Expanding Communication Mechanisms: They’re Not Just E-Mailing Anymore

Cynthia A. Murnan Oberlin College

148 West College St. Oberlin, OH 44074

1-440-775-8774

cynthia.murnan@oberlin.edu

ABSTRACT Students are walking around with cell phones, making calls and text-messaging. For many, this has now become their main communication mechanism with friends and family. College faculty and staff still count on e-mail as the main communication tool, amongst themselves and with students. Student demand for e-mail accounts from new students before they even arrive on campus has increased exponentially in the past couple of years. Web pages are used to provide information to the outside community and internally, across campus. Web pages have often become the main mechanism for providing step-by-step documentation. Meanwhile, wikis, blogs and MySpace® have entered the online communication world. Students look at our web pages, but how often? They all have college-provided e-mail accounts, but do they use them? What is the best mechanism these days to get the word out, and what will be the mechanism in the future? This paper will explore the mechanisms and approaches that students, and others on campus, are using to communicate now, and will present thoughts on where we’re going in the future and the impact that will have on user services.

Categories and Subject Descriptors H.5.2 [Information Systems]: User Interfaces – standardization; theory and methods; training, help and documentation, voice I/O.

General Terms Management, Documentation, Human Factors.

Keywords Blog, communication, Facebook©, Gmail™, Instant Messaging (IM), Internet, LiveJournal™, MySpace®, PDAs, Skype™, social networking, spam, text-messaging, web, wiki.

1. INTRODUCTION It seems but a short time ago when e-mail began to be used as a primary mechanism for communicating. People rapidly embraced

the technology, especially in the college/university and other workplace environments, moving from telephone communication as the primary means, to e-mail messaging. The advantages were many. In an ever-expanding, global world, one could send a message at any time, no longer needing to be concerned about time-zone differences. Replies were often received quickly, increasing information flow and productivity. The written word provided for clarity, lessening the chance of miscommunication and misinterpretation. People who were reluctant to call others for various reasons – dealing with a difficult person, unpleasant topic to discuss, etc. – now had a more comfortable, less anxiety-ridden approach.

Thus, we saw the use of e-mail expand annually. This changed, or added to, our support services. We now had e-mail applications to provide and maintain, and users to support with training, documentation, and assistance. These days, we spend a great deal of effort trying to eliminate spam mail for our users, so they can remain focused on relevant messages.

Students in colleges and universities today can barely recall a world in which e-mail did not exist. They grew up with it and are comfortable with it. They often have multiple e-mail accounts. However, as we look around us today, we see that e-mail isn’t the only mechanism any longer. Everywhere you go, around campuses and around towns, in cars and in airports, people are talking on cell phones. It seems that almost every student has a cell phone, used for voice and/or text-messaging purposes. More and more colleges and universities are moving away from providing wired telephone service in residence halls, since usage has fallen in recent years due to the proliferation of cell phones.

Other users who are supported by college and university computing services staff are also using different communication means. We now see Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) that double as cell phones being used by faculty and staff. These are now considered mission-critical devices, providing required notes and access to calendars, as well as voice communication.

In addition to cell phones and e-mail, many other tools are being used by our constituents for communication, research, training, documentation, etc. It seems, even before we’ve grasped the implications of one, another has come to the fore. We now have blogs and wikis, chat and instant messaging, Skype™ and LiveJournal™. We’ve been providing documentation and information via the World Wide Web (web). Is that still sufficient? How do we keep up with the latest trends, or do we? How do we continue to provide excellent service to our clients, using the same

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. SIGUCCS ‘06, November 5-8, 2006, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Copyright 2005 ACM 1-59593-438-3/06/0011...$5.00

267

finite number of resources? What mechanisms should we embrace to communicate with our users? What should we be planning for the future?

2. COMMUNICATION MECHANISMS As we contemplate the new approaches we may need to consider, let’s first explore the mechanisms currently in use by our constituents. These mechanisms can be broken into subsets: responsive communication tools, used mainly for communication in which the sender anticipates a direct response; informative communication tools, used mainly to provide information, training, and documentation; and combination tools, which use both of the previous means to some degree.

2.1 Responsive Communication Mechanisms Responsive communication tools in use today are quite varied. E-mail appears to be used by everyone in the college/university environment, with many clients having accounts from multiple sources (college, home Internet Service Provider, other source to use additional resources such as IM/chat). Users who did not often receive accounts in the past, due to the nature of their work (such as dining services, custodial, and trades personnel), now routinely receive accounts to stay in contact with supervisors and to receive institutional information. Incoming personnel request accounts sooner than their arrival on campus; departing personnel request to retain accounts longer.

Cell phones are used by more and more people, both for voice and text-messaging. Students can often be seen walking around campus, cell phones to their ears, and staff members in meetings must be cautioned to turn off their cell phones as the meeting starts. Cell phones are being used more and more frequently for text-messaging, especially by students keeping in touch with friends. Wired telephones are still widely used in offices, although students appear to require them less and less in their residence halls.

More technology-intensive communications mechanisms are being used with increasing degree. Instant messaging and chat systems (such as Microsoft Instant Messenger, AOL Instant Messenger (AIM), and iChat) use client programs in conjunction with Internet Service Provider (ISP) connectivity to allow users to have immediate, responsive dialog via their computers with others online using the same client program.

Skype™ usage has become quite prolific on college and university campuses, both for informal communication to family and friends, and for educational communication, such as speaking with persons in other countries to enhance language-learning opportunities. Skype™ is a “…proprietary, peer-to-peer Internet telephony (VoIP) [Voice Over IP] network…”[1]. With the Skype™ software installed, Skype™ users can audibly converse with other Skype™ users around the world for free, using headphones/microphones attached to their computers. Calls to landline and mobile phones can also be made, at a cost normally significantly cheaper than landline or cell phone service.

Mailrooms, with actual, physical mailboxes, still exist for all constituents, allowing for campus mail and postal mail delivery and receipt. Also, direct in-person contact is still the favored approach by many, providing the direct visual feedback missing in other mechanisms.

2.2 Informative Communication Mechanisms Informative communication tools are those used to provide information, training, and/or documentation via either push (sent to the users) or pull (retrieved or viewed by the user) means. College and university websites provide information to constituents, both external and internal to campuses. Information can be general in nature, such as an overview of the college, or quite specific, such as details regarding how to connect one’s computer in the residence halls.

Wikis are used more and more to present material that can be quickly edited or enhanced. In college and university information technology areas, for example, users may discover an alternative, perhaps easier, way to accomplish something, and post that information to the wiki. Figure 1 shows the wiki developed by the Oberlin College Center for Information Technology (CIT) to post information most relevant to users, and/or most likely to change as processes and capabilities are enhanced.

Figure 1. Center for Information Technology (CIT) Wiki

Electronic reserve material (e-Res) has become more prolific on campuses, allowing increased access to course materials required for students. Hardcopy documentation and training materials may still exist, although their use has decreased with the advent of websites. Books and periodicals are provided, both in hardcopy and electronically. iPods have attained widespread use, not just as a repository and listening/viewing mechanism for music, photos and videos, but also as a learning tool for courses requiring an auditory mechanism, such as language courses.

2.3 Combination Mechanisms Combination mechanisms provide an opportunity to input information to be viewed by oneself and/or others, and also provide a means of responsive communication, such as online posting or chat capabilities. These tools are often considered today in the

268

context of “social networking”, wherein online relationships are established based on social commonalities [2].

Blogs started as a web-accessible means of providing information and allowing comments on a particular topic. Individuals used them as journals that others could view. Some used them to log their travel experiences, for example. During the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, one Oberlin College student who went to the area to provide assistance used a blog to notify friends and family of his experiences. Now, blogs are used in college and university environments as a means to provide information, while allowing users to ask questions or make comments, allowing for a back-and-forth exchange of ideas and information. Figure 2, below, depicts the Oberlin College Library blog, known as “Reading Girl Speaks”, which provides information and a forum for discussion on topics such the air quality in the main library.

Figure 2. Oberlin College Library Blog

LiveJournal™ is an online “…communication tool that lets you express yourself and connect with friends online. You can use LiveJournal™ in many different ways: as a private journal, a blog, a social network and much more.”[3]. At Oberlin College, the community aspect of LiveJournal™ is used by students seeking information, such as whether to purchase a Macintosh or Windows computer for use on campus, or by students seeking to post comments on a particular issue, such as the capabilities of the residential network.

MySpace® and Friendster® are similar online tools for people to meet others, find friends, and communicate. MySpace® has engendered a lot of concern due to its very open nature, with information readily available to anyone with an account. Students often report initially acquiring a MySpace® account for its novelty value, then decreasing its use over time.

Facebook© is a more restrictive online communication tool created in 2004 by Harvard University student Mark Zukerberg. Users are required to have a valid e-mail address from a supported college, high-school, or company. With Facebook© “…access to users’ profiles is limited only to the other members of the educational

community…a user’s profile is available at most to a few thousand people who already share in that person’s ‘real-world’ community.”[4]

Course management systems, such as Blackboard™, have moved from mainly providing course-related materials and access, to providing an entire online community system. The intent is to enhance the college community environment, allowing for greater collaboration and communication.

Other tools have also improved communication abilities. Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) once mainly used to track schedules and take notes, now incorporate wireless access to web and e-mail, and increasingly include cell phone capability, becoming smartphones.

3. CONSTITUENT USAGE An informal survey of people at Oberlin College indicates the communication mechanism used greatly relates to the age of the individual, the role of the individual (student, faculty, dining services staff, computing services staff, etc.), and the intended recipient of the communication (parent, friend, co-worker, etc.). In general, younger people tend to embrace newer mechanisms more readily; if an individual’s role brings him/her into contact with a certain mechanism, he/she is more likely to use it; and the tools available to the recipient help define the mechanism of choice used by the sender.

3.1 Age Group 18-23 Not surprisingly, students (ages 18-23 were polled) use, or try, newer mechanisms more than any other group. They are more likely to have MySpace® and Facebook© accounts, and to have used Skype™ and LiveJournal™. Most reported their use of MySpace® was mainly for keeping in touch with high-school friends who had not gone on to college, or as a novelty, and that they were cautious of MySpace® due to its open nature. They preferred using Facebook©, since it presents a more focused and controlled environment. A number of Oberlin students appear to use LiveJournal™ as a means to present comments, meet people, and/or ask questions.

Individuals in this group still use e-mail extensively, and they are very apt to have an alternative e-mail account, in addition to their college/university-provided e-mail account. They often have the alternate account to use the corresponding chat capability, for example, a Gmail™ account in order to use Gmail™ Chat. E-mail is used to communicate with family, friends, students, staff, professors, etc.

Persons in this age group also reported a high use of cell phones, both for voice and text-messaging. Text-messaging seems to be conducted mainly among friends who similarly use this service. Contact with others via cell phone is done by voice. Family, especially parents, will be contacted based on the parents’ main mechanism – usually cell phone to parent’s cell phone or wired phone, or e-mail to e-mail. A student who spent a semester abroad in Japan reported using her cell phone less often, due to the high cost. Instead, she reported using Skype™ almost daily to keep in touch with family and friends, due to its low cost. Most in this group did not use wired phones much, due to the cost of maintaining service.

269

Everyone in this group reported using the web a great deal. Most reported consistently obtaining their world and local news online, from sources such as cnn.com and local online newspapers. They view weather reports from weather.com and read comics from webcomics sources. They conduct research for courses, and research graduate schools. They also check out the online college classified ads, and look for other college-related information, such as calendars and how-to documentation.

Some in this group also noted the use of direct, person-to-person, contact. This was either because their position required it – interaction with professors, employed in a store – or because they preferred the personal style and the ability to pick up non-verbal communication cues.

Figure 3 provides a graphical view of the use of the various communication mechanisms by the students surveyed, ages 18-23. The usage data is depicted on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 indicating low usage and 10 being high. As can be seen, students in this group report the heaviest use for e-mail, cell phones (voice), and the web.

STUDENTS (18-23)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

E-M

ail

Cell:

vo

ice

Cell:

text-

mess

ag

ing

Vo

ice:

lan

d-

lin

e

In-p

ers

on

IM/

Ch

at

Skyp

e

Po

stal M

ail

Info

rmati

ve

Mech

an

ism

s(w

eb

)

Co

mb

oM

ech

an

ism

s

COMMUNICATION MECHANISM

Figure 3. Age Group 18-23 Usage Data

3.2 Age Group 30-40 Persons in this age group reported using e-mail as their primary communication tool. Cell phones (voice only) and wired phones are also heavily used. For the most part, people in this group did not use text-messaging, although they were familiar with it.

STAFF/FAC (30-40)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

E-M

ail

Cell

: vo

ice

Cell

: te

xt-

mess

ag

ing

Vo

ice:

lan

d-

lin

e

In-p

ers

on

IM/

Ch

at

Skyp

e

Po

stal

Mail

Info

rmati

ve

Mech

an

ism

s(w

eb

)

Co

mb

oM

ech

an

ism

s

COMMUNICATION MECHANISM

Figure 4. Age Group 30-40 Usage Data

They reported significant in-person contact, mainly due to the nature of their roles – assisting others, providing service, teaching, etc. Most did not report use of IM or chat, although one individual did indicate heavy use of IM and Skype™, mainly to maintain contact with friends and previous co-workers. Most did not use other responsive communication mechanisms to any degree. Again, for this group, extensive use of the web was reported. One faculty member noted she could simply not function without it. Continuous access was indicated, conducting job-related research, seeking how-to information, acquiring news (weather, local news, world news, sports news, etc.), conducting online banking, and seeking information relevant to the college. A graphical view of the data for this group is depicted in Figure 4.

3.3 Age Group 40-50 Persons in this group reported use of e-mail and cell phones (voice only) as their primary communication tools. They did no text-messaging and used IM and chat very minimally. As with other groups, in-person contact was due to roles and responsibilities. This group reported little to no use of other responsive communication mechanisms. As noted with other groups, use of the web was reported as continual and extensive. It is used to gather news and information, conduct research, make travel arrangements, etc. Figure 5 presents a graphical view of the data for this group.

STAFF/FAC (40-50)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

E-M

ail

Cell

: vo

ice

Cell

: te

xt-

mess

ag

ing

Vo

ice:

lan

d-

lin

e

In-p

ers

on

IM/

Ch

at

Skyp

e

Po

stal

Mail

Info

rmati

ve

Mech

an

ism

s(w

eb

)

Co

mb

oM

ech

an

ism

s

COMMUNICATION MECHANISM

Figure 5. Age Group 40-50 Usage Data

3.4 Age Group 50-60 This was the group that seemed to have the greatest variance. While all seemed to use e-mail, some used it extensively, while others used it to a lesser degree, or reported using it just to send short, pointed messages. Most used the web, although some used it to a lesser degree or for fewer purposes than those reported by individuals in other groups. Not unexpectedly, persons in this age group tend to continue using older mechanisms, at least to some degree, such as the use of postal mail to maintain some measure of contact with family and friends. For this group, use of e-mail is generally high, although one person reported minimal use due to the nature of her employment (dining services staff), which allowed limited computer contact. Cell phone for voice was used significantly, although one person indicated its use for emergency purposes only. Wired, landline, phones were still used to a great extent. Text-messaging was not indicated. In-person

270

contact was extensive, with one individual reporting a strong predilection for this type of communication, due to its more personal nature and the ability to acquire the corresponding non-verbal communication cues. Most other forms of responsive communication were not used. Again, generally high use of the web was reported, although not as continual as with other groups. The web was used to seek information and news, find products, conduct online banking, make travel arrangements, etc. Figure 6 below depicts usage data for this group.

STAFF/FAC (50-60)

0123456789

10

E-M

ail

Cell:

vo

ice

Cell:

text-

mess

ag

ing

Vo

ice:

lan

d-

lin

e

In-p

ers

on

IM/

Ch

at

Skyp

e

Post

al M

ail

Info

rmati

ve

Mech

an

ism

s(w

eb

)

Co

mb

oM

ech

an

ism

s

COMMUNICATION MECHANISM

Figure 6. Age Group 50-60 Usage Data

4. WHAT’S AHEAD Across all groups, the use of e-mail remains high. It is unlikely this will decrease in the near future. All the reasons that brought e-mail to the fore remain valid: a global world requiring a means of communicating regardless of time-of-day, rapid response capability, and message text that can be reviewed to ensure correct interpretation and provide a written record of communication.

Cell phone usage continues to expand. A report by the Pew Internet and American Life Project in 2005 reported approximately 134 million American adults have cell phones [4]. Students report heavy cell phone usage and very minimal wired phone usage. It is likely that more and more colleges and universities will discontinue providing wired phone service to students in campus residence halls.

In this country, at present, use of the cell phone remains focused on voice capability. Text-messaging is in use by younger persons, but has not been embraced to any degree amongst all groups. The Pew Internet report mentioned above notes: “The most likely cell phone texters are in Generation Y (ages 18-27). Fully 63% of those with cell phones in that cohort are texters, compared to 31% of cell owners in Generation X (ages 28-39), 18% of cell phone owners among younger Baby Boomers (age 40-49), 13% of cell phone owners among older Baby Boomers (ages 50-58) and 7% of cell phone owners among those over age 60.” [5]. Cell phone use will likely expand once service improves, including use for text-messaging and other capabilities. Some users report their continued use of wired, landline phones due to the unacceptable reception of cell phones. One Oberlin student who spent a semester in Japan reported significantly improved reception and capabilities for cell phones in that country, resulting in her increased use of that mechanism while in that country.

Use of cell phone/PDA combination units (smartphones), such as the Palm® Treo™ 650, will likely continue to rise as the cost of the unit and the required service decrease, and the capabilities of the unit and the service increase. The ability to “do it all” (phone, e-mail, Internet access, schedule keeper, contacts list, note-taking, etc.) with one small, handheld, wireless device is quite desirable. A presentation at the Special Interest Group on University and College Computing Services (SIGUCCS) 2005 by personnel from Italy indicated use of a handheld, Bluetooth®-capable, mobile device by students to access academic services, such as course information (course time, exam dates) and exam subscription requests [6]. This type of access will likely become prevalent in the future.

Communication mechanisms for social networking – MySpace®, Facebook©, LiveJournal™, etc. – are currently considered a novelty by many, but may continue to expand if security and a more controlled, or focused, environment can be assured. Facebook©, for example, already claims 7.3 million users from 2,100 colleges and 22, 000 high schools [4].

The increased use of these combination mechanisms, or social networking tools, bodes well for the future use of applications such as Blackboard Community System™, a software application designed to build “vibrant online connections between campus groups” [9]. One student noted that she would use this application if it proved to provide communication and information resources relevant to her needs.

Regarding informative communication mechanisms, the web continues to be the mechanism of choice, and will likely continue to be in the future. The vast amount of information available, combined with its ease of use, will continue to make this a highly regarded asset.

Thus, the trend seems to be toward small, handheld devices providing multiple communication mechanisms – voice, web access, e-mail access, text-messaging, etc. E-mail will still be a viable contact choice, and the web will only expand as a vital resource.

5. IMPLICATIONS FOR COMPUTING SERVICES E-mail will remain a valid communication tool for students, faculty, and staff. Thus, this will remain an effective means of communicating with the constituents at our institutions, regardless of what type of device they use to access it. We’re already being asked to provide e-mail service sooner to incoming students. At Oberlin College, we began the practice of providing e-mail accounts to newly admitted students, prior to their arrival on campus, in May 2006. This resulted in a spate of calls to the CIT Help Desk for persons not yet on campus, seeking assistance with their accounts (“how-to” information, password information, etc.). Spam will continue to be a problem that computing services personnel will have to deal with. Space/quota storage issues will continue, and will likely be addressed by adding storage capability, as people continually increase in mobility and require access to messages from global locations. Increased storage capability leads to increased issues for conducting backups – more time required, more space required.

271

The proliferation of combination communication mechanisms, such as those recognized for social networking (there are more than 200 such sites [10]), indicates the potential for success with applications such as the Blackboard Community System™. As Oberlin moves forward with this process, it will be vital to carefully establish the roles and community aspect of this system to enhance the perceived value and participation of all college constituents. The web will continue to play a vital role in providing data. Institutional information provided must be current, valid, and relevant. More emphasis needs to be placed on keeping this a dynamic process for departments posting information online. Access to the web is now considered mission-critical. Students and faculty conduct research using online resources. Staff members also use online resources to find answers to job-related questions. People in all campus groups use the web increasingly for access to news, placing orders, seeking product information, conducting online banking, etc. One faculty member reported extensive use of Google Print to search for the exact location of text in a book, whereupon he can then go directly to that page in the actual physical book. This ever-increasing dependency on the web results in increased efforts to maintain continuous service. This makes performance of server maintenance an area of discussion, as users expect, and require, continuous uptime. At Oberlin College, we have also already seen added emphasis on ensuring connectivity for Skype™, as the Languages faculty and staff make use of this program to converse real-time with people in other countries. This application, then, is rapidly becoming mission-critical for some activities on campus. Support for smartphones has been increasing rapidly. This service is becoming more prolific, especially among senior administrators. Resources (staff, training, equipment) will need to be expanded to support these devices.

6. CONCLUSION It would appear we’re going to be able to continue communicating with our constituents using e-mail as a primary responsive communication mechanism, but our support requirements for this service will continue to grow. Service will be requested sooner (prior to arrival on campus). Spam will need to be dealt with. Storage/quota levels will be pressed to increase. Backups and preventive maintenance on servers will need to be reconsidered to determine optimal timing and operations for such vital services. Smaller, handheld, wireless devices will require more support. This will focus our attention anew on standards. Will we standardize on one device to streamline support resources? Text-messaging will continue to expand. We’ll likely be able to send e-mail that will end up on users’ cell phones or smartphones as text messages. What will be the implication for support in that environment? Applications such as Facebook©, LiveJournal™ and others indicate that users are interested in online social networking. Development

of systems such as Blackboard Community System™ may provide the college/university social network that users desire, and will, therefore, use heavily. The web has become a vital resource for all constituents. Maintaining dynamic, informative websites is crucial if we expect our users to access our documentation, news, and training resources. Being able to communicate effectively has always been a top priority for any society. Our ability to communicate with our constituents requires more and more effective, secure, and stable online and mobile access. As one student put it, “We’re more and more connected, for better or worse.”

7. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many thanks to the students, staff and faculty at Oberlin College who provided the usage data gathered for use in this paper. Special thanks to Oberlin College CIT staff members Fred Lowery and Scott Saluga for their assistance on the use of various online tools. Also, special thanks to Barbara Winterich, secretary for CIT, for use of her exceptional editing skills.

8. REFERENCES [1] Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype [2] Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_networking [3] LiveJournal website: http://www.livejournal.com [4] Buch, Jason, “Facebook Allows Old Friends to Meet Up Jpeg

to Jpeg”, The University Star. Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, April 26, 2006 (http://star.txstate.edu)

[5] Pew Internet and American Life Project, Press Release of March 14, 2005, http://www.pewinternet.org

[6] IBID. [7] Di Stefano, Giorgia; Genco, Alessandro; Lovecchio, Laura;

Messineo, Rosario; Raccuglia, Paolo; Reina, Guiseppe; Santoro, Guiseppe; and Sorce, Salvatore: “An Augmented Campus Design for Context-aware Service Provision”. In Proceedings of the SIGUCCS Fall 2005 Conference (SIGUCCS’05) (Monterey, CA, November 6-9, 2005). ACM Press, New York, NY.

[8] Buch, Jason, “Facebook Allows Old Friends to Meet Up Jpeg to Jpeg”, The University Star. Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, April 26, 2006 (http://star.txstate.edu)

[9] Blackboard website: http://www.blackboard.com/products/as/communitysys

[10] Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_social_networks

272