All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

A Meta-Analytical Review of the Relationship between Teacher Immediacy and Student Learning
Unformatted Document Text:  Immediacy and Learning Meta-Analysis 17 22,915, 27% shared variance) and those of experimental studies (average r = .306, k = 7, N = 1,559, 9% shared variance). These experiments were constrained by factors such as time of teacher immediacy displayed, specific teachers, content-topics of messages, the specific situation, the brevity of the inductions, etc. Despite accounting for 18% more variance and the all too frequent use of causal language, the surveys did not, and could not, establish the causal link between teacher immediacy and student learning. These results may be inflated by uncontrolled variables associated with immediate teachers. Given the limitations of both methods, the true estimate of the association between teacher immediacy and student learning, while elusive, may lie between the estimates provided by experiments and surveys. These analyses of overall learning and overall teacher immediacy provided general conclusions that facilitated a broad perspective on the relationship of teacher immediacy to learning. However, the testing of variances within all the groupings discussed above revealed greater variance than would be expected from random sampling error alone. Results from heterogeneous samples may be useful to affirm the direction and relative strength of associations, but we continued our analysis by examining three specific categories of immediacy and three specific categories of learning. This further testing provided more analytic insights and specific conclusions. Three Types of Immediacy and Three Types of Learning Drawing from Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy of educational objectives and general tenets of attitude theory (Inskso, 1967; Triandis, 1971; Zimbardo & Ebbesen, 1969), we classified student learning outcomes into three categories: perceived learning, cognitive learning, and affective learning. Because of the large number of studies using the learning loss measure, we created the learning category of perceived learning. Although we believed that learning loss measurement

Authors: Witt, Paul., Wheeless, Lawrence. and Allen, Mike.
first   previous   Page 17 of 41   next   last



background image
Immediacy and Learning Meta-Analysis 17
22,915, 27% shared variance) and those of experimental studies (average r = .306, k = 7, N =
1,559, 9% shared variance). These experiments were constrained by factors such as time of
teacher immediacy displayed, specific teachers, content-topics of messages, the specific
situation, the brevity of the inductions, etc. Despite accounting for 18% more variance and the all
too frequent use of causal language, the surveys did not, and could not, establish the causal link
between teacher immediacy and student learning. These results may be inflated by uncontrolled
variables associated with immediate teachers. Given the limitations of both methods, the true
estimate of the association between teacher immediacy and student learning, while elusive, may
lie between the estimates provided by experiments and surveys.
These analyses of overall learning and overall teacher immediacy provided general
conclusions that facilitated a broad perspective on the relationship of teacher immediacy to
learning. However, the testing of variances within all the groupings discussed above revealed
greater variance than would be expected from random sampling error alone. Results from
heterogeneous samples may be useful to affirm the direction and relative strength of associations,
but we continued our analysis by examining three specific categories of immediacy and three
specific categories of learning. This further testing provided more analytic insights and specific
conclusions.
Three Types of Immediacy and Three Types of Learning
Drawing from Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy of educational objectives and general tenets of
attitude theory
(Inskso, 1967; Triandis, 1971; Zimbardo & Ebbesen, 1969),
we classified student
learning outcomes into three categories: perceived learning, cognitive learning, and affective
learning. Because of the large number of studies using the learning loss measure, we created the
learning category of perceived learning. Although we believed that learning loss measurement


Convention
All Academic Convention can solve the abstract management needs for any association's annual meeting.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 17 of 41   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.