14.6.1.4. Intellectual ]Impact on Conventional Courses. The purpose of most of the uses of CMC is to reduce problems caused by large geographic distances between colleagues. However, some very important effects from local uses can also be realized. Kuehn (1988) suggests that electronic mail can extend classroom discussions, increase the ease of evaluating student assignments, increase the connectedness of students and faculty, and increase both the social as well as an intellectual impact from this means of communication. Muffo (1987) also suggests that personal communications themselves can change due to the inclusion of computers, and particularly electronic mail, in the curriculum.
One of the problems observed by Grabowski (1990) was the need to increase opportunities for intellectual and social exchange among students. This includes new students who enter the program each semester and need to adjust to a new environment, establish new friends, adjust to a new pattern for studying, and juggle time for classes and life events, as well as seasoned students who are at the dissertation stage. Grabowski (1990) observed that there were several subpopulations of students: those who were heavy users of CMC, light users, one-time users, and those who did not use it at all. In order to evaluate the perceived usefulness, Grabowski mailed surveys to students who were currently enrolled, both users and nonusers. The principle findings can be summarized as follows:
Full-time doctoral students without children are the most likely e-mail users.
A high percentage of the users send e-mail to fellow students, friends, and faculty for the purpose of exchanging information or discussing ideas, and a lower number send e-mail to exchange social information.
For nonusers, "no need" (40%) was reported most as the reason for nonuse. Technical skills (13%) and convenience (14%) were not as important.
From the data, there was very little indication of social impact, but a very high indication of intellectual impact among users, with 23% of the respondents either agreeing or strongly agreeing with the statement about social impact; whereas 73% agreed or strongly agreed with the statement about the impact on their intellectual life.