p. 103; Hahn & Stout, 1994, p. 516). They can engage in discussion that
can lead to creation, experimentation or discovery--a process that may lead
to change--and to those activities such as reaching a collective dialogic
wisdom (Berge 1994, p. 103).
It is our contention that such lists, especially those whose intended purpose is scholarly discussion, have much in common with other voluntary associations of adult learners (Harnack & Fest, 1964, Knowles, 1977) that have developed over the years. We suspect adults join EDGs to take advantage of opportunities for "enlightenment" which Brilhart (1974) describes as "a fuller understanding, a wider grasp of information pertinent to a topic, or consideration of a problem from as many points of view as possible" (p.117). While SDG members can articulate a purpose and intention to learn from the discussion; much incidental learning also occurs, and members derive many benefits, including keeping updated in their professional field, getting materials, getting answers, learning the medium, a sense of belonging, a chance to express themselves and networking for contacts. They may also use these groups as newsletters, to get and provide information, or to exchange ideas and experiences (Rojo, 1995).
BRIEF LITERATURE REVIEW
ADULT LEARNING
Peterson (1979), making the distinction between deliberate education
and unintentional learning in the Sources of Education and Learning
(SEL) typology puts "schools, non-school organizations and individually
used sources" into the domain of deliberate education (p. 14). Peterson
claims that "unintentional adult learning is a fact of life for everyone;
it is a concomitant of living. However, one can conceive of environments,
particularly interpersonal environments, that are more stimulating than
others and thus make for more frequent unintended learning" (p. 18).
He adds that people learn without intending to, in what academic psychologists
call incidental learning: "Learning, as the acquisition of new
cognitive, affective, or motor response, is virtually synonymous with living
(p. 64).
Some members contribute frequently to EDGs however, no individual is
required to post comments as a condition of membership (except perhaps,
on a few lists, an introduction). Most subscribers can, and often do, to
use Internet parlance, "lurk" (Newby, 1993, p. 34) and only listen/read,
forming an large audience for the ongoing discussion. Such listening/reading
can be a valuable activity in itself for apprentice scholars.
DISCUSSION
Discussion, as opposed to casual conversation or talk, is an important
part of human interpersonal communication and is most often employed to
achieve one of two basic purposes: learning (information-sharing and enlightenment)
or decision making, or some combination of these two (Brilhart, 1974: Gulley,
1968). It is through discussion that one person can influence or persuade
another or many others. Discussion provides an opportunity to articulate
and explicate one's own thinking and perhaps to modify one's own ideas,
beliefs or self-presentation in response to feedback from others. Incorporation
of new data, the testing of arguments, and using one's judgment and reasoning
helps move a person toward new ways, and higher levels of thinking (Berge
& Collins, 1995, p. 183). Brookfield (1990) notes that "discussion
encourages active, participatory learning" (p. 190) and helps learners
explore their experiences so that they can become more critical thinkers.
Discussion serves to "expose learners to a diversity of perspectives
on an issue, topic or theme; help learners externalize the assumptions underlying
their values, beliefs and actions; assist learners in perspective taking,
and introduce learners to elements of complexity and ambiguity in an issue,
topic or theme" (p. 192).
THE ONLINE CONTEXT
Participants in online scholarly discussion need only to have access
to an Internet-accessible electronic mail (email) program. Logistically,
the "discussion" appears in participants' mailbox as a continuing
series of email messages, and are replied to by sending an email message
back to the mail handling software that automatically manages the mailing
list, (i.e., an electronic form of Internet mail distribution list similar
to a magazine subscription list). Mail volume is usually manageable, but
some lists receive many hundreds of posts a day (Harris, 1993). Once subscribed
to a particular discussion group, a subscriber receives an email copy of
every post distributed to that list, and from this can internally construct
a "discussion" and sometimes, even a sense of "virtual community"
(Quarterman, 1993; Rheingold, 1993).
SCHOLARLY DISCUSSION GROUPS
A SDG is a type of computer conference that functions as an electronic
forum-a place to hold open discussions on questions of mutual interest (Harnack
& Fest, 1964; Gulley, 1968). Kovacs et al. (1995) describe over 4,000
scholarly discussion groups that exist for discussion of the complete spectrum
of academic interests and pursuits. While it appears that SDGs are rarely
used for group decision making, participants exchange information and data,
ask questions, share insights, and ideas (Berge & Collins, 1995). The
outcome, hopefully, is increased understanding and the construction of shared
meaning.
SDGs are groups formed as a result of voluntary association (Harnack
& Fest, 1964). Some persons use SDGs to gather information, to explore
different views of the same issues, much as they would a library. Other
participants meet online with colleagues to informally discuss ideas, to
promote creative thinking and to listen to others in much the same way as
they do in person, by phone or at a seminar. Some members are highly involved,
posting contributions daily, sometimes hourly, while others listen and only
post a message when they believe their contribution is worthwhile (Berge
& Collins, 1995) .
Rojo (1995) in her dissertation examined participation in a random sample
of twelve scholarly electronic forums in terms of subscribers' adoption
processes, purposes for participation, contribution rates and patterns of
use and perceived benefits. Contribution was operationalized as 1) asks
for information; 2) provides information; 3) asks complex questions; 4)
responds to complex questions; 5) makes short comments; 6) makes elaborate
comments. Benefits and modes of use were operationalized as 1) keeping updated;
2) getting materials; 3) getting answers; 4) learning about the medium;
5) feelings of belonging; 6) possibility to express oneself; and 7) enhancing
contacts. In her typology, IPCT-L would be a "stagnant" forum
with few newcomers, few people leaving and a high proportion of old users.
Most of the categories used in this survey were derived from those developed
by Rojo.
MEANING-MAKING METAPHORS
As noted above, EDG discussion occurs in the form of an exchange of electronic
mail messages among a group of subscribers and appears as text in an email
message in their computer systems' representation of a mailbox. It is in
the reading of these messages that the participants often construct metaphors
to provide "a sense of familiarity and provide navigational and cognitive
aids, helping to organize the interactions and set participant expectations
. . . [they also] convey what is socially appropriate" (Harasim, 1993,
pp. 29-30,, Newby, 1993) in the situation. Spitzer (1986) likens SDG communication
to a slow motion panel discussion (which infers an audience) while others
have likened it to a conversation being held in a room full of people, or
some other informal face-to-face gathering, or a long and drawn-out after-dinner
conversation. Scholarly discussion groups have been likened in function
to a library, a public or academic meeting or having a newspaper or magazine
subscription (Berge & Collins, 1995).
RESEARCH
The Interpersonal Computing and Technology (ipct-l@listserv.georgetown.edu)
discussion group was chosen to serve as a case study because the authors
are the listowners and familiar with the personalities, discussion and dynamics
of that SDG (Berge & Collins, 1993). The survey was posted to the entire
membership but initial response was low (21 responses). Those respondents
were deleted from the list roster of 996 members in 49 countries (on July
29, 1996), which was then randomly sampled and private messages sent until
an approximately five percent random sample was obtained. IPCT-L was started
in February 1992 and was very active for almost three years (averaging 10--15
posts a day), until a leading discussant died suddenly. No one stepped forward
to fill his role (Newby, 1993 p. 34) and as the listowner's interests had
moved elsewhere, the list has become very quiet over the past year, with
between 1 and 10 posts a week.
From the literature review above a electronic survey was constructed
to investigate the list members' definition of their list membership and
their definition of this SDG as a deliberate or incidental learning experience.
Participants were asked their reason for joining; the benefits they felt
they derived, the rate of their contribution and participation, the intentionality
of their learning, the metaphors they used to frame the setting of the discussion,
and their opinion of the perceived effects of participation in EDGs. The
following demographics were collected: length of time on the list; and membership
of other lists and gender; age; and educational level. From two prior electronic
surveys, (of the IPCT Journal (Berge and Collins, in press) and the
DEOSNEWS journal (unpublished)), the population had been described as more
male than female, with more respondents in the 35-55 age groups.
FINDINGS
DEMOGRAPHICS
Fifty-five list members responded to the survey: 41 men and 14 women
with 88 percent of those in the 36 to 55 age group. They were from eight
different countries with the majority (69 percent) from North America. Eighty-seven
percent of respondents had been a member of the list for more than a year.
These were well educated persons with 16 percent having earned Bachelor
degrees, 46 percent Masters degrees and 33 percent doctorates. They are
also experienced list users with every respondent belonging to between two
and more than 9 lists besides IPCT-L From prior research we can say this
group closely represents the readership of IPCT-L who respond to electronic
surveys.
INVOLVEMENT
Respondents were asked about their involvement with the list: 52 respondents
read posts as they come, 70 percent saying they read posts daily, or weekly;
that reflects the frequency of postings sent to the list. Respondents were
asked how often they contributed by asking for and providing information,
asking and answering questions, making short and elaborate comments, and
sharing experiences. A range between 29 percent and 43 percent said they
never contributed and a range between 23 percent and 43 percent said they
contributed at least yearly. That reflects the frequency of the low level
of current traffic on this list. Two years ago there would have been several
posts in the same day by the same person, if they were one of the principal
discussants on a current topic. The proportion of those who contribute is
unusually large in this sample, as the general accepted ratio of "lurkers"
to contributors is approximately 10:1 (Newby, 1993, p. 34).
Their top five reasons for joining IPCT-L:
| 89.0 % | Generally interested in topic |
| 49.1% | Looking for others interested in topic |
| 40.0% | Looking for forum to share opinions |
| 23.6% | Looking for job-related resources |
| 21.8% | To develop/upgrade talents or skills |
Their top seven benefits from their list membership:
| 83.3% | I get information valuable to me |
| 68.5% | Staying updated in my field |
| 51.9% | I can learn about list topic |
| 50.0% | Exchange thoughts/ideas/opinions with others |
| 40.7% | I get materials I can use |
| 37.0% | Professional development opportunities |
| 33.3% | Networking/making contacts |
Their top three metaphors: What is this List most like?
| 70.4%. A ongoing small group discussion |
| 40.7%. A series of private conversation(s) |
| 40.7%. A ongoing panel discussion with an audience |
Their top five effects of participation in Listserv Groups
| 100% Increase knowledge |
| 85.5% Change perspectives/outlooks |
| 74.5% Increase skills |
| 69.1% Change attitudes |
| 58.2% Reduce isolation/loneliness |
Without trying to, one can learn (acquire new knowledge, skills and feelings about oneself) simply by undertaking different activities at home, at work, and at play. Is your learning from this discussion list:
| 29.1% | Mostly unintentional, incidental, just happens |
| 10.9% | Mostly planned, deliberate, what I am here for |
| 52.7% | Both, at different times |
| 7.3% | I don't learn from this list |
CONCLUSION
Once again: communication on EDGs appears as email messages that arrive
in subscriber's private electronic mailboxes. Despite the fact there are
actually almost 1000 members on the IPCT-L subscription list, the respondents
framed discussion on IPCT-L as most like a small discussion group, a series
of private conversations, or a panel discussion in front of an audience.
This speaks to the sense of "intimacy" in communication that listeners/readers
construct from the text messages arriving in their mail boxes from other
list members.
While "generally interest in the topic" is the principle reason
given for joining IPCT-L, subscribers were also seeking out others interested
in the topic (49 percent) and looking for a forum in which to share opinions
(40 percent). Particular benefits that participants derive from their membership
include getting valuable information (83 percent) and staying updated in
their field (69 percent), a matter of pressing concern to many academics,
they can learn about the list topic (52 percent) and have an opportunity
to "exchange thoughts, ideas and opinions" (50 percent), all functions
similar to face-to-face discussion groups for enlightenment/learning.
All respondents agreed that one effect of participation in discussion
groups is "increases knowledge" with 86 percent saying it also
changes perspectives and outlooks; and 74 percent saying that it increases
skills. Ninety-three (93) percent of respondents say that they do indeed
learn from IPCT-L with 11 percent saying that is their plan and design for
membership; 29 percent saying their learning from the discussion is incidental
and 53 percent saying they learn both incidentally and deliberately at different
times. This may well be for all the same reasons that discussion can be
a good learning method in adult face-to-face groups (see above).
This study was limited in that the list purposely chosen for this case-study
has a rich past history of wide-ranging and vigorous discussion. It is not
so now. Most of the respondents (87 percent) had been members for more than
2 years and remembered the list in its hey-day. Several remarked they were
responding to the questions on the basis of this remembered experience.
This list has always attracted a high proportion of degreed scholars, and
to the extent that old learning is a predictor of new learning (Brookfield,
1986, pp 5-6), the general agreement that IPCT-L is a "learning"
place may be a function of this list and these respondents.
Before EDGs can be generally accepted as situations where lifelong learners
seek out self-directed learning opportunities, further research is needed
with more representative samples from many other electronic discussion groups
that randomly represent the proportion of scholars to non-academics now
using the Internet, and that are not deliberately framed as "scholarly"
discussion groups.
SIGNIFICANCE FOR PRACTICE
Knowing the characteristics of SDGs in terms of their perceived value
to adult learners, the advantages and disadvantages of such lists and the
extent to which EDG membership may enhance self directed, any time, any
place adult learning can provide instructors with a academically acceptable
rationale for decisions concerning the use of electronic discussion lists
in their classes. Such information can also frame the format and content
of learning opportunities delivered to homes through the cable modems of
the not-so-distant future.
REFERENCES
Berge, Z. L. (1994). Electronic discussion groups. Communication Education. 43(2), 102-111.
Berge, Z. L. & Collins, M. P. (in press). IPCT Journal Readership Survey. Journal of the American Society for Information Science
Berge, Z. L. & Collins, M. P. (1993). The Founding and Managing of IPCT-L: A Listowner's Perspective. Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century (1)2. Archived as BERGE IPCTV1N2 at listserv@listserv.georgetown.edu
Berge, Z. L. & Collins, M. P. (1995). Computer-mediated scholarly discussion groups. Computers in Education, 24(3), 183-189
Brilhart, J. K. (1974). Effective Group Discussion. (2nd ed). Dubuque, IA: Wm C. Brown.
Brookfield, S. D. (1990). Discussion. In M. W. Galbraith, (Ed.) Adult learning methods: A guide for effective instruction. Malabar, FL: Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company.
Gulley, H. E. (1968). Discussion, Conference, and Group Process (2nd). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
Hahn, H., & Stout, R. (1994). The Internet complete reference. Berkeley, CA: Osborne McGraw-Hill.
Harasim, L. M. (Ed.). (1993). Global networks: Computers and international communication. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Harnack, R. V., & T. B. Fest. (1964). Group Discussion: Theory and Technique. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Harris, J. (1993). Freedom of the (Key) press: Internet-based discussion groups. The Computing Teacher. March: 52-55.
Kovacs, D. & The Directory Team, (Eds.). (May 1995). Directory of Electronic Journals, Newsletters and Academic Discussion Lists. (5th ed.). Office of Scientific and Academic Publishing, Association of Research Libraries: Washington, DC
Knowles, M. S. (1977). A history of the adult education movement in the United States, (rev. ed). Malabar, FL: Robert. E. Krieger Publishing Co.
Newby, G. (1993). The Maturation of Norms for Computer-mediated communication. Internet Research, 3(4), 30-38.
Quarterman, J. S. (1993) The global matrix of minds. In. L. Harasim, (Ed.).Global networks: Computers and international communication. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Rheingold, H. (1993). A slice of life in my virtual community. In. L. Harasim, (Ed.).Global networks: Computers and international communication Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Rojo, A. (1995). Participation in scholarly electronic forums.
Doctoral Dissertation, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada. [Online]
http://www.oise.edu/~arojo/
Mauri Collins, Research Associate, Educational Systems Programming Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff AZ 86011-5751 mauri.collins@nau.edu |
Zane L. Berge, Director, Training Systems, University of Maryland Baltimore County 1000 Hilltop Circle Baltimore, MD 21250 berge@umbc2.umbc.edu |
Presented at the Eastern Adult, Continuing and Distance Education Research Conference, Penn State University, University Park, PA, October 24-26, 1996.