Revisiting the Relation Between Teacher Immediacy and Student Learning in African American College Classrooms

Exploring the perceptions of HBCU student affairs practitioners toward the racial diversification of Black colleges.

“…We focused on student affairs practitioners because they often have a close relationship with students as they work with them outside of the classroom to help facilitate the development of their psychosocial skills and abilities (Hirt, Bennett, Strayhorn, & Amelink, 2006). This study makes an important contribution to the literature because, although limited studies (i.e., Arroyo, Palmer, & Maramba, 2015;Carter & Fountaine, 2012;Closson & Henry, 2008;Gendrin & Chandler, 2011;Hall & Closson, 2005;Nixon & Henry, 1991;Palmer & Maramba, 2015a;Strayhorn, 2010) have provided some insight into the perceptions that faculty at HBCUs have toward non-Black students (e.g., Asian American, Latino/a, and White) to date, no study has examined the perspectives of student affairs practitioners at HBCUs in order to better understand their perceptions toward the racial diversification of Black colleges.…”

Student Perceptions of Instructor Immediacy in Online Program Courses

“…It has been firmly established that instructor immediacy contributes to student learning and course satisfaction in traditional classroom contexts (Arbaugh, 2001;Jaasma & Koper, 1999;Ni & Aust, 2008). Moreover, decades of research have identified specific instructor communication behaviors, both verbal and nonverbal, that are perceived by students to be immediate (Gendrin & Rucker, 2004;Gorham, 1988;Richmond et al, 1987;Zhang et al, 2007). Understanding of specific behaviors that develop a sense of immediacy has made it possible to train instructors to use such behaviors in traditional classrooms to improve outcomes (Jensen, 1999).…”

“…The measure of learning loss represented a shift in the measure of cognitive learning in the immediacy literature and the field of communications overall. Subsequent to Richmond et al's (1987) study, many other immediacy researchers have used the learning loss method in order to measure perceptions of cognitive learning (e.g., Chesebro & McCroskey, 2001;Fayer, Gorham, & McCroskey, 1988;Gendrin & Rucker, 2004;Gorham, Cohen, & Morris, 1999;Hinkle, 1998;McCroskey et al, 1996;Messman & Jones-Corley, 2001;Myers, Zhong, & Guan, 1998;Neuliep, 1995;Neuliep, 1997;Ni & Aust, 2008;Witt & Wheeless, 2001). This research has consistently found a relationship between instructor immediacy and perceived cognitive learning.…”

“…Nearly a decade later, Richmond et al (2003) claimed that the VIB is "completely invalid as a measure of verbal immediacy" and that it is instead "a measure of the verbal behaviors exhibited by good teachers-not necessarily immediacy behaviors" (p. 505). Despite serious criticisms of Gorham's (1988) VIB, many researchers (e.g., Arbaugh, 2010;Baker, 2010;Furlich, 2016;Ghamdi et al, 2016;Gendrin & Rucker, 2004;Goodboy et al, 2009;Shutt et al, 2009;Titsworth, 2004;Velez & Cano, 2008;Wilson & Locker, 2007;Witt & Wheeless, 2001) have continued to use the measure. Many researchers have measured verbal immediacy rather than nonverbal immediacy due to beliefs that nonverbal socio-emotional cues could not be communicated in online learning that was asynchronous and text-based (Arbaugh, 2001;Baker, 2004;Hutchins, 2003;Jensen, 1999;Rourke, Anderson, Garrison, & Archer, 1999;Swan, 2003).…”