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) goes on to point to the notion that the "need to verbalize 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 bia anonymous ftp to byrd.mu.wvnet.edu or via e-mail message addressed to LISTSERV@KENTVM or 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