You are here:

Examining the impact of video feedback on instructor social presence in blended courses
ARTICLE

, George Mason University ; , , Brigham Young University ;

IRRODL Volume 15, Number 3, ISSN 1492-3831 Publisher: Athabasca University Press

Full Text

Abstract

This mixed method research examined instructors’ use of video feedback and its impact on instructor social presence in 12 blended sections of three preservice educational technology courses. An independent samples t-test was conducted and found no significant difference in perceptions of instructor social presence between students who received video feedback (M = 5.77, SD = 0.85) and those who received text (M = 5.62, SD = 0.75); t(178) = 1.23, p = 0.22. The analysis of 22 student and nine teacher interviews found that participants generally viewed video feedback to be more effective at establishing instructor social presence because instructors could better speak with emotions, talk in a conversational manner, and create a sense of closeness with students. Students also explained that the blended learning format lessened the impact of video feedback on instructor social presence, which may help to explain why statistical differences were not found.

Citation

Borup, J., West, R., Thomas, R. & Graham, C. (2014). Examining the impact of video feedback on instructor social presence in blended courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(3),. Athabasca University Press. Retrieved August 9, 2024 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Anderson, T. (2009). A rose by any other name : Still distance education — a response to D.R. Garrison: Implications of online and blended learning for the conceptual development and practice of distance education. Journal of Distance Education, 23(3), 111–116.
  2. Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D.R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 1–17.
  3. Arbaugh, J., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S., Garrison, D., Ice, P., Richardson, J., & Swan, K. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the community of inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3-4), 133–136.
  4. Boling, E.C., Hough, M., Krinsky, H., Saleem, H., & Stevens, M. (2012). Cutting the distance in distance education: Perspectives on what promotes positive, online learning experiences. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(2), 118– 126.
  5. Borup, J., Graham, C.R., & Velasquez, A. (2011). The use of asynchronous video communication to improve instructor immediacy and social presence in a blended learning environment. In A. Kitchenham (Ed.), Blended learning across disciplines: Models for implementation (pp. 38–57). Hershey, PA: IGI
  6. Borup, J., West, R.E., & Graham, C.R. (2012). Improving online social presence through asynchronous video. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(3), 195– 203. Doi:10.1016/J.iheduc.2011.11.001
  7. Cuthrell, K., Fogarty, E.A., & Anderson, P.J. (2009). “Is this thing on?” University student preferences regarding audio feedback. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 32–35).
  8. Draft, R.L., & Lengel, R.H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554-571.
  9. Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70–120.
  10. Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2010). The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: A retrospective. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1-2), 5–9. Doi:10.1016/J.iheduc.2009.10.003
  11. Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87–105.
  12. Garrison, D.R., & Arbaugh, J. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157–172. Doi:10.1016/J.iheduc.2007.04.001
  13. Garrison, R. (2009). Implications of online learning for the conceptual development and practice of distance education. Journal of Distance Education, 23(2), 93–104.
  14. Glaser, B.G. (1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems, 12(4), 436–445. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/798843
  15. Gould, J., & Day, P. (2012). Hearing you loud and clear: Student perspectives of audio feedback in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1–13.
  16. Greene, J.C., Caracelli, V.J., & Graham, W.F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255–274.
  17. Gunawardena, C.N. (1995). Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(2/3), 147–166.
  18. Hara, N., & Kling, R. (1999). Students’ frustrations with a web-based distance education course. First Monday, 4(12).
  19. Hew, K.F., & Cheung, W.S. (2013). Audio-based versus text-based asynchronous online discussion: Two case studies. Instructional Science, 41(2), 365–380.
  20. Ice, P., Curtis, R., Phillips, P., & Wells, J. (2007). Using asynchronous audio feedback to enhance teaching presence and students’ sense of community. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(2), 3–25.
  21. Johnson, L.P. (2008). The caring teacher: Tips to motivate student learning. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
  22. Khurana, C., & Boling, E. (2010). “Setting the Climate”: The role of instructional design and multimedia to enhance social presence. World Conference on Educational Media, Hypermedia, and Telecommunications (pp. 1813–1818).
  23. Kim, J. (2011). Developing an instrument to measure social presence in distance higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(5), 763– 777.
  24. Kim, L. (2004). Online technologies for teaching writing: Students react to teacher response in voice and written modalities. Research in the Teaching of English, 38(3), 304–337.
  25. Martin, L., & Mottet, T.P. (2011). The effect of instructor nonverbal immediacy behaviors and feedback sensitivity on Hispanic students’ affective learning outcomes in ninth-grade writing conferences. Communication Education, 60(1), 1–19.
  26. Mathieson, K. (2012). Exploring student perceptions of audiovisual feedback via screencasting in online courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 26(3), 143–156.
  27. Mathison, S. (1988). Why triangulate? Educational Researcher, 17(2), 13–17.
  28. Merriam, S.B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education: Revised and expanded from case study research in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Vol 15 | No 3 July/14
  29. Examining the Impact of Video Feedback on Instructor Social Presence in Blended Courses Borup, West, Thomas, and GrahamMoore, M.G. (1980). Independent study. In R.D. Boyd & J. Apps (Eds.), Redefining the discipline of adult education (pp. 16–31). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
  30. Olesova, L.A., & Richardson, J.C. (2011). Using asynchronous instructional audio feedback in online environments: A mixed methods study. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(1), 30–42.
  31. Oomen-Early, J., Bold, M., Wiginton, K.L., Gallien, T.L., & Anderson, N. (2008). Using asynchronous audio communication (AAC) in the online classroom: A comparative study. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4(3), 267–276.
  32. Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass.
  33. Parsad, B., & Lewis, L. (2009). Distance education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions: 2006–07. World Wide Web Internet And Web Information Systems. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009044.pdf
  34. Parton, B.S., Crain-Dorough, M., & Hancock, R. (2010). Using flip camcorders to create video feedback: Is it realistic for professors and beneficial to students? International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 7(1).
  35. Pearce, C.G., & Ackley, R.J. (1995). Audiotaped feedback in business writing: An exploratory study. Business Communication Quarterly, 58(1), 31–35.
  36. Price, M., Handley, K., Millar, J., & O’Donovan, B. (2010). Feedback: All that effort, but what is the effect? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(3), 277–289.
  37. Rodway-Dyer, S., Knight, J., & Dunne, E. (2011). A case study on audio feedback with geography undergraduates. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 35(2), 217–231.
  38. Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D.R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14(2), 51–70.
  39. Shea, P., Sauli, C., & Pickett, A. (2006). A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college Vol 15 | No 3 July/14
  40. Silva, M.L. (2012). Camtasia in the classroom: Student attitudes and preferences for video commentary or Microsoft Word comments during the revision process. Computers and Composition, 29(1), 1–22.
  41. Swan, K. (2002). Building learning communities in online courses: The importance of interaction. Education, Communication & Information, 2(1), 23–49.
  42. Swan, K.P., Richardson, J.C., Ice, P., Garrison, D.R., Cleveland-innes, M., & Arbaugh, J.B. (2008). Validating a measurement tool of presence in online communities of inquiry. E-mentor, 2(24), 1–12.
  43. Swan, K., & Shih, L.F. (2005). On the nature and development of social presence in online course discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3), 115–136.
  44. Thompson, R., & Lee, M.J. (2012). Talking with students through screencasting: Experimentations with video feedback to improve student learning. The Journal of Interactive Technology & Pedagogy, 1.
  45. Tu, C., & McIsaac, M. (2002). The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 131–150.
  46. Wiener, M. & Mehrabian, A. (1968). Language within language: Immediacy, a channel in verbal communication. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
  47. Wolcott, H.F. (1994). Transformative qualitative data: Description, analysis, and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  48. Wolsey, T.D. (2008). Efficacy of instructor feedback on written work in an online program. International Journal on E-Learning, 7(2), 311–329.
  49. Wood, K.A., Moskovitz, C., & Valiga, T.M. (2011). Audio feedback for student writing in online nursing courses: Exploring student and instructor reactions. The Journal of Nursing Education, 50(9), 540–3.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Links