The relationships between teacher nonverbal immediacy and student course workload and teacher availability expectations

Communication Research Reports

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 275-282

  Mottet, Timothy P ^a   Parker Raley, Jessica ^a   Cunningham, Cory ^a   Beebe, Steven A ^a  

^a TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Course workload demands; Course workload expectation; Teacher available expectation; Teacher immediacy

Indexed keywords

EID: 33645232939     PISSN: 08824096     EISSN: 17464099     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/000368105000317482     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Cohen, J., 2003. Evaluating faculty candidates teaching during the search. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 56: 203–206.
2. Epting, L. K., Zinn, T. E., Buskist, C., and Buskist, W., 2004. Student perspectives on the distinction between ideal and typical teachers. Teaching of Psychology, 31: 181–183.
3. Frymier, A. B., Shulman, G. M., and Houser, M., 1996. The development of a learning empowerment measure. Communication Education, 45: 181–199.
4. Hoover, E., 2004, November 26. Students study less than expected, survey finds. The Chronicle of Higher Education, A31: A1
5. Kearney, P., Plax, T. G., Hays, E. R., and Ivey, M. J., 1991. College teacher misbehaviors: What students don't like about what teachers say or do. Communication Quarterly, 39: 309–324.
6. Kearney, P., Plax, T. G., Smith, V. R., and Sorensen, G., 1988. Effects of teacher immediacy and strategy type on college student resistance. Communication Education, 37: 54–67.
7. Kember, D., 2004. Understanding how students perceive workload. Studies in Higher Education, 29: 165–184.
8. Kember, D., Jamieson, Q. W., Pomfret, M., and Wong, E. T. T., 1995. Learning approaches, study time, and academic performance. Higher Education, 29: 329–343.
9. Kennedy, D., 1999. Academic duty, Boston: Harvard University Press.
10. Kuh, G. D., 2001. Assessing what really matters to student learning: Inside the National Survey of Student Engagement. Change, 33: 10–17.
11. Mehrabian, A., 1966. Immediacy: An indicator of attitude in linguistic communication. Journal of Personality, 34: 26–34.
12. Morreale, S. P., Hanna, M. S., Berko, R. M., and Gibson, J. W., 1999. The basic communication course at U.S. colleges and universities: VI. Basic Communication Course Annual, 11: 1–36.
13. Mottet, T. P., Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C., (Eds.). (2006a). Handbook of instructional communication: Rhetorical and relational perspectives Boston Allyn and Bacon.
14. Mottet, T. P., Richmond, V. P., and McCroskey, J. C., 2006b. “ Assessing instructional communication ”. In Handbook of instructional communication: Rhetorical and relational perspectives, Edited by: Mottet, T. P., Richmond, V. P., and McCroskey, J. C., 283–308. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
15. Pascarella, E. T., and Terenzini, P. T., 1991. How college affects students: Findings and insights from twenty years of research, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
16. Richmond, V. P., McCroskey, J. C., and Johnson, A., 2003. Development of the nonverbal immediacy scale (NIS): Measures of self- and other-perceived nonverbal immediacy. Communication Quarterly, 51: 504–517.
17. Sander, P., Stevenson, K., King, M., and Coates, D., 2000. University students’ expectations of teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 25: 309–320.
18. Shelley, P. H., (2005, January 2). Colleges need to give students intensive care. The Chronicle of Higher Education, p. B16.
19. Thweatt, K. S., and McCroskey, J. C., 1998. The impact of teacher immediacy and misbehaviors on teacher credibility. Communication Education, 47: 348–358.
20. Witt, P. L., Wheeless, L. R., and Allen, M., 2004. A meta-analytical review of the relationship between teacher immediacy and student learning. Communication Monographs, 71: 184–207.