It offers a larger pool of potential correspondants with (presumably) similar interests. (CS)
The students are free to chose topics THEY are interested in. They can communicate in English anytime they want. Since the teacher does not moderate the communication, I believe that students are freer to express their real thoughts and feelings. Also, since the teacher does not moderate the communication, it is easy for the teacher! (DK)
I agree with another collegue's earlier message that there is sometimes confusion and difficulty with student's starting the intro-sl sequence. for students who are new to email it cause no end of confusion for them. I beleive the earlier method used by the list was much more efficient and easier for students. (KS)
Also, there is of course the dilemmma for students who now have email from their dorms or homes...and this is on the increase. It brings about the difficulty of students participating within a class. (KS)
One huge advantage is that the Student Lists enable students to find keypals on their own. The teacher is relieved of the chore of matching students with other students or trying to locate teachers in other parts of the world who would be willing to have classes exchange e-mail. This is particularly important in Japan, where the school calendar is very different from that in just about every other country. Student Lists, then, solve several "logistic" problems at once, putting students readily in touch with other students and without undue concern for differences in school calendars. (LD)
Mainly, I underestimated the flood of email that my students would receive and the implications. For instance, the unanticipated time necessary to extricate ourselves from the onslaught with the nomail message, plus the other unanticipated problems that resulted. Also, instruction on other matters were going on--I was teaching English writing with computers and attempting to minimize computer related instruction. But this minimizing was difficult. (RP)
Perhaps more flexibility would solve some of the problems. For example, I prefer that my students who have interest in sports, for instance, send Email to each other on this topic. Then after this experience, that they have the choice of using the listserv that relates to sports at the outset. It's the idea of going from a near audience (their classmates) on a topic to a distant audience (ie. students in other countries) on the same topic, which is in accordance with writing-process theory. Instead, we get this flood of mail from what some students called "strangers." not a simple way to experience a listserv at the outset. (RP)
volume of messages - particularly on intro-sl, can be a little overwhelming. On the plus side, Ss very quickly learn to screen messages ruthlessly, based on subject line. (CS)
lack of interesting content - probably the biggest negative. I try to do a lot of prep with my classes before they post, and I think they usually come up with interesting, personal posts. They consistently express disappointment at the sameness and lack of substance in the majority of posts they read. (CS)
general unfamiliarity with the concept of discussion lists - many Ss are really looking for a keypal, rather that interested in participating in a general discussion.(CS)
Some of the students did not follow directions, either from the teacher or from the Welcome Message. The most troublesome was setting to NOMAIL. (DK)
I suppose the volume of messages, particularly for the introductory SL, was one problem, especially so for students who were absent for a week and came back to find 75 or more messages waiting for them. There were few technical problems to speak of. Of over a hundred students, only two failed to follow the procedures for subscribing and unsubscribing to various lists correctly. (LD)
Confusion about signing on to INTRO-L, then stopping their mail, then signing on to the DISCUSS-L. I fancy myself as being able to give very clear instructions, but even after repeating them 6 times (no exaggeration!), a high proportion of the students didn't catch on. (DP)
I love the ideas of the student lists and used to enjoy reading the student postings on DISCUSS-SL myself, but I have become very discouraged about my lack of success in getting the students signed on and operational. (DP)
See above. I've had mixed success with the lists, although I'll continue to use them because I think they're a really nice intro to discussion lists in general, at a level of English proficiency that most of my Ss can handle. (CS)
Ss level of satisfaction depends on content of posts they receive, more than anything, as well as whether or not they connect with an individual keypal.(CS)
Serious students saw the value of the lists. Others did not care for it so much as they did not participate fully. This is the first year to use the lists, and I think part of the responsibility for the student reaction falls on me as the teacher. I already plan to redo my lesson plans for introducing and using the list. (DK)
As the majority of my students are adults from all walks of life, their general reaction to the lists was that they were more for the benefit of high school students and undergraduates. (GA)
For the most part, students genuinely liked working on student lists and spent quite a lot of time in their correspondence and postings. They grew a great deal as correspondents and as writers of English through the opportunities for real communication that the Student Lists provided. (LD)
1. threading messages
2. netiquette
3. the importance of a good subject line (CS)
I hope this doesn't sound completely negative. The S-lists have been a valuable part of my telewriting class, and will continue to be. Thanks for your hard work. (CS)
I think they can learn that not everyone has the same attitudes as Japanese do. In terms of language learning it gives them a real-world reason to write. It provides an opportunity to do lots of writing (writing for fluency), and if they are not clear in the message, other members of the list will comment on it, so it also encourages writing for accuracy. Most of all, it is fun. (DK)
Student Lists have helped my students learn the conventions of e-mail netiquette and the proper forms for posting messages of their own and replying to other people's e-mail. All this has happened in large part because of the excellent models and suggestions for effective e-mail writing that are provided in the explanatory notes that students receive from the Lists as soon as they are subscribed. (LD)
The lists have also given my students models of discourse (some of it quite good) written by students from other countries who are using English as a foreign language. In addition, I think that my students' direct experience of using English as the "lingua franca" for international electronic communication brings home to them the importance of learning English and helps to motivate them to work harder at their own English language development. (LD)
CS - Cliff Stevens -- U C Extension <cliffs@qal.Berkeley.EDU>
DK - David Kluge -- Kinjo Gakuen University <kluge@kinjo-u.ac.jp>
GA - Geoffrey Astbury -- <ageoffr@act.net.ar>
KS - Kathleen R. Seaton -- <krf@s867.thu.edu.tw>
LD - L. M. Dryden -- <dryden@gol.com>
RP - Rich Porter -- <rich.porter@mailexcite.com>
DP - Denny Packard -- <dennyp@WORLDNET.FR>
Members 7/96 11/96 1/97 5/97 7/97 12/97 7/98
business-sl 32 104 119 95 92 181 131
chat-sl 130 176 258 170 226 177 218
discuss-sl 149 162 180 143 125 130 120
engl-sl 85 200 247 171 166 113 113
event-sl 87 89 94 165 177 120 116
movie-sl 108 134 194 194 222 212 183
music-sl 82 101 150 110 146 162 133
scitech-sl 26 33 48 57 46 47 33
sport-sl 36 74 103 89 96 116 102
-------------------------------------------------------------
intro-sl 644 1021 1558 1038 1424 1287 1094
indiv-sl* 61 42 45 36 52 31 33 (*individual members;
not for posting)
Total Subscriptions 1440 2136 2996 2268 2772 2576 2276
Countries 7/96 11/96 1/97 5/97 7/97 12/97 7/98
business-sl 9 7 8 8 10 9 7
chat-sl 10 11 13 11 10 11 11
discuss-sl 8 10 11 10 10 9 14
engl-sl 14 16 15 9 10 10 10
event-sl 10 9 9 8 8 10 11
movie-sl 8 8 11 10 10 9 9
music-sl 7 9 13 9 11 10 8
scitech-sl 7 7 9 9 10 9 8
sport-sl 9 10 13 8 9 11 10
----------------------------------------------------------
intro-sl 11 15 15 19 17 15 12
indiv-sl* 19 16 16 15 19 13 16
Postings (Cumulative) From May 1 1996 through
7/96 11/96 1/97 5/97 7/97 12/97 7/98
business-sl 5 109 179 267 302 510 663
chat-sl 133 204 591 726 1004 1440 1807
discuss-sl 336 444 637 776 941 1083 1278
engl-sl 69 213 281 388 467 573 686
event-sl 51 124 149 275 354 453 576
movie-sl 232 187 511 624 817 1064 1293
music-sl 114 180 368 424 538 717 819
scitech-sl 11 19 41 61 90 115 151
sport-sl 29 52 163 207 254 378 491
---------------------------------------------------------
intro-sl 459 978 1813 2546 3144 4144 5036
Total postings
to date 120 1439 2510 4733 6294 10477 12800
Membership distribution for selected lists.
TCHR-SL INTRO-SL EVENT-SL
* Argentina 3 * Argentina 1 * Argentina 1
* Australia 3 * Australia 27 * Australia 3
* Brazil 1 * Czech Republic 7 * Brazil 1
* China 1 * Finland 2 * China 1
* Finland 1 * France 1 * Germany 1
* France 1 * Germany 1 * Hongkong 1
* Germany 2 * Great Britain 4 * Japan 66
* Great Britain 2 * Japan 532 * Korea 24
* Hongkong 1 * Korea 232 * Switzerland 1
* Hungary 1 * Switzerland 11 * Taiwan 2
* Italy 1 * Taiwan 72 * USA 15
* Japan 31 * USA 204
* Korea 3
* New Zealand 1
* Spain 1
* Sweden 1
* Switzerland 2
* Taiwan 4
* Turkey 2
* USA 25