Computer mediated vs. Face to Face, what's best?

Those involved in the delivery of e-learning, including this author, have claimed that computer-mediated-communication (CMC) and face-to-face (F2F) interaction are equivalent. This author was involved in the accreditation of the first program approved by the Middle States Association for delivery entirely online and proving the equivalent outcomes was part of that initial process. However, one instance can be an aberration and its important to continue to corroborate the findings.

A 2005 study (see reference below) has confirmed what we had stated to Middle States a decade earlier. Outcomes can indeed be equivalent even though more research needs to be performed to assess issues of greater score variance in the CMC case which appears to be due to prior acquaintance with the technology.

It was positive that many CMC learners noted that “this experience enhanced their communication skills, increased their awareness of technological challenges facing computer-mediated teams, and provided valuable experience for future job opportunities in industry.” While this is not the original intent or course objective it is a significant bonus derived from computer mediated learning and for this reason I encourage learners to participate in at least one e-learning course or training.

Ref:A COMPARISON OF GROUP PROCESSES, PERFORMANCE, AND SATISFACTION IN FACE-TO-FACE VERSUS COMPUTER-MEDIATED ENGINEERING STUDENT DESIGN TEAMS Whitman, Malzahn, Chaparro, Russell, Langrall, & Mohler. (2005) JEE 94 (3), pp. 327-333.