Case Study 3: Applied Psychology and Computing

Two versions of this case study are available to download in pdf format (the Adobe Acrobat Reader to allow viewing of pdf files is available for download here). The first version is the basic case study as presented on this page, the second version includes all the 'voices of experience' - comments taken from learners and teachers to build up the case study - that are accessible from each section below, interwoven into the case study as a whole.

>> Case Study: CMC Use in Applied Psychology and Computing - summary version

>> Case Study: CMC Use in Applied Psychology and Computing - including interwoven 'Voices of Experience'

To view the 'Voices of Experience' relating to each section click on the 'plus' icon under each header where they appear

Introduction

This is a third-year option module in a degree entitled 'Applied psychology and computing'. It was taken by about 45 students who were split into four groups. At the time of our contact the course had been running for several years. The syllabus was a mixture of technical and psychological issues and was jointly taught by two lecturers (although one was on leave during this particular presentation). For practical reasons, we were only able to talk with the tutor and a rather small number of students - and only one of these was recorded sufficiently precisely to quote their exact words.

Characteristics of the Communication Technology

WebCrossing was the text conferencing package used. It was chosen because there are no client-side complexities. Thus access was easy and most students did so from within the campus computer room service. A Java-enabled browser was incorporated to allow chat sessions as well as threaded asynchronous messaging. Separate browser windows allowed simultaneous inspection of a document (say an essay) and the communications responses associated with it.

Stated Purpose of the Conferencing

All students were familiar with email and web technology. However, as the course was explicitly about computer communications, it was considered important that the students have first hand experience with the technologies in question. These discussions were complemented by a weekly lecture. While face-to-face contact may occur, the conferencing was intended to take the place of a more traditional programme of seminar support.

Stated Principles of Use

Students were required to take part in two discussions. One lasted around 5 weeks and in it they considered the significance of email as a communications tool. This was set up to be an unstructured discussion although it was resourced by a focal research paper. In the second task, students were invited to play the role of a communications consultant. They had to work out a strategy for a hypothetical company. Focus groups were organised to allow reflection on their experiences of use. The discussions were not moderated by the tutor - unless there were complaints from students about particular postings. Space was left on the system for graduates to return and discuss their experience of employment.

Their contributions were assessed for up to 20% of the total course assessment (the remainder was an essay - albeit arising from the conferencing - and an examination). Thus marks were available for quality, quantity and interactivity of their engagement with the system.

Character of the Communication

Students reported an awareness of contributors' tone or rhetoric in relation to the messages. This was partly a matter of formality - a feeling that it was proper to try and make contributions that looked good and flowed well as text. However, with experience, this gave way to a greater degree of informality - although that could bring tensions that suggested the need for some form of external management. One student indicated that she tended to write more for students in her group that she knew; she did not quite know how to write in relation to 'strangers'.

Some students were perceived as writing self-consciously - perhaps in order to appear particularly scholarly, although this may have been motivated by a straightforward ambition to get more marks (as participation was declared to be assessed).

There was a feeling that it was difficult to manage the flow of the discussion. Although, to some degree, individual participants spontaneously took some responsibility, there was a feeling that explicit moderation would have aided the pace and progress of the discussion. Some students reported a feeling that they needed to wait until everyone in the group had responded before they were able to move the discussion on - even though this was unrealistic, given the inevitable low-participating members. Moderation was felt less needed to resolve disputes and disagreement - on the whole, there was a sense of people agreeing widely on the topics discussed.

One student reported missing the facility of incorporating emphasis and other typographical features into her conferencing text.

Self-Perceptions

Participation was often grounded in an initial uncertainty and, in particular, self-consciousness about exposing one's own opinions and arguments too visibly. Similarly, there were feelings of inhibition when encountering messages that seemed particularly 'clever'. Other people's contributions (and their motives) left some students uncertain at first about the style of presentation that it was appropriate to adopt.

Other people's contributions often would read as somewhat contrived, thereby leaving the reader uncertain as to how they should write in this medium.

Learning and Teaching Relationships

The exercise was perceived as a 'feature' of the course rather than in any way a significant part of how it was taught. This somewhat marginal nature of the conferencing perhaps meant that the experience did not impinge greatly on relationships elsewhere in the class. Moreover, the tutors' low profile position on this exchange meant that there was no obvious disturbance to student-teacher relations.

Getting Things Done

The main 'task' associated with the discussion was formulating a position on the medium itself and evolving a consultancy case study. As commented above, this form of asynchronous discussion was felt by some to slow down the pace of progress in developing those goals. There was also a feeling that the novelty of this medium made it hard to have a strong view about it - one that could be articulated and defended - this meant that some students felt the need to present somewhat contrived positions.

Continuity with Curricula

The exercise has a very straightforward goal of illustrating a technology central to the content concerns of the curriculum. In that sense it appears to have worked well as a species of hands on experience

Evaluation

The constituency of this course might seem quite typical of that for a possible conferencing initiative in residential higher education: an advanced undergraduate group taking an optional degree module with teaching over two terms. Yet the curricular interest in conferencing itself makes the extent and character of the participation harder to judge. Students had a prior interest in the medium by virtue of their decision to sign up for a course on computer mediated communications. They had a clear interest in experiencing the interaction first hand and approached the opportunity in that interested spirit.

The decision to relate assessment to participation is also a significant feature of this course structure and one that the students seemed very conscious of. The association can be experienced as a basis for other students becoming formal and contrived in their style of presentation.

Topics were chosen to build discussion around. The first concerned the nature of the medium itself. Students seemed of a fairly common mind about its advantages and disadvantages and so the discussion was characterised by a greater degree of consensus than might otherwise occur. The second topic was more exploratory; it required a hypothetical communications consultancy problem. Here there was some problem with the medium in terms of the ease with which it allowed a discussion to develop and flow. Simple decisions about the parameters of the task seemed to take a long time to negotiate and thus there was a sense of making rather slow progress.

The intervention is peculiarly tied to the academic content of the course but, in those terms, it seemed well appreciated by the students as an illustration.

Text of this section by Charles Crook, editor Erica McAteer

Computer-Mediated Conferencing: Grounded Guidelines