Maximizing Computer Mediated Communication as a collaborative learning environment for ESL teachers

Amy B. M. Tsui

Department of Curriculum Studies

A social constructivist view of learning perceives learning as situated in communities of practice, and knowledge as socially constructed through action and communication. Hence, learning is best facilitated through expert practice and promoting conversations amongst learners. Within the social constructivist paradigm, computer-mediated communication (hereafter referred to as CMC) is a powerful means of bringing about the social construction of knowledge by making it possible for a large group of practitioners with a shared goal to engage in collaborative talk irrespective of geographical location and time (Chee, 1996). The asynchronous nature of CMC also allows time for participants to think about the issues discussed, to test their ideas with other people and to formulate their own thinking before expressing them in written form. This is conducive to deep learning and the development of critical thinking (Baym, 1998; Selinger, 1998; Wilson & Whitelock, 1998).

The enormous potential of CMC to bring about collaborative learning has generated numerous attempts to develop collaborative learning communities using CMC tools. There is the assumption that in CMC, because social cues such as gender, race, rank, physical appearance and other public identity features are filtered out (Walther & Burgoon 1992), participants gain greater anonymity and consequently, their relationships are more equal and the participation is more evenly distributed (Sproull & Kiesler, 1991).

However, many researchers have pointed out that despite the potential of CMC for collaboration, participation by users is often scanty and patchy (see for example Crook, 1994; Light, Colbourn & Light, 1997; McAteer et al. 1997, Pearson 1999). Though explanations like lack of time are often put forward by users for not participating (see for example Mason & Bacsich, 1998; Tsui, 1995, Tsui & Ki, 1996), it has been pointed out that skewed participation rate seemed to be a norm and that this suggests that something more fundamental is at work (see Tolmie & Boyle, 2000).

Indeed, as Riel (1989) points out, "(T)he promise of a new social organisation, an electronic community, is not realised when computers are connected with modems. The evolution of local, national and international electronic communities requires attention to group organisation, group dynamics and educational leadership." (p. 261). Feenberg & Bellman (1990) describe the computer network as a "sociotechnical system combining social and technical elecments in a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts" (p. 68).

In the past ten years or so, a number of studies have been conducted on successful and unsuccessful uses of CMC as a tool for collaborative learning, and the emergence of communities on the Internet. They found that successful interaction and patterns of interaction are affected by the complex interplay of a host of factors. Some of these factors pertain to technical aspects such as experience in using computers, attitude towards computers, accessibility of both hardware and software, and technical support (see for example, Tolmie & Boyle, 2000; Tsui, 1996a; Tsui & Ki, 1996; van Braak, 2001). Others pertain to the characteristics of the group and the relationship among its members, the temporal structure of the group, that is, whether communication is synchronous or asynchronous and whether members log on at work or at home and the purposes for which the CMC is used (see for example, Contractor & Seibold, 1993; Hollingshead & McGrath, 1995). Baym (1998) maintains that "[All] interaction, including CMC, is simultaneously situated in multiple external contexts. Rather than disappearing when one logs on, the pre-existing speech communities in which interactants operate provide social understandings and practices through and against which interaction in the new computer-mediated context develops. CMC use is always nested in the national and international cultures of which its participants are members" (p. 40). She further points out that when the participants come from a homogeneous group, the influences of those subcultures on communication will remain strong because "…participants’ communicative styles are oriented around common social practices before they even enter into CMC, practices that are unlikely to be supplanted by computer mediation." (1998, p. 40; see also Contractor & Seibold, 1993).

The aim of this paper is to examine the complex interplay of the socio-cultural and psychological factors which mediate interactions on a teachers’ network. It points out that awareness of such factors and corresponding measures to address possible difficulties generated are very important if we wish to maximize CMC as a collaborative learning environment for teachers. Data from a computer network set up for English language teachers in secondary schools in Hong Kong, Telenex, will be used. The data were collected over several years and include questionnaire surveys administered to all users, interviews with users, and messages from the conference corners.

In order to contextualize the discussion, I shall present below some background information about Telenex.

To a large extent, this user group could be considered homogeneous. They are all English language teachers teaching in Hong Kong schools and over 98% are Chinese. In other words, the users not only have the same cultural background, but possibly also share a sub-culture of teachers, and perhaps even a sub-culture of English teachers who are non-native speakers of English. This suggests the possibility that there is an interesting interplay between these two sub-cultures and that this could have an effect on teachers’ behaviour on the network.

The network consists of two major components, a database component and a messaging component. The former consists of two databases, the Teaching Resources Database which is a bank of teaching materials that teachers can download and use for teaching, and a Grammar Database which provides reference materials on English language. The latter consists of a number of conference corners where teachers can seek advice and share ideas and materials with fellow teachers and TELEC staff who are all English language specialists or English language teacher educators. The corners in which teachers participate most actively are the Teaching Issues Corner where teachers discuss ideas and problems relating to teaching in general and English language teaching in particular; the Grammar Corner where they discuss questions relating to English grammar and grammar teaching; the Social Corner where they meet each other, share their joys, sorrows and frustrations; and the Fun Corner where they share jokes and funny incidents in their teaching. (For a full list of corners, see Table 1 below. For a detailed description of the design of Telenex, see Tsui 1996a.)

As an indication of the nature of the interaction on the network, Table 1 summarizes the participation rate in different conference corners from 1997 onwards when the network migrated to the Internet. Table 2 shows the topics covered in the Teaching Issues Corner.

In this section, I shall outline the socio-cultural factors which have been identified as mediating participation in Telenex.

The absence of social and visual cues in CMC and its effect on participant relationship is an issue which has been debated a great deal. Some research studies show that the elimination of the contextual clues in CMC removes the pressure to comply with overt group norms and encourages more expression of feeling and more attention to interpersonal relationships (see for example Smilowitz, Compton & Flint, 1988; Matheson & Zanna, 1989), and that CMC provides greater opportunities for shy participants to express themselves (McConnell, 1990). Other research studies, however, show that in CMC participants tend to be less inhibited and less sensitive to other participants’ feelings, and more prone to be direct and insulting, as evidenced by flaming (reacting by e-mail in a hostile and/or insulting manner to a newsgroup posting or website) on the network. However, more and more researchers have come to believe that CMC should be complemented or supplemented by FFC (see for example, Hiltz, 1986; Wilson & Whitelock, 1998). Mason & Kaye, (1990) make the following observation.

CMC should probably not be seen as a substitute for such face-to-face events, but rather as a means of continuing to serve a number of the above functions (i.e. tutorial discussion, seminars, counseling, socializing, etc.) conveniently and effectively in between occasional meetings. A group of learners who have already met each other in person, in the presence of a tutor/animateur, are more likely to be able to communicate effectively on-line because the personal meeting has provided a number of contextualizing cues that would otherwise be absent from discussions held exclusively within the framework of a computer conference (p.20).

They argue that it is better to supplement CMC with a range of options for interactivity so that people’s varying communication needs, moods, and situations can be catered for.

Whether opportunities for FFC are available is particularly important from the point of view of developing a sense of community in which participants feel sufficiently comfortable to engage in collaborative learning and critical enquiry. Some studies have found that many CMC participants invest strong emotional feelings in the on-line groups and that they often develop a strong sense of belonging to these groups as well as a web of personal relationships when they participated in the discussions for a long enough period of time (see for example, Rheingold, 1993; Weise, 1996). Other studies, however, have found that this does not apply to all participants (see for example Ito, 1997). In Selinger’s study (1998) of the use of CMC by student-teachers enrolled on distance learning programs, it was found that students felt a stronger sense of community even if they had only met a sub-set of the community, and that once they had enough confidence and started to post messages when they felt that they had something to offer, they were much less apprehensive about who was reading the messages (p. 26).

In a survey conducted on Telenex teachers (reported in Tsui & Ki, 2001) in which they were asked to rate whether they felt that they belonged to a professional community on the network, both teachers who participated in the discussions (n=66) and those who did not (n=137) rated it positively (over 2.2 on a Likert scale of 4). In the messages sent by Telenex teachers the term Telenex family was used frequently. This suggests that generally teachers acknowledge the existence of a community out there. However, while some see themselves as part of the family, some feel that they are outside the family. Still others feel that there are groups within this family and that they have to either join existing groups or start their own groups. In other words, not all participants have the same sense of belonging to the community. In the interviews with the teachers, it was found that after meeting staff from TELEC and participants from other schools in training workshops and seminars, they felt that the social distance was shortened and that names were no longer names but people. It is interesting that though they felt comfortable addressing their fellow teachers in other schools by their first names before meeting them, they addressed TELEC staff by title and last name because they were seen as university teachers, hence having a higher status than school teachers. However, after meeting the TELEC staff in person, they felt that they could address them by their first names. This is highly indicative of the reduction in social distance, especially in a culture, such as Chinese, in which terms of address are important indicators of social status, and university teachers are generally treated with respect. Besides a change in personal relationships, there was a change in their sense of obligation to the community as well. Teachers felt that they had the obligation to respond to the messages that TELEC staff sent to the conference corners. They also felt that they had the responsibility to respond to the messages even when they were not addressed to them.

In the original design of the interface for conferences, the messages sent by teachers automatically bore their names and their schools’ names as in most email software. However, it soon became apparent that most teachers found this very face-threatening. This apprehension about not being properly represented by the messages that they wrote is not peculiar to participants of Telenex. Kimmel, Kerr & O'Shea (1988) found that only a minority of the participants in their Electronic Exchange System (EIES) authored their comments. Similarly, Wells (1992) found, at the beginning of distance education programs, students were reluctant to contribute to electronic discussions because they were afraid their messages might look unintelligent or might make themselves vulnerable to criticism. Pearson (1999) found that, in his interviews with trainee teachers, almost all of them mentioned the fear that their written messages might be subject to criticism and that their views might not be fully formed. As Harasim (1990) observes, in textual communication, the text becomes one’s signature, and making typos or other errors is perceived as "a detraction from one's image" (p. 50).

Authoring written messages is considered more face-threatening by Telenex participants because over 98% of the participants are English language teachers who are non-native speakers of English. They are not entirely confident about their English and are apprehensive that their messages might contain grammatical errors and that they would be seen as asking stupid questions. Some teachers reported that they would be seen as incompetent teachers if they made grammatical mistakes in the messages or if they asked questions about grammar or English language teaching. Others reported that their colleagues actually drafted the messages on paper and checked for grammatical errors before sending them out. Still others reported that they would not share their ideas for teaching on the network unless they were sure that the ideas were really good. For example, one teacher said in an interview:

They have used it (Telenex) in getting information and asking questions but they seldom contribute ideas.... they still have to overcome the psychological problem of having the risk of losing face. They will not type in their own ideas unless s/he is sure that it is really good. (Tsui, 1995: 160).

Further evidence of teachers’ concern for self-presentation is the length of the messages. Those sent by very experienced teachers and English Panel Chairs (equivalent to Heads of English Departments in countries like England) are usually much longer than less experienced teachers’ whose messages often consist of only one or two sentences.

In the study reported by Tsui & Ki (2001), it was found that there was no significant difference between the ratings of teachers who participated in the discussions and those who did not on the following dimensions: (1) whether they are worried that there might be grammatical mistakes in the messages that they send; (2) whether they try to make sure that there are no grammatical mistakes in the messages that they write before sending them; (3) whether they are worried that their questions may not make sense; and (4) whether they are worried that by asking questions they may look incompetent. The participating teachers, however, were significantly more willing to send messages bearing their real names.

In a subsequent small-scale study on anonymous messages, TELEC staff identified 12 teachers who had sent anonymous messages (by using An English Teacher as the name of the sender) within a period of three months and interviewed them. On tracing the identity of these teachers, we found that they also sent messages using their real names. In the interviews, we asked them when and why they sent anonymous messages; and, whether they would have sent those messages anyway if the option had not been available. All of them said that when the questions were very simple grammar questions, they sent them anonymously. Some examples are: "Should we say ‘he is soft spoken’ or ‘he is softly spoken’?" and "Can anybody suggest the difference between ‘stay at home’ and ‘stay in home’?" If the questions were more sophisticated, they used their real names. One teacher reported in the interviews as follows:

We’ve heard teachers saying that they are afraid that the questions they asked are too simple. Especially in the Language Corner, they will feel embarrassed to use their names or school names to ask simple questions.

The findings suggest that self-presentation (Goffman, 1971) is a very important factor to all participants, no matter whether they actually send messages or not. Teachers are keen to present themselves as competent professionals, or at least no less competent than their peers. For example, one of the teachers who took a little while to participate in the conferences said:

There is another factor that would affect how we use the network. It is the self-image and self-expectation of the teacher. Sometimes it is hard to admit and to accept one’s incompetence as an English teacher. I believe there are complex psychological factors involved. Speaking from my own experience, I began my name as "An English Teacher" [anonymous] in the network. As I see more people using the network, I feel much more comfortable to use my real name (Tsui & Ki, 2001: 13).

Another teacher confessed that his confidence was boosted when he found that the quality of the messages was mixed. If the messages were all of very high quality, he would be more hesitant for fear that his own messages would look comparatively weak in content and language.

For second or foreign language teachers, this concern is particularly serious because of the anxiety associated with the partial representation of self as a competent individual in a second or foreign language. As Horwitz et al. (1986) point out, "any performance in the L2 is likely to challenge an individual’s self-concept as a competent communicator and lead to reticence, self-consciousness, fear, or even panic" (p.128; see also Tsui, 1996b). What is interesting is that Telenex teachers felt that to appear to be incompetent not only damages the face of the individual teacher, but also the face of their school if their school names were shown on the messages. For them, the latter was a much more serious offence than the former. The teachers’ concern to preserve not only their own face, but also the face of the their school, and the fact that the latter was considered more important than the former can be attributed to a collectivist culture, shared by Chinese, where the individual’s interest is measured against the interest of the group (see for example, Yang & Bond, 1990).

Just as foreign language learning anxiety can be overcome when learners gain confidence with more practice, the anxiety associated with self-presentation can also be overcome. Once Telenex teachers took the first step to send messages, and found that their messages did not compare too badly to other messages, they became less apprehensive about making themselves vulnerable through written text (see also Tsui & Ki, 2001).

Self-presentation has to do with the way an individual would like to be perceived by others. This has been referred to as a socially reflected aspect of self-concept which includes the perception of the reference group with which they identify. For Telenex teachers, the reference group is their fellow English teachers in other schools. Another aspect of self-concept is an individual aspect which is their perception of themselves (see Friedman & Farber, 1992, p. 29). From interviews with Telenex teachers, it was found that the motivation for sending messages which were free from grammatical errors and good in content was not just the teachers’ concern for how they would be perceived by their reference group, but also by the standards that they set for themselves. For example, one teacher said:

I cannot allow myself to send messages with grammatical mistakes and deficient in content. … As an English teacher, … you don’t feel good if you produce messages with no substance and worse still with grammatical mistakes. It would be okay if I was a mathematics teacher, but there is more pressure on me as an English teacher to compose flawless English messages (Tsui & Ki, 2001: 13).

It is this factor which held him back from sending messages.

Another aspect of self-concept has to do with the teachers perceptions of their own professional competence and their roles in the network community. In the questionnaire survey reported in Tsui & Ki (2001), most Telenex teachers rated themselves positively as having enough experience in and knowledge about English language teaching to share with other teachers (a mean score of over 2.5 on a Likert scale of 4). However, there were significant differences between the two groups of teachers, that is, those who participated and those who did not, in the ratings of questions relating to whether they would like to help less experienced teachers on the network and whether they saw themselves having a role to play in sustaining the discussion on the network.

The term community is an immensely complex concept and has "descriptive, normative and ideological connotations" (Fernback, 1997: 39). Critics of on-line communities have expressed their concerns for the homogeneity and lack of moral commitment in these communities. They have pointed out that real communities do not consist of like-minded individuals (Healy, 1997) and that they include complex social and environmental necessities and must be lived (see Doheny-Farina, 1996). Hence, they find on-line communities as alternatives to off-line communities worrying because the former do not require their participants to deal with diversity (Healy 1997), and they often become a sanctuary for people who do not wish to take on social and moral responsibilities nor to confront problems of the real world. Baym (1998), however, points out that the segregation between on-line and off-line communities made by many is more apparent than real. She argues that the former do not substitute for the latter. Quite the contrary, as pointed out at the beginning of this paper, all on-line communities are situated in social and cultural contexts, and the social practices, norms, and values inherent in these contexts will have a bearing on the content, style and patterns of their interactions.

In the sections on self-presentation and preservation of face, as well as self-concept, we have already seen how the social and cultural values shared by the off-line community of Chinese teachers of English impacted on their behaviour in Telenex. Further evidence of the interaction between on-line and off-line communities can be seen from the implicit norms that were observed by Telenex teachers which impacted on their participation, in terms of the content of the messages, whether they sent authored or anonymous messages and whether they participated in the discussion at all.

In the TELEC study on anonymity mentioned earlier in this paper, teachers reported that when they were making value judgements which they felt might be frowned upon by their peers, they would hide their identities. For example, one teacher, when giving moral support to another teacher who was upset by remarks made by her peers, told her to ignore them because "they would have been working in other fields if they had been (sic were) smart enough." It is ironical that on the one hand, the sender of the message was being collegial and supportive to her fellow teacher, yet on the other hand, she was denigrating the teaching profession. Her remarks violate the norm that members of the teaching profession should stand up for their own professional status and be proud of their profession. Although no reference was made specifically to this message by any of the teachers interviewed, it is highly likely that this kind of message would fall under the category of making value judgements which are not acceptable to the teaching profession. Another example is that when teachers criticize their colleagues’ teaching, or attitudes, they hide their identities because public criticism of one’s own colleagues is considered unprofessional and unethical. The teachers interviewed also revealed that in some cases, when they felt that the topic was too sensitive or might embarrass their colleagues or their schools, they refrained from sending messages.

The above findings show that an awareness of the pre-existing shared social norms and values of the communities from which participants come is important. This is especially true when the participants come from a homogeneous group because there is likely to be a strong shared culture, as Baym (op. cit.) rightly pointed out.

After Yvette’s response, Mandy responded, followed by another teacher, who was less experienced than Mandy and Yvette, who asked for further clarification of the concept of process writing and how far it is different from guided writing and free writing. She also requested a copy of the paper. The excerpts can hardly represent the full complexities of the concepts explored. However, even from the short excerpts, we can see that though the discussion was sparked off by a request for practical ideas for teaching writing, it deepened into explorations of a range of issues including the cognitive abilities of young learners to cope with process writing, text ownership, textual features and its relation to writing, and the integration of reading and writing. A rich web of ideas relating to teaching writing was thus collaboratively woven.

In the above discussion, we have seen that there are a number of factors which mediated the interactions on the network. We have seen that the social and cultural values shared by participants are carried into the on-line community and that they affect their behaviour on the network. Hence, whether the potential of CMC as a tool for creating a collaborative learning environment is fully realized depends on whether the architects of a network community are fully aware of these factors and whether there are corresponding measures to address them. These architects include the designer of the communication software as well as those who are responsible for sustaining the discussions on the network, including the participants themselves.

I would like to conclude this paper with a citation from Feenberg and Bellman (1990) on the importance of social factors in software design.

Baym, N. K. (1998). The emergence of on-line community. In S.G. Jones (Ed.) Cybersociety 2.0 - Revisiting computer-mediated communication and community. Thousand Oaks, California.: Sage Publications. pp35-68.

Chee, Y. S. (1996). Mind bridges: a distributed, multimedia learning environment for collaborative knowledge building. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications 2(2/3), 137-154.

Contractor, N. S. & Seibold, D. R. (1993). Theoretical frameworks for the study of structuring processes in group decision support systems: Adaptive structuration theory and self-organizing systems theory. Human Communication Research 19(4), 528-563.

Crook, C. (1994). Computers and the Collaborative Experience of Learning. London: Routledge.

Doheny-Farina, S. (1996). The Wired Neighbourhood. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Fernback, J. (1997). The individual within the collective: Virtual ideology and the realization of collective principles. In S. G. Jones (Ed.) Virtual Culture. London: Sage. pp36-54.

Friedman, I. & Farber, B. (1992). Professional self-concept as a predictor of teacher burnout. Journal of Educational Research 86(1), 28-35.

Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in Public. New York: Harper and Row.

Harasim, L. (1990). On-line education: An environment for collaboration and intellectual amplification. In L. Harasim (Ed.) On-line Education : Perspectives on a new environment. New York: Praeger. pp39-66.

Healy, D. (1997). Cyberspace and place: The Internet as middle landscape on the electronic frontier. In D. Porter (Ed.) Internet Culture. New York: Routledge. pp55-71.

Hiltz, S. R. (1986). The "virtual classroom": Using computer-mediated communication for university teaching. Journal of Communication 36(2), 95-104.

Hollingshead, A. B. & McGrath, J. E. (1995). The whole is less than the sum of its parts: A critical review of research on computer-assisted groups. In R. Guzzo and E. Salas (Eds.) Team Effectiveness and Decision Making in Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. pp46-68.

Horwitz, E., Horwitz, M. & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. Modern Language Journal 70(1), 125-132.

Ito, M. (1997). Virtually embodied: The reality of fantasy in a multi-user dungeon. In D. Porter (Ed.) Internet Culture. New York: Routledge. pp87-110.

Kimmel, H., Kerr, E. G. & O'Shea, M. (1988). Computer conferencing as a resource for in-service teacher education. Science Education 72(4), 467-473.

Light, P., Colbourn, C. & Light, V. (1997). Computer-mediated tutorial support for conventional university courses. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 13, 228-235.

Mason, R. & Bacsich, P. (1998). Embedding computer conferencing into university teaching. Computers & Education 30, 249-258.

Mason, R. & Kaye, T. (1990). Towards a new paradigm for distance education. In L. Harasim (Ed.) On-line Education : Perspectives on a new environment. New York: Praeger. pp15-38.

Matheson, K. & Zanna, M. P. (1989). The impact of computer-mediated communication on self-awareness. Computers in Human Behaviour 4(3), 221-233.

McAteer, E., Tolmie, A., Duffy, C. & Corbett, J. (1997). Computer mediated communication as a learning resource. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 13, 219-227.

McConnell, D. (1990). Case study: The educational use of computer conferencing. Educational and Training Technology International 27(2), 190-208.

Pearson, J. (1999). Electronic networking in initial teacher education: Is a virtual faculty of education possible? Computers and Education 32, 221-238.

Rheingold, H. (1993). Virtual Communities. Reading, M.A.: Addison-Wesley.

Riel, M. (1989). Four models of educational telecommunications: Connections to the future. Education and Computing 5, 261-274.

Riel, M., & Levin, J. (1990). Building electronic communities: Success and failure in computer networking. Instructional Science 19, 145-169.

Schon, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner. London: Basic Books.

Selinger, M. (1998). Forming a critical community through telematics. Computers Education 30(1/2), 23-30.

Smilowitz, M., Compton, D. C. & Flint, L. (1988). The effects of computer-mediated communication on an individual's judgement: a study based on the methods of Asch's social influence experiment. Computers in Human Behaviour 4(4), 311-321.

Smyth, J. (1991). Teachers as Collaborative Learners. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Sproull, L. & Kiesler. S. (1991). Connections: New ways of working in the networked organization. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press.

Tolmie, A. & Boyle, J. (2000). Factors influencing the success of computer mediated communication (CMC) environments in university teaching: a review and case study. Computers and Education 34(2), 119-140.

Tsui, A. B. M. (1995). Social factors in the implementation of a computer network for English language teachers. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education 4(2), 149-164.

Tsui , A. B. M. (1996a). The participant structures of Telenex. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications 2(2/3), 171-197.

Tsui, A. B. M. & Ki, W. W. (1996). An analysis of conference interaction on Telenex - a computer network for ESL teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development 44(4), 23-44.

Tsui, A. B. M. & Ki, W. W. (2001). Socio-Psychological Dimensions of Teacher Participation in Computer Conferencing. Manuscript.

Walther, J. B. & Burgoon, J. K. (1992). Relational communication in computer-mediated interaction. Human Communication Research 19(1), 52-90.

van Braak, J. (2001). Factors influencing the use of computer mediated communication by teachers in secondary schools. Computers and Education 36, 41-57.

Weise, E. R. (1996). A thousand aunts with modems. In L. Cherny & E. Weise (Eds.) Wired Women. Seattle: Seal. ppvii-xv.

Wells, R. (1992). Computer-Mediated Communication for Distance Education: An International Review of Design, Teaching, and Institutional Issues. American Centre for the Study of Distance Education, College of Education. The Pennsylvania State University Research Monograph No. 6.

Wilson, T. & Whitelock, D. (1998). What are the perceived benefits of participating in a computer-mediated communication (CMC) environment for distance learning computer science students? Computers and Education 30(3/4), 259-269.

Yang, K. S. & Bond, M. H. (1990). Exploring implicit personality theories with indigenous or imported constructs: The Chinese case. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 58, 1087-1095.