Computer Mediated Communication

2427 Words5 Pages

INTRODUCTION

The continued development of information and communication technologies has virtualized the teaching process in many ways. Instructors are now using various forms of multimedia and web-based systems in delivering and teaching content to students. The use of computer mediated communication (CMC) has enabled synchronous (realtime chat) and asynchronous (forums, e-mails) communication to provide a more socially constructed form of learning.

Understanding the connection of technology and the learning process has been the goal of many scholars who stated that use of technology should play a wide roll in transforming the process to a learner-centric model that is flexible enough to address the need of the individual learner. However, in spite of the use of technology we see today, this goal is far from achieved. The setback is due to focus on automating teaching efforts by recreating the environment in the classroom instead of creating new forms of learning content and tools that address dynamic needs of every learner. The traditional approach in content delivery and transmission from teacher to student is unable to keep up with the multiplying rate at which knowledge is growing.

There are many challenges to overcome in incorporating technology successfully within the learning paradigm. These challenges include high production costs, insufficient storage, low content standards, isolated and closed systems. However, the new Internet (Web 2.0) and other recent development in technologies can assist in redefining the learning process that can meet the demands of the 21st century and overcome the shortfalls of current methods. The end result should be an environment where a large numbers of students participate in the c...

... middle of paper ...

...n source content as well as tools and the network effect. As the educational system focuses more on the learner-centric model, the quality of content and tools will increase rapidly. Unfortunately this is not the case now as most systems are developed and marketed towards institutions and teachers instead of students.

Recent developments of SCORM, SIF and LETSI have the potential to support the creation, transmission and tracking of learning content as well as activities that are consistent with students’ needs. The success also depends on instructors using the variety of tools effectively to meet the learning goals of the students.

Works Cited

Miles, C. (1992). Checklists for Assessing Thought in Action. Journal of Developmental Education, pg 32-33.

Mumford, A. (1986). Learning to Learn for Managers. Journal of European Industrial Training, pg 10.

Open Document