Educators feel frustrated and sometimes, overwhelmed. Students feel left out because of not being familiar with computers. Both are feeling the results of Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) and authors, Vrasidas and McIsaac, attempt to explain why they are feeling this way. The core of this article is interaction and our authors researched, using an online class, what it is like to interact online.

    The class being used for research meets face-to-face half the time and the other half is spent online. Interviews and questionnaires were used to elicit responses concerning both educator and student online experiences. The results showed that structure influences interaction and though the requirment of online interaction existed, findings still underscored the correlation of structure to interaction. From this, we find there are students that no matter what the structure are hesitant about interaction online.

    The authors assert that there little doubt as to the advances in conferencing software that is a key factor in promoting participation and dialogue. It is important for educators to structure for dialogue because learner-learner interaction is an important component of dialogue according to our authors. Though, in this study interactions were inhibited to an extent partly, our authors fee, because of in-class interaction. This interaction may substitute enough dialogue as to prevent online discussions and interaction. One aspect of the study is important and that is the findings that prior experience with CMC influenced interaction. Being comfortable with and knowing what to expect helped those students interact more where students not familiar with the technology were more hesitant and less involved in interaction.

    Another issue that influenced interaction is feedback. It was found that message postings continued as long as there was feedback. When the feedback was delayed message posting usually stopped until feedback was received. The authors note that when students do not get feedback they feel they are posting to an empty network.

    Though the study has some shortcomings such as comparing student attributes such as computer users to computer novices, the work does point us towards good suggestions. Educators need to structure interaction into their courses. Structuring interaction leads to less ambiguity and supports good online discussions. Feedback is also critical because structure needs to be supported with recognition. And finally, experience with the technology leads to success in online interaction. Students who do not possess these skills either must have help by teaming with an experienced user or supplemented with help in using the technology.

    Overall, this article is well written, informative, and helpful. The results of the experiment ought to help better equip educators for successful interactive online experiences for both themselves and their students.