J. EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS, 28(3) 219-230,1999-2000

ADAPTING ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION TO MEET THE SEVEN PRINCIPLES OF EFFECTIVE TEACHING

ROBERT DeBARD

STAN GUIDERA

Bowling Green State University, Ohio

THE NEED FOR ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION

It is time to move from advocacy to adaptation of sound principles in the implementation of asynchronous communication in the higher education classroom. There is no question that the investment in this computer technology, and the infrastructure needed to support it, by colleges and universities has continued to increase over the last decade. Also called Computer-Mediated Communication, asynchronous communication includes a variety of related mediums such as e-mail, list serves, and dedicated electronic bulletin boards, all integrated with the World Wide Web to create access to people and information. Part of this investment has been spurred by the changing demographics of higher education that place a premium on access and convenience; another part has resulted from increased calls for productivity of and accountability for the educational outcomes [1]. In response to these challenges, colleges and universities are devoting considerable resources in efforts to instructional computing. At large institutions, these expenses can reach 10 percent of their budget [1].

One justification put forth for these expenses is that institutional expansion through technology investment is being viewed as a cost-effective alternative to the expansion of the physical plant of the institution. According to Carter and Deden, institutions are "redirecting their infrastructure investments from brick and mortar to wire" adding that "as the cost of new construction continues to rise, opportunities to increase enrollments without building more classrooms and dormitories becomes increasingly attractive" [2]. Beyond the economic considerations, other influences have spurred higher education's investment in technology. One such imperative is the emerging role of the Internet as a mechanism for accessing information accompanied by increased demands by employers for competency in communication skills as well as the application of college leaming in employment [2].

The deployment of resources at this level has led to increased pressure on faculty to utilize this technology in the classroom in order to justify the investment. It is in the actual implementation of computer technology in the classroom that questions have been raised about whether this strategy is based on efficiency at the expense of effectiveness. The mere repackaging of an existing course as "online" has been met with criticism from both teachers and students. Anderson stated that "it is not enough to simply take the traditional course and attempt to convert that content to a different delivery mechanism" and referred to such an approach as an "academically impoverished but technologically advanced enterprise" [3]. Improperly used technology that fails to enhance the course structure and support pedagogically sound activities can result in negative perceptions among students. According to Anderson, "if students do not see a bonafide reason for using the media they can become rebellious over using some new toy the professor finds fascinating"[4].

Despite such reservations, the current trends in higher education along with the promise and practice of computer technology make it a question of how rather than whether to adapt such technology in order to achieve the educational outcomes desired. Answering this question must rest with ways in which computer technology can help faculty become more effective teachers which, of course, depends on making students more effective learners. Ultimately, effective implementation of computer technology in the classroom must be evaluated on its contribution to learning outcomes. In other words, it must answer affirmatively what educational value is added rather than what efficiencies are gained.

There most definitely are advantages to asynchronous communication. According to Althaus it can be used to create a unique environment for discussion that avoids many of the limitations found in face-to-face communication [5]. The most significant difference is that it eliminates both time dependence and place dependence. As opposed to "real time" communication, asynchronous communication is time-independent. Messages can be sent and responded to at the convenience of users. In its present form it is also "place-independent," meaning that the communication medium can be utilized from any location with the appropriate hardware and access to the communication network.

One of the primary advantages of asynchronous communication is that it relies upon commonly used technologies. Most students and faculty now routinely use e-mail and most institutions provide access to their electronic communication networks throughout the campus in libraries, computer labs, and residence halls. The widespread acceptance of the Internet by the general public as well as higher education has extended the reach of these networks to students' homes as well as to public libraries. Therefore, e-mail, list-serves, and electronic bulletin boards provide communication mediums that are both familiar and readily available.

THE SEVEN PRINCIPLES OF EFFECTIVE TEACHING

Notice that the advantages indicated above still refer to access and convenience to learning rather than the effectiveness of it. It is the social dimension of learning that is the greatest challenge to instructional computer technology. It is the premise of this article that, if correctly aligned with the "Seven Principles of Effective Teaching," asynchronous communication has the potential to enhance learning effectiveness. Based on a review of fifty years of research on the way teachers teach and the way students learn, Chickering and Reisser developed a list of seven principles of effective teaching [6].

Seven Principles of Effective Teaching Encourages Student-Faculty Contact Encourages Cooperation Among Students Encourages Active Learning Gives Prompt Feedback Emphasizes Time on Task Communicates High Expectations Respects Diverse Talents and Ways of Knowing

Consider the adaptation of these principles within the context of asynchronous connnunication. For instance, effective teaching encourages student-faculty contact and encourages cooperation among students. Student-faculty relationships have been found to be essential for the development of engaging student participation in learning and, in fact, "frequent student-faculty contact in and out of classes is the most important factor in student motivation and involvement" [6]. This would appear to be one of the primary indictments of the application of asynchronous communication in the classroom. Defining faculty-student interaction as the willingness of students to show up during the faculty member's office hours requires adherence to time and space that asynchronous conununication does not respect. The question is whether such face-to-face interaction, which places the student in a subservient role at a time and place specified by a professor, truly nurtures "frequent student-faculty contact."

Given its time and place independence, asynchronous communication has been shown to have the capability of enhancing student-faculty interaction. Electronic communication provides contact with the instructor beyond the bounds of the class periods, office hours, and distance from campus [7]. Students are able to submit questions to the instructor whenever they arise and instructors can respond not only to the students, but also to the entire class by posting a message on the classroom bulletin board [8]. Brouwer stated that "electronic communication not only enables faculty and students to communicate outside of class time or office hours, it also allows students to carry on classroom conversation beyond the scope of the physical classroom and class meeting time" [9]. Therefore, asynchronous communication does not stifle outside-of-class interaction between teachers and students any more than office hours ensures it. The key is still for students to want to reach out and teachers to want to respond. Once there is motivation for cooperation among teachers and students, the technology can facilitate such communication.

Also cited in the seven principles is the need to provide prompt feedback because students need to perform the skills to be developed through learning and receive constructive suggestion for improvement so that they can fully develop these skills. One of the age-old criticisms of "correspondence" study and its technological replacement, distance learning, is the slowness and lack of quality of the feedback on students' work. The ability to privide prompt feedback is greatly enhanced in a course utilizing asynchronous communication. In a management course offered at the Ohio State University, one professor used asynchronous communication to change his grading procedures in response to the capabilities of the medium by sending an essay question to students every two weeks. He stated that "students send their responses to me by e-mail, I grade and send comments embedded in the essay back to the students along with the next question that is to be answered," adding that "the result is a dramatic improvement in learning, at least from the subjective assessment of the students" [10]. Similarly, a 1998 study by Aviv and Golan found students' ability to send assignments and receive feedback electronically provided a significant contribution to their satisfaction with an online course [11].

One of the primary benefits of asynchronous communication regarding feedback, however, concerns the opportunity for students to provide feedback to other students. Although e-mail can provide a mechanism for private communication between faculty and students, through the use of electronic forums, discussions between students and comments from the instructor are available for everyone in the class to read. This provides for more extensive peer interaction and facilitates more engaged learning, particularly when students are required to post their assignment to the class bulletin board. Sawyer suggested that students interacted more thoughtfully when they are required to respond to each other's writings and reflections [12]. He stated that "the learning actually seems deeper when each student receives a response from another student," adding that "peer accountability is higher because students do not want to 'lose face'." Peer communication and evaluation play a significant role in students' perceptions of the effectiveness of an asynchronous communication component in a course. Additionally, when asynchronous communication is included as a component of a classroom course, it can allow for peer interaction and learning without taking away from regular class time [13].

Such peer critiques can address yet another of the seven principles: encouraging active learning. According to Chickering and Reisser, good teaching practices require students to "talk about what they are learning, write about it, relate it to past experience," and to "make what they learn part of themselves" [6]. In addition to peer critique, they state that challenging discussions and team projects also contribute to active learning. Similarly, Sawyer stated that "active learning is a concept that involves ways to increase the student's involvement in his/her own learning process" [12]. Facilitating class discussion while encouraging students to reflect with the accountability of a posting on an on-line forum, electronic bulletin board, or list serve e-mail message encourages active learning as well as collaboration in formulating the best collective response for class consideration. As Huff stated, "no other medium allows for so extensive an interactive content with so few limitations on time and space" [13].

Such in-depth reflections and posting lead to one of the most important of the seven principles of effective teaching, which is setting high expectations. It is the unique nature of online discussion characteristic of asynchronous communication that can provide for more meaningful discussion than possible through face-to-face communication. Since the communication medium does not necessitate an immediate response, students can take more time to read messages posted by their teacher and classmates and more thoughtfully compose responses [5, 7]. Brouwer noted that time-independent electronic communication "allows students to have control over what they contribute, giving them time to reflect and compose their thoughts rather than having to 'think on their feet' as they often must do in class" [9]. Evidence of the advantages of reflection on communication can be found in research cited by Althaus which found that, in a comparison of communication patterns in a college course, an average response in an electronic discussion was found to be 106 words while the average in-class response was only twelve words [5].

The power of reflection in discussion also touches upon another of the seven principles, the need to encourage cooperation among students. Chickering and Reisser advanced the "good leaming, like good work, is collaborative and social, not competitive and isolated. Sharing one's ideas and responding to others' reactions sharpens thinking and deepens understanding." One way that asynchronous communication can contribute to collaborative leaming and cognitive development is by posting students' assignments and their reflections and discussions in the public forum of the class bulletin board. Henri described how Computer Mediated Communication accomplishes this:

Computer Mediated Communication promotes cognitive development by placing individuals in an environment where their own cognitive concepts and their points of view are confronted with those of others. This gives rise to cognitive conflicts which in turn give rise to more complex mental constructs [14].

Collaboration among students can be enhanced through electronic communica tion mediums. Althaus stated that "on-line discussion is naturally interactive and collaborative, in part because it lends itself so easily to many-to-many conununication" [5]. Collaboration can also be fostered through the group projects that can utilize electronic media. Anderson pointed out an important reason why using electronic media to facilitate group projects provides an advantage over traditional group projects: increased participation by non-traditional students since the communication medium no longer requires in-person meetings at set times that may interfere with other commitments and responsibilities [4].

One of the most challenging of the seven principles is the need to address the diverse leaming styles. However, this is one of the most compelling aspects of asynchronous communication. The self-paced characteristics of asynchronous discussion remove the limitations present in conventional communication mediums. According to Althaus, "the absence of time limitations in Computer-Mediated Discussion is especially helpful to students who have difficulty articulating their thoughts verbally" [5]. Another factor is the perceived anonymity of the communication medium. Based on his experience in using electronic bulletin boards, Huff stated that "very often, those students who are most shy in class can interact with skill electronically, perhaps because there are fewer social pressures in on-line interaction" [13].

Along with the absence of time limitations, the perception of anonymity can also provide benefits to individuals with physical handicaps. Althaus suggested that asynchronous communication places those with disabilities on a more equal social footing [5]. He stated that "people with physical handicaps go unnoticed and those with speech or neuromuscular disabilities can take as much time as they need to compose their statements." Asynchronous communication can encourage participation by culturally diverse students as well. A 1997 study by Powers and Mitchell indicated that participation by Asian-American students was greater in the electronic forum than in the regular classroom environment [7]. Their study suggests that culturally diverse students benefited from the same characteristics that contributed to participation among students with diverse leaming styles:

Asynchronous communication (listserv and e-mail) provided the Asian students with the opportunity to think about their comments and carefully write their messages. Just as in the immediate nature of the classroom, the foreign students struggled more with communicating synchronously (chat). Fortunately, the listserve format provided the opportunity for cultural difference to emerge without the hindrance of communication difficulties [7].

There is a final principle that is not to be underestimated in terms of importance to the learning process, but also suggests a major challenge to using asynchronous communications in the classroom. Simply stated, there is no substitute for time on task. Astin's research at UCLA has confirmed what common sense has led us to believe: the amount of learning that takes place is correlated to the "amount of physical and psychological energy that the student devotes to the academic experience [15]. It this regard, there is no substitute for time on task. Insofar as asynchronous communication is used to minimize students' involvement by reducing their time commitment, the results will be unsatisfactory. However, when used to save extraneous travel time so that students can devote more to the learning process, it is encouraging time on task.

THE PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION

Reviewing the alignment between the seven principles of effective teaching and asynchronous communication it is a wonder that the full use of this medium is still in its infancy and is, in fact, resisted by many in the academy. It must be acknowledged that asynchronous communication is not without its complications. One of the primary problems is that, despite the widespread deployment of the technology, many students may still lack access. This is particularly true for commuting students and those who work full-time off campus. It is dangerous for teachers to assume that all of their students have equal access in posting instructions and evaluating student involvement based on the number of postings they make. The truth is that access is more readily available to students on campus and living in residence halls that have been wired for access. This can disadvantage the very people who are most needful of it: non-traditional off-campus students.

Even when there is access, however, there are additional problems associated with asynchronous communication. One is that professors cannot assume that the technologically advanced means will necessarily accomplish the pedagogical ends and become discouraged when this does not appear to happen. As with any form of communication, the medium cannot be the message. Professors might assume that their posted questions should provoke responses, that assignments placed on the electronic bulletin board are incisive in motivating high performance, and that their critiques are well understood, but it should be acknowledged that asynchronous communication is "cold" when it comes to clarification. Unless the receiver is fully comfortable with the media, it is possible that he or she will not ask for clarification, especially if there is the fear that the response will be read by peers.

Another aspect of asynchronous communication is the possibility that the perception of anonymity could encourage negative remarks and critiques by peers that would not be made in a face-to-face conversation. Brouwer suggested that the "lack of presence of a human message recipient ... removes some of the 'natural' constraints that influence social norms" [9].

Another obvious nuance of communication that is missing from asynchronous communication is the non-verbal cues that mere text cannot capture. Experts disagree whether or not this is important. Althaus asserted that the text-based format of asynchronous communication makes physical presence or verbal delivery irrelevant [5]. As has been pointed out, this can be helpful for those who are self-conscious about either, but it can prove problematic in interpretation because as Brouwer suggests:

Specialists in human communication have taught us the importance of non-verbal cues such as tone of voice, gesture, body language, and facial expressions in framing message content. (Test-based communication) lacks the rich contextual information that we depend on to make our conversations meaningful and directed. Strip away the additional meta-infonnation and the words are naked, subject to ambiguity and misinterpretation [9].

One other problem that has emerged in our research is more pedagogical than technical, but still adversely impacted the viability of asynchronous communication. Most faculty use this facility as an ancillary part of the course to "augment" rather than an integral part. This is sometimes coupled with the tendency to treat participation as extra credit rather than as a substantive accountability. This approach can also apply to class discussion and so some professors treat it as nothing more than a sophisticated method of giving students a chance to express themselves.

Finally, asynchronous communication is additional work for faculty. It would be a delusion to suggest otherwise. This, then, places its priority on a cost-benefit analysis when it comes time for faculty to appropriate their time. Unless there is solid administrative support for the system and professional development opportunities for the faculty, individual professors will defer involvement. As with many technological advancements, those with experience are in the best position to have the best future experiences.

STRATEGIES FOR OVERCOMING PROBLEMS

Despite the problems explained above, we feel the advantages far outweigh any obstacles and that there is a compelling argument for incorporating asynchronous communication as an integral component in the overall course design. Still, there are some strategies that, if applied, will drive up the potential satisfaction found by faculty and enjoyed by students as asynchronous communications becomes more a part of higher education.

The first strategy is to remain leamer-centered rather than instructor-centered when planning to implement asynchronous communications. Barr and Tagg have suggested that the new learning paradigm that places emphasis on teaming and student-success outcomes rather than instruction and faculty inputs should be well aligned with technology that removes time and place as inhibitors to learning [16]. It is essential, however, for faculty to conduct an "inventory of access" on the part of their students, to make necessary arrangements for accommodation for those who might need such, and to build the syllabus assignments around this inventory instead of expecting students find their own means.

Furthermore, faculty must be willing to approach the design of such a course differently from a traditional course design. Care must be taken to allow learning and instructional imperatives to drive the design process. As noted by Berge, faculty must remember that "when designing instruction, the use of technology is secondary to well developed teaming objectives and instructional plans" [17].

In order to overcome the problem of course design as well as confront the problem of anonymity and bad behavior, faculty must be willing to orient students at the start of the class. Using the first week as a warm-up to the utilization of the technology is more effective than trying too hard to impress students with its potential. The educational benefits must be appreciated by students if the educational intentions of the faculty are to be realized. One of the best ways to orient students is to have the instructor act as a full partner in participating in the asynchronous discussions, postings, and responses. The role modeling that goes on early in the class sets the tone for future student behavior.

In order to overcome the limitations of text-only communications, faculty should use the material generated through the media in the regular classroom to help clarify when necessary and illuminate the personality behind the message when appropriate. The point is to not allow the media to determine meaning, but rather to advance textual meaning by placing it within the context of the classroom. In short, asynchronous communication should not be substituted for classroom discussion, but rather provoke it.

This leads to another strategy, which is to fully integrate the activities conducted through asynchronous communication with regular classroom activity. If the question was posed on the course listserve, the instructor must be willing to ask it again in class if there is confusion. Most importantly, faculty should use the excellent postings in class to compliment the participants as much as they would a cogent comment during class discussion. Using a "hot" compliment to reinforce the meeting of high expectations on a "cold" medium is gaining the best of both opportunities to communicate. The more reference to postings during lecture or discussion in the regular classroom, much like when referring to class readings, the more credibility the asynchronous communication activity will have with students.

The final strategy tries to address both the concerns over the potentially ancillary quality of asynchronous communication within the course plan and the workload burden on professors. Accountability must be built into participation in asynchronous communication if it is to have credibility with students. However, this accountability should not assume that the pie of workload is to get bigger for either the student or the faculty. If it does, neither party will be motivated to maximize the potential contributions to the class that can be made by asynchronous communication. With each assignment, faculty should take a holistic view of what is being added and so what can be dropped; not view this as an additional toy to be used when one is bored with traditional classroom activity. It is both too powerful and problematic to be an "add-on."

CONCLUSION

Asynchronous communication can be adapting within the higher education classroom in order to meet the seven principles of effective teaching. In so doing, teachers are not only placing themselves in a position to share more knowledge with their students, but to gain the reflective practice that is vital to critical thinking. Students will be placed more at the center of the educational equation of teaching and learning. The investment being made by institutions of higher learning is admittedly more projected by administrators as to the potential efficiencies that can be reaped by removing time and space that could result in more students to be served and less brick and mortar to be purchased. It has been the premise of this article, however, that faculty have an ethical, professional concern to ensure that educational quality becomes the salient issue in adapting asynchronous communication technology in their classroom.

We do not pretend that such adaptation will not require additional work on the part of faculty. Anderson stated the design issues for this type of class are new to most faculty and will require more work and time spent on planning [4]. Additionally, there will be more time required for preparing written communication and feedback for students. Participation as a part of asynchronous connnunication will extend the time commitment on the part of faculty, but will also extend their impact on student learning. Some time will need to be devoted to orientation of students to make sure that they are comfortable with the technology, and faculty will need to make themselves available to help students work through difficulties. Assignments using the media should be made early in the class to set the tone and make students realize the full integration of this effort into the course design. Anderson also warned that faculty had best be prepared for the technology to fail at some point of the process [4]. So what is the cost-benefit analysis of asynchronous communication? In an age where tradition is being challenged as intransigence and where technological advancement is gaining momentum, these authors see the benefits as far outstripping the costs. Still, like any instructional strategy, the outcomes of learning will be correlated to the input of effort on the part of both students their teachers.

REFERENCES

Direct reprint requests to:

Dr. Robert DeBard
Associate Professor
Higher Education and Student Affairs
Bowling Green State University
Bowling Green, OH 43403