URL: http://www.emoderators.com/papers/bergev1n3.html
The Arachnet Electronic Journal on Virtual Culture
__________________________________________________________________
ISSN 1068-5723 May 20, 1993 Volume 1 Issue 3
BERGE V1N3
COMPUTER CONFERENCING AND ONLINE EDUCATION
Zane L. Berge
Georgetown University
BERGE@GUVAX.BITNET
Mauri Collins
The Pennsylvania State University
mauri@ecl.psu.edu
ABSTRACT
This article proposes a model for viewing
computer conferencing within a communications
framework. It supplies an overview of how CC is
similar to, and yet different from other channels
of communication. The capabilities of CC such as
synchronous and asynchronous communications and
archiving are described. Benefits of CC, such as
professional growth, information processing,
independence of time and distance are discussed,
as are the limitations of the media. Those
features most significant to educational uses
(i.e., text-based with features of face-to-face
communication; promoting student-student and
student-instructor interactions) are explained.
INTRODUCTION
Computer Conferencing (CC) has become very popular in
the past decade. These systems of communication use the
filing and organizational capabilities of a computer to
promote powerful interactions among groups of people (Kaye,
1989). There are several varieties of CC, based upon the
needs of the group of people being served (Feenberg, 1989).
These include groups organized by topics, (e.g., within a
discipline), for specific projects, (e.g., research; editing
a book); or for the purpose of meeting (e.g., information
exchange; support group). These run on many platforms from
PCs to mainframes and traverse networks that may be
encompassed by the four walls of one room, or extend beyond
national boundaries.
This article proposes a model for viewing computer
conferencing within a communications framework. It supplies
an overview of how CC is similar to, and yet different from
other channels of communication. The advantages, benefits
and limitations of CC are described; as are those features
most significant to educational uses.
COMPUTER CONFERENCING WITHIN HUMAN COMMUNICATIONS
There are many ways to classify human communications.
Classification by levels, contexts, types or forms are
common ways found in communications theory texts. It is
useful for our purposes here to use the division of human
communications by Huebsch (1989) into: 1) interpersonal, 2)
intrapersonal, 3) mass, 4) media, and 5) extrapersonal.
While these five may be linked and intertwined, it is
the category of "media" that we wish to highlight in this
paper. Media communications is described by Huebsch (1989) as:
Like mass communication, media communication
requires some intermediate instrument of transfer.
When two or more persons use some intermediate
means for transmitting their messages, we have
media communication. There will be no face-to-
face communication, as the participants are not
together in the same space.
Media communication often involves the use of
an electrical or mechanical device to send or to
receive the message. This is also called
"metacommunication." This channel could be a
telephone, video, mobile radio, radar or Teletype.
In written transactions involving two or more
people, intermediate devices such as memoranda,
letters, reports and notes are used. (p. 6)
Within these channels of media communication, computer
uses include both offline and online services. An example
of offline computer-mediated communications is computer-
assisted instruction, where the goal is to deliver an
instructional developer's message to students, usually at a
stand-alone computer workstation. Examples of online
services include searchable databases, (e.g., to deliver a
cataloger's efforts to clients), electronic shopping, and
news/weather reports. Online services also include
interpersonal communications (Rapaport, 1991), where
computers, linked together, act as a channel of
communications among people. Computer conferencing, which
is the focus of this article, is included in this type
computer-mediated communications (CMC).
There have been analogies drawn which compare CC to
other media channels (Graddol, 1989; Spitzer, 1986). For
example, Spitzer (1986) points to CC as: "talking in
writing, slow motion panel discussion, letters mailed over
the telephone" (p. 19). This suggests there are attributes
of both print (written) media and oral conversation:
Conferencing is a print medium in the sense
that it deals with written text that appears on
the reader's screen. As with other forms of
print, the writer is absent. Thus all of the cues
present in spoken conversation are missing.
Facial expression, body language, and other
nonverbal signals are important parts of the
communication process. . .
While there are analogies between print and
computer conferencing, there are also significant
differences. There are also analogies between
computer conferencing and telephone conversation.
In both conferencing and telephone conversations,
the speaker is physically absent; in both,
conversation is often spontaneous; in both, the
participants must remember what was said
previously. The major difference between these
forms of communication is that when speaking on
the telephone people avail themselves of the
communicative properties of the human voice, an
element lacking in computer conferencing. Another
difference is that it is easier to withdraw from a
computer conference than it is from a telephone
conversation. (p. 19).
When describing CC within education, Harasim (1990)
states that CC shares some attributes of both distance
education and face-to-face, classroom learning. The
combination of attributes forms a new learning environment
that, like distance education, is time- and place-
independent within a mediated form of communication. Yet
distance education is based on a one-to-one or a one-to-many
(e.g., broadcast) model, usually including a way for
(relatively) timely feedback from the instructor by phone,
fax, post or some other channel. Computer conferencing
offers an online learning environment that is more social--
more similar to face-to-face education where a many-to-many,
(e.g. small group discussion), interactive model is
possible.
CHARACTERISTICS OF COMPUTER CONFERENCING
Waggoner (1992) defines CC as "group discussion and
private individual interaction that take place over
computer-mediated communication networks. This is
facilitated by sophisticated software residing on a host
computer that is connected to one or more networks" (p
232).
Most computer conferencing systems provide capabilities
for email, common discussion space (or bulletin boards)
broken into separate areas or threads, file archiving of
conference discussions and files, and synchronous
communication. This integration provides an environment
that includes the benefits of conversation, (both real-time
and delayed); the reviewing of conference discussions; and
the storage, retrieval, searching and distribution of
documents. Some computer conference systems also provide
capabilities for group decision making and the editing by
many persons of a single document file.
CAPABILITIES OF COMPUTER CONFERENCING SYSTEMS
Computer conferencing systems typically provide some or
all of the following communication capabilities:
SYNCHRONOUS, ONE-TO-ONE COMMUNICATION
Synchronous communication requires that the interacting
communicators both be present online at the same time, in
the same manner as a phone call. Most host computers
provide a facility for users to send one or a succession of
one line messages to others who are logged in at the same
time. When transmitted over the BITNET network, these
messages can be sent to the machine on the next desk, or to
a machine half a world away. An instructor could use this
facility to message all computer conference members logged
on at the same time.
Interactive requests for files can also be sent using
this one-line message system to computers holding document
archives, which will return files via email, (and/or as
files, depending upon the systems involved), to the address
originating the request.
Another facility, variously called "chat", "talk" or
"phone," when implemented, splits the screen horizontally
so that two persons who are logged on at the same time can
communicate with one another, with each typing in their own
half of the screen. This allows for conversations to
proceed at the speed of typing, in real time. However,
communication tends to be more terse, as a function of the
difference in expended effort between speaking and typing.
The person at a disadvantage is the one whose typing speed
and accuracy is low, rather than the person who formulates
their speech slowly, but can type rapidly.
SYNCHRONOUS ONE-TO-MANY
Some computer conferencing systems provide a facility
similar to that known as Internet Relay Chat (IRC), or the
"chat" areas found on many bulletin board systems. Many
persons can log on at the same time and type their
contributions and responses to the on-going conversation,
with such contributions appearing sequentially on the
screens of all the participants.
ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION
Most communication in computer conferences takes place
in an asynchronous mode. This means that messages and
files can be posted and left to be read by others at their
convenience.
ONE-TO-ONE/ONE-TO-MANY: DELIVERED TO INDIVIDUAL ADDRESSES
The ubiquitous electronic mail, (i.e., email), facility
can be used to deliver mail messages to a single addressee's
private mailbox, or to send the same message to multiple
mailbox addresses at the same time. Private one-to-one
correspondence can be shared by strangers, by peers and by
those at different levels of hierarchical ranking (teachers
and students, supervisors and subordinates). For instance,
a paper contributed by a "guest lecturer" to a class
conference could be sent to each individual's mailbox to
ensure that each person would have their own copy. Another
example falling under this type is a Listserv discussion
groups. Email sent to the discussion group email address at
the host computer is forwarded, (either moderated or
unmoderated), to the email addresses of the members of that
list.
ONE-TO-MANY, STORED IN A CENTRAL LOCATION
This is the Bulletin Board System (BBS) format, where
individually posted messages are held in a central location,
usually requiring specific access actions. Messages can be
read sequentially, or read in "threads," using the contents
of the subject line as a guide. Responses to messages can
be posted and left for other readers. This method is very
efficient for distributing messages, but receipt depends on
conference users logging in the BBS and reading them.
Usenet newsgroups belong in this category. Potential
readers cannot subscribe individually, but are dependent on
their site receiving a usenet "feed" stored in a central
location.
Separate BBS areas can be set up as a common work areas
for use by small, individual workgroups, or they can be
accessed by the entire group. They can also be set up by
topic. A contribution by a "guest lecturer" could be posted
to such a topic-specific bulletin board, read by those
logging in and can then be copied or saved to individuals'
private work areas. Commentary on the guest lecture could
then be posted to that topic specific bulletin board for
others to read.
The term "salon" has come to refer to short-duration
conference groups associated with face-to-face conferences
where several papers may be posted prior to the conference
and subscribers can read and then comment on or discuss the
paper, often with the author(s) joining in. This allows not
only conference attendees a voice, but many persons who can
only "virtually" attend can also participate.
One form of general BBS area that is often set up in
classroom conferences is a "commons" or "cafe" where
conference members can electronically meet and greet one
another, and the conversation is social rather than only
task related. Another is the technically oriented
"Helpline" where questions concerning access to, use and
functions of the conferencing system can be posted by users
and then responded to by system staff. The accumulated
responses can become a helpfile of FAQs, (i.e., frequently
asked questions), that can be searched for immediate help
prior to the posting of a question, (the response to which
may be delayed until the board is next checked by those
providing technical assistance).
LIBRARY
The "library," or "reference" area of CC can contain
several different types of files of general interest to the
members of the computer conference, stored in read-only
format. These can include readings from various sources,
papers, resource lists, reference files required for the
completion of classroom assignments, "help" files for
assistance with using the conferencing system,
bibliographies and glossaries. Files are posted to this
area by conference system staff. While they can be
accessed, retrieved, read or copied to individual storage
areas, they can not be annotated or changed by the general
readership.
TRANSACTION ARCHIVE/DATABASE
All messages posted within the conferencing system to
private or public access work areas can be archived and then
searched and/or reviewed using criteria that include the
author's name, the subject line, the date posted, etc.
These archives can be used when reviewing what has been
previously contributed to a specific topic. Archives can
also be used to track the number and content of
contributions made by conference members thus facilitating
record keeping by system staff. It also provides a measure
of security for conference proceedings to participants in
the case of personal equipment or disk storage failure.
BENEFITS
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH
For the education professional, computer conference
membership like that offered by Listserv discussion groups
and commercial online services offer the opportunity to
augment personal and professional networks into an
international community, without necessarily leaving one's
own office. Professional and collegial relationships can be
established, developed, and nurtured within the bounds of an
electronic conference setting. Colleagues with common
interests can be met and associated with, many more than
could be encountered within the confines of a work, home or
campus setting. Opportunities for professional growth and
development can be found and taken advantages of, with the
resultant enlargement of professional goals and aspirations.
For example, co-authors for articles and books have been
discovered; researchers with similar projects have been
found; employment, funding and research opportunities have
been turning up regularly through CC.
INFORMATION PROCESSING
With all contributions to computer conferences being
archived, a rich database of contributions can be
accumulated, and carried forward. In the classroom, the
best contributions can be held over from semester to
semester to serve as models or guides.
CONVENIENCE
Once some mastery has been achieved in accessing and
using computer conferencing programs, the convenience of
being able to access the conference from a desk-top computer
at work, at home, or in a dorm room becomes evident. It is often
not necessary to go to the room where the computer
conference server is located, but merely to remotely access
the conference from familiar surroundings.
INDEPENDENCE OF TIME
Because a computer conference is open and available 24
hours a day and seven days a week, work can be done at a
time that is convenient to the user and one that fits in
with a personal schedule. It is frequently not necessary
for all group members on a project to be in the same place
at the same time for face-to-face meetings, provided the
conference BBS is frequently checked for new messages.
Before response is made to postings, time can be taken
for reflection and consideration, and the accumulation of
data and references with which to substantiate one's
arguments and positions.
This permissible time-lag in computer conferencing is
particularly well suited to shy, thoughtful or hesitant
conversationalists and to members of those cultures, (for
instance, native American), where answers and responses are
to be considered and carefully framed before presentation.
Under face-to-face conversational circumstances this can be
perceived as problematical; the lack of immediate response
may be taken to indicate that a response will not be
forthcoming and a speaker may continue in their
conversational turn and a slow responder will lose theirs.
In CC a time lag of hours or even days may be acceptable
with the only consideration begin the currency of the topic
being responded to.
INDEPENDENCE OF DISTANCE
Independence of distance is achieved by being able to
remotely logon to the conference from locations that can be
determined by the user. It is not necessary to leave job or
home locations in order to attend class conferences.
Travel-time can be eliminated and inclement weather
complicating travel during the winter is no longer a factor.
BECOMING PART OF A VIRTUAL COMMUNITY
Computer conferences allow interaction with other
conference members in ways that, while somewhat limited by
the text-based nature of the medium, still allows for the
building of a sense of "virtual" community. Virtual here
meaning "not physically existing as such, but made by
software to appear so" (COD, 1991). One can dialog with
kindred spirits having similar interests, skills and
attitudes, when one is, in reality, isolated from one's
peers (Loughlin, 1993). This tends to lessen feelings of
isolation and loneliness: one's "virtual" friends reside
just behind the screen regardless of the physical distances
between you.
However, for those who wish to listen and consider
before they contribute, computer conference users can "lurk"
(i.e., individuals can interact with the topic(s) that
he/she feels qualified to discuss regardless of others, thus
enhancing the overall group process) (Turoff, 1991).
REMOVING BARRIERS TO PARTICIPATION
The relative anonymity of computer conferences allows
shy persons protection and cover when they contribute to
discussions. Where they might be overcome with "stage
fright" when required to present their ideas in front of a
live audience of peers, it is considerably more comfortable
when there is little sense of the physical presence of
others and speakers may be safely located in their own home
territory. One is rarely required to instantly respond to
the presentation of information or to challenges to one's
ideas.
The appearance of text on the screen is a function of
the hardware and displayed characters all basically look the
same. How that text got to the screen is not immediately
apparent. The voice synthesizer reading the text to the
blind person can not be heard, nor the agonizingly slow tap-
tap of pencils held in the hand braces of a paraplegic as
they painstakingly compose their response, nor the flipping
of dictionary pages as correct translations are sought. The
text looks the same on the monitor whether it comes from the
chief executive officer's keyboard, or from the janitor's.
Unless stated, there are no cues as to social rank,
ethnicity, gender, age nor appearance. Communication is
democratized and the opportunities for stigmatization
reduced to those inherent in the use of language and text--
syntax, spelling and content--all matters that can be
transparently changed and modified offline, before the text
appears on the screens of others.
SERENDIPITY
Many users of CC comment on their experiences with
serendipity online, (i.e., unplanned meetings or events
within those that have been planned). This may be due to a user
becoming involved with more kindred spirits, or being able
to form more and varied professional alliances, or come
across an opportunity for personal growth than would have
been possible without CC.
LIMITATIONS AND COSTS
STEEP LEARNING CURVES AND TIME INVESTMENTS
Computer Conferencing software is sophisticated and
frequently involves steep learning curves, with large
investments of time and energy being required in order to
become sufficiently familiar with the software to use it
with ease and confidence. Some systems are designed with
"point and click," or menu-driven interfaces, to ease the
learning curve, but the systems are still complex, and
sometimes intimidating and difficult to master, especially
for the novice computer user.
Text editors provided with most computer conferencing
systems are not as user-friendly, nor as fully featured, as
word processors: this can make text entry and editing
cumbersome, frustrating, and time consuming.
Instructional design for classroom computer
conferencing can be a time-consuming process, as classroom
teaching styles do not necessarily make an easy nor direct
translation to effective online teaching methods.
The creation of a sense of community among learners
also takes time and skill. Computer conferencing encourages
participation and this may place a heavy burden on a
conference leader. Not only is there an aggregate of more
leader-learner interactions; having to respond in writing to
each one may take considerably more time than phone calls or
face-to-face meetings.
TEXT-BASED
Computer conferencing is text-based, although there may
eventually be the potential for incorporating sound and
graphics. Data entry is almost invariably via a keyboard so
this favors those who can type, and those who are literate
in the language being used. Text-based presentations
require the ability to read and to comprehend what is being
read. In order to keep up with an on-going discussion, all
messages posted since last reading must be read and the
information synthesized with what has gone before. When
combined with textbook or course readings, this can involve
a heavy time investment.
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
Computer conferencing software allows for the archiving
and linear display of information that has been presented
but does not provide for easy sorting, or categorization of
incoming information. This can lead to information-overload
as the number of contributions mounts up as a conference
discussion progresses. Computer conferencing software does
not allow for the building of dynamic links on screen
between the ideas and concepts that have been presented.
This sometimes makes the finding, analysis, structuring and
synthesis of information online difficult.
LACK OF SOCIAL CONTEXT CUES
Because computer conferencing is text-based, all the
usual social context cues that are read in interaction with
others are missing. There are no facial expressions, body
language, voice tones; you can't see clothing, appearance
nor physical setting; there is little sense of the physical
presence of others. It is very easy to lose track of the
fact that there is another person stringing together the
text appearing on your screen, and this can foster a sense
of impersonality and detachment (Sproull and Kiesler, 1986).
The immediacy of feedback in face-to-face conversations is
missing and it is often hard to assess the effect of one's
contributions on the conference membership, especially if no
one chooses to respond.
ACCESS REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET
In order to access computer conferences, certain
hardware requirements must be met. A potential member must
have access to a sufficiently powerful computer with a phone
line and modem or a hard-wired connection with which to
connect to the conferencing software. An access account is
also required. Access to commercial computer conferencing
systems carries with it membership charges and associated
costs for the time spent logged in, (e.g., online time
charges; long distance telephone charges). These are
usually included in tuition or computer fees in academic
settings, or can be included in "business overhead" at work.
HARDWARE AND CONNECTIONS NOT 100 PERCENT RELIABLE
Computer hardware has not yet reached the stage of 100
percent reliability and computers can "go down"
unexpectedly, taking one's work with them. When a computer
conference is being accessed at a site remote from the
access point, there can be network outages or poor phone
connections that can cause delays and disruptions in message
transmission.
COMPUTER CONFERENCING IN EDUCATION
Kaye (1989) points out that there are two very
important features of CC that effect the pedagogical
arguments for its use: "it is essentially a medium of
written discourse, which nevertheless shares some of the
spontaneity of and flexibility of spoken conversation," and
"it can be used as a powerful tool for group communication
and for cooperative learning." (p. 10)
TEXT-BASED COMMUNICATIONS
Is CC written or spoken communication? Spitzer (1986)
describes computer conferencing as "a form of writing
lacking non-verbal cues. It is temporary but nevertheless
leaves a permanent record." (p. 19) Harasim (1990)
identifies CC as being text-based and being one of five
characteristics unique to this mode of communication in
education, (i.e., along with the many-to-many communications
model; time-independence; place-independence; and computer-
mediated interactivity). That learners can construct their
own knowledge, then formulate and manipulate this knowledge
into words many can share, is one of the most powerful
capabilities of computer conferencing.
One of the benefits of text-based communication is that
learners often perceive themselves reflecting more on their
thoughts and perceptions than when in a face-to-face class
or on the telephone (Harasim, 1990). The asynchronistic
nature of CC permits the reader to reflect prior to
responding to a message--and therefore make a conscious,
analytic effort (Vygotsky, 1962). Further, Harasim (1990)
all aspects of interaction within the text-based environment
can enhance such metacognitive skills as self-reflection and
revision in learning." (p. 49).
Another aspect of text-based CC is that nonverbal and
other social context cues associated with face-to-face, or
telephone conversation are absent. This allows students to
concentrate on the message, rather than the presenter
(Harasim, 1987). From this flows the notion of CC as an
"equalizer" of persons. In a sense, the message is sans
race, gender, physical appearance, physical handicap, or
external social-economic cues.
We should also note that this style of conversation is
thought by many as being different from that used in other
channels of communication. The style used in CC is
characterized as being a combination of writing and
telephone conversation and requires a measure of acclimation
by conference users. Tracz (1980) points out that each
user, "will have to pass through various stages of
adaptation to the medium of computer conferencing
('electronic passages'?), the length and intensity of the
stages begin a function of the user's personality and
previous computer and typing skills." (p. 17)
PROMOTING STUDENT-STUDENT AND STUDENT-INSTRUCTOR INTERACTIONS
In recent decades, there has been an emphasis in
education on active learning. Instead of a model that
depicts students passively soaking in knowledge "poured"
into them, the aim is for active manipulation, formulation,
analysis and synthesis when learning. Harasim (1990)
comments on this aspect of computer-mediated communications:
Communication that is computer-mediated is
distinct from other forms of communication. It is
interactive; it encourages active involvement,
whereas books and radio transmission are oriented
toward passive receipt of information. But, above
all, computers offer control capabilities--the
ability to present, receive, process, and manage
information (Kozma 1987; Rice 1984). Online
educational interactions, being revisable,
archivable, and retrievable, augment the user's
control over the substance and process of the
interactions. (p 51).
CC is a tool that promotes many-to-many communication.
The conference environment is a place for students to
interact among themselves and with their instructors.
Through such interaction, it is possible that content is
formulated and reformulated, and with each assimilation and
reconstruction, the learner's understanding grows.
SUMMARY
Within mediated, human communications, computer
conferencing is a channel that includes many online and
offline services. It shares some attributes of both
distance education and face-to-face, classroom learning,
with the combination of attributes forming new learning
environments. Computer conferencing is more social than
typical distance education, with a similarity to face-to-
face education where a many-to-many, (e.g. small group
discussion), interactive model is possible.
Benefits of CC include convenience, place- and time-
independence, the potential for users to become part of a
virtual community, and the removing of many of the barriers
to participation found in other forms of education. Yet,
there are some costs associated with its use: steep learning
curves and time investments, it is text-based with the
attendant lack of social context cues, and access
requirements must be met in a hardware and software
environment that is not 100 percent reliable. Of these
benefits, the two that were discussed as perhaps having the
most influence in educational settings were the text-based
aspect of the media, and the ability for people to interact
as they learn.
As Hiltz (1986) points out, the educational uses of CC,
the "virtual classroom," if you will, seem to hinge on,
"whether students do take a more active part in the learning
process and take advantage of the potential for more
interaction with professor and the other students, despite
the absence of nonverbal cues to facilitate this
interaction." (p. 100) We are only just beginning to tap
the power of this medium of communication.
REFERENCES
COD - Concise Oxford Dictionary 8th Ed.. (1991). Oxford:
Oxford University Press. Online at HANGOUT.RUTGERS.EDU
in reference/dictionary.
Feenberg, A. (1989). The Written World. In R. Mason and A.
Kaye, MINDWEAVE: COMMUNICATION, COMPUTERS AND DISTANCE
EDUCATION, pp. 22-39. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Graddol, D (1989). Some CMC discourse properties and their
educational significance. In R. Mason and A. Kaye,
MINDWEAVE: COMMUNICATION, COMPUTERS AND DISTANCE
EDUCATION, pp. 3-21. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Harasim, L.M. (1990). Online Education: An environment for
collaboration and intellectual amplification. In L. M.
Harasim (Ed). ONLINE EDUCATION: PERSPECTIVES ON A NEW
ENVIRONMENT, pp. 39-64. NY: Praeger Publishing.
Harasim, L.M. (1987). Teaching and learning on-line: Issues
in computer-mediated graduate courses. CANADIAN JOURNAL
FOR EDUCATIONAL COMMUNICATION, 16(2); 117-35.
Hiltz, S.R. (1986). The "virtual classroom": Using computer-
mediated communication for university teaching.
JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION, 36(2), 95-104.
Huebsch, J.C. (1989). COMMUNICATION 2000 (2nd). Durban, SA:
Butterworths Professional Publishers (Pty) Ltd.
Kaye, A. (1989). Computer-mediated communication and
distance education. In R. Mason and A. Kaye,
MINDWEAVE: COMMUNICATION, COMPUTERS AND DISTANCE
EDUCATION, pp. 3-21. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Kozma, R. (1987). The implications of cognitive psychology
for computer-based learning tools. EDUCATIONAL
TECHNOLOGY, 27(11), 20-25.
Loughlin, T.W. (1993). Virtual Relationships: The solitary
world of CMC. INTERPERSONAL COMPUTING AND TECHNOLOGY
JOURNAL, v1 n1. Archived on LISTSERV@GUVM as file
LOUGHLIN.IPCTV1N1.
Miller, G.R. (1990). Interpersonal communication. In
Gordon L. Dahnke and Glen W. Clatterbuck (Eds), HUMAN
COMMUNICATION: THEORY AND RESEARCH. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Rapaport, M.J. (1991). Computer conferencing, bulletin
boards, and information professionals. ONLINE (May),
pp. 33-37.
Rice, R. (1984). Mediated group communication. In R. Rice
and Associates (Ed.), THE NEW MEDIA: COMMUNICATION,
RESEARCH, AND TECHNOLOGY, pp. 129-54. Beverly Hills, CA:
Sage Publications
Spitzer, M. (1986). Writing style in computer conferences.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION, 29(1),
19-22.
Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context
cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication.
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 32, 1492-1512.
Tracz, G. (1980). Computer conferencing: An eye opening
experience. THE CANADIAN JOURNAL OF INFORMATION
SCIENCE, 5, 11-20.
Turoff, M. (1991). Computer-mediated communication
requirements for group support. JOURNAL OF
ORGANIZATIONAL COMPUTING, 1, 85-113.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1962). THOUGHTS AND LANGUAGE. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Waggoner, M.D. (1992). EMPOWERING NETWORKS: COMPUTER
CONFERENCING IN EDUCATION. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Educational Technology Publications.
_____
Articles and Sections of this issue of the _Electronic Journal on Virtual
Culture_ may be retrieved via anonymous ftp
to byrd.mu.wvnet.edu or via e-mail message addressed to LISTSERV@KENTVM.KENT.EDU
(instructions below)
Papers may be submitted at anytime by email or send/file to:
Ermel Stepp - Editor-in-Chief, _Electronic Journal on Virtual Culture_
M034050@MARSHALL.WVNET.EDU
_________________________________
*Copyright Declaration*
Copyright of articles published by Electronic Journal on Virtual Culture
is held by the author of a given article. If an article is re-published
elsewhere it must include a statement that it was originally published
by Electronic Journal on Virtual Culture.
_________________________________
Editorial Board (EJVC Founders/Arachnet Moderators)
Ermel Stepp, Marshall University, Editor-in-Chief
M034050@Marshall.wvnet.edu
Diane (Di) Kovacs, Kent State University, Co-Editor
DKOVACS@Kentvm.Kent.edu
A. Ralph Papakhian, Indiana University, Consulting Editor
PAPAKHI@@IUBVM
Consulting Editors
Anne Balsamo, Georgia Institute of Technology
ab45@prism.gatech.edu
Patrick (Pat) Conner, West Virginia University
u47c2@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU
Skip Coppola, Applied Technology, Inc.
skip@aptech.atl.ga.us
Cynthia J. Fuchs, George Mason University
cfuchs@gmuvax.bitnet
Stevan Harnad, Princeton University
harnad@Princeton.EDU
Edward M. (Ted) Jennings, University at Albany, SUNY
EMJ69@ALBNYVMS
Michael Joyce, Vassar
MIJOYCE@vaxsar.vassar.edu or USERTFSG@UMICHUM
Jay Lemke, City University of New York
JLLBC@CUNYVM.BITNET
Carl Eugene Loeffler, Carnegie Mellon University
cel+@andrew.cmu.edu
Willard McCarty, University of Toronto
editor@EPAS.UTORONTO.CA
James (Jim) Milles, Saint Louis University
millesjg@sluvca.slu.edu
Algirdas Pakstas, The University of Trondheim, Norway
Algirdas.Pakstas@idt.unit.no
A. Ralph Papakhian, Indiana University
PAPAKHI@@IUBVM
Bernie Sloan, University of Illinois, Champaign
AXPBBGS@UICVMC.BITNET or b-sloan@uiuc.edu
Allucquere Roseanne Stone, University of Texas, Austin
success@emc.cc.utexas.edu
Kali Tal, Viet Nam Generation
kali@access.digex.com
Associate Editors
Robert J. (Bob) Beebe, Youngstown State University
ad219@yfn.ysu.edu
David W. Brown, Ball State University
01dwbrown@LEO.BSUVC.BSU.EDU
Kathleen Burnett, Rutgers University
BURNET@zodiac.rutgers.edu
G. Phillip Cartwight, University of California, Davis
PCARTWRI@KENTVM
Paulo A. Dasilva, Military Institute of Engineering, Brazil
S9PAULO@IMERJ.BITNET
Jill Ellsworth, Southwest Texas State University
je01@swtexas
Jan George Frajkor, Carleton University, Canada
gfrajkor@ccs.carleton.ca
Dave Gomberg, University of California, San Francisco
GOMBERG@UCFSVM
Lee Hancock, The University of Kansas Medical Center
Le07144@ukanvm
Mary Hocks, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaigne
mhocks@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
Nancy Kaplan, University of Texas, Dallas
NKaplan@utdallas.bitnet
Brendan Kehoe, Cygnus Support
bk@well.sf.ca.us
Joan Korenman, University of Maryland, Baltimore County
korenman@umbc2.umbc.edu or korenman@umbc
Steven D. Koski, St. Bonaventure University
KOSKI@sbu.edu
Sharyn Ladner, University of Miami
SLADNER@umiami.IR.miami.EDU
Lyonette Louis-Jacques, University of Chicago
llou@midway.uchicago.edu
Joseph Psotka, Army Research Institute
PSOTKA@alexandria-emh2.army.mil
Martin E. Rosenberg, University of Kentucky
MROSE01@UKCC.uky.edu
Laverna Saunders, University of Nevada, Las Vegas
saunders@nevada.edu
David Sewell, University of Rochester
dsew@TROI.CC.ROCHESTER.EDU
James Shimabukuro, University of Hawaii
jamess@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu
Christinger (Chris) Tomer, University of Pittsburgh
ctomer@vms.cis.pitt.edu or ctomer+@pitt.edu
Stuart Weibel, OCLC
stu@oclc.org
Bob Zenhausern, St. Johns University
drz@sjuvm.stjohns.edu or drz@sjuvm.bitnet
Anyone that is interested in an editorial role with the EJVC
should obtain a copy of the call for editors, either from an
EJVC editor or by anonymous ftp to byrd.mu.wvnet.edu in
subdirectory ejvc, and complete the "notification of interest"
and forward it to the Editor in Chief or the Co-Editor.
____________________________
Anonymous FTP Instructions
____________________________
ftp byrd.mu.wvnet.edu
login anonymous
password: users' electronic address
cd /pub/ejvc
type EJVC.INDEX.FTP
get filename (where filename = exact name of file in INDEX)
quit
LISTSERV Retrieval Instructions
_______________________________
Send e-mail addressed to LISTSERV@KENTVM (Bitnet) or
LISTSERV@KENTVM.KENT.EDU
Leave the subject line empty. The message must read:
GET EJVCV1N1 CONTENTS
Use this file to identify particular articles or sections then send e-mail
to LISTSERV@KENTVM or LISTSERV@KENTVM.KENT.EDU with the command:
GET
where is the name of the article or section (e.g., author
name) and is the V#N# of that issue of EJVC
Brought to you by emoderators.com
|
Berge
Collins Associates
|
||
|
September 9, 2006
|
||