The use of asynchronous video communication to improve instructor immediacy and social presence in a blended learning environment

Blended Learning across Disciplines: Models for Implementation

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 38-57

  Borup, Jered ^a   Graham, Charles R ^a   Velasquez, Andrea ^a  

^a BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84855364604     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-60960-479-0.ch003     Document Type: Chapter

References (24)

1. Christensen, L., & Menzel, K. (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(1), 82-90. doi:10.1080/03634529809379112
2. Christophel, D. M. (1990). The relationship among teacher immediacy behaviors, student motivation, and learning. Communication Education, 39(4), 323-340. doi:10.1080/03634529009378813
3. 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(4), 292-306. doi:10.1080/03634529509379020
4. Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554-571. doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554
5. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105. doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
6. Gorham, J. (1988). The relationship between verbal teacher immediacy behaviors and student learning. Communication Education, 37(1), 40-53. doi:10.1080/03634528809378702
7. Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends, and future directions. In Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 3-21). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
8. Graham, C. R. (2008). Blended learning models. In Khosrow-Pour, M. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology (Vol. 2, pp. 375-382). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Inc.
9. Graham, C. R., Allen, S., & Ure, D. (2005). Benefits and challenges of blended learning environments. In Khosrow-Pour, M. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology (pp. 253-259). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Inc.
10. Griffiths, M. (2010). Improving the asynchronous video learning model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT.
11. Griffiths, M. E., & Graham, C. R. (2009a). The potential of asynchronous video in online education. Distance Learning, 6(2), 13-22.
12. Griffiths, M. E., & Graham, C. R. (2009b). Using asynchronous video in online classes: Results from a pilot study. Instructional Technology & Distance Education, 6(3), 65-76.
13. Griffiths, M. E., & Graham, C. R. (2010. (in press). Using asynchronous video to achieve instructor immediacy and closeness in online classes: Experiences from three cases. International Journal on E-Learning.
14. Gunter, G. A. (2007). The effects of the impact of instructional immediacy on cognition and learning in online classes. International Journal of Social Sciences, 2(3), 196-202.
15. Ice, P., Curtis, R., Philips, P., & Wells, J. (2007). Using asynchronous audio feedback to enhance teaching presence and students' sense of community. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(2), 3-25.
16. LaRose, R., & Whitten, P. (2000). Re-thinking instructional immediacy for web courses: A social cognitive exploration. Communication Education, 49(4), 320-338. doi:10.1080/03634520009379221
17. Meheabian, A. (1969). Some referents and measures of non-verbal behavior. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 1, 213-217.
18. Overbaugh, R. C., & Casiello, A. R. (2008). Distributed collaborative problem-based graduate-level learning: Student's perspectives on communication tool selection and efficacy. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(2), 497-515. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007.02.017
19. Parsad, B., & Lewis, L. (2008). Distance education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions: 2006-2007. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009044.pdf
20. Rice, R. E., Hiltz, S. R., & Spencer, D. H. (2005). Media mixes and learning networks. In Hiltz, S. R., & Goldman, R. (Eds.), Learning together online: Research on asynchronous learning networks (pp. 215-237). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
21. Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (1999). Assessing social presence in asynchronous, text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14(2), 50-71.
22. Rovai, A. (2002). Building sense of community at a distance. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 3(1).
23. Sirotnik, K. (2001). Renewing schools and teacher education: An odyssey in educational change. Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
24. Velasquez, A., Graham, C., & McCollum, K. (2009). Online social networking used to enhance face-to-face and online pre-service teacher education courses. In I. Gibson, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2009. Chesa-peake, VA: AACE.