A great question was put to me which is difficult to answer, but I will try.
Asynchronous communications force us to question what is it to be social. The telephone is a synchronous communications tool, where the participants are separated by space. With asynchronous communications they are also separated by time. For me the social aspect is not one of space or time, but the quality of the conversation.
For example, one-way communications (TV, Radio, Lecture?) are not social, unless the audience can participate through some form of feedback (think: talkback radio, TV polls and SMS voting on Big Brother). Even so, the quality of conversation is often still quite low, some would say very low :).
Until recently, audio and video could not easily be transmitted over the internet in real time. The result was online communications were based on email, discussion boards and chat (of these chat was the least used). There are however, some advantages asynchronous forms of communications have over synchronous. Here are a few that come to mind: First, in the asynchronous world you have time to consider what you are writing about. Posts to a forum or blog for example are often more thoughtful / considered than text chat or voice communications. Blogs and discussion boards tend to better support intellectual discussions than chat. Second, asynchronous communications do NOT require everyone to schedule a common time to meet, so it is a more flexible way of arranging communications. Asynchronous tools augment the student experience and bring education to the students, rather than the other way around. Third, asynchronous communications are a great evener: Teachers who use discussion boards report that quiet students gain confidence online, particularly international students who want to communicate, but find it hard to keep up in realtime conversation.
Learning is a social experience, and I believe that successful tools are such because they promote conversation, no matter if this is synchronous or asynchronous. Comments welcome!
Comments
William - that is a really thought-provoking response: particularly the bit about how much considered an aynchronous response can be.
Posted by: melissa | August 17, 2006 01:43 PM
Your points on asynchronous communication are well taken. However, I wonder if you could comment on the advantages of synchronous communication, especially in distance classrooms. Do we lose something if we don't do synchronous communication ever? If so, what?
Posted by: Irmgard Willcockson | January 19, 2007 09:46 AM
Yes quality is the social component of communication whether it be synchronous or not. An asynchronous educational discussion group I frequent has quantity as they prattle on but quality is almost forgotten.
Your three points in favour of asynchronous communication are valid but there is a down fall. One disadvantage is that it allows participants to waffle on and on and on… while other participants have to wade through a mire of meaningless drivel to find the true intent of the thread.
Posted by: Barry Maloney | April 12, 2007 09:14 PM