Advertisement

Journal of Computing in Higher Education

, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp 60–72 | Cite as

A content analysis of CESNET-L e-mail messages: directions for information delivery in higher education

  • Ed Neukrug
  • Richard Cicchetti
  • Julia Forman
  • Nicole Kyser
  • Rebecca McBride
  • Sharon Wisinger
Article
First Online:

Abstract

This study examined the content of email messages to the listserv “CESNET-L” in order to identify trends, common themes, and “hot topics;” to clarify its purpose; and to offer suggestions for the future of CESNET-L and similar email lists in higher education. CESNET-L is an unmoderated listserv mostly used by counselor educators and doctoral students in counselor education. This study examined all 9,197 email submissions between January, 2005 and December, 2008. Using an inductive approach, six researchers generated a list of 20 superordinate and 17 subordinate categories. After achieving high interrater agreement on a random sample of emails, two teams of two researchers found that the vast majority of the 9,197 emails were represented by the categories of Resource Request and Recommendations, Personal Communication, Program Development, and Employment Opportunities. It was also found that many of the categories were similar to categories in content analyses of other email lists that served faculty and related professionals. After examining the categories of the content analysis, a discussion is offered concerning whether the needs of faculty and others are best advanced through a listserv. The article concludes by making suggestions for the development of a designated website that could have multiple functions and increase the ease of knowledge and information sharing with faculty and related professionals.

Keywords

Content analysis CESNET Higher education Counseling Information sharing 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Bar-Ilan, J., & Assouline, B. (1997). A content analysis of PUBYAC—A preliminary study. Information Technology and Libraries, 16, 165–174.Google Scholar
  2. Berrios, R., & Lucca, N. (2006). Qualitative methodology in counseling research: Recent contributions and challenges for a new century. Journal of Counseling & Development, 26, 174–186.Google Scholar
  3. Bruck, B. (2002). Taming the information tsunami. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Press.Google Scholar
  4. Buboltz, W. C., Jr, Miller, M., & Williams, D. J. (1999). Content analysis of research in the Journal of Counseling Psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 46, 496–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Collins, L. H. (2007). Practicing safer listserv use: Ethical use of an invaluable resource. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 38, 690–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Computer Desktop Enyclopedia. (2009). LISTSERV. Retrieved, January 20, 2009, from http://lookup.computerlanguage.com/host_app/search?cid=C000401&term=LISTSERV.
  7. Edwards, L. M., & Pedrotti, J. T. (2008). A content and methodological review of articles concerning multiracial issues in six major counseling journals. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55, 411–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. FAQ. (2009a). What do you know about the members of the listserv? Retrieved January 20, 2010, from http://www.cesnet-l.net/FAQ/index.html.
  9. FAQ. (2009b). What is the purpose of CESNET-L? Retrieved, January 20, 2010, from http://www.cesnet-l.net/FAQ/index.html.
  10. Hara, N., & Hew, K. (2007). Knowledge-sharing in and online community of health-care professionals. Information Technology & People, 20(3), 235–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kennedy, A. (2007). COUNSGRADS listserv set to celebrate milestone anniversary. Counseling Today, 49, 3.Google Scholar
  12. Lederman, R. P. (1991). Content analysis: Reliability and validity. The American Journal of Maternal Child Nursing, 16, 199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lee, F., & Peterson, C. (1997). Content analysis of archival data. Journal of Consulting and clinical Psychology, 65, 959–969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. L-Soft. (2009). LISTSERV email list management software: Higher education. Retrieved from http://www.lsoft.com/scripts/wl.exe?qL=higher+education&F=L&F=T.
  15. L-Soft. (2010). Lists with 1,000 subscribers or more. Retrieved, January 20, 2010, from http://www.lsoft.com/scripts/wl.exe?XS=1000.
  16. Mahoney, K. T., Buboltz, W. C., Jr, Soper, B., Doverspike, D., & Simoneaux, B. J. (2008). Content analysis of Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research (Volumes 44–59). Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 60, 246–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McBride, R., & Neukrug, E. (2009). An assessment of response rates to surveys on a professional listserv (in progress).Google Scholar
  18. Neuendorf, K. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  19. Pennington, R., Wilkinson, C., & Vance, J. (2004). Physical educators online: What is on the minds of teachers in the trenches? Physical Educator, 61(1), 45–56.Google Scholar
  20. Portman, T. (2000). Inclusion of qualitative research: Content analysis of ACA journals. Washington, D.C.: ACES Research Promotion Focus Group at the American Counseling Association World Conference.Google Scholar
  21. Young, J. R. (2009). Change or die: Scholarly email lists, once vibrant, fight for relevance. Chronicle of Higher Education [Electronic version]. Retrieved August 15, 2009, from http://chronicle.com/article/Change-or-Die-Scholarly-E-/46962/.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ed Neukrug
    • 1
  • Richard Cicchetti
    • 1
  • Julia Forman
    • 1
  • Nicole Kyser
    • 1
  • Rebecca McBride
    • 1
  • Sharon Wisinger
    • 1
  1. 1.Counseling Program, College of EducationOld Dominion UniversityNorfolkUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options