CHAPTER ONE: Introduction

“Our Age of Anxiety is, in great part, the result of trying to do today’s jobs with yesterday’s tools.”

Marshall McLuhan

In one sense the famous quote from Oracle Corporation that “the Net changes everything” is both an under- and an overstatement of the premise guiding e-research. The birth of the first cost effective, globally interactive medium (the Internet) opens the door to modes of communication, transaction, data gathering and dissemination that are as profound as any other invention in the history of humankind. The Net creates a new global context in which many fundamental aspects of our social, educational, commercial and even spiritual existence is challenged, reshaped and expanded.

This new context operates at micro levels impacting the means, applications and the frequency of our communications with family, friends and co-workers. It operates at macro levels, facilitating global commerce, restructuring the workplace (including educational systems) and fundamentally shifting political systems. Living in a wired world both allows and forces us to rethink pre-Net conceptions of time, place, access, affordability, interactivity and decision making. However as the journalist Jeff Bradley (2000) noted “As a rallying cry, ‘the Net changes everything’ conveys all of the potential promise and peril of entering uncharted territory. But, as an operating philosophy, it leaves much to be desired.”

E-Research is designed as both a conceptual guide to the creation of an “operating philosophy” for research using the Net and as a practical guide for educational researchers. Making the most effective use of the Net challenges researchers to develop and practice their knowledge of research philosophy, ethics and basic methodologies. Philosophically, the Net-enhanced researcher acquires an attitude of curiosity, a critical, but accepting, attitude towards technological tools and a willingness to look at the world through new technological and communication lenses. The e-researcher realizes that a Net-based focus provides a new “frame” through which to study the world and the creatures that live upon it. E-research does not preclude nor does it obsolete the older methods and techniques of research. Rather, it adds new arrows to the researcher’s quiver. E-research operates under different economic, security and ethical constraints than other investigative techniques, thus both restricting and opening the door to augmentation or even substitution of traditional research techniques. E-research also challenges the researcher’s technical skills. Although it is not necessary to gain the skills of a network engineer, a computer programmer or a systems analyst to effectively use Net tools, it is important to understand the basic operational features of the Net. Such an understanding allows e-researchers to be critical consumers of new tools and provides a background upon which particular and relevant new knowledge can be acquired and built. Aiding the reader to understand, appreciate and control the underlying economics, operating techniques and ethical considerations of e-research is a primary goal of this book.

What is Research?

Research is a natural human process that each of us engage in from earliest childhood to advanced age. As children, our research focuses on understanding and manipulating our environment, usually aided by toys and parents and later by friends and teachers. As adults, our research needs diverge to unique interests – often related to our occupation but also covering our family concerns and leisure hobbies.

The Cambridge dictionary defines research as a “detailed study of a subject, especially in order to discover (new) information or reach a (new) understanding.” The reader will note that in our examples above the “newness” included in the dictionary definition can apply on an individual level, or on a societal level. Discovering something new for an individual, even if it is knowledge or information known to others, is a valid research endeavor even if it does not warrant distribution in learned journals.

As adults, the methods we employ in carrying out our research change over time as well. In formal school we acquire the literacy skills that permit us to learn from the work of others. We also learn to conduct active tests by which our ideas are confirmed, refuted and refined. We acquire the skills of reflection and intuition by which all parts of our mind and our experience are directed towards solutions to our research problems. We learn to apply our research in real life situations in order to solve problems or further our practical understandings. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, we learn to communicate our ideas. Through communication our ideas are further developed and honed. From all of these processes we learn that good research never leads to simple answers, but only leads us to further questions and opportunities to increase our knowledge.

Thus, research has many characteristics and qualities and operates in many different contexts. One of the most important of these qualities is quality itself. How do we know that the research we engage in as ordinary citizens, students or professionals is of high quality? To answer this question, we must first realize that perceptions of quality are themselves normative - determined by the community within which the research is distributed, applied and evaluated. In the 1970s most researchers clung doggedly to the belief that an unbiased “scientific methodology” guided and judged all our quality research. The scientific method purported to provide a set of principles and techniques with underlying assumptions of control, operational definition, validity and reliability that, if followed diligently, provided measures and guarantees of quality. However the scientific method began to be questioned by many researchers in the 80s and 90s. It was argued that there is sufficient evidence that all forms of knowledge are socially constructed and thus depend, at least to some degree, on consensual agreement for their veracity. This agreement is socially and culturally defined and thus our conception of quality relies on common understandings of context, tools and language to be judged as quality. The divergence of opinion between quantitative research (the ‘scientific’ paradigm) and qualitative research (the ‘interpretive’ paradigm) practices continues today. We discuss research paradigms further in Chapter 3.

Despite the differences in perception and the ontology of research, there are a few characteristics that define quality in research. First, quality research is important research. It addresses real concerns of importance to you, your colleagues and to a wider social context. Second, quality research is adroitly focused on solutions to an important problem. It follows, then, that it addresses questions that are answerable. It constantly surprises us to carefully read the research questions drafted by beginning researchers, only to discover on close reading that answering the question is either logically, philosophically, or ethically impossible! Third, quality research is systematic. By this we mean that quality research involves more than “hit and miss” probes into a bewildering environment. Through careful planning, attention to detail and reflection, the research process develops or adopts a structured approach that attempts to reveal as much as possible about the variables of context that affect the objects of our investigation. Fourth, quality research is transparent. From the extreme replication imperatives of the science laboratory, to the thick descriptions of the ethnographic researcher, quality research attempts to make the process of research as visible as possible so that it can be understood, if not replicated, by the interested observer. Fifth, quality research is made publicly available. Despite the growing practice of hiding research results to protect their commercial value, it is important that research be made visible, primarily so it can be validated within a social context. Research also needs to be made visible in order to contribute to the human condition. In an increasingly commercial world it sounds naive to be promoting free distribution of research results – yet we are reminded of Isaac Newton’s famous quote “If I saw further, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants.” We will not benefit from the view from others’ shoulders, if the results of their research are hidden behind commercial or political barriers. Fortunately, the Net provides new platforms for making research visible, and is even underlying the popular (if multiply attributed) insight that “information wants to be free” (Clarke, 2000).

The use of the Net in itself adds little intrinsic value to enhancing the quality of research. However, like any useful tool in the hands of a skilled practitioner, the Net can provide opportunities and techniques that enhance many components of our research practice. In this book we attempt to illustrate through instruction, hints, our experiences, and examples the means by which the Net can be used to improve research practice. This book also discusses some of the perils of conducting Net-based research. While the Net provides many new opportunities to improve our research practices, it also introduces new problems and challenges.

What Does the “e” in e-Research Mean?

We often joke that adding the letter “e” in front of every noun we use is an unfortunate distinction of the early years of this Internet technology era. We struggled with the stigma of trendiness that will mark and date a text referring to “e-research.” In fact we fear a visit from the “Society for the Preservation of the Other 25 Letters,” when they see the effusive use of the “e” prefix used in this book! However, we think the term captures some of the excitement, breadth and diversity offered by an ever increasing and sometimes bewildering set of new Net-based tools and techniques. Only a few years ago “e” (as in email) meant a tool that was primarily text-based operated on relatively insecure communications link and provided wide variation of performance and “quality of service.” In education, e-applications focused on the lowest common denominators so that students and faculty could access contents with even the slowest and most dated of hardware. Convergence of audio, video and multi-media channels to a Net-based platform, which is continuing to fall in price and rise in power of computer hardware, has resulted in an explosion of applications in almost every domain. This has also resulted in a change of our connotations of the Net or the “e” word. Generally, the “e” prefix means that the activity or noun modified takes place on a high speed, digital network, that is available “anytime/anywhere.” Today that network is the Internet.

What Kinds of Educational Research Activities are Meant by “e-Research”?

The Net now supports a wide variety of communication modes and information processing tools. As such, it is becoming easier to define the subset of behaviors that cannot be researched on the Net as opposed to those that can be the subject of research. Not withstanding the dangers of missing novel ways of using the Net, we list below some of the most obvious manifestations of e-research.

Distribution and retrieval of text-based surveys.
Open ended or structured text-based interviews conducted via email or computer-mediated conferencing.
Focus groups using real time Net-based video or audio conferencing.
Analysis of Web logs and other tracking tools for measurement and synthesis of online activities.
Net-based telephone interviews.
Analysis of text transcripts of learning or social activities.
Analysis of social behavior in virtual reality environments.
Online assessment and/or evaluation of performance or knowledge.

We expect that the increasing power and ubiquity of the Net coupled with its imaginative use by researchers will result in continuing expansions and variations of the scope of research practiced around the globe.

The Special Task of e-Research

The networked world is awash in volumes of data. E-research helps us to convert this data into information and present and disseminate this information in ways that allow it to be transformed into knowledge and wisdom by the researchers, their sponsors, educators, and the general public. The quantity of information produced, coupled with the speed in which it can be accessed, filtered, sorted and combined creates endless opportunity. However, this abundance forces e-researchers to be more selective and critical of the veracity of the data they gather. In addition, it is becoming increasingly apparent that we can no longer, if we ever could, gather all relevant data. Instead we must make judicial decisions about which type and what quantity of data is most helpful in answering our research questions.

E-research is more than a set of new research techniques. The quantum physicist studying sub-atomic particles realizes that the very act of viewing these tiniest of particles disturbs and changes the objects. The e-researcher is a component of the Net. E-researchers provide and create tools for analysis and conceptual understanding of human behavior as it develops on the networks. In some cases the e-researcher is the outside evaluator, in other contexts the practitioner-e-researcher is both a participant and researcher of the environment in which the research occurs. E-researchers are also usually members of other Net communities, thus they bring their experience and insights into the way online individuals and groups communicate and operate. They act as Net-savvy artisans of a network culture. Informally, they interact with peers, family and in the workplace – investing their time in the development of new skills and in the process gaining “Net efficacy.”

E-research takes its place along side e-commerce and e-learning as new ways to act, understand, and create knowledge in a networked society. New tools require new skills, but also allow creativity and an ability to manipulate the world in new ways. These new tools span both the physical and temporal barriers. We are accustomed to conceiving of technology spanning geography – after all, humans have had nearly 150 years since the telegraph first allowed us to communicate in real-time over geographic distance. The Net easily meets this challenge. But equally, the Net spans temporal distance. Users are now able to benefit from asynchronous interaction through tools of email, voicemail or the capture and time-shifting of audio or visual presentation. New tools such as asynchronous voice conferencing and “video capture” (an advanced form of picture mail) promise to allow full multimedia interaction in asynchronous formats.

Asynchronous communication too, has been with us for a long time. From St. Paul’s letters to the early Christian church to the friendships that have grown and flourished via pen pal letters – asynchronicity has provided a uniquely reflective means by which humans communicate and by which we are communicating with you, at this very moment. However, asynchronicity has long been confounded with text literacy. Now we realize that text-based communication, supported either asynchronously or in real-time, (as practiced in ICQ – an online instant messaging program, MOOs – Mud, Object Oriented, MUDs – Multi-User Dimension, Palaces and other Net based chat systems) is but one form of communication. In an advanced, Net-based context voice, sound and video become as easily formatted, stored and retrieved as text. Already, early versions of asynchronous voice conferencing (for example, see www.wimba.com) and asynchronous “virtual people speaking your email” animations of voice messaging (i.e., http://www.lifefx.com) are becoming available in addition to synchronous audio and video conferencing.

Since the Net so aptly supports both synchronous and asynchronous communication, it should be no surprise that e-research utilizes this capability to provide a wide variety of research methods and tool capacities. Research applications can be customized to take advantage of either synchronous or asynchronous formats – or both. For example, online focus groups allow the researcher to gather groups of subjects from widely disbursed geographic locations. These groups can be conducted synchronously using voice or text formats so that instant feedback is provided to both researchers and participants, and the immediate presence can be used to build common understandings and ideas. Alternatively they can be conducted asynchronously, permitting reflective interactions that are not dominated by the participants who think and communicate most quickly.

E-research also utilizes the distributed data and information processing capacity of the Net. Stand-alone data processing applications (including statistics programs, registration systems, and programs that monitor network activity) are all becoming “Net enabled” and thereby can be applied to locations and times that are noncontingent with the behavior or process being studied. Thus, e-researchers are able to use research tools, monitor activity, and collect data without traveling large distances or coordinating local time schedules.

E-research permits the exploration of new fields of knowledge. As more social and economic interaction takes place on the networks, new fields of human endeavor are created. Researchers can now study the ways in which students learn online or how online education and civic groups make decisions and conduct business. These new human activities grow in economic and political importance daily. These fields of study are not readily accessible to researchers who cannot access or who lack the skills to proficiently use the Net. Thus, this text provides a guide that can be used to for both instruction and motivation to acquire and effectively use the new tools and techniques of networked research.

If, as Benedikt (1991) argues, cyberspace “has a geography, a physics, a nature and a rule, of human law” (p.123), then obviously it is an environment that can provide insight into human behavior and nature, through examination of the cultural and sociological constructs that humans create within this context. Thus, cyberspace as an evolving and extremely intricate human context attracts the researcher. It is unclear how many of the research tools that have been developed, tested and normed in real communities will be as useful in virtual contexts. Likely, existing tools will need to be modified to maximize their usefulness in this new milieu. Moreover, it is certain that creative minds will develop new tools uniquely designed for producing both knowledge and wisdom in the virtual context. Thus, e-research is concerned both with the application and adoption of tools from the real world and the invention, refinement and calibration of a new genre of tools.

We are convinced that a networked society is not a fad and that we are at the beginning of a new era in human collective activity. This era is not marked by elimination of the value or unique functionality of face-to-face and place-bound interaction. Rather, it represents the growth of parallel and alternative forms of many types of human interaction and discourse. These parallel forms are not inherently better, nor worse, than pre-Net forms of interaction and education. However, network enhanced interaction better fulfills some human needs at certain points in time by providing access, convenience, utility, speed and cost effectiveness. These attributes result in the eager exploration of cyberspace by many citizens, thereby creating a new human context that selectively, and individually, forms a merged environment of networked and face-to-face environments. We know little of this merged context – either at a macro level, or at the individual interaction level. Thus, e-research is critically important in providing a means to first understand and then to create a networked social and economic context that assists individual human beings and their collective organizations to live productively, joyfully and securely on our planet.

Scope of e-Research

As we researched this book, it became apparent that the network was becoming an integral component of many activities that had been undertaken previously using non-networked tools. It also became obvious that new forms of behavior and community were being established in which the existence and support of the network were necessary for the behavior to exist. Thus, the scope and extent of e-research is expanding at unprecedented levels. What we needed was a conceptual rubric to help us to differentiate those forms of behavior and research activities that we were to examine in this book from those that we were to leave to other authors. Table 1 was constructed to guide us and may be useful for the reader in understanding where this book fits in the larger arena of research and network writings. The shaded cells are the focus of this book – activities in the un-shaded cells are adequately covered in earlier, more traditional research and methods texts.

Table 1 illustrates that e-research works at two quite distinct levels. In the top right quadrant, the Net is used as a new medium to undertake research tasks that were previously done using alternate media or without mediated tools at all. In the top left quadrant e-research allows us to investigate activity that itself would not be possible without the Net.

Research Attributes of e-Research

Studying the applications and communities that have formed in virtual space is a researchers’ dream world due to the data collection that is often integral and automatically gathered during online activity. The major activity of many communities is verbal discourse and the transcript of this interaction is routinely captured and stored on the Net as text files. These files can readily be imported into text analysis tools, thus eliminating cost, time and transcription. Second, the Net is renowned for the continuous tracking of most types of online activity, such as the sequence of participant activities at a site or the amount of use of an online resource. As such, it is capable of collecting valuable data that provides a unique window into human activity on the Net.

The Net also provides a unique context in which to study innovations in the social sciences and particularly in education. Modern learning theory stresses the value of multiple perspectives, of working with peers on collaborative and co-operative tasks, of searching and constructing information artifacts and of exploring and learning in multi-cultural communities. The Net provides new and very cost effective possibilities for each of these contexts. Many of the techniques being developed for online learning are finding application in the classroom – and vice versa. As we learn the unique educational capacity of both online and real-time classrooms, we will design learning exercises and activities that maximize each environment.

The Qualities of the e-Researcher

This book is designed to help researchers become proficient e-researchers. It does so, not by describing step by step details, or how to operate Net-based software (there are many books and other learning resources that address this task). Neither is it a book focused on developing generic or specific research skills – again there are specialized texts dealing with all of the methods and tools of good research practice. Rather, this book focuses on describing and illustrating, in clear and simple language, the variety of ways in which a researcher may use the Internet to enhance their professional practice. We also provide suggested activities and links to related Internet sites. This combination of conceptual overview of network programs, practices and operating processes, coupled with suggestions for hands-on activity, is designed to quickly increase the readers’ self efficacy in regard to both the skills of research and the capacity to effectively use networked resources.

Figure 1 illustrates the e-research skills that exist at the intersection of networking skills and research skills. The processes on the right of the diagram detail the course of research in any domain. We do not believe the function of each component of the research process is fundamentally different in either e-research or traditional research. The Internet skills listed on the left of the model are the prerequisite skills and capacity needed to be a competent network user. The e-researcher needs to develop these skills and will do so in the process of undertaking and completing an e-research project. Like other complex skills, there is no single minimal level of competency needed, but increasing skills at all levels results in more effective and efficient use. In addition, it can be assumed that these skills will change and evolve as the network and its tools evolve.

As Figure 1 also illustrates, our listing of Internet skills begins with “Internet efficacy”. Efficacy has long been associated with competence and accomplishment. Internet efficacy means the confidence and willingness to learn to use new tools and to become competent at applying these tools to authentic problems. Bandura’s (1977) pioneering work illustrates the importance of having the confidence to learn new skills and acquire new attitudes. A major source in creating the digital divide (those with technological skills and access to network technologies and those without) lies beyond economic and class attributes, and includes the self-confidence necessary to attempt to use new networking tools. The effective e-researcher has to have the confidence and willingness to experiment with and learn to use network tools – even those that are unfamiliar and, at least initially, are perceived as highly complex and perhaps intimidating. Eastin and LaRose (2000) developed an eight item scale to reliably assess (and in a sense behaviorally define a measurement for) Internet self-efficacy. This scale includes items such as “I feel comfortable describing network technology, software, searching for information and learning Internet applications.” They determined that it was not Internet skill alone that determined competency, but rather a strong sense of Internet efficacy that allowed users to effectively adapt to the requirements of working in this transitory environment.

Mental models of how the Internet works and the way that various organizations and resources function and communicate on the network are also needed to be an effective e-researcher. Mental models are usually graphical but can be abstract renderings or “pictures” of the way in which ideas, processes or practices are organized and related to each other. They help us to predict, anticipate and manipulate artifacts and structures around us. Construction of accurate metal models of the Internet and the way in which practitioners use it, is necessary for the development of Internet skills and competencies. For example, it is necessary to have access to a mental model of asynchronous decision making and robotic control before one can even imagine how a group of people could plant and harvest a “virtual garden” as was done in the TeleGarden project in 1996 (see http://www.usc.edu/dept/garden/). Readers interested in exploring Internet mental models will probably enjoy Mark Stefik’s 1996 book, Internet Dreams: Archetypes, Myths and Metaphors.

Access is perhaps the most obvious pre-requisite of skillful Internet use. However, access is more complicated than what might be initially apparent. There are different types of access, some related to the speed with which Internet resources can be used and others related to the capacity of the computer to render and display complex graphic images. Our own experiences convince us that the speed with which images appear is directly related to both satisfaction and persistence. In addition, use of many multimedia resources, especially those requiring extensive video, are restricted to those with both high bandwidth connection and equipment new and powerful enough to render the images in real time. Access is also available to researchers differentially in regard to both time and space. Those whose access to the Internet is restricted to home or office, or whose other personal commitments do not allow evening or weekend access, will likely not be as effective in their e-research projects as those whose access is available “anytime/anywhere.” Access is also restricted for those who have a variety of physical or mental disabilities. Much necessary e-research is needed to examine and develop prosthetics that allow all peoples to access and benefit from the Net.

Mastery of appropriate terminology is important in any field and especially so when the field is expanding and new terms are routinely introduced. There are many useful terminology reference sites and glossaries that can be linked to, as needed (see especially Jenkins, 2000). However, a new e-researcher may find that reviewing online tutorials such as those found at the WebTeacher site at http://www.webteacher.org/ or reading through a generic introductory text such as Maran and Whitehead’s Teach Yourself the Internet and World Wide Web VISUALLY (1999) can be most useful in acquiring basic terminology and functionality detail.

Eastin and Larose (2000) found that “prior Internet experience was the strongest predictor of Internet self-efficacy. Up to two years’ experience may be required to achieve sufficient self-efficacy.” While we would agree that time on task is an important component of Internet self-efficacy and effective use of the Internet, we do not think that two years of use is a prerequisite to doing effective e-research. However, we all know colleagues, friends and family members who acquire Internet skills and related Internet self-efficacy at vastly different speeds. Some of us, for example, seem to have a learning style or motivation preference that makes us predisposed to enjoy the challenges associated with the types of learning experiences found on the networks. Alternatively, others of us find learning these skills to be an arduous task. Our advice to the beginning e-researcher is to expect to spend time, some of which will involve exploration down “blind alleys”. The investment in time most often results in serendipitous returns – much of which will have application in later networking tasks.

Network skills come from systematic efforts that reflect the use of the technology. Some of us find that our skills are improved rapidly through enrollment in face-to-face or online courses. Others develop our skills through self-study and even random exploration. Whatever way you learn best, you can be assured that, over time, you will see a sharp increase in your networking and research skills as you undertake and complete e-research projects.

Finally, troubleshooting on the Internet is a particularly useful skill as many Net technologies are not fully developed or optimized for inexperienced users. As your self-efficacy as an e-researcher increases you will find both opportunity and need to develop trouble-shooting skills related to both Internet hardware and software. Our only advice is to use your research skills in these practical applications, searching, studying, and finding assistance from a variety of online and localized resources. It follows that you can be helpful and acquire a great deal of knowledge by collaborating with and assisting others struggling with networked tools.

When you expand your Internet skills and Internet self-efficacy, and combine it with your existing knowledge and skills as a researcher, you will be able to do effective e-research. We hope this text serves as a source of information that will turn into knowledge as you apply the information to personally relevant contexts. This knowledge bridges the tools and culture of the network and the established tradition of academic or commercial research. Increasing your e-research skills will increase your capacity to apply them in novel and effective ways. There are far too many perplexing questions and important, unsolved problems crying for solutions in both the networked and non-networked worlds of education. We hope this text helps us in at least a small way to contribute to their solution.

Perils of e-Research

We are not immune to the occasionally well-argued and always vitriolic critics of new technology applications in research and education (for example Neil Postman and David Noble). However, most of us who use the Net do not hold an extreme view of technological determinism. Rather, our moderate view of technological determinism acknowledges how we both use, and are used, by technology. The Net, like all technology, is capable of amplifying and extending the best and the worst of human nature – including that enacted in the practice of educational research. Indeed, it is easier now to conduct shoddy research, to more quickly and broadly disseminate incorrect or misleading results, to more readily exploit the trust of research subjects, to more easily plagiarize the work of others, and to rely on breadth rather than depth of coverage on most any scholarly topic.

As in other times of rapid change, the ethical, moral, and legal checks to such behavior often lag behind the capacity of the unscrupulous or uncaring to profit from their application. Therefore the e- researcher is cautioned always to reflect before acting, to seek the counsel of others within and outside their own community, and to be scrupulously honest and open when explaining and documenting their activities. Doubtlessly, we will make mistakes as we pursue new knowledge using new techniques. However, this is no reason to abandon our effort. Progress in both humanity and in scientific research has always advanced unevenly, making false starts and reaching dead ends. E-research offers no panacea – it guarantees neither efficacy nor quality of result. Yet, we are convinced that the promise exceeds the peril. We write this book with the hope that researchers will adopt e-research techniques and tools with the ever-present critical edge that defines all effective research.

On Naming the Net

Throughout the creation of this text we have struggled with the task of consistently naming the network environment that is the context in which our research takes place. Often we use the term “online” to refer to networked behavior, however we are becoming increasingly aware that wireless networking removes even the line from online activity! The more technical term “Internet” may be more accurate, but as networking progresses beyond the original TCP/IP (Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol) set of standards that defined the original Internet, the word itself seems too confining. We rigorously reject the term “virtual” with its connotations of unreality, since we are convinced that online behavior and the interactions and feelings that it invokes are very “real” to most participants. For similar reasons we do not use the term “cyberspace” that we believe belongs more appropriately within the slightly futuristic writings of its inventor, William Gibson, and less so in the more mundane world of network-based education development and delivery. Likewise, we do not aggrandize the notion of partnership between networked technology and human beings to indulge in the language of cyborgs or cybernetics – even though we remain open to the notion of the continuous development of some quite astounding technical aides to human processes, many of which will be neurologically linked directly to our bodies. Although much of the context of networking focuses on communication among and network users, we also do not use the term, “computer mediated communication.” The Net provides access to data, virtual environments, textbooks and many other non-human reference sources. Describing the use of these resources as “communications” seems too anthropomorphic for our liking. Thus, we are left with a shortage of precise and well-understood terminology. We have settled on the use of the adjective “networked” and the noun “Net” (with a capital) to describe this context. “Net” seems to reflect the technical nature of the environment, but also carries with it the context of human interconnectedness that is critical to educational applications of the Internet.

Our discussion of terminology underscores the multiple functions of the Net. At one level the Net is merely a technology. A technology based upon digital transmission, routing, error checking and sending and receiving of data in many formats. These transmissions may be private and exclusive to as few as two participants or as wide as broadcasts to millions. At the same time, the Net is a rich social environment or context in which many aspects of human life, from schooling, to commerce, to sex, are supported. The Net is also a sociological and psychological filter, in which ideas are formatted and in many ways de-contextualized into text or audiovisual constructs. The Net is also a business in which fortunes are made and lost. Finally the Net is a repository, providing means and tools to store and retrieve a host of cultural, academic, commercial and technical data.

We have experienced even greater difficulty describing non-networked activity, which we often like to contrast to activity mediated via the network. Describing non-networked research as “real” as opposed to “virtual” certainly does not work. Describing all aspects of life, which are not mediated on a network, as “off-line” activity also seems somewhat condescending and techno-centric. We are also not comfortable with the somewhat derogatory reference to humans as “wetware”, “meatware” or “liveware”. Thus, when we are discussing non-networked activity or contexts we usually refer to them as “face-to-face” or “traditional” and in their educational sense as “classroom” or “campus-based.”

An e-Research Example:

In the winter of 2001, Liam Rourke and I (Terry Anderson) developed a research proposal to investigate the capacity and impact of peer moderators in the computer mediated communications delivered graduate course that Terry was teaching. From our own teaching, we were aware of the excessive time commitments involved in teaching online and of the literature on peer teaching effectiveness. We had developed a tool to assess “teaching presence” (Anderson, Rourke, Garrison, & Archer, 2001) that we wanted to apply in a “real life” context. We used the Net to scour the ERIC database and Goggle engine to search for related terms like “peer moderators” and “peer teaching” and ordered texts not available in our university library using online interlibrary loan request forms. We created a research plan and shared it with a colleague for critical review. We then downloaded and completed the research ethics forms from our faculty Web page and, of course, submitted them electronically. Upon approval of the project, we drafted a letter of introduction to students, in which we informed them of the intent of the research and the proposed activities. We emailed this letter and opened a forum on a conferencing system for discussion of the research process. In some cases, a follow-up email was required, but eventually, all 18 students gave their consent to participate. We then developed a short Net-based survey on the elements of teaching presence. These results were triangulated with information from a transcript analysis. During the six weeks of the experiment, we emailed each of the students reminding them of the day they were to complete the weekly online questionnaire. After the course completed, we conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with a sample of the students, applied our transcript analysis instrument with two independent coders, and reflected on our own experiences of the course. From these data sources, we drafted and revised a paper and emailed it to the students for comments (as a member check). After a final revision, we submitted the paper to the Journal of Interactive Media in Education http://www.jime.ac.uk – a non-blind, peer reviewed, online journal. The article was reviewed by three reviewers and after some minor edits and improvements, it was accepted for publication by the editor. In addition, we posted the paper along with additional output from our research group on our own Web dissemination site at http://www.atl.ualberta.ca.

Was this an e-research example? Certainly the context and the site of investigation were based on the Net. We used the Net extensively to support data collection and administration of the project. For example, we conducted our literature review almost exclusively on the Net, used a conference to archive ongoing discussion with students, used email to obtain informed consent and to communicate, developed and administered a Web-based survey, and used the Web in a number of ways for dissemination of results. However, we weren’t dogmatically committed to the Net. We used the telephone for interviews, as not all students had IP (Internet Protocol) based telephony.

In this example, the Web was used in two common applications of e-research. First, it enabled and made more efficient the process of research practice as a means to research and disseminate the results. Second, the Net allowed us to investigate an educational activity taking place on the Net. Rapid communications with subjects throughout the course of the research as well as investigation of interaction through transcript analysis shaped the kind and nature of the research process.

Summary

The primary goal of this book is to help the reader to understand, appreciate and control the underlying economics, operating techniques and ethical considerations of e-research. Research has many characteristics and qualities, and operates in many different contexts. One of the most important of these qualities is quality itself. Quality research addresses important problems and is honed to find solutions to those problems. It is systematic, transparent, and publicly available. The Net provides us with new tools for quality research, as well as the exploration of new fields of knowledge. But the e-researcher must also have a set of research skills necessary to conduct quality e-research. These skills are twofold: Internet skills (self-efficacy, mental models, access, terminology, experience, and trouble shooting) and research skills (problem statement, literature review, data collection, data analysis, and dissemination).

References

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological review, 84, 191-215.

Benedikt, M. (1991). Cyberspace: Some proposals. In M. Benedikt (Ed.), Cyberspace: First steps (pp. 119-224). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Bradley, J. (2000, January). Online business still needs the basics. Washington CEO, http://www.washingtonceo.com/archive/jan00/0100-E-Com.html.

Clarke, R. (2000). Information wants to be free. [On-line]. Available: http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/II/IWtbF.html.

Eastin M., & LaRose, R. (2000). Internet Self-Efficacy and the Psychology of the Digital Divide. Journal of Computer Mediated Communications, 6(1). [On-line]. Available: http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol6/issue1/eastin.html.

Jenkins, S. (2000). Internet glossary. [On-line]. Available: http://www.unisa.edu.au/itsuhelpdesk/faqs/glossary.htm.

Stefik, M. (1996). Internet Dreams: Archetypes, Myths, and Metaphors. Cambridge, MS: MIT Press.