Steven A. Beebe

Instructors Who Resist “College Lite”: The Neutralizing Effect of Instructor Immediacy on Students’ Course-Workload Violations and Perceptions of Instructor Credibility and Affective Learning

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of an instructors nonverbal immediacy behaviors and course-workload demands on student perceptions of instructor credibility and student higher-order affective learning. H1 and H2 predicted that an instructors nonverbal immediacy behaviors would neutralize the instructors violations of students’ course-workload expectations in a manner that would preserve students’ perceptions of instructor credibility and higher-order affective learning. H1 and H2 were supported. H3 predicted that students who experienced a highly immediate instructor with moderate course-workload demands would report significantly more higher-order affective learning than students who experienced a highly immediate instructor with low or high course-workload demands. H3 was not supported. Implications for instructors are discussed.

The effects of student verbal and nonverbal responsiveness on teacher self‐efficacy and job satisfaction

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of student verbal and nonverbal responsiveness on teacher self‐efficacy and job satisfaction. Over a quarter (26%) of the total variance in teacher self‐efficacy and over half (53%) of the total variance in teacher job satisfaction were attributable to student verbal and nonverbal responsiveness. Rather than student verbal and nonverbal responsiveness interacting, the analyses of variance yielded significant main effects for both the verbal responsiveness and nonverbal responsiveness independent variables on each of the teacher self‐efficacy and job satisfaction dependent variables. Overall, student nonverbal responsiveness had a greater effect on teacher self‐efficacy and job satisfaction than verbal responsiveness. Also, teacher job satisfaction was more susceptible to student verbal and nonverbal responsiveness than teacher self‐efficacy. Limitations and implications are reviewed.

Eye contact: A nonverbal determinant of speaker credibility

Because it is hypothesized that eye contact contributes to a speakers perceived credibility, and because there is a dearth of studies examining the effects of eye contact in a live public‐speaking situation, this study examined the effects of eye contact on speaker credibility in a live public‐speaking situation. Results indicated that an increase in the amount of eye contact generated by a speaker significantly increased the speakers credibility in terms of qualification and honesty factors. Thus, this study provided documentation for the importance of eye contact in a public‐speaking situation.

Relationships between teacher nonverbal immediacy, student emotional response, and perceived student learning

The purpose of this study was to use emotional response theory as a way to explain the relationships between students’ perceptions of teacher immediacy behaviors and their cognitive and affective learning. Emotional response was conceptualized and measured using a three dimensional approach: pleasure, arousal, and dominance (Mehrabian & Russell, 1974; Russell & Barrett, 1999). It was hypothesized that students who experience an increase in pleasure, arousal, and dominance would self‐report increased levels of affective and cognitive learning. To support the claim that emotional response may explain the immediacy effect, it was also hypothesized that students’ pleasure, arousal, and dominance would account for more of the unique variance in perceived learning than teacher nonverbal immediacy behaviors. The first hypothesis was supported and the second hypothesis was partially supported.

Instructional Communication Predictors of Ninth-Grade Students’ Affective Learning in Math and Science

The purpose of this study was to examine how students’ perceptions of their teachers’ instructional communication behaviors were related to their affective learning in math and science. A survey was used to collect perceptions from 497 ninth-grade students. The following conclusions were yielded from the data: (1) students’ perceptions of their math and science teachers’ use of clarity and content relevance behaviors, rather than their teachers’ use of nonverbal immediacy and disconfirmation behaviors, predicted students’ desire to pursue additional study in math and science as well as consider careers in the fields of math and science; (2) students did not perceive meaningful differences in their affective learning between math/science and nonmath/science courses; and (3) students perceived minimal differences between their math/science and nonmath/science teachers’ use of instructional communication behaviors.

The Relationships Between Student Responsive Behaviors, Student Socio-Communicative Style, and Instructors’ Subjective and Objective Assessments of Student Work

The purpose of this study was to examine whether instructor perceptions of student responsive behaviors and student socio-communicative style were related to instructors’ subjective (speech presentation) and objective (multiple-choice exam) assessments of student work. The results suggest that student nonverbal and verbal responsive behaviors positively influence instructor assessments of student speech grades accounting for 8% and 11% of the variance, respectively. Instructor perceptions of student socio-communicative style were unrelated to instructor assessments of student speech grades. Neither student responsive behaviors nor student socio-communicative style were related to how well students scored on a cognitive-based, multiple-choice exam assessing public speaking knowledge.

Testing the neutralizing effect of instructor immediacy on student course workload expectancy violations and tolerance for instructor unavailability

This study investigates how an instructors use of relational messages, specifically nonverbal immediacy behaviors, may neutralize how students interpret instructor course workload demands and student expectations for instructor availability. It was hypothesized that instructor immediacy would temper instructor course workload demands that violated student expectations in a way that preserved student affect for the instructor (H1), student compliance with instructor course workload demands (H2), and student tolerance for instructor unavailability (H3). The first hypothesis was supported; however, the second and third hypotheses were not supported. The data suggest that instructor course workload demands negatively impacted student compliance (H2) and neither instructor immediacy nor workload demands impacted student tolerance for instructor unavailability in a meaningful manner (H3). Implication and directions for future research are discussed.

The Relationships Between Teacher Nonverbal Immediacy and Student Course Workload and Teacher Availability Expectations

The purpose of this study is to identify student expectations for course workload and teacher availability and to assess whether teacher nonverbal immediacy influences these student expectations. Based on a sample of 198 students at a large public university enrolled in a required general education hybrid communication course, students were willing to complete more work than the current course requires, which is comparable to other general education hybrid communication courses in the USA. Additionally, students have moderate to high expectations for teacher availability. Student perceptions of teacher nonverbal immediacy were positively correlated with students’ willingness to engage in their learning (reading, writing, speaking), teacher availability expectations, and tolerance for teacher unavailability.

The Effects of Student Responsiveness on Teachers Granting Power to Students and Essay Evaluation

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of student responsiveness on teachers granting relational power to students, and to determine if this power influenced how teachers evaluated student essays. Rather than student verbal and nonverbal responsiveness interacting, student nonverbal responsiveness significantly impacted the coercive, reward, and referent power that teachers granted students. Student verbal and nonverbal responsiveness affected the expert power that teachers granted students. Nine to 18% of the variance in relational power was attributed to student responsiveness. Additionally, student referent power significantly predicted teachers’ evaluation of student essays accounting for 11% of the variance.

What Do Communication Trainers Do

When I was an undergraduate, I remember one of my professors talking about being a communication consultant. Intrigued, I asked what he did when he was a consultant. His response was, ‘‘I present communication training seminars.’’ I nodded in faux agreement, suggesting that I understood what he did, but I was actually uncertain about how presenting a training seminar was different from teaching an undergraduate communication class. A few years after my brief exchange with my professor about communication training, a good friend of mine who knew I taught communication classes thought that I could help his corporate colleagues improve their communication skills. He asked me to give a short training program to his company. I remember struggling with deciding what to present during that 2-hr training session. Although that first paid training session went reasonably well, I realized I could have done a better job. I had approached that 2-hr session as if I were teaching a 2-hr undergraduate course. To increase my competence as a communication trainer, I bought books, read articles, attended training seminars presented by others, and immersed myself in whatever I could find about communication training. After learning more about communication training, I thought, ‘‘Why not teach students how to present communication training seminars?’’ So, integrating what I knew from my undergraduate teacher education program, my own experience as a trainer, and what books and articles I could find about training, 25 years ago I developed a course called ‘‘Communication Training and Development’’ and have since written a textbook about communication training. My goal in developing the course and writing the book was to present material that I wished someone would have taught me about communication training when I was a student. Key questions I explore in my course include: What do communication trainers do? What is the difference between training and education? What are the differences between preparing for a communication training session and teaching a university-level communication class? How do you become a communication trainer? How do you get training clients?