Editor\u27s Page

Now 16 years old, the Basic Communication Course Annual continues to hold a unique and instrumental status among peer communication journals. Notably, the Annual is the only national communication journal devoted to research and scholarship pertaining to the basic communication course. What started as an infant in 1988 has grown into a bright young-adult with an admirable sense of self. The success of the Annual is entirely attributable to the community of scholars who have supported the journal over the years. All of us should be thankful for the leadership provided by the previous editors: Deanna Sellnow, Craig Newburger, and especially Larry Hugenberg. One hallmark of the Annual has always been the professionalism and generosity of the editorial board, and that tradition certainly continues with the most recent iteration. Most importantly, the continued vitality of this journal is indebted to the long list of scholars who have used the Annual as the outlet for their scholarly efforts

Editor\u27s Page

As my tenure as editor of the Basic Communication Course Annual comes to an end, I have a great deal of excitement about the future of communication education and basic course scholarship. Looking back on the three most recent volumes, the diversity of scholars and ideas is remarkable. Moreover, careful readings of articles found in these volumes will show that these scholars are using rigorous methods to ask and answer theoretically provocative and practically potent questions. Indeed, these volumes will add to the rich history of this journal and will also serve as a foundation from which to build as Dr. Paul Turman takes over as editor for Volumes 19-21

Editor\u27s Page

Volume 17 of the Basic Communication Course Annual offers a great deal of insight on the varied dimensions of basic course pedagogy which, at the end of the day, allows the basic course to embody the ideals of our discipline. The complexity of communication is best illustrated in Turman’s article exploring the use of technology in the basic course. As Paul explains, students’ perceptions of teacher immediacy and affect are influenced not only by gender, but also by the use of technology. Paul’s findings show us that the classroom communication environment must not be characterized with a “one approach fits all” mentality. Communication richness could be defined in a number of ways. As Marshall and Violanti show us, the use of online individual conferences dramatically improve students’ perceptions of the class while at the same time causing students to feel better prepared. Last, the humanity present in all human communication is revealed through three separate studies. Javette Hayes reminds us of the very human behavior of using symbols to resolve classroom conflict and other problematic behaviors; Rattenborg, Simonds, and Hunt provide all teachers with a shot v of humanity by taking us inside the minds of students as they prepare for classroom dialogue; and, Amy Rachelle Wolfsen helps us understand how students with varying levels of communication apprehension react to different forms of pedagogy. Of course, this division of articles between complexity, richness, and humanity is arbitrary, for each article illustrates, in some way, these fundamental characteristics of human communication. For that we should all admire and attempt to emulate these scholars

The Effects of Praise on Student Motivation in the Basic Communication Course

This exploratory study tested the effects of praise on student motivation and affect toward a class and instructor. Participants (N=64) listened to a teacher-student interaction containing either praise or neutral feedback from the teacher. Students hearing praise reported higher levels of hypothetical affect and motivation than students hearing neutral feedback. Qualitative data were examined to help explain these results. Results are discussed in terms of future research possibilities in the basic course

Kenneth Burke, the Basic Communication Course, and Applied Scholarship

The Journal of Applied Communication Research published a forum of position papers in 2000 (Volume 28, Issue 2) that sought to define “applied communication research.” Collectively, the authors called for scholarship that embodies a reflexive relationship between theory and practice (O’Hair, 2000; Keyton, 2000, Cissna, 2000; Eadie, 2000; Frey, 2000; Seibold, 2000; Wood, 2000). In this essay, we call for applied scholarship that focuses on how we talk, perform, and theorize the basic communication course. Drawing from the works of Kenneth Burke (e.g., 1931/1968; 1935; 1937/1984; 1941/ 1967; 1945/1969; 1954/1984), we focus specifically on the salience of discourses of and about the basic communication course and communication enriched courses across general education and liberal studies curricula

The Effects of Using Peer Workshops on Speech Quality, Public Speaking Anxiety, and Classroom Climate

This field experiment answered the call to explore alternative pedagogies in communication by testing the use of structured peer workshops in public speaking courses. Peer workshops use systematic and structured peer feedback to assist students in improving their speeches. While strong theoretical reasons for using workshops have been advanced, and evidence from other disciplines suggest that they are effective, no research has specifically examined their use in public speaking. Results of our study show that peer workshops are a viable pedagogical option because they improve students’ speech grades, reduce public speaking anxiety, and improve perceptions of classroom climate. When comparing the use of workshops at two different universities, however, we observed inconsistent results which could be attributed to how workshops were integrated and supported

The Impact of Digital Distraction on Lecture Notes and Student Learning

Accepted for presentation at 2020 AERA Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA. Conference cancelled due to Covid-19. Laptop computers allow students to type lecture notes instead of relying on the traditional longhand (i.e., paper-pencil) method. The present research examined lecture note taking in today’s digital age by investigating how the quality and quantity of typed and handwritten notes differed when students did or did not text during a simulated lecture. Findings indicate that although undistracted laptop users captured more lecture ideas into their notes, this advantage failed to improve learning relative to longhand note takers. Moreover, this speed advantage disappeared when laptop users texted during the lecture. Finally, regardless of note-taking method, participants stored many incomplete idea units into their notes. Findings suggest that laptops might not be as helpful for learning as students believe

An experiment testing the effects of teacher immediacy, organizational lecture cues, and student notetaking on students\u27 affective and cognitive learning

This study tests the effects of teacher immediacy, organizational lecture cues, and student notetaking on student affective and cognitive learning. Teacher immediacy behaviors include verbal and nonverbal stimuli which generate perceptions of psychological closeness between a teacher and her/his students. Immediacy behaviors can include eye contact, personalized examples, vocal variety, and natural movement about the classroom. Organizational lecture cues are verbal signals indicating the structural elements of a lecture. These cues can consist of verbal advance organizers, explicit transitions between main and subordinate points, and verbal summaries of lecture content. Affective learning is a students\u27 sense of liking, motivation, or attention toward instruction. Cognitive learning represents a students\u27 ability to recall, analyze, or synthesize information. Available literature indicated that teacher immediacy, organizational cues, and student notetaking could all potentially influence students\u27 affective and cognitive learning. A 2 (high immediacy/low immediacy) x 2 (with organizational cues/without organizational cues) x 2 (with notetaking/without notetaking) experiment was conducted using scripted videotaped lectures viewed by 223 participants. Participants levels of affective and cognitive learning were assessed immediately after viewing the lecture and then again one week later. Notes taken by participants in the notetaking condition were also analyzed for completeness and organization. Results of the experiment indicated that teacher immediacy had its greatest effect on students\u27 affect toward instruction. Teacher immediacy had its most substantial effect on immediate student affect, and had some negative effects on cognitive learning. Cognitive learning was influenced by a combination of factors. Notetaking consistently had a main effect on cognitive learning with effect sizes ranging from .07 to .25. Organizational cues also had a moderately consistent effect on cognitive learning. For three of the tests, immediacy interacted with organizational cues to influence cognitive learning. Although immediacy appeared to distract students from learning details from a lecture in the short term, immediacy resulted in longer retention of information for students. The quantity and organization of students\u27 notes in the notetaking condition also significantly predicted their scores on achievement tests. Finally, immediacy and organizational cues both influenced the number of details and organizational points recorded in students\u27 notes. Based on the results of the study, the optimal learning condition for promoting long-term achievement is where students take notes over lectures containing organizational cues and immediacy. These results are discussed in terms of their contribution to current research. Limitations of the study and directions for future research are also discussed

Impact of Digital Distraction on Lecture Note Taking and Student Learning

Laptop computers allow students to type lecture notes instead of relying on the traditional longhand (i.e. paper–pencil) method. The present research compared laptop and longhand note-taking methods by investigating how the quality (i.e. complete versus incomplete idea units) and quantity (i.e. total words and total idea units) of typed and handwritten notes differed when students did or did not reply to text messages during a simulated lecture. Accounting for the presence of text messaging while participants took notes situated the present study within the reality facing many students in today’s digital age. Findings indicated that a considerable proportion of the idea units captured in participants’ notes were incomplete, regardless of note-taking method or exposure to distraction during the simulated lecture. However, only the total number of complete idea units stored in student notes meaningfully predicted lecture learning. Furthermore, the presence of digital distraction was particularly disruptive to the quality and quantity of laptop users’ lecture notes relative to longhand note takers. Finally, digital distraction emerged as a more meaningful predictor of lecture learning than note-taking method. Recommendations for improving the quality of student lecture notes are discussed and avenues for future research into note-taking completeness and the interplay between digital distraction and note-taking method are proposed

Do Distracted Students Take Incomplete Notes and Learn Less?

Presentation given at 22nd Annual International Conference on Education, Athens, Greece