The Relationship Between Teacher Immediacy Behaviours And Distant Learners’ Social Presence Perceptions In Videoconferencing Applications

Year 2008, Volume: 9 Issue: 1, 180 - 192, 01.03.2008

Mujgan Bozkaya

Abstract

Videoconferencing systems combine face-to-face and mediated interactions in distance education. We extend the use of a Social Presence measure to on-site (face-to-face) learners and distant learners. Comparison between physically present and distant located learners did not indicate significant differences in social presence. Also results indicate that the predicted social presence score for distance instruction is slightly lower than for the on-site instruction for high nonverbal behavior while the reverse is true of low non verbal behaviors. Predicted social presence for face to face instruction is quite higher than for the distance instruction for the high verbal behaviors while the reverse is true of low verbal behaviors. It means that students’ social presence is predicted to be higher in the face to face setting comparing to the videoconferencing course in both models. Additionally, when both nonverbal and verbal behaviors increase, the predicted social presence is facilitated, controlling for the grouping variable. In other words, instructors’ nonverbal and verbal communication skills enhance learners’ social presence in either environment.

Keywords

Teacher Immediacy Behaviour; Social Presence; Videoconferencing.

References

• Andersen, J., Andersen, P., & Jensen, A (1979). The measurement of nonverbal
• Immediacy. Journal of Applied Communication, 7, 153-180. Andersen, J. F. (1979). Teacher immediacy as a predictor of teaching effectiveness. New
• Jersey: Transaction Books. Argyle, M. & Dean, J. (1965). ― Eye contact, distance and affiliation‖. Sociometry, ,289-304.
• Booth- Butterfield, S., Mosher, N., & Mollish, D. (1992). Teacher Immediacy and student involment: Adual process analysis.Communication Research reports,9, 13-22.
• Burgeon, J., Buller, D., & Woodall, W. (1996). Nonverbal Communication: The unspoken Dialogue (2.nd): McGraw-Hill.
• Christophel, D. M. (1990). The relationship among teacher immediacy behaviors, student motivation and learning. Communication Education, 39, 323-340.
• Daft, R. L.,& Lengel, R. H. ( 1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial behaviour and organizational design. Research in organizational Behaviour, 6, 191-233.
• DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and application, Sage Publications, California.
• George, D., & Mallery, P. (1995). SPSS: Step by step. Belmont CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
• Griffiths, D., Stirling, D. W., & Weldon, L. K. (1998). Understanding Data: Principles & practice of statistics. Queensland: John Wiley & Sons.
• Gorham, J. (1988). The relationship between verbal teacher immediacy behaviors and student learning. Communication Education. 37, 40-53.
• Hackman, M & Walker, K. (1990). Instructional communication in the televised classroom: the effects of system design and teacher immediacy on student learning and satisfaction. Communication Education. 39 (3), 196-206.
• Kydd, C.T. & Ferry, D.L. (1994). Managerial use of videoconferencing. Information & Management, 27 (6), 369-375.
• McIsaac, M. S., & Gunawardena, C.N. (1996).Distance Education. In Jonassen, D
• (ed.) Handbook for research on educational communications and technology, Scholastic Press, New York, pp.403-437. Mehribian, A. (1967). Attitudes inferred from non-immediacy of verbal communication.
• Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 6, 294-295. Murphy, K. L., & Farr, C.W.(1993). The critical role of the ID in interactive television: The value of immediacy. In proceedings of selected research and development presentations at the convention of the AECT sponsored by the Research and Theory Division, New Orleans, LA, January 13-17.
• Netemeyer, R. G, Bearden, W. O and Sharma, S. (2003): Scaling Procedures: Issues and Applications, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
• Newliep, J. (1997). Communication Research a cross-cultural comparison of teacher immediacy in American and Japanese College classrooms. Communication Education, (4), 431.
• Richmond,V.P., Gorham, J.S., & McCroskey, J.C.(1987). The relationship between selected immediacy behaviours and cognitive learning. In M. McLauhhlin (Ed.),
• Communication Yearbook 10 (pp. 574-590). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Richmond, V. P., McCroskey, J. C., & Johnson, A. E. (2003). Development of the Nonverbal
• Immediacy Scale (NIS): Measures of self- and other-perceived nonverbal immediacy. Communication Quarterly, 51, 502-515. Rifkind, L. J. (1992). Immediacy is a predictor of teacher effectiveness in the instructional television classroom.Journal of Interactive Television, 1(1), 31-38.
• Sanders, J. A., & Wiseman, R. L.(1990). The effects of verbal and nonverbal teacher immediacy on perceived cognitive, affective and behavirol learning in the multiculturel classroom. Communications Educations, 39, 341-353.
• Short, J., Willliams, B., & Christie, B (1976). The Social Psycholgy of elecommunications. London: Wiley.
• Siktin, S., Sutcliffe, K., & Barrios- Choplin, J. (1992). A Dual- Capacity Model of communication Media Choice in Organizations. Human Communication Research, 18 (4), 563-598.
• Thweatt, K. S., McCroskey, J. C. (1996). Teacher nonimmediacy and misbehavior:
• Unintentional negative communication. Communication Reseach Reports, 13 (2), 204. Titsworth, B. S. (2001). Immediate and delayed effects of interest cues and engagement cues on students‘ affective learning. Communication Studies, , 169-179.
• Trevino, L., Lengel, R. & Daft, R. ( 1987). Media Symbolizm, Media Richness, and media Choice in Organization. Communications Research, 14( 5), 553-574.
• Walter, J.B. & Burgoon, J.K. ( 1992). Relational Communication in computer-mediated interaction, Human Communication Research, 19 (1), 50-88.