Exploring Business Students’ Communicative Needs

Social Presence in Effective Online Instruction

Authors

  • Scott Christen Tennessee Technological University
  • Stephanie Kelly North Carolina A&T State University
  • Lisa Fall University of Tennessee
  • Lisa Gueldenzoph Snyder North Carolina A&T State University

Keywords:

Business Student Communication, Social Presence, Online learning, Community of Inquiry

Abstract

Problem: The trend of offering business courses online is increasing yearly. Therefore, it is becoming increasingly important for online instructors to understand how to convey a strong social presence to their students.

Research Questions: What communicative behaviors do business students perceive make an instructor more socially present? What differences exist among demographic variables in students’ perceptions of instructor behaviors related to social presence?

Data Collection Procedures: Data were collected by administering a qualitative survey to business students who were asked to identify behaviors that their instructors display in the online classroom that enhanced their perceptions of instructors’ social presence. First, thematic analysis was used to identify recurring themes in students’ qualitative responses. The themes that emerged were then used as a coding scheme for a content analysis of the data. Logistic regression was utilized to determine if the indicators of social presence differed based on gender and college status.

Findings: Findings indicated that females rely more on interactive and cohesive messages than males, and undergraduates prefer computer-mediated instructional immediacy more than graduate students.

Conclusions/Recommendations: Online educators should use affective, interactive, and cohesive communication; provide a visual reference of themselves to students; and use computer-mediated immediacy cues.

References

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2007). Online nation: Five years of growth in online learning. Retrieved from: http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/pdf/online_nation.pdf

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Class differences: Online education in the United States. Retrieved from: http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/ class_differences

Annand, D. (2011). Social presence within the community of inquiry framework. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 12(5), 40–56. ISSN: 1492-3831

Bailey, C. A. (2007). A guide to qualitative field research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

Berry, G. R. (2011). Enhancing effectiveness on virtual teams: Understanding why traditional team skills are insufficient. Journal of Business Communication, 48, 186–206. doi: 10.1177/0021943610397270

Biocca, F., Harms, C., & Burgoon, J. K. (2003). Toward a more robust theory and measure of social presence: Review and suggested criteria. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 12(5), 456–480. doi:10.1162/105474603322761270

Burleson, B., Hanasono, L., Bodie, G., Holmstrom, A., Rack, J., Rosier, J. G., & McCullough, J. (2009). Explaining gender differences in responses to supportive messages: Two tests of a dual-process approach. Sex Roles, 61, 265–280.

Burleson, B. R., Kunkel, A. W., Samter, W., & Working, K. J. (1996). Men’s and women’s evaluations of communication skills in personal relationships: When sex differences make a difference and when they don’t. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 13(2), 201–224. doi: 10.1177/0265407596132003

Caples, R. K. (2006). The role of social presence in online communities. (Doctorial Dissertation). Retrieved from Digital Repository at the University of Maryland: http://hdl.handle.net/ 1903/3768

Community of Inquiry (CoI). (2011). Retrieved from https://coi.athabascau.ca/coimodel/

Conaway, R. N., Easton, S. S., & Schmidt, W. V. (2005). Strategies for enhancing student interaction and immediacy in online courses. Business Communication Quarterly, 68, 23–35. doi:10.1177/1080569904273300

Fall, L. T., Kelly, S., & Christen, S. (2011). Revisiting the impact of instructional immediacy: A differentiation between military and civilians. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 12, 199–206.

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. doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6

Holmstrom, A. J. (2009). Sex and gender similarities and differences in communication values in same-sex and cross-sex friendships. Communication Quarterly, 57(2), 224–238. doi: 10.1080/01463370902889455

Jorgensen, D. (2002). The challenges and benefits of asynchronous learning networks. In H. Iyer (Ed.), Distance Learning: Information Access and Services for Virtual Users, (pp. 3–17). Binghamton, NY: The Haworth Press, Inc.

Kehrwald, B. (2008). Understanding social presence in text-based online learning environments. Distance Education, 29(1), 89–106. doi:10.1080/01587910802004860

Kehrwald, B. (2010). Being online: Social presence as subjectivity in online learning. London Review of Eduaction, 8(1), 39–50. doi:10.1080/14748460903557688

Kelly, S., & Fall, L. T. (2011). An investigation of computer-mediated instructional immediacy in online education: A comparison of graduate and undergraduate students’ motivation to learn. Journal of Advertising Education, 15, 44–51.

Kerr, G., Proud, B., & Beede, P. (2007). Designing executive education curriculum to fit the professional development continuum. The case of advertising and public relations practitioners in Australia. Journal of Advertising Education, 11, 33–46.

Lam, C. (2012). The efficiency of text messaging to improve social connectedness and team attitude in student technical communication projects: An experimental study. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 27, 180–208. doi:10.1177/1050651912468888

Lear, J. L., Isernhagen, J. C., LaCost, B. A., & King, J. W. (2009). Instructor presence for web-based classes. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 51, 86-98.

Martinez, M. (2001). Key design considerations for personalized learning on the web. Educational Society and Technology, 4(1), 26–40.

Mayadas, A. F., Bourne, J., & Bacsich, P. (2009). Online education today. Science, 323, 85–89. doi:10.1126/science.1168874

Pazos, P., Chung, J. M., & Micari, M. (2013). Instant messaging as a task-support tool in information technology organizations. Journal of Business Communication, 50, 68–86. doi:10.1177/0021943612465181

O’Sullivan, P., Hunt, S., & Lippert, L. (2004). Mediated immediacy: A language of affiliation in a technological age. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 23(4), 464–490. doi: 10.1177/0261927X04269588

Richardson, J. C., & Swan, K. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’ perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1), 68–88.

Robles, M., & Braathen, S. (2002). Online assessment techniques. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 44, 39–49.

Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (1999). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14, 50–71.

Rourke, L., & Kanuka, H. (2009). Learning in communities of inquiry: A review of the literature. Journal of Distance Education, 23(1), 19–47.

Ruppert, B., & Green, D. (2012). Practicing what we teach: Credibility and alignment in the business communication classroom. Business Communication Quarterly, 75(1), 29–44. doi:10.1177/1080569911426475

Sallnas, E. L., Rassmus-Grohn, K., & Sjostrom, C. (2000). Supporting presence in collaborative environments by haptic force feedback. ACM Transactions on Computer Human Interaction, 7, 461–476. doi:10.1.1.97.730

Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. New York, NY: Wiley.

Subrahmanyam, K., Waechter, N., Espinoza, G., & Reich, S. M. (2008). Online and offline social networks: Use of social networking sites by emerging adults. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(6), 420–433. doi:10.10162008.07.003

Swan, K. (2002). Building learning communities in online courses: The importance of interaction. Education, Communication & Information, 2(1), 23–49. doi: 10.1080/1463631022000005016

Swan, K., & Shih, L. (2005). On the nature and development of social presence in online course discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3), 115–136. doi: 10.1.1.102.5653

Titsworth, S., Quinlan, M., & Mazer, J. (2010). Emotion in teaching and learning: Development and validation of the classroom emotions scale. Communication Education, 59(4), 431–452. doi:10.1080/03634521003746156

Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3–43. doi: 10.1177/009365096023001001

Walther, J. B. (2007). Selective self-presentation in computer-mediated communication: Hyperpersonal dimensions of technology, language, and cognition. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 2538–2557. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2006.05.002

Walther, J. B., & Parks, M. R. (2002). Cues filtered out, cues filter in: Computermediated communication and relationships. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of Interpersonal Communication (pp. 529–563). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Zembylas, M., Theodorou, M., & Pavlakis, A. (2008). The role of emotions in the experience of online learning: Challenges and opportunities. Educational Media International, 45(2), 107–117. doi:10.1080/09523980802107237

Zhao, S. (2003). Toward a taxonomy of copresence. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 12(5), 445–455. doi:10.1162/105474603322761261

Downloads

Published

2015-06-01

How to Cite

Christen, S., Kelly, S., Fall, L., & Gueldenzoph Snyder, L. (2015). Exploring Business Students’ Communicative Needs: Social Presence in Effective Online Instruction. Journal of Research In Business Education, 57(1), 31-46. https://jrbe.nbea.org/index.php/jrbe/article/view/49

Similar Articles

1-10 of 78

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.