Reconsidering the measurement of teacher power use in the college classroom

Communication Education

Volumn 56, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 308-332

  Schrodt, Paul ^a   Witt, Paul L ^a   Turman, Paul D ^b  

^a TEXAS CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH DAKOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Confirmatory Factor Analysis; Measurement Invariance; Student Affect; Teacher Evaluations; Teacher Power

Indexed keywords

EID: 34547363857     PISSN: 03634523     EISSN: 14795795     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03634520701256062     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2. Christophel, D. M., & Gorham, J. (1995). A test-retest analysis of student motivation, teacher immediacy, and perceived sources of motivation and demotivation in college classes. Communication Education, 44, 292-305.
3. Elliot, S. (1979). Perceived homophily as a predictor of classroom learning. Communication Yearbook, 3, 585-602.
4. Ellis, K. (2000). Perceived teacher confirmation: The development and validation of an instrument and two studies of the relationship to cognitive and affective learning. Human Communication Research, 26, 264-291.
5. Ellis, K. (2004). The impact of perceived teacher confirmation on receiver apprehension, motivation, and learning. Communication Education, 53, 1-20.
6. French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150-167). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
7. Frymier, A. B., & Houser, M. L. (2000). The teacher-student relationship as an interpersonal relationship. Communication Education, 49, 207-219.
8. Golish, T. D. (1999). Students' use of compliance gaining strategies with graduate teaching assistants: Examining the other end of the power spectrum. Communication Quarterly, 47, 12-32.
9. Golish, T. D., & Olson, L. N. (2000). Students' use of power in the classroom: An investigation of student power, teacher power, and teacher immediacy. Communication Quarterly, 48, 293-310.
10. Gudykunst, W. B., Yang, S. M., & Nishida, T. (1985). A cross-cultural test of uncertainty reduction theory: Comparisons of acquaintances, friends, and dating relationships in Japan, Korea, and the United States. Human Communication Research, 11, 407-455.
11. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
12. Kearney, P., Plax, T. G., Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C. (1984). Power in the classroom IV: Alternatives to discipline. Communication Yearbook, 8, 724-746.
13. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd edn). New York: Guilford Press.
14. Little, T. D. (1997). Mean and covariance structures (MACS) analyses of cross-cultural data: Practical and theoretical issues. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32, 53-76.
15. McCroskey, J. C. (1994). Assessment of affect toward communication and affect toward instruction in communication. In S. Morreale & M. Brooks (Eds.), 1994 SCA summer conference proceedings and prepared remarks: Assessing college student competence in speech communication. Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
16. McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1983). Power in the classroom I: Teacher and student perceptions. Communication Education, 32, 175-184.
17. McCroskey, J. C., Richmond, V. P., & Daly, J. A. (1975). The development of a measure of perceived homophily in interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research, 1, 323-332.
18. McCroskey, J. C., Richmond, V. P., Plax, T. G., & Kearney, P. (1985). Power in the classroom V: Behavior alteration techniques, communication training and learning. Communication Education, 34, 214-226.
19. Myers, S. A., & Rocca, K. A. (2000). The relationship between perceived instructor communicator style, argumentativeness, and verbal aggressiveness. Communication Research Reports, 17, 1-12.
20. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
21. Park, H. S., Dailey, R., & Lemus, D. (2002). The use of exploratory factor analysis and principal components analysis in communication research. Human Communication Research, 28, 562-577.
22. Plax, T. G., & Kearney, P. (1992). Teacher power in the classroom: Defining and advancing a program of research. In V. P. Richmond & J. C. McCroskey (Eds.), Power in the classroom: Communication, control, and concern (pp. 67-84). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Plax, T. G., Kearney, P., McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1986). Power in the classroom VI: Verbal control strategies, nonverbal immediacy and affective learning. Communication Education, 35, 43-55.
24. Richmond, V. P. (1990). Communication in the classroom: Power and motivation. Communication Education, 39, 181-195.
25. Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C. (1984). Power in the classroom II: Power and learning. Communication Education, 33, 125-136.
26. Richmond, V. P., McCroskey, J. C., Davis, L. M., & Koontz, K. A. (1980). Perceived power as a mediator of management communication style and employee satisfaction: A preliminary investigation. Communication Quarterly, 28, 37-46.
27. Roach, K. D. (1994). Temporal patterns and effects of perceived instructor compliance-gaining use. Communication Education, 43, 236-245.
28. Roach, K. D. (1995a). Teaching assistant argumentativeness and perceptions of power use in the classroom. Communication Research Reports, 12, 94-103.
29. Roach, K. D. (1995b). Teaching assistant argumentativeness: Effects of affective learning and student perceptions of power use. Communication Education, 44, 15-29.
30. Schrodt, P. (2003). Students' appraisals of instructors as a function of students' perceptions of instructors' aggressive communication. Communication Education, 52, 106-121.
31. Schrodt, P., Turman, P. D., & Soliz, J. (2006). Perceived understanding as a mediator of perceived teacher confirmation and students' ratings of instruction. Communication Education, 55, 370-388.
32. Scott, M. D., & Wheeless, L. R. (1975). Communication apprehension, student attitudes, and levels of satisfaction. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 41, 188-198.
33. Stephenson, M. T., & Holbert, R. L. (2003). A Monte Carlo simulation of observable versus latent variable structural equation modeling techniques. Communication Research, 30, 332-354.
34. Student, K. R. (1968). Supervisory influence and work-group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 52, 188-194.
35. Turman, P. D., & Schrodt, P. (2006). Student perceptions of teacher power as a function of perceived teacher confirmation. Communication Education, 55, 265-279.