 |
A Meta-Analytical Review of the Relationship between Teacher Immediacy and Student Learning
| |
| | Unformatted Document Text:
Immediacy and Learning Meta-Analysis 39
.540 .600 .
.
.
.
AL
Roach & Byrne Germany
2001
77 .380
.478
.
.
.
.
PL
.430 .508 .
.
.
.
AL
Robinson
1994
536 .530
.598
.
.
.
.
AL
Rodriguez et al.
1996
224 .450
.634
.
.
.
.
PL
.660 .735 .
.
.
.
AL
Sanders & Wiseman White
1990
625 .
.
.
.
.550
.744
PL
.
.
.
.
.540 .581
AL
Sanders & Wiseman Asian
1990
134 .
.
.
.
.570
.771
PL
.
.
.
.
.520 .553
AL
Sanders & Wiseman Hispanic
1990
135 .
.
.
.
.550
.744
PL
.
.
.
.
.550 .595
AL
Sanders & Wiseman Black
1990
35 .
.
.
.
.500
.677
PL
.
.
.
.
.530 .564
AL
Schaller
1993
557 .
.
.
.
.520
.698
PL
.
.
.
.
.690 .759
AL
Shaw
1988
100 .265
.290
.
.
.
.
PL
.170 .181 .
.
.
.
AL
Sorensen Study 2
1989
451 .650
.681
.
.
.
.
AL
Teven
1998
249 .470
.654
.
.
.
.
PL
.480 .526 .
.
.
.
AL
Thompson U.S.
1992
893 .440
.652
.380
.552
.
.
PL
.480 .568 520 .603 .
.
AL
Thompson Puerto Rico
1992
125 .195
.328
.395
.581
.
.
PL
.340 .457 .470 .552
AL
Thompson Finland
1992
296 .385
.546
.320
.456
.
.
PL
.480 .543 .400 .456 .
.
AL
Thompson Hungary
1992
186 .045
.081
.090
.220
.
.
PL
.220 .334 .190 .399 .
.
AL
Titsworth
2001
223 .
.
.
.
.100
.121
CL
Witt Study 2
1997
64 .285
.316
.
.
.
.
AL
Witt & Wheeless
2001
347 .090
.129
.000
.000
.
.
PL
.180 .213 .000 .000 .
.
CL
.510 .608 .010 .012 .
.
AL
1
The designation r denotes actual reported correlations or correlations derived from reported
statistics. The designation r’ denotes effects after correcting for error due to attenuated measurement and (in four cases) dichotomizing or trichotomizing continuous immediacy data for the purpose of analysis.
2
Types
of
Learning:
PL = Perceived Learning (1-item Perceived Learning measure, 2-item Learning Loss
measure, or other measures of perceived learning)
CL = Cognitive Learning (recall or recognition test, exam or course grades) AL = Affective Learning (Affective Learning Scale, including behavioral predisposition,
or other affective learning measures)
|
| | Authors: Witt, Paul., Wheeless, Lawrence. and Allen, Mike. |
|
| |
|
|
Immediacy and Learning Meta-Analysis 39
.540 .600 .
.
.
.
AL
Roach & Byrne Germany
2001
77 .380
.478
.
.
.
.
PL
.430 .508 .
.
.
.
AL
Robinson
1994
536 .530
.598
.
.
.
.
AL
Rodriguez et al.
1996
224 .450
.634
.
.
.
.
PL
.660 .735 .
.
.
.
AL
Sanders & Wiseman White
1990
625 .
.
.
.
.550
.744
PL
.
.
.
.
.540 .581
AL
Sanders & Wiseman Asian
1990
134 .
.
.
.
.570
.771
PL
.
.
.
.
.520 .553
AL
Sanders & Wiseman Hispanic
1990
135 .
.
.
.
.550
.744
PL
.
.
.
.
.550 .595
AL
Sanders & Wiseman Black
1990
35 .
.
.
.
.500
.677
PL
.
.
.
.
.530 .564
AL
Schaller
1993
557 .
.
.
.
.520
.698
PL
.
.
.
.
.690 .759
AL
Shaw
1988
100 .265
.290
.
.
.
.
PL
.170 .181 .
.
.
.
AL
Sorensen Study 2
1989
451 .650
.681
.
.
.
.
AL
Teven
1998
249 .470
.654
.
.
.
.
PL
.480 .526 .
.
.
.
AL
Thompson U.S.
1992
893 .440
.652
.380
.552
.
.
PL
.480 .568 520 .603 .
.
AL
Thompson Puerto Rico
1992
125 .195
.328
.395
.581
.
.
PL
.340 .457 .470 .552
AL
Thompson Finland
1992
296 .385
.546
.320
.456
.
.
PL
.480 .543 .400 .456 .
.
AL
Thompson Hungary
1992
186 .045
.081
.090
.220
.
.
PL
.220 .334 .190 .399 .
.
AL
Titsworth
2001
223 .
.
.
.
.100
.121
CL
Witt Study 2
1997
64 .285
.316
.
.
.
.
AL
Witt & Wheeless
2001
347 .090
.129
.000
.000
.
.
PL
.180 .213 .000 .000 .
.
CL
.510 .608 .010 .012 .
.
AL
1
The designation r denotes actual reported correlations or correlations derived from reported
statistics. The designation r’ denotes effects after correcting for error due to attenuated
measurement and (in four cases) dichotomizing or trichotomizing continuous immediacy data for
the purpose of analysis.
2
Types
of
Learning:
PL = Perceived Learning (1-item Perceived Learning measure, 2-item Learning Loss
measure, or other measures of perceived learning)
CL = Cognitive Learning (recall or recognition test, exam or course grades)
AL = Affective Learning (Affective Learning Scale, including behavioral predisposition,
or other affective learning measures)
|
|
 Convention | | All Academic Convention is the premier solution for your association's abstract management solutions needs. | | 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. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
