Uzaktan öğrenenlerin bilgisayar ortamlı iletişime yönelik algılamaları

Bu çalışmada Anadolu Üniversitesi Bilgi Yönetimi Programı 1. Sınıf öğrenenlerinin bilgisayarı bir iletişim aracı olarak kullanma konusundaki düşünceleri belirlenmeye çalışılmıştır. Bilgisayar ortamlı iletişim konusunda öğrenen görüşlerinden elde edilen veriler, alanyazında yer alan üç farklı bakış açısı çerçevesinde tartışılmıştır. Alanyazında ilkbakış açısı iletişim kurma konusunda yüzyüze ortamın bilgisayara göre daha etkili olduğu yönünde, ikinci bakış açısı, gerekli zaman ayrılırsa bireylerarasında kurulan iletişimin, bilgisayar aracılığıyla da en az yüzyüze ortamlardaki kadar etkili olabileceği yönünde, üçüncü bakış açısı ise, bilgisayar ortamında gerçekleşen iletişimin yüzyüze iletişime göre daha etkili olabileceği yönündedir. Gerçekleştirilen uygulamanın sonunda, öğrenenlerin büyük bir çoğunluğunun bilgisayarı bir iletişim ortamı olarak kullanma konusunda olumlu tutuma sahip olmadıkları görülmüştür. Bu sonucun ortaya çıkmasının nedenlerinden biri olarak, öğrenenlerin şimdiye kadar almış oldukları yüzyüze eğitim alışkanlıklarını devam ettirme eğiliminde olmaları söylenebilir. Öte yandan öğrenenler bilgisayarın jest, mimik, beden dili gibi iletişimi destekleyen sosyal ipuçlarını sınırlı düzeyde barındırması, iletişim kurdukları kişilerin kimlikleri ve gönderdikleri mesajların doğruluğu konusunda güvensizlik yaşıyor olmaları nedeniyle bilgisayar ortamında gerçekleştirilen iletişime olumlu yönde tutum geliştirmemiş olabilirler.

Distance learners' perceptions of computer mediated communication

In this study, perspectives of the first year students in the completely online Information Management Associate Degree Program at Anadolu University regarding computer as a communication medium were investigated. Students’perspectives on computer-mediated communications were analyzed in the light of three different views in the area of computer-mediated communications: The first view suggests that face-to-face settings are better communication environments compared to computer-mediated environments. The second view argues that if the required time is allocated, interpersonal communications in computer-mediated environments are as effective as face-to-face interpersonal communications. Finally the third view claims that computer-mediated communication is more effective than face-to-face communications. The results have shown that students do not consider computer as a communication medium. One of the reasons of this perspective can be the preconceptions and past experiences of the students on traditional education. Meanwhile shortage of nonverbal social clues, such as body movements, mimics, and so forth, and having doubts about others’ identities in the communication process as well as reliability of the postings could be other reasons why the students could not generate positive attitudes about computer-mediated communications.

PDF

___

Barnes, S.B. (2004). Computer-Mediated Communication: Human-to-Human Communication Across the Internet. Boston:Allyn and Bacon.
Bubas, G.(2006). Competence in Computer-Mediated Communication: An Evaluation and Potential Uses on a Self-Assesment Measure. Manuscript submitted for presentation consideration, Universitu of Zagreb, Croatia.
Brown, S., Fuller, R. M.& Vician, C.(2002). Who is Afraid of Virtual World? The Role of Anxity in Computer – Mediated Communication Use and Satisfaction. Journal of The Association for Information System, 5 (2), 81-109.
Campbell, S. W. & Neer, M.R. (2001). The relationship of communication apprehension and interaction involment to perception of computer-mediated communication. Communication Research Reports, (4), 391-398.
Connolly, T., Jessup, L.M.& Valacich, J.S. (1990). Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on idea generation in computer mediated groups. Management Science, 36 (6), 689-703.
Doğan, A. (2006). Bilgisayar Dolayımlı İletişim: İnternette Sosyal Psikoloji Kuramlarını Yeniden Düşünmek. Yayınlanmamış Dok .tezi Ankara Ünv. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Gazetecilik Ana Bilim Dalı.
Doyle,E., Stamouli, I.& Huggart, M. (2005).Computer Anxiety, Self-Efficacy, Computer Experience. An investigation throughout a Computer Science degree. 35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Educaion Conference.
Daly, J., M. & Miller, M. (1975). The empirical Development of an instrument to measure writting apprehension. Research in the Teaching of English, 9, 242-249.
Garton, L. & Wellman, B. (1995). Social impact of electronic mail in organization: a rewiev of the research literature. Commmunication 18, 435-453.
Gunawardena, C. L. (2002). Social presence and the sociocultural context of online education. Açık ve Uzaktan Eğitim Sempozyumu:Eğitim İletişim veTeknolojisinde Yeni Ufuklar, Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi, 23-25 Mayıs 2002.
Hunter, J.& Allen, M. (1992). Adaptation to electronic mail. Journal of Applied Communication Research,20 (3), 254-274.
Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T.W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39 (10), 1123-1134.
Lea, M. & Spears, R. (1991). Computer – mediated communication, deindividualization and group decision-making. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 34, 283-301.
Leen, J.Y.A & Ramayah, T. (2006). The impact of personal computer anxiety and communication apprehension on computer-mediated communication anxiety. Asia Journal of Information Technology, 5(7),702-705.
Mabrito, M. (1991). Electronic mail as avehicle for peer response.Written Commuication, 8(4),509-532.
McCarson, L. R. (2005). Measuring Comunication Apprehension, Writing Apprehension and Grup Satisfaction Levels in Face to face and Virtual Settings. Annual Review of Undegraduate Research School of Humanities and Social Science, 4 (1), 32.
McCrosky, J.C. (1985). The content validity of the PRCA-24 as a measure of communication apprehension across communication contexts. Communication Quarterly, 33 (3), 165-173.
McCroskey, J. C.& Richmond, V. P. (1998). Communication Apprehension Avoidance and Effectiveness. A Pearson Education Company 160 Gould Street Needham Heights, Massachusetts.
Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analyses (2.nd ed). Thousand Oasks, CA: Dage.
Moore, M. G. (1992). Distance education theory. The American Journal of Distance Education, 5(3),1-6.
Parks, M.R.,& Floyd, K. (1996). Making friends in cyberspace. Journal of Communication, 46(1), pp 80-97.
Perse, E. M.& Ferguson, D. A. (2000). The benefits and cost of web surfing. Communication Quarterly , 48 (4), 343-359.
Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1998). Breaching or building social boundaries SIDE effect of computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 25 (6). 689-715.
Schliesman, T. & Ayres, J. (1999). The relationship between computer time and comminication apprehension/communication competence among adolescent. Paperpresented at the Annual Meeting of the National Communication Association, Chicago, IL.
Scott, C. R.,& Rockwell, S. C. (1997). The effect of communication, writing and technology apprehension on likelihood to use new communication technologies. Communication Education, 46, 44-62.
Scott, C. R. & Timmerman, C.E. (2005). Relating Computer, Communication and Computer- Mediated Communication Apprehensions to New Communication Technology Use in the Workplace. Communication Research, 32 (6), 683-713.
Vrasidas, C., & McIsaac, M.S. (1999). Factors influencing interaction in an online course. American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 6-29.
Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer mediated communication: Impersonal, Interpersonal and Hyperpersonal Interaction. Communication Research, 23 (1), 3-43.
Walter, J.B. (1994). Anticipated ongoing interaction versus channel effect on relational communicaton in computer-mediated interaction. Human Communication Research, 20, 473-501.
Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effect in computer-mediated interaction: A relational Perspective. Communication Research, 19(1), 52-90.
Walther, J. B. & Burgoon, J.K. (1992). Relational communication in computer mediated interaction. Human Communication Research, 19 (1), 50-88.
Watson, B. R. (2007). Speaking up in the 21 st Century: The Effect of Communication Apprehension and İnternet Self Efficacy on use of Social Networking Websites. Doktora Tezi. Fafulty of the Graduate School of Journalism at the University of Missouri-Colombia
Yıldırım, A.& Şimşek, H. (2000). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Sözkesen Matbaacılık, Ankara.
İNTERNET KAYNAKLARI
Gibbs, G., Simpson, C.& Macdonald, R. (2003). Improving Student Learning through Changing Assessment- A Conceptual and Proctical Framework”. European Association for Research into Learning and Instruction, Padova. http://www.open.ac.uk/Science/fdtl/pub.htm.
Jacobson, D. (1999). Impression Formation Cyberspace:Online Expectation and Offline Experience in Tex-based Virtual Communities, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 5(1).10haziran tarihinde http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol5/issue1/jacobson.html adresinden erişilmiştir.
Kim, J (2002). Interpersonal Interaction in Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) Exploratory Qualitative Research based on Critical Review of the Existing Theories Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association. 10 mayıs 2006 tarihinde http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p112010_index.html adresinden erişilmiştir.
Kim, J (2000). Social interaction in computer-mediated communication. 22 Kasım 2006 tarihinde http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Mar-00/kim.html adresinden erişilmiştir.
Liu, Y. (2002). What does research say about the natue of computer-mediated communication: Taskoriented, social emotion-oriented or both?.Electronic Journal of Sociolology. 21 Kasım 2007 tarihinde http://www.sociology.org/content/vol006.001/liu.html adresinden erişilmiştir.
Mabrito, M. (2000). Facilitating and evaluating student interaction in an online business writing course. 20 Ekim tarihinde http.//as1.ipfw.edu/2000tohe/papers/mabrito.html adresinden erişilmiştir.
Spitzberg, B. H. (2006). Preliminary development of a model and measure of computer mediated communication (CMC) competence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,11(2), 20 Şubat 2006’da http:/jcmc.indiana.edu/col11/issue2/spitzberg.html adresinden erişilmiştir.
Taylor, R., & W. Licklider, J.C.R. (1968). The Computer as a Communication Device. Reprinted from Science and Technology. 10 Mart 2007 tarihinde http://gatekeeper.dec.com/pub/DEC/SR C/research-reports/abstracts/src-r061.htm adresinden erişilmiştir.