This is the last topic as part of the approach to discourse analysis. One question that I need to raise before presenting my viewpoint about the advantages and disadvantages of computer mediated discourse. Are there strategies that can be employed to avoid or compensate for the problems?
Email, video, audio, and text chat are all examples of computer mediated communication. Basically, it’s something going from one network to another. Some advantages are: it is being free, easiness, ability to talk to many people at once, speed. Disadvantages: when a server or internet connection is lost, the chats end. This is often with some services. At the same time, you can get spam unwanted messages, but if you were talking on the phone you could just not pick up easily because of the connection problem. Another is telephone as a good example of computer mediated communication and most commonly used in various call center companies in the world especially the countries that offer such service, like the Philippines.
Most of the existing research has focused on the use of text-based systems (email, chat) in higher education. You will have to consider carefully whether the information generalizes to the type of use you may be considering. To further elaborate the topic, let me discuss with you the advantages and disadvantages of CMC with its impact on the digital age.
Some advantages of CMC are obvious. For instance, all CMC is place independent--that is, the parties do not have to be in the same location to communicate. Certain forms of CMC, such as e-mail, are also time independent--the parties do not have to participate in the exchange of information at the same point in time. For these reasons, CMC may offer a practical solution to some educational problems relating to time and location. There are situations in which face-to-face communication is nearly impossible. We cannot hide the fact we are influenced by the technology which mediates our daily communication and with that, there are universities which offer online class, usually graduate studies either inside or outside the country. Some teachers in our society today pursuing their graduate and post-graduate studies in a university where they admitted themselves in an online class and with that, they are thankful for the technology because it helps them pursue their studies even more than a hundred miles. Some institutions have started teaching an Internet version because this is sometimes the only practical option for these students.
The issues of time and place come into play in some other important ways. Class time is precious, especially time devoted to student participation, and it turns out that CMC may have a significant positive impact in that area.
For a long time, educational researchers have studied the question of who tends to dominate classroom discussions as part of CMC’s impact on student participants. When classes are involved in discussion, teachers speak between 40 and 80 percent of the time, and most communication is between the teacher and a student rather than among students. In some observations and researches, it has been proven that the nature of classroom discussion also has some startling characteristics. Traditional instruction tends to involve students who are good at developing quick responses and rapid questions. This situation may exist because students must compete for the attention of the teacher and group within a time-dependent environment. Quick responses are also rewarded because most teachers pause after asking a question for less than two seconds before speaking again to call on another student, rephrase the question, or provide an answer.
Despite the advantages of CMC, there are some difficulties that are important to recognize. Often these difficulties stem from the same basic attributes as the advantages. One of the most consistently recognized characteristics of CMC is the reduced number and variety of visual and auditory cues that are available. Some researchers, as I have just seen, feel that fewer cues encourage greater student participation. But others feel that the lack of cues can be associated with immature, insensitive, and unproductive behaviors. There is some indication that CMC results in more evaluative comments, including comments that are too critical. Participants sometimes retaliate in an insulting manner, and then the conversation can degenerate into what in the online world is called a flame war, an exchange of angry or derogatory remarks. As a teacher, you should be aware that CMC messages can be misinterpreted and exchanges can become negative. Students involved in CMC can be sensitized to these limitations, learning to become more careful in the construction of the messages they send. Schools frequently provide students with a code of online conduct, often called netiquette.
Some good sides and bad sides are presented to perpetuate the value of embracing and studying CMC. I hope that this can impart knowledge to everyone especially to those who study discourse. Simply to achieve fairness in our ideas, we have to be opened in ventilating the good and bad side of the topic. I have learned a lot in discourse class. I am hopeful that I can apply it in reality. Simply, I have to challenge myself to value the cycle of education that everything starts from learning and it ends up with the application.