A Case Study of Communication Channels in a Graduate Program
Sheng-Cheng Huang
School of Information, The University of Texas at Austin
Email: huangsc@mail.utexas.edu
Chao-Hsiu Chen
Dept. of Curriculum and Instruction, The University of Texas at Austin
Email: joycehysh211@yahoo.com.tw
Hsin-Liang Chen
School of Information, The University of Texas at Austin
Email: chen@ischool.utexas.edu
technologies (ICT) in education has changed teaching and
learning substantially. Researchers and educators have
investigated how to integrate technologies with instruction
to help students learn more effectively. For example,
technologies can provide means by which learners solve
problems and can serve as cognitive tools to scaffold
learners’ deeper understanding (Blumefeld et al., 1991;
Fosnot, 1996; Jonassen, 1999; Land & Hannafin, 2000).
Also, the emergence of the Internet allows students to
search and access relevant information to help them study
subject matter and reflect critically on their learning
(Yumuk, 2002). Furthermore, technologies provide
opportunities for dialogues and discussions within a
learning community (Fosnot, 1996). In addition, ICT can
facilitate the sharing of learning resources, space and can
promote collaborative and autonomous learning. Teachers’
roles have changed as well. They have to meet different
students’ varying needs in these new learning environments
(Wheeler, 2001).
The investigators attempt to obtain a thorough
understanding of the communication channels
used in a graduate program, which is an
independent academic unit. After collecting data
with qualitative and quantitative research methods,
the investigators analyze and present the findings
regarding four major aspects: (1) the current
communication channels used in the program; (2)
how the students, faculty and staff perceived the
communication methods utilized; (3) the
relationship between students’ viewpoints and the
program’s perspectives, and (4) suggestions for
further improvement in the distribution of
information.
Introduction
The researchers conducted a study on the
communication channels between students and an
independent academic graduate program in the United
States. The purposes of this study were to (1) identify
available communication channels between students and
the program; (2) investigate the students’ attitudes toward
current communication channels; (3) examine the
relationship between students’ and the program’s
expectations of effective communication channels; (4)
discover any gaps in expectations between students and the
program; (5) determine the potential student need for
alternative communication channels; and (6) provide
suggestions for potential improvement or new
communicative means. Using questionnaires and
interviews, the researchers collected data from students and
faculty in the program. The findings may inform members
of the graduate program in designing and implementing
communication channels utilized in the program. Also,
suggestions for the improvement of current communication
channels and characteristics of effective communication
channels are provided.
ICT can also influence the effectiveness of
distributing information in an institution. Welsh & Metcalf
(2003) reviewed the literature and derived four variables
affecting institutional effectiveness: perceived motivation,
perceived depth of implementation, perceived definition of
quality, and level of involvement. To improve institutional
effectiveness, faculty members need to get involved and
become familiar with internal interests (e.g., students’
needs). To make substantial changes, faculty must know
how to implement activities, and how to achieve desired
outcomes. In addition, faculty also needs to involve
themselves in the development of institutional activities. If
any activity is to be successful, staff members have to
receive meaningful information for their work. Good
communication can enhance their commitment to an
organization and is a core element of good management at
all levels (Wood, 1999). Additionally, Friedland (2001)
argued that, “democratic groups are more likely to form in
communities that are integrated through communication”
(p.359). It is critical for members of a democratic
community to discuss and formulate issues and concerns
that are important to them. ICT provides an institution with
Background and Literature Review
Broad use of information and communication
1
new methods for communicating and processing
information. Moreover, effective communication channels
play an important role in shaping a successful and
democratic community in an academic environment.
communication and support systems should accommodate
different instructional objectives, strategies, and outcomes.
Participants in an institution will select different
communication methods depending on their needs and
support the system’s structure. Online communication
provides users with less visual and audio cues than
face-to-face communication. However, Cornelius & Boos
(2003) suggested that, given appropriate training,
participants in a computer-mediated communication
environment (CMC) can perform as well as they would in
face-to-face communication.
Researchers and authors of communication literature
focus on three categories of communication: channels,
sources, and messages. A communication channel refers to
a transmission system or medium, including the whole
process of sending messages from the source to receiver.
The communication channel selection or design plays an
important role in achieving effective communication
(Johnson, 1996). Researchers of ICT in education explored
the relationships among communication channels, learning
results, and attitude changes. For example, Yu (2002)
investigated
the
effectiveness
of
electronic
telecommunications (e.g., E-mail) in fostering interpersonal
relationships among students and between students and
instructors. Bonebrake (2002) explored the relationships
that people develop with others online through different
communication methods provided via the Internet (e.g.,
E-mail, group mailing forums, interactive games, etc.). Yu
& Yu (2002) advocated using E-mail to improve learning
outcomes. Several aspects of Internet media make online
interactions different from offline interactions. Developing
effective communication depends upon media type, task
arrangement, and the characteristics of other participants.
Studies on the usage of ICT in an educational
institution have focused on various concerns such as
different barriers like technical limitations (e.g., access and
cost), and cultural factors, can impede information seeking
or distribution (Johnson, 1996). We conducted a case study
on communication channels in a library and information
science program. We investigated the usage of current
communication channels and explored the potential needs
of students. The current communication channels were
mostly electronic-based (e.g., E-mail and web pages), but
some traditional communication methods (e.g., physical
bulletin board and print-outs) were still utilized. The
findings of this study helped us understand how various
communication channels were implemented in this
academic program and ways the students and the institution
perceived the communication channels. After identifying
some characteristics of effective communication, we
provided suggestions that reflect students’ needs for
improvement of current communication channels as well as
suggestions for designing new channels. We hope this
article will extend the application of information and
communication technologies in the program and help staff,
faculty and students improve their work, instruction and
learning.
Improving the effectiveness of online communication
can enhance learning results in an electronic learning
environment. Swan (2002) examined the methods to form
an effective learning community in an online course. The
higher the degree of interaction between participants, the
more satisfaction they reported. Also, Shin (2002) reported
research on the “telepresence” in a similar setting.
“Telepresence” refers to students’ perceptions of the
psychological presence of other teachers, peers, and
institutions. To develop good relationships and a
community, participants in a working community tended to
be verbose to strengthen their social presence during online
discussions. Monteith & Smith (2003) investigated
students’ learning and perception on a virtual campus
constructed on the Internet. Using ICT, students interacted
peers and tutors, and adopted new learning strategies.
Research Questions
In this study, we investigate the following questions:
1. What are the major communication channels in the
program?
2. How do faculty members and students use these
communication channels?
However, new communication technologies should
not be viewed as a panacea for achieving good
communication. Tolsma (1997) emphasized that
3. Which communication channels are more effective?
4. What changes can be made to improve the current
communication channels?
2
Table 1—Academic Year of Student Participants (N=80)
N
%
Less than 1 year
48
60%
1-2 years
27
33.75%
More than 2 years
5
6.25%
Methods
Participants
During the interviews, the investigators audio
recorded and took notes of the participants’ comments and
responses to the interview questions for reference in later
analyses.
The participants in this study included 80 graduate
students and the associate dean of the graduate program.
Table 1 shows the population status of student participants
based on their academic year. In Fall 2003, participants
were sampled from registered students in 5 courses. The
program’s associate dean was chosen to be the faculty
participant in the interview section. The associate dean
oversees the institution’s information technology services
and is particularly knowledgeable regarding the program’s
information needs.
Data Analysis
The responses to the questionnaire were encoded into
numerical data and analyzed quantitatively in order to
identify whether there is any significant factor affecting
students’ preference of communication channels. The
analysis focused on the percentage and ranking distribution
of participants’ reported experiences of the communication
channels, participants’ reported attitudes toward the
communication channels, and participants’ reported
perceptions of the effectiveness of the communication
channels.
Research Procedure
A self-report questionnaire was used to collect data
on participants’ experiences in using the major
communication channels in the program, as well as to learn
about their expectations regarding the services. The
questionnaire contained 10 questions and covered the
following topics: (1) participants’ academic background; (2)
participants’ knowledge of current communication channels
and services; (3) participants’ current use of
communication channels; (4) participants’ experiences with
ICT and media; and (5) participants’ expectations of current
and future services.
The participants’ verbal comments and responses to
interview questions, as well as the investigators’ notes from
the interviews were analyzed qualitatively. The qualitative
analysis focused on revealing the participants’ attitudes and
expectations regarding current communication channels.
The aim of this analysis was to gain a deeper and more
nuanced understanding. Finally, the investigators provided
suggestions and recommendations for improving the
implementation of communication channels based on
students’ interview comments. This qualitative analysis
helped the investigators identify specific reasons and
opinions that could not be elicited from the quantitative
analysis.
The questionnaires were distributed to students in the
sampled courses during the usual class time. Participants
completed the questionnaires in 15 minutes, and they were
asked if they would be willing to be interviewed later.
Results and Discussion
After all participants answered the questionnaire, the
investigators collected and examined the data. Based on the
data, the investigators conducted interviews with
participants to collect in-depth information. A total of 10
individual students and a focus group of 5 others
participated in the interviews (each interview took
approximately 15-30 minutes). A one-hour faculty
interview was also conducted in order to provide an
institutional perspective to the following: (1) the
institution’s perception of communication channels, (2) the
implementation of online communication used for
education purposes, and (3) future vision and area of
improvement regarding communication methods.
We investigated what types of communication
channels were used in the program, how these
communication channels were used, which channels were
more effective, and how to improve communication
processes. Table 2 shows the reported online
communication experiences of the participants. One item
from the questionnaire asks how often the participants
check their E-mail accounts and the school website. Data
indicated that every participant had an E-mail account and
96.25% of the participants checked their E-mails at least
once a day. According to the responses of interviewees,
most of them routinely read and replied to messages at
work or at home.
3
Table 2—Background of Online Communication Experience (N=80)
E-mail Checking Frequency
N
%
Never
0
0%
Monthly
0
Weekly
School Website Checking Frequency
N
%
Never
1
1.25%
0%
Less than once a month
2
2.5%
3
3.75%
Once a month
9
11.25%
Once a day
10
12.5%
Once a week
42
52.5%
Multiple times a day
67
83.75%
Everyday
25
31.25%
Table 3—Population of E-mail List Subscription (N=80)
N
%
Yes
67
83.75%
No
9
11.25%
Not sure
4
5%
N
%
Less-than-1-year student
38
79% (n=48)
More-than-1-year student
29
90% (n=32)
This online communication mechanism is heavily
used among faculty and staff members of the program
because of its efficiency to inform and manage
task-oriented events or meetings. The comments from the
associate dean pointed to additional reasons for relying on
this communication channel. She reported that every
faculty member had a school E-mail account and part of
their daily job was to check and reply to important
messages regarding issues of administration and school
committees.
were in the student population. Interestingly, the associate
dean assumed that the subscribing rate of E-mail list was
only 30-40% of total student population. Data also
indicated that the students who had stayed longer in the
program participated more in this communication channel
(90% subscribing rate among continued students).
This communication method is conventionally
introduced to new graduate students during the school’s
orientation activities, during which time students are
encouraged to sign up for the list in order to receive school
announcements, event schedules, and information about
course or group activities from faculty members and
students. For distributing schedule changes and official
school announcements, the institution relies on this method.
However, it is not considered a thorough way of
communication according to the associate dean because not
every student is on the E-mail list.
The data presented in Table 2 also show that a large
percentage of the student participants (83.75%) visited the
school website at least once a week. Some student
interviewees who had broad-band Internet connections at
home or take advantage of online facilities provided by the
school were familiar with electronic resources of
information. In addition, they were aware of constant
updates to the school’s website. Students who were
currently taking web-based courses or had previous
experience with distance education also habitually checked
the school or course websites for updated information.
There has been a debate among some of the faculty
members as to why the school would not automatically
subscribe all students to the E-mail list. It would be
effortless for school to do so, but the school has to consider
the issue of students’ privacy. Thus, it has been more of a
policy decision not to subscribe students to the list
automatically. However, at some point, if the school
decides to subscribe every student to the list, students who
are not on the list or withdraw from the list will risk not
receiving important messages from school. Nevertheless,
some students among the interviewees who responded to
this issue addressed other factors about not subscribing to
the list. For instance, some of them confronted technical
problems while performing the subscription procedure. A
new student stated that her reason for not subscribing to the
The university in this investigation has various
electronic information distributing systems providing
internal broadcasting services, including E-mail lists
(listservs) within each department and school. The E-mail
lists used in this academic program include faculty-staff
lists and student lists. The faculty-staff list is regarded as an
official communication channel in the program. The
primary student list is the student association’s E-mail list.
Table 3 shows the population of students (among the
participants) who subscribed to the insider mailing list.
Data indicated a large number of E-mail list users (83.75%)
4
Table 4—Experience with Current Communication Channels (N=80)
Acknowledgement
N
%
Ranking of Main Information Sources
1st
2nd
3rd
Not Ranked
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
Physical Bulletin Board
51
63.75%
1
1.25%
16
20%
27
33.75%
4
5%
School Website
77
96.25%
13
16.25%
35
43.75%
12
15%
12
15%
School E-mail List
69
86.25%
50
62.5%
8
10%
2
2.5%
11
13.75%
Print Material
11
13.75%
1
1.25%
0
0%
6
7.5%
0
0%
Other
15
18.75%
3
3.75%
5
6.25%
12
15%
2
2.5%
Other communication channels addressed by the participants include word of mouth, student mail boxes, group
meetings, and PhD. News.
list was simply that she had not attended the school
orientation. This resulted in her lack of knowledge
regarding this communication channel.
whereas an average of 5 to 10 messages are distributed
through the school E-mail list on a daily basis. Thus, the
information flow is actually higher in the school E-mail list
than on the school website. One factor causing this
difference is that the E-mail list is open to both faculty
members and students whereas only the web management
staff can update the school website. This factor shaped the
results of frequency in the use of these two communication
channels presented in Table 2.
Table 4 shows students’ reported experience with
current communication channels used in the school. The
school website was highly acknowledged (96.25%) while
the school E-mail list ranked as the first main information
source (62.5%) among students. The percentage of students
who acknowledged the school E-mail list (86.35%) was
similar to that of the subscription rate (83.75%), which
indicated that students who knew this communication
channel used it.
Table 4 also shows that traditional communication
methods like physical bulletin boards were still appealing
and acknowledged by students (63.75%). However, their
rank as an information source held a much lower position
compared with the school’s website and the E-mail list.
Other than the communication channels identified by the
investigators, the participants also acknowledged oral
communication. 10 out of 15 students in this category
addressed the importance of information exchange
occurring in personal contact and social interaction within
the school and classes. Comments from interviewees
regarding this issue also reflected the significance of
face-to-face communication for addressing situations and
problems that would be difficult to solve through online
communication. The interviewees also concurred that they
had to differentiate and chose the most appropriate
communication channel based on various needs in different
situations.
Faculty and student interviewees all agreed that the
school website had increasingly become the public
representation of the institution and of the university. In
fact, the institution has made efforts in seeking and
developing better mechanisms to keep the site current in
order to distribute information to either prospective or
current students. In keeping with this goal, faculty members
are encouraged to establish their own online resources,
such as personal home page, curriculum information, and
research interests under the school website for public
communication purpose. However, the school is also aware
of the lack of knowledge regarding the communication
effectiveness of the school website since it has not formally
assessed its functionality and usability.
One student’s comments responding to this concern
revealed that as a prospective student, he got most of his
background information regarding the program from the
school website, but after he was admitted and entered the
program, information distributed through E-mail list
became more helpful. This helps explain why the school
E-mail list was ranked at the first place for the main
information source although the school website was more
highly acknowledged by the students. Another possible
explanation is the difference of updating frequency
between these two channels.
Table 5 presents participants’ preferences of current
communication channels. The student association’s E-mail
list was students’ favorite communication channel (68.75%)
and the ideal communication channel for official school
announcements (58.75%), along with the school website as
the second place of choice. Participants in interview
sessions indicated that they had a certain level of
satisfaction with current communication channels,
especially the school website and the E-mail list. They
had little interest in seeking alternative communication
channels. Students also expected that the school would
focus on improving these two major communication
The school website is updated on a weekly basis,
5
Table 5—Preference of Communication Channels (N=80)
Popularity of Current Communication Channels
N
%
Physical Bulletin Board
0
0%
School Website
21
School E-mail List
Ideal Channel for Official Announcement
N
%
Physical Bulletin Board
0
0%
26.25%
School Website
15
18.75%
55
68.75%
School E-mail List
47
58.75%
Print Material
0
0%
Brochure
0
0%
Other
4
5%
Newsletter
3
3.75%
Oral Announcement
10
12.5%
Other
5
6.25%
Table 6—Comparison of Two Major Communication Channels (N=80)
st
School E-mail List
School Website
1 Main Info. Source
Favorite Channel
Ideal Official Channel
N
%
N
%
N
%
50
62.5% (n=80)
55
68.75% (n=80)
40
72.73% (n=55)
48
71.64% (n=67)
41
85.42% (n=48)
31
64.58% (n=48)
13
16.25% (n=80)
21
26.25% (n=80)
9
42.86% (n=21)
6
46.15% (n=13)
4
66.67% (n=6)
4
66.67% (n=6)
channels. The interviews with students indicated that, to
improve the effectiveness of informing students about
timely events, website staff should frequently update and
make the institution’s events calendar and announcements
more explicit. Also, the website can provide information
such as faculty members’ research interests and detailed
information about courses, so students need not spend too
much time consulting with their advisors.
announcement as the ideal communication channel for
school announcements. Responses from student
interviewees indicated that the context of online materials
might appear unclear or less authentic from the students’
perspective, so they had to clarify the information with the
person who sent the message electronically. The associate
dean, who has been responsible for most web-based
courses in the program, also confirmed that this
circumstance often occurred in distance education when the
instructor and students mostly communicated via text-based
electronic methods. Miscommunication arose when people
tended to skim through lots of text on the web and not read
messages carefully.
Even though most participants chose the E-mail list
as their main and favorite source of receiving information,
there were several critical issues about sending and
receiving messages via E-mail. While distributing
messages via E-mail, the titles of messages must be
obvious and comprehensible in order to prevent students
from deleting important messages. Hyperlinks can be added
in E-mails to link to relevant web pages containing detailed
descriptions of the topics or events. The institution may
consider sending timely messages to remind students of
important events (e.g., registration, speeches, meetings, etc.)
and help students subscribe to important listserv (e.g., the
mailing list of the administration) to receive these
messages.
Table 5 also presents two major groups of users by
their preference of communication channels. Table 6
indicates that users’ preferences would affect the selection
of the ideal communication channel for official
announcements. 71.74% of the E-mail list users ranked the
student association’s E-mail list as their primary source of
information. 72.73% of the users who preferred the E-mail
list selected the E-mail list as the ideal communication
channel and, although less significant, 42.86% of website
users regarded the school website as the ideal
Surprisingly, 12.5% of the participants selected oral
6
Table 7— Correlation Analysis of Table 6 (N=80)
r
Joining E-mail lists and regarding E-mail lists as major information source
0.611** (p<.01)
E-mail as the favorite method of getting information and the ideal way of getting
official announcements
0.421** (p<.01)
Website as the favorite method of getting information and the ideal way of getting
official announcements
0.368**
(p<.01)
Table 8—Reasons of Choice
Num
% (n=80)
School Website
E-mail List
N
% (n=21)
N
% (n=55)
Without time constraint
64
80%
18
85.71%
43
78.18%
Without space constraint
29
36.25%
8
38.1%
19
34.55%
Messages can be forwarded
21
26.25%
0
0%
19
34.55%
Multimedia messages
11
13.75%
3
14.29%
7
12.73%
Confidential
10
12.5%
2
9.52%
5
9.09%
Other
17
21.25%
3
14.29%
3
5.45%
the main reason of selecting a communication channel.
Interview comments also verified that this advantage
allowed users to manage their time flexibly so they did not
have to wait for incoming messages. Although one of the
major features of E-mail is that messages can be forwarded
by a third party, this is not the main concern for users in
choosing E-mail as their favorite communication channel.
Similar to the participants’ reactions to multimedia features
on the website, students’ primary interests focused on the
content and context of the information itself.
communication channel.
By performing correlation analysis on the data in
Table 6, which compared the two major communication
channels in the program, three significant patterns
regarding participants’ perceptions of these two
communication channels were discovered: (1) students who
joined E-mail lists tended to choose E-mail lists as the main
source of getting information (r=0.611**, p<0.01); (2)
students who chose E-mail as their favorite method to get
information tended to consider E-mail lists the ideal way to
get official announcements (r=0.421**, p<0.01); and (3)
students who chose the school’s website as their favorite
method to get information tended to consider the school
website the ideal way to get official announcements
(r=0.368**, p<0.01). The result shows persistent patterns in
participants’ preferences to communication channels (Table
7). In addition, data from 71.64% of the E-mail list users
who ranked it as the first main source of information
indicated that this communication channel has active
information flow. Also, 72.73% of the population of
students whose favorite communication channel was
E-mail list selected it as the ideal communication channel
for official announcements. This indicated that this
communication channel was effective and satisfying to
most of its users.
Table 9 presents student participants’ preferences
regarding two-way communication when they needed to
express personal opinions to faculty members. Most of the
participants chose E-mail as the most appropriate method
(62.5%). Nonetheless, many people still preferred
face-to-face communication when they needed in-depth
discussion. However, in this situation, E-mail still played
an important role in contacting individuals in order to make
appointments. Although telephone calls or voice mails can
achieve the same result as E-mail did, faculty members and
students placed it at a lower rank due to its inefficiency in
time management. Some students used electronic
discussion boards for class discussions while taking online
courses from the program. Most of them appreciated the
features provided by electronic discussion boards, yet
sometimes they encountered technical problems such as
system failure occurring in the electronic environment.
Despite this drawback, many students were satisfied with
the function of posting messages in online discussion. One
Table 8 lists participants’ reasons of choosing certain
communication channels as their favorite methods of
getting information from school. Data show that the
advantage of using methods without time constraint was
7
Table 9—Preference of Two-Way Communication (N=80)
Ranking
1st
2nd
3rd
Not Ranked
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
Face-to-face
26
32.5%
30
37.5%
12
15%
1
1.25%
Telephone
0
0%
7
8.75%
36
45%
1
1.25%
E-mail
50
62.5%
24
30%
0
0%
1
1.25%
Electronic discussion board
3
3.75%
3
3.75%
8
10%
0
0%
Other
0
0%
0
0%
1
1.25%
0
0%
student interviewee suggested expanding this method for
school-wide communication by creating a web-based
school forum for students to publicly express opinions.
privacy, and copyright should be considered while
implementing information and communication technologies
in an institution (Quinn, 2003). Some students still favored
face-to-face communication, especially when encountering
task-oriented problems or seeking personal consultation.
This finding concurred with Tolsma’s (1997) suggestion
that people had to choose different communication means
for supporting different purposes and needs.
Conclusions
The findings of this study indicate that electronic
communication channels (e.g., E-mail and web pages) have
become an important communication means among the
institutions, faculty, and students. The freedom from
constraints of time and space and the accessibility of
different information resources can provide faculty and
students with autonomy and flexibility (Monteith & Smith,
2003). Without much additional cost, E-mail lists can be a
highly beneficial means of distributing messages in an
institution or in a course (Yu, 2002; Yu & Yu, 2002).
According to student interviewees’ suggestions, some
improvements can make E-mail communication more
effective, such as (1) using clear and standardized titles to
prevent accidentally deleting or ignoring important
messages, (2) including hyperlinks leading to external web
pages where students can find relevant descriptions and
details of the topic, and (3) providing technical support to
help students subscribe to essential listservs and E-mail
lists.
Through computer-mediated communication, people
may feel that mutual understanding or satisfaction is
reduced (Cornelius & Boos, 2003). However, Bonebrake
(2002) argued that online relationship development did not
differ much from offline. Findings in this study also show
that communication in web-based courses still relies on
personal contact and social interactions between the
instructor and students. Cornelius & Boos (2003) also
argued that visual or audio cues in a CMC environment
were not vital for successful communication. Data from
this study supported this argument by indicating that
multimedia features on the school website were not the
major attractions to students when selecting the most
appropriate communication channel. Therefore, researchers
can conduct further studies to investigate the psychological
facets of electronic communication.
Besides official and regular information, web sites
can also provide timely information about recent and
upcoming events (e.g., speeches, registration, new research
interests, etc.). However, it is critical to maintain and
design functional web pages to make the information
accessible and explicit. Data in this study show that
students had an overall appreciation for the current school
website’s rich content. Yet, interview comments
consistently illustrated students’ high expectations for
improving its content management and including more
comprehensive descriptions of the program’s courses. To
make the electronic communication (e.g., web pages) more
effective, further studies about user interface design,
usability assessment, and online information management
can be conducted to enhance the communication process.
ICT provides faculty, staff, and students with efficient
and flexible communication channels as the technology
gradually changes or replaces the traditional ways of
distributing messages in an institution. However, students,
educators, and administrators should continually identify
ways to improve communication processes within
individual programs and among all university institutions.
This is best done by understanding users’ goals and
objectives in order to provide appropriate and suitable
communication methods to match those needs.
Acknowledgements
The authors express their appreciation to those who
provided assistance and guidance to this project: Dr. Mary
Lynn Rice-Lively and Director of Career Services, Ron
Pollock, who provided valuable background information
Moreover, other issues such as freedom of speech,
8
about the school, and Prof. Francis Miksa and Prof. Glynn
Harmon who gave permission for conducting class surveys.
Welsh, J. F., & Metcalf, J. (2003). Institutional
effectiveness activities: faculty and administrator
support at two-year institutions. Community College
Journal of Research and Practice, 27(2), 75-94.
Wheeler, S. (2001). Information and Communication
Technologies and the Changing Role of the Teacher.
Journal of Educational Media, 26(1), 7-17.
Wood, J. (1999). Establishing internal Communication
Channels that Work. Journal of Higher Education
Policy and Management, 21(2), 135-149.
Yu, F., & Yu, H. J. (2002). Incorporating e-mail into the
learning process: its impact on student academic
achievement and attitudes. Computer & Education,
38, 117-126.
Yu, F. (2002). The Efficacy of Electronic
Telecommunications in Fostering Interpersonal
Relationships. Journal of Educational Computing
Research, 26(2), 177-189.
Yumuk, A. (2002). Letting go of control to the learners:
the role of the Internet in promoting a more
autonomous view of learning in an academic
translation course. Educational Research, 22(2),
141-156.
References
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J.
S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating
project-based learning: Sustaining the doing,
supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist,
26(3&4), 369-398.
Bonebrake, K. (2002). College Students’ Internet Use,
Relationship Formation, and Personality Correlates.
Cyber Psychology & Behavior, 5(6), 551-557.
Cornelius, C., & Boos, M. (2003). Enhancing Mutual
Understanding in Synchronous Computer-Mediated
Communication by Training. Communication
Research, 30(2), 147-177.
Fosnot, C. T. (1996). Constructivism: A psychological
theory of learning. In C. Fosnot, (Ed.),
Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice
(pp. 8-33). New York: Teachers College Press.
Friedland, L.A. (2001). Communication, Community,
and Democracy: Toward a Theory of the
Communicatively
Integrated
Community.
Communication Research, 28(4), 358-391.
Johnson, J. D. (1996). Information Seeking: an
Organizational Dilemma. Westport, Connecticut:
Quorum Books.
Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Designing constructivist
learning environment. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.)
Instructional-design theories and models Volume II:
A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp.
215-240). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Land, S.M., & Hannifin, M. J. (2000). Student centered
learning environments. In D.H. Jonassen & S.M.
Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning
environments (pp 1-23). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Monteith, M., & Smith, J. (2003). Learning in a Virtual
Campus: The Pedagogical Implications of Students’
Experiences. Innovations in Education and Training
International, 38(2), 119-132.
Quinn, D. M. (2003). Legal Issues in Educational
Technologies: Implications for school leaders.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(2),
187-207.
Shin, N. (2002). Beyond Interaction: the relational
construct of ‘Transactional Presence.’ Open
Learning, 17(2), 121-137.
Swan, K. (2002). Building Learning Communities in
Online Courses: the importance of interaction.
Education, Communication & Information, 21(1),
23-49.
Tolsma, R. S. (1997). Managing Information Resources
and Services in a distance Environment. New
Directions for Teaching and Learning, 71, 111-117.
9