4.5.2 Discussion List: Procedure

Internet discussion lists can also be referred to by the generic term of mailing lists which is a collection of e-mail addresses (Carroll Broadhead, 1994). Thus, any message sent to the list is automatically distributed to all members of the list in asynchronous time. Messages and information from mailing lists are distributed via regular Internet e-mail. Special software is not required to read or send a message to the list (Ibid.). Anyone with an Internet e-mail address can choose to join a mailing or discussion list. Mailing lists represent interest groups or topics of discussion (Falk, 1994) and constitute a convenient method for people on different computer systems from different parts of the world to discuss particular topics or share information. This study provided for discussion in both French and English by means of an English list called CREDO and a French list called CREO . Invitations to join CREDO were sent to six lists that relate to education and/or language learning (see Appendix B). Invitations to join CREO were also sent to six lists (see Appendix B). These lists in turn distributed the invitation to their members who would have immediately received the invitation to subscribe. Subscriptions were processed by a listserve (a specialized piece of software provided by the service provider) that managed the process of list administration (subscribing and unsubscribing). To send out a message to the list or to respond to any message on the list, subscribers needed only to send their message to credo@stemnet.nf.ca or to creo@stemnet.nf.ca. Haughey Anderson (1998) explain how the listserve program manages the list:

A list server program maintains a list of the names and e-mail addresses of everyone who is subscribed to the list. The list owner has the capacity to restrict membership in any way that he or she chooses. When a list member wishes to send a message to the other members on the list, he or she composes the message on e-mail software and addresses it to the list. When the message arrives at the server, it is reposted to all the members. Each member then receives a private e-mail message in his or her "inbox". Replying to this message sends it to all the members of the list, which in turn supports e-mail interaction among many people. (p.23)

The questions and topics for the discussion came from various sources. Besides topics, issues or questions raised by the participants themselves, questions and topics were also generated from the topics and issues raised in both the review of the literature in Chapter 3 and the conceptual and historical framework in Chapter 2. The discussion lists represented a highly effective means of providing an opportunity for teachers to articulate their reflections, recount their experiences, present anecdotes, ask questions, provide comments and suggestions, express frustrations and seek and share advice. The discussion list was meant to be an indirect means to provide teachers with an opportunity to express beliefs. For this reason, the questioning did not focus specifically on beliefs but rather on issues that might generate a discussion in which beliefs would be indirectly expressed.

In terms of the postings, their frequency was irregular with an average of approximately four to five postings per week over a period of approximately 40 weeks. Certain threads of discussion might prompt numerous responses during a week-long period. Other threads or comments and questions raised by the researcher elicited few, if any, responses. The number of postings and their frequency was highly irregular and unpredictable. The total number of postings, excluding those of the researcher, exceeded 200 for the duration of the study. While some of these may have been as much as two pages in length, others were a few lines or several paragraphs long (for examples of participant postings see Appendix C). Not all discussion was initiated or directed by the researcher (for examples of postings by the researcher see Appendix D). Participants frequently asked questions or posted comments in reaction to the comments of others. The English list CREDO was more active than the French list which had fewer members and which represented a more geographically dispersed and diverse range of individuals who may have had less in common pedagogically than their counterparts in the English list.