Variations in learning, motivation, and perceived immediacy between live and distance education classrooms

Communication Education

Volumn 50, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 230-240

  Carrell, Lori J ^a   Menzel, Kent E ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN OSHKOSH   (United States)

^b DEPAUW UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Affective and behavioral learning; And powerPoint; Distance education; Gregorc cognitive style; Immediacy; Motivation; Perceived and actual learning; Technology

Indexed keywords

EID: 0035638860     PISSN: 03634523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03634520109379250     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Albright, R. C., & Post, P. E. (1993). The challenge of electronic learning. Training, 47, 27-29.
2. Andersen,J. F. (1979). Teacher immediacy as a predictor of teaching effectiveness. In D. Nimmo (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 3, (pp. 543-559). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
3. Andersen, P., & Andersen, J. (1982). Nonverbal immediacy in instruction. In L. Barker (Ed.), Communication in the classroom, (pp. 98-120). Englewood cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
4. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Company.
5. Christophel, D. M. (1990). The relationship among teacher immediacy behaviors, student motivation, and learning. Communication Education, 39, 323-340.
6. Christensen, L. J., & Menzel, K. E. (1998). The linear relationship between student reports of teacher immediacy behaviors and perceptions of state motivation, and of cognitive, affective and behavioral learning. Communication Education, 47, 82-90.
7. Cohen, J. (1998). Statistical powe r analysis for the social sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence E. Erlbaum.
8. Connick, G. P. (1997). Issues and trends to take us into the twenty-first century. New Directions for Teaching & Learning, 71, 7-12.
9. Comstock, J., Rowell, E., & Waite Bowers, J. (1995). Food for thought: Teacher nonverbal immediacy, student learning, and curvilinearity. Communication Education, 44, 251-266.
10. Cooper, P. J. (1995). Communication for the classroom teacher. Scottsdale, AZ: Gorsuch Scarisback Publishers.
11. Cyrs, T. E. (1997). Competence in teaching at a distance. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 77, 15-19.
12. Egan, M. W., & Gibb, G. S. (1997). Student-centered instruction for the design of telecourses. New Directions for Teaching & Learning, 77, 33-40.
13. Gill, P., & Myers, C. (1989). Classroom of the year 2001. ERIC document ED325066.
14. Gorham, J. (1988). The relationship between verbal teacher immediacy behaviors and student learning. Communication Education, 37, 40-53.
15. Gorham, J., & Zakahi, W. R. (1990). A comparison of teacher and student perceptions of immediacy and learning: Monitoring process and product. Communication Education, 39, 354-368.
16. Gregorc, A. F. ( 1985). The Gregorc style delineator. Columbia, CT: Gregorc Associates.
17. Guerrero, L. K., & Miller, T. A. (1998). Associations between nonverbal behaviors and initial impressions of instructor competence and course content in videotaped distance education courses. Communication Education, 47, 30-42.
18. Haynes, K. J., & Dillion, C. (1992). Distance education: Learning outcomes, interaction, and attitudes. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 33(1), 35-45.
19. Howles, L. (1997, September). Instructional technology in the classroom. Workshop presented at the Undergraduate Teaching Improvement Council Board Meeting, Madison, WI.
20. Imel, S. (1996). Distance education: Trends and issue alerts. ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education, Columbus, Ohio.
21. Jones, J. (1992). Distance education: A cost analysis. Iowa State Department of Education, Des Moines, IA.
22. Kearney, P. (1994). Generalized immediacy scale. In R. B. Rubin, P. Palmgreen, & H. E. Sypher (Eds.) Communication research measures: A sourcebook (pp. 169-172). New York: Guilford Press.
23. Lemke, R. A. (1992). Advancing distance education programs with ordinary technologies. In Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations at the Convention of the Association Educational Communications and Technology.
24. McHenry, L., & Bozik, M. (1995, April). Communicating at a Distance: A Study of Interaction in a Distance Education Classroom. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Central States Communication Association. Indianapolis, IN.
25. McLaughlin, M., & Ericson, K. (1981). Multidimensional analysis of the "ideal interpersonal communication instructor. Communication Education, 30, 397-398.
26. Menzel, K. E., & Carrell, L. J. (1999). The impact of gender and immediacy on willingness to talk and student learning. Communication Education, 48, 31-40.
27. Nilsen, A. (1987). Three decades of sexism in school science materials. School Library Journal, 117-122.
28. Norton, R. (1983). Communicator style: Theory, applications, and measures. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
29. Sanders, J. A., & Wiseman, R. L. (1990). The effects of verbal and nonverbal teacher immediacy on perceived cognitive, affective and behavioral learning in the multicultural classroom. Communication Education, 39, 341-353.
30. Simonson, M. R. (1997). Evaluating teaching and learning at a distance. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 71, 87-91.
31. Yeaman, A. (1994). Analysis of computers in education as a cultural field. Educational Media and Technology Yearbook, 20, 70-74.