Session S3B E-teaching Simply with E-mail Julie E. Sharp1 Abstract. This paper describes e-mail as a simple, relatively low-tech, and effective way to enhance teaching. Focusing on the “boon” rather than the “bane” of e-mail, it presents practical methods for using e-mail as a teaching tool and for communicating with students more effectively. It reports results of a two-semester survey of engineering students in a technical communication course, updating the previous report of a one-semester survey. Items receiving the most responses from 59 participants indicate recommendations to faculty about communicating with e-mail in the following categories: format and organization, reminders and assignment information, usage, frequency, e-mail and the Web, and miscellaneous tips. Index Terms – e-mail, electronic mail, teaching methods, student survey, online teaching
with posting and downloading files and differentiating responses to a message board [9]. Some professors find only a few of its capabilities really needed. In contrast, using e-mail as a teaching tool is relatively simple. Unlike a few years ago when some faculty avoided e-mail [10], most faculty today send and receive e-mail effectively without being experts in e-mail software. It requires only a connection to the Internet, e-mail software (such as Eudora Light or Outlook Express), and minimal practice. E-mail requires little or no training and does not have the technical difficulties of other electronic strategies. For example, it is much simpler to e-mail a file for a conference proceedings than to transfer it by another electronic method. In addition, rarely does using e-mail result in crashing the computer or being bumped off-line as with some methods. Although we should not limit ourselves to e-mail, we can be pleased with its benefits [2].
Introduction Effectiveness In a recent journal article, Felder et al. discuss the need for engineering educators to use new teaching techniques to improve students’ learning [1]. In the last few years, in addition to techniques such as cooperative learning and inductive teaching, engineering educators have begun using the latest technological advances, which can sometimes be difficult or time consuming to learn and use [2]. This article discusses using e-mail as a simple yet effective teaching tool to enhance student learning and reports on a two-semester survey of student recommendations to professors. This topic is limited to e-mail sent by the professor to students (both collectively and individually) as a teaching tool to supplement rather than supplant face-to-face classroom teaching and individual conferences.
My rationale for using e-mail is that the benefits far outweigh the problems. As one student commented, “E-mail is a great way to turn in work, receive information about an assignment, and get help.” It offers increased interaction between professor and student, last-minute changes in plans or venues, and “just-in-time” information for assignments by providing tips when students are most likely to need them. It offers flexibility for students to send homework in an attachment after class and outside office hours. It is asynchronous and versatile enough to be used effectively without having a class Web page or message board [2]. While it increases the professor’s accessibility, it also offers the privacy and control of access that a phone call at home does not.
Simplicity Practical Considerations In recent years, new technology has made it increasingly easy for engineering educators to “e-teach” with a variety of methods and forms of electronic communication [3]-[7]. Some methods, however, require a major time commitment to learn and operate successfully. For example, one such software package is Prometheus, used by some of my faculty. Taking the university-offered seminars to learn the system requires four one-and-a-half-hour seminars on four consecutive days. The topics covered include creating courses, discussions and chat capabilities, online testing and grading, and HTML and attachment issues [8]. While Prometheus provides benefits and generally gets good reviews from students, it does have problems, particularly 1
A concern may be that a professor will be inundated with student e-mail. Teaching with e-mail does not require a major time commitment or sending numerous class messages, especially for small classes and a total semester load of no more than 100 students. Even in larger classes, the professor can devise an appropriate system [2]. For example, sending mass e-mails but curtailing individual messages would work. An instructor can match the e-mail frequency to the needs of each course. A course meeting three times a week (two sections totaling 35-44 students) with several assignments per week could benefit from a once-a-week
Julie E. Sharp, Vanderbilt University, Department of Chemical Engineering, Nashville, TN 37235,
[email protected]
0-7803-6424-4/00/$10.00 © 2000 IEEE October 18-21, 2000 Kansas City, MO 30th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference S3B-8
Session S3B mass e-mail clarifying assignments due and discussing any changes or emphases needed. This is the case with my technical communication course. Another course, such as my team-taught combined chemical engineering lab/technical communication course, with fewer and less varied assignments, may need only the occasional mass email message. Here are some techniques [2] for sending messages to the entire class and to individual students: • Install virus protection software and keep it updated to protect your computer from viruses inadvertently sent by students in attachments. Set the protection options to automatically scan incoming e-mail files. • At the beginning of the course, get the preferred email addresses from students. Some schools have these posted online as part of the online roll, providing either the capability for downloading or copying into your e-mail software. • Announce the course requirements for checking email (e.g., daily). • Let students know your general schedule for answering e-mail (e.g., office, home, or both). • Check in class after sending the first collective message for any problems receiving it and correct these. • Make the subject line as specific as possible, particularly if there is a change in the assignment or syllabus. • Put the main point or summary of the message up front in the first few lines. Otherwise, in a message longer than one paragraph, students may not scroll down far enough. This method also makes reading easier. • Use general-to-specific order in each paragraph after the overview. • Use whatever visual cues your e-mail software allows. My version of Eudora Light does not allow formatting with bullets, bold, or italics. However, other versions of software do. I use a system of an overview and numbered lists emphasized by indentation and capitalization. • Check your student e-mail at least once and preferably twice a day to allow for responses. Some e-mail software allows you to filter responses so that students’ messages can be read in a batch at one time. • Check messages the evening before a major assignment is due. • Send a mass e-mail with tips for success no later than one day before a major assignment is due. • Consider getting an alternative Internet connection if you have difficulty accessing your school’s connection from home during peak hours. Some companies offer free connection now, a couple without the annoying advertising.
•
•
• •
•
For attachment problems, make sure you know what version of the software a student is using. You may need to save your document as a Rich Text File (RTF) or as an older version of WORD, for example, since older versions usually cannot read more recent versions. If forwarding messages with attachments in some e-mail software (such as my version of Eudora Light), first save the attachment to your hard drive and then re-attach it before you forward. Proofread and correct confusing passages and inappropriate tone before sending the message. Doublecheck the recipient’s name before sending, especially if you are using the shortcut “New Message to” or “Insert Recipient” function. It is frighteningly easy for your finger to slip and send a wrong message to an entire class. Avoid sending too many mass e-mails; they diminish effectiveness.
Survey Description To get feedback on improving my use of e-mail, I surveyed my students. This survey covered two semesters, Fall 1999 and Spring 2000, of a technical communication course for engineering majors. The number of students responding was 59 (31 for Fall semester and 28 for Spring) out of 64 students enrolled in four sections. Of the 64 students, 75 percent were male and 25 percent were female. The age range was approximately 19-22 (with only one student being over 22 years old). Of the total enrollment, 20 percent were seniors, 50 percent were juniors, 28 percent were sophomores, and 2 percent were freshmen. Computer access was not a problem for these students, so they had no trouble checking e-mail. Most of them owned computers and also had access to about 100 computers in the Engineering School computer labs. Everyone used the same word processing software, which is standard in the school. This project started because I wanted feedback from my students about the effectiveness of my e-mail messages to the entire class. I expanded that to include recommendations they would make to all professors in general. In the Fall classes, I asked students to write responses to three questions about e-mail: • What’s working in this course? • What’s not working? • What advice do you have for your instructor and for faculty in general? From their answers, I made a questionnaire with 50 items of advice to faculty in general. Each item was a statement to which students responded as either agreeing, disagreeing, or having no opinion. Some also wrote comments. Their responses were to be anonymous although
0-7803-6424-4/00/$10.00 © 2000 IEEE October 18-21, 2000 Kansas City, MO 30th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference S3B-9
Session S3B a few students wrote their names. I classified the items into six categories: • Format and Organization • Reminders and Assignment Information • Usage • Frequency • E-mail and the Web • Miscellaneous Tips (mostly about content) There is some overlap, particularly with the categories of frequency, usage, and reminders. Students in the Spring semester responded to the same questionnaire used in the Fall. The results of the twosemester survey, in general, followed the Fall survey’s trends of agreement and disagreement except for four items (Table V in the Appendix, items 14, 27, 49, and 50). The Fall survey results are presented in another paper [2].
Survey Results: Student Recommendations to Faculty The number of students responding to the two-semester survey (59) is certainly not enough to generalize to the entire student population. However, perhaps these students’ views will offer some insight. Tables I-III list the items receiving the most agreement responses in order from the most to least. Table IV presents the items with which a clear majority (minimum of 59 percent) disagreed. Table V in the Appendix presents the complete results in each of the six categories. The top tier of student recommendations shows that these students highly value using e-mail to communicate with faculty. They check it more frequently than printed class materials and want messages with information about their assignments. They recommend using formatting and organizational techniques to make messages easy to read. Like professors, they are also concerned about being inundated with messages.
TABLE I (cont.) Statement Place urgent material first in the e-mail message. Notify students beforehand when there is a change in policy or grading. Use e-mail for clarifying assignments and reminding students about major assignments. Use e-mail to reiterate assignments, clarify, and list items due. E-mail is a valuable teaching tool.
Agree 92% 92% 90% 86% 85%
Four items tied for ninth place: TABLE II Four Items Tying For Ninth Place Recommendation
Statement E-mail helps students feel that professors are accessible. Use e-mail to connect to students. Use numbered and bulleted lists [i.e., formatting techniques] for ease of reading. Students check e-mail more often than the ClassPak [course materials]. Use e-mail to summarize assignments and emphasize key elements.
Agree 83% 83% 83% 83%
Two items tied for tenth place: TABLE III Two Items Tying For Tenth Place Recommendation
Statement
Agree
Avoid sending e-mail the day of an assignment.
80%
Do not send too many e-mail messages.
80%
Other Majority Recommendations
Thirteen additional items received agreement responses from a majority (75 percent to 60 percent) of the students. An analysis of this second tier of student ratings shows that most of these students (70 percent) still want the option of meeting with the professor and want to be notified of the Top Ten Recommendations professor’s office availability. Students are concerned with getting information about The following statements received the top ten rankings of assignments in time to apply it before the due date. Most of student recommendations, indicating the most agreement, the students, 70 percent, want a weekly (Sunday night) ranging from 97 percent to 80 percent (rounded reminder of assignment due dates and further explanation. percentages): In addition, 70 percent favored one comprehensive message about an assignment. The data is not clear about how TABLE I frequently this type of message should be sent. A hefty 71 Top Eight Recommendations For Teaching With E-Mail percent preferred messages to be evenly spaced out in time Statement Agree and relatively short. By a small margin, most students Include “Assignment Change” in the subject line 98% considered that two days before a due date is probably when appropriate. enough, but one day before is acceptable, and same-day Be concise because students will ignore wordy parts. 97% announcements are too late. More than I expected, 64 E-mail is a great way to communicate with 93% percent, favored getting a comprehensive message four or professors since office hours can conflict with five days ahead of time. For notice about changes and students’ schedules. possible difficulties with the assignment, 63 percent said that 0-7803-6424-4/00/$10.00 © 2000 IEEE October 18-21, 2000 Kansas City, MO 30th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference S3B-10
Session S3B such notices should be sent as soon as possible. In a later addendum to this questionnaire, intended to clarify this issue, 45 percent of 40 respondents said three e-mail messages a week sent to the entire class is too many and 32 percent said four a week. Contrary to my expectations, students did not favor Web page use over e-mail. Most (75 percent) recommended using Web links or attachments for showing examples. However, 63 percent recommended using the Web page to post changes in the schedule. Here are some representative student comments: • “I like the once-a-week reminders. I keep them for the whole week and refer to them . . .” • “I like the fact that you remind us of assignment deadlines and details about the assignments. It’s also good that you give hints and helpful suggestions based on your previous experience with students.” • “It’s nice to know a general time the professor leaves his or her office so we . . .can know when we should expect a response. If the professor checks email at home, that is also helpful information.” • “Use lists instead of long paragraphs because they are easier to read.” • “Make it short and sweet. The fewer words, the better.” Top Disagreements Six items received the highest percentages of disagreement, ranging from 73 percent to 59 percent (Table IV). These responses showed that students wanted e-mail messages to supplement rather than substitute for handouts describing assignments. They also favored e-mailing messages to the entire class over posting an announcement to the class Web page. TABLE IV Items With Which The Student Majority Disagreed
Statement Distribute assignments by e-mail. It saves paper.
Disagree 73%
Since I do not usually print a copy of an e-mail message, I forget that it is there. Save e-mail for person-to-person communication and post messages to the entire class on the class Web page. Put assignment details in attachments. Send lots of short e-mail messages. Only a few of my professors communicate by e-mail.
68% 66%
66% 61% 59%
The following student comments represent some of these results: • “I don’t believe that grades decided in the
•
course should be dependent on e-mail. For example, I don’t think that homework assignments should be given over e-mail only. . . .Use e-mail in a way that students shouldn’t depend on e-mail but can use e-mail to enhance learning.” “Using this [e-mail] too often becomes ineffective. Students have a tendency to ignore professors that write too much. The trick is to find a balance.”
Conclusions and Implications These student responses to this survey indicate the following conclusions: • Students value e-mail as a teaching and communication tool. [2] • E-mail has an immediacy and impact that reading class notes and materials does not have [2]. • Using e-mail to communicate with the entire class is effective. • Professors should use e-mail not only for announcements, but also for intervention techniques to promote learning [2]. • Professors should avoid sending either too few or too many group e-mail messages. • Professors should keep e-mail messages relatively short, preferably without attachments. • Professors should gauge how much time students need to receive messages about an assignment before the due date. • Students, while valuing e-mail communication from the professor, are nevertheless concerned about email message overload. • Students in this survey confirm communication experts’ advice about writing clear, concise, and well-organized e-mail messages. • One’s role as either writer or reader affects one’s performance as a technical communicator, sometimes causing a reversal. For example, when functioning as e-mail readers, my students recommended good technical writing principles that they do not always practice. On the other hand, when functioning as an e-mail writer, I sometimes needed their reminders of those same principles that I usually preach [2]. Although many professors use e-mail to communicate with students, 34 percent of my students agreed that only a few of their professors did. One student’s comment, therefore, makes a fitting close: Few of my professors communicate by email. Those that do, I feel they care enough about their students to give little reminders or words of encouragement and I appreciate it greatly. Come to think of it, it’s discouraging to think I have so many
0-7803-6424-4/00/$10.00 © 2000 IEEE October 18-21, 2000 Kansas City, MO 30th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference S3B-11
Session S3B professors that don’t have those extra 10-15 minutes a week to have any sort of extratextbook communication with their class that they themselves initiate.
References [1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
Felder, R.M.,et al. “The Future of Engineering Education: Part 2. Teaching Methods that Work,” Journal of Chemical Engineering Education, Vol. 34, No. 1, Winter 2000, pp. 26-39. Sharp, J.E., “E-mail as a Teaching Tool: More Perks than Problems,” ASEE 2000 Conference Proceedings, 13 pp. Available online at http://www.asee.org/conferences/search/20190.pdf. Goodson, C.E., and S. L. Miertschin, “Development and Implementation of Web Based Courses for Engineering Technology,” ASEE 1998 Annual Conference Proceedings, 5 pp. Available online at http://www.asee.org/conferences/search/00127.pdf. Goodson, C.E., S. Miertschin, S. Schroeder, and P. Daniel, “Experiences with Video Enhanced Collaborative Learning, “ ASEE 1999 Conference Proceedings, 6 pp. Available online at http://www.asee.org/conferences/search/99conf207.pdf.
[5]
Kraebber, H.W., “Using the World Wide Web to Support Teaching in Manufacturing Engineering Technology,” ASEE 1998 Annual Conference Proceedings, 6 pp. Available online at http://www.asee. org/conferences/search/00617.pdf. [6] Das, M.K., “An Innovative Use of WWW for Enhancing Student Learning,” ASEE 1997 Annual Conference Proceedings, 4 pp. Available online at http://www.asee.org/ conferences/search/ 00853.pdf. [7] Coleman, G.D., and G.W. Garrison, “Course Management Systems and HTML: Comparison of Two Approaches to Web-Assisted Instruction for Distance Learning,” ASEE 1999 Annual Conference Proceedings, 8 pp. Available online at http://www.asee.org/ conferences/search/99conf584.pdf. [8] Marler, M.W. “Re: Prometheus Registration,” [e-mail to J.E. Sharp], [Online], Available e-mail:
[email protected], 25 Jan., 2000. [9] Amy Pate, “New Software Key to Opening Cyber-Classrooms,” Vanderbilt Register, Nov. 29-Dec. 5, 1999, pp. 1-2. [10] Held, J.A., C.Y. Fitzpatrick, and J.E. Sharp, “ Empty Pathways: Faculty Use of Computer-Mediated Communication,” IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, December 1994, pp. 203-206. .
0-7803-6424-4/00/$10.00 © 2000 IEEE October 18-21, 2000 Kansas City, MO 30th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference S3B-12
Session S3B APPENDIX Table V
Format and Organization 1. Place urgent material first in the e-mail message. 2. Put assignment details in attachments. 3. Use boldface type or underline. 4. Use numbered and bulleted lists for ease of reading. 5. Be concise because students will ignore wordy parts. Reminders and Assignment Information 6. Give possible times for students to meet with the instructor to discuss ambiguous assignments. 7. Use e-mail to summarize assignments and emphasize key elements. 8. Send reminders the night before or one day ahead of time. 9. Include “Assignment Change” in the subject line when appropriate. 10. Use e-mail to reiterate assignments, clarify, and list items due. 11. Send one comprehensive e-mail explaining the assignment and reminding students about the due date. 12. Use e-mail just to clarify assignments. 13. Distribute assignments by e-mail. It saves paper. 14. Give handouts for assignments the old-fashioned way. Use e-mail strictly for reminders and not for additional information. 15. Use e-mail for clarifying assignments and reminding students about major assignments. 16. Most students do not start assignments more than two days before the due date. 17. Send messages about changes and difficulties with assignments as soon as possible because many students like to work ahead. 18. Do not send important messages the night before an assignment is due without warning students in class to expect it. 19. Send an e-mail with a weekly syllabus. Include Web links for explanations of special assignments. 20. Send an e-mail every Sunday night listing the week’s events. It could be just a summary of what’s in the ClassPak [course materials]. Usage 21. The tone of the e-mail should encourage questions. 22. Students check e-mail more often the ClassPak [course materials]. 23. Remember that some students do not check e-mail daily. 24. Sometimes messages get lost in a student’s mailbox. 25. Do not expect or ask for responses unless the message is sent to an individual student. 26. E-mail helps students feel that professors are accessible. Use e-mail to connect to students. 27. Few students will use e-mail to contact professors unless the professor shows a preference for it. 28. Only a few of my professors communicate by e-mail. 29. E-mail is a great way to communicate with professors since office hours can conflict with students’ schedules. 30. E-mail is a valuable teaching tool. 31. Since I do not usually print a copy of an e-mail message, I forget that it is there. 32. Tell students in class when an e-mail is going to be sent. Frequency 33. Avoid sending e-mail the day of an assignment. 34. Send a comprehensive e-mail four to five days before the assignment is due. 35. Using e-mail too often can become ineffective. Students may ignore professors’ messages if sent too often. Ex.: Professor writes the whole group when any student asks a question. 36. Keep e-mails relatively informal, terse, and quite evenly spaced out in time, somewhat like a good TV show, such as Moneyline or CNN. 37. Be consistent. Do not omit sending e-mails when students might be expecting them. 38. Send lots of short e-mails. 39. Do not send too many e-mail messages. 40. Different types of messages require being sent at different frequencies. E-mail and the Web 41. Create a forum on the Web page for students to post questions and to allow students and the professor to respond. 42. Put schedule changes on the class Web page and maybe notify students by e-mail also. When students read e-mail, we don’t always have our schedules with us; the Web is the easiest place to see a schedule. 43. Class Web pages are wonderful. 44. Only a few of my professors provide and use a class Web page. 45. In e-mail messages, provide Web links or attachments to show assignment examples. 46. Save e-mail for person-to-person communication and post messages to the entire class on the class Web page. Miscellaneous (mostly about content) 47. Do not send frivolous e-mails. We have enough as it is. 48. Notify students beforehand when there is a change in policy or grading. Many professors change policies and notify the class after the fact. 49. Include humor sometimes in your e-mail messages. 50.
Do not e-mail tips on giving oral presentations after some students have already presented. It’s not fair to the first group.
Omitted
Indifferent
Disagree
Agree
Combined Results from a Two-Semester Student Survey Giving Recommendations to Faculty About Teaching with E-mail (59 students, Fall 1999 and Spring 2000).
91.5% 11.9% 52.5% 83.1% 96.6%
0.0% 66.1% 15..3% 3.4% 1.7%
8.5% 22.0% 32.2% 13.6% 1.7%
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
69.5% 83.1% 69.5% 98.3% 86.4% 69.5% 52.5% 15.3% 40.7%
1.7% 5.1% 23.7% 0.0% 5.1% 10. 2% 22..0% 72.9% 37.3%
28..8% 10..2% 6.8% 1.7% 8.5% 16..9% 22..0% 8.5% 22..0%
0.0% 1.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.4% 3.4% 3.4% 0.0%
89.8% 62.7% 62.7%
5.1% 23.7% 18.6%
5.1% 11.9% 15.3%
0.0% 1.7% 3.4%
67.8% 54.2% 69.5%
18.6% 20.3% 18.6%
13.6% 25.4% 11.9%
0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
40.7% 83.1% 44.1% 39.0% 54.2% 83.1% 33.9% 33.9% 93.2% 84.7% 20.3% 33.9%
8.5% 11..9% 35.6% 37.3% 25.4% 6.8% 47.5% 59.3% 3.4% 5.1% 67.8% 16.9%
50.8% 5.1% 20.3% 23.7% 20.3% 10.2% 18.6% 6.8% 0.0% 10.2% 11.9% 49.2%
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
79.7% 64.4% 62.7%
11.9% 16.9% 13.6%
8.5% 18.6% 23.7%
0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
71.2%
3.4%
22%
3.4%
66.1% 15.3% 79.7% 47.5%
5.1% 61.0% 5.1% 13.6%
28.8% 22.0% 15.3% 39.0%
0.0% 1.7% 0.0% 0.0%
37.3% 62.7%
30.5% 15.3%
23.7% 16.9%
8.5% 5.1%
55.9% 49.2% 74.6% 13.6%
8.5% 40.7% 10.2% 66.1%
32.2% 6.8% 11.9% 16.9%
3.4% 3.4% 3.4% 3.4%
47.5% 91.5%
13.6% 3.4%
35.6% 1.7%
3.4% 3.4%
40.7%
10.2%
44.1%
5.1%
45.8%
27.1%
22.0%
5.1%
0-7803-6424-4/00/$10.00 © 2000 IEEE October 18-21, 2000 Kansas City, MO 30th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference S3B-13
