Uncovering Embedded Face Threat Mitigation in Landscape Architecture Critique Feedback

Receiving public feedback on academic work may threaten students’ face, particularly when such feedback is critical. One way that feedback may be cushioned is through face-threat mitigation techniques. I analyzed the use of such techniques in the feedback given by faculty and professionals to landscape architecture students as preparation for integrating communication instruction into these courses. This analysis revealed that informal language was the most prevalent technique employed by both faculty and professionals. Findings also indicated that faculty offered more direct advice to students than professionals, potentially fulfilling students’ desires for relevant feedback. The marked differences between faculty and professionals patterns point to different interpretations of and goals in providing feedback. The analysis concludes with a discussion of this study’s implications for future research on feedback

A New Hybrid: Students’ Extensions of Integrated Communication Content

Using Bandura’s (1977) self-efficacy theory, this study examined student perceptions of changes in efficacy and affect toward a variety of communication skills (e.g., interpersonal, writing, visual, public speaking, group collaboration) over a sequence of two hybrid basic course classes. As part of a larger assessment initiative, both quantitative and qualitative data from the first course (n = 793) and the second course (n = 273) were analyzed. Students reported greater affect and efficacy during the second course when compared to the first course. Specifically, students reported six affective changes including expanded knowledge, enhanced collaborative skills, increased openness and acceptance, heightened awareness, increased confidence, and the ability to critically examine. The students referenced observing these changes in academic and work life, but most frequently felt that these skills would impact their everyday life. The results have implications for assignment sequences, incorporating visual communication into the basic course, and requiring two basic courses to maximize affect and efficacy changes in students

A Blended Basic Course Examination of Communication Apprehension and Self-Efficacy: A Comparative Analysis

Students desire rich subject-matter and relevant pedagogy despite rising tuition costs, greater demands for flexibility, and unique learning preferences (Allen & Seaman, 2014; Donnelly, Rizvi, & Summers, 2013; Reed & Sork, 2009; Moore, 2007). As higher education modalities have evolved a careful examination of these newer approaches is necessary. This study is a comparative assessment of communication apprehension and self-efficacy of students in traditional (face-to-face) and blended (face-to-face and online instructional components) basic course modalities. Parallel sections of a basic communication course are assessed and results indicated no significant differences between the two groups with minor exceptions

Student satisfaction in interactive engagement-based physics classes

Interactive engagement-based (IE) physics classes have the potential to invigorate and motivate students, but students may resist or oppose the pedagogy. Understanding the major influences on student satisfaction is a key to successful implementation of such courses. In this study, we note that one of the major differences between IE and traditional physics classes lies in the interpersonal relationships between the instructor and students. Therefore, we introduce the interpersonal communication constructs of instructor credibility and facework as possible frameworks for understanding how instructors and students navigate the new space of interactions. By interpreting survey data (N=161 respondents in eight sections of an IE introductory algebra-based physics course), we found both frameworks to be useful in explaining variance in student ratings of their satisfaction in the course, although we are unable to distinguish at this point whether instructor credibility acts as a mediating variable between facework and course satisfaction

Do they see it coming? Using expectancy violation to gauge the success of pedagogical reforms

We present a measure, which we have named the Pedagogical Expectancy Violation Assessment (PEVA), for instructors to gauge one aspect of the success of their implementation of pedagogical reform by assessing the expectations and experiences of the students in the classroom. We implemented the PEVA in four physics classes at three institutions that used the Student Centered Active Learning Environment for Undergraduate Programs (SCALE-UP) pedagogy in order to gain an understanding of students’ initial expectations, how those expectations are shifted during early classes, and what students report experiencing at the end of the semester. The results indicate appropriate shifts in student expectations during orientation, but some gaps between student expectations and experiences persisted. Students rated the communication aspects of SCALE-UP as desirable and indicated an overall positive affect toward the pedagogy, indicating that violations of their initial expectations were largely positive. By studying the patterns of the shifts in students’ expectations and gaps between those expectations and their experiences, we gain insight for improving both the orientation of the students and the implementation of the course

Big Rubrics and Weird Genres: The Futility of Using Generic Assessment Tools Across Diverse Instructional Contexts

Interest "all-purpose" assessment of students' writing and/or speaking appeals to many teachers and administrators because it seems simple and efficient, offers a single set of standards that can inform pedagogy, and serves as a benchmark for institutional improvement. This essay argues, however, that such generalized standards are unproductive and theoretically misguided. Drawing on situated approaches to the assessment of writing and speaking, as well as many years of collective experience working with faculty, administrators, and students on communication instruction in highly specific curricular contexts, we demonstrate the advantages of shaping assessment around local conditions, including discipline-based genres and contexts, specific and varied communicative goals, and the embeddedness of communication instruction in particular "ways of knowing" within disciplines and subdisciplines. By sharing analyses of unique genres of writing and speaking at our institutions, and the processes that faculty and administrators have used to create assessment protocols for those genres, we support contextually-based approaches to assessment and argue for the abandonment of generic rubrics