Exploring Students’ Perceptions of an Asynchronous Oral Communication Course

Emoni White; Christopher Stripling; Shelli Rampold; Molly A. West; Carrie Stephens

doi:10.5032/jae.v67i4.3341

Authors

Emoni White University of Tennessee https://orcid.org/0009-0009-3180-5075
Christopher Stripling University of Tennessee https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5045-3492
Shelli Rampold University of Tennessee
Molly A. West University of Tennessee https://orcid.org/0009-0002-9078-5560
Carrie Stephens University of Tennessee

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.v67i4.3341

Keywords:

online learning, digital, constructivism, public speaking, social cognitive theory, asynchronous learning

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to describe undergraduate students’ perceptions of an asynchronous oral communication course taught in a college of agriculture in hopes of gaining an increased understanding of how the educational experience can be improved and inform future asynchronous teaching practices. This qualitative study utilized individual, semi-structured interviews (n = 16) to explore students’ perceptions of an asynchronous oral communication course. Data were analyzed using domain analysis and four domains emerged: (a) decision to enroll, (b) quality indicators, (c) learning outcomes, and (d) limitations. Overall, participants were satisfied with their learning experience and believe their oral communication skills improved. In addition, participants perceived they were more skilled in utilizing technology for speaking in digital contexts. Therefore, we recommend the asynchronous oral communication course continue to be offered. Also, because of the increasing need to effectively communicate in digital contexts, colleges of agriculture should consider if there is a need to offer an oral communication course specific to digital contexts. Future research should determine curricular needs related to digital contexts and continue to investigate the efficacy of asynchronous oral communication courses seeking to replicate an in-person oral communication course.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Baker, D., Unni, R., Kerr-Sims, S., Marquis, G. (2021). An examination of the factors leading to students’ preference and satisfaction with an online course. International Journal for Business Education, 161(1). https://doi.org/10.30707/ijbe161.1.1648090824.279374

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall, Inc.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman and Company.

Broeckelman-Post, M. A., Hyatt Hawkins, K. E., Arciero, A. R., & Malterud, A. S. (2019). Online versus face-to-face public speaking outcomes: A comprehensive assessment. Basic Communication Course Annual, 31, Article 10, 144–170. https://ecommons.udayton.edu/bcca/vol31/iss1/10

Castro, M. D. B., & Tumibay, G. M. (2019). A literature review: Efficacy of online learning courses for higher education institution using meta-analysis. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 1367–1385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10027-z

Cline, L. L., Week, P. P., & Weeks, W. G. (2013). There’s no place like home: Why students enrolled in an online agricultural leadership degree completion program. NACTA Journal, 63(2), 231–236. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26769643

Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. SAGE Publications.

Dendy, C. B. (2020). Online or face-to-face? A study of communication education modalities among non-traditional students (Publication No. 27668963) [Doctoral dissertation, Trevecca Nazarene University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

Dooley, K. E. (2007). Viewing agricultural education research through a qualitative lens. Journal of Agricultural Education, 48(4), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2007.04032

Drohan, D., Delestar, E., & Seling, P. (2021). Online learning and the new normal. Business Education Innovation Journal, 13(1), 87–93. https://doi/org/10.1145/3368308.3415433

Engleberg, I. N., Ward, S. M., Disbrow, L. M., Katt, J. A., Myers, S. A., & O’Keefe, P. (2017). The development of a set of core communication competencies for introductory communication courses. Communication Education, 66(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2016.1159316

Estepp, C. M., Stripling, C. T., Conner, N. W., Giorgi, A., & Roberts, T. G. (2013). An examination of the learning activities, cognitive level of instruction, and teacher immediacy behaviors of successful instructors in a college of agriculture. Journal of Agricultural Education, 54(2), 15–28. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2013.02015

Flick, U. (2006). An introduction to qualitative research. SAGE Publications

Frymier, A. B., Goldman, Z. W., & Claus, C. J. (2019). Why nonverbal immediacy matters: A motivation explanation. Communication Quarterly, 67(5), 526–539. https://doi.org/10.1080/0143373.1668442

Harris, H., & Martin, E. (2012). Student motivations for choosing online classes. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(2), 11. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijostl.2012.060211

Horspool, A., & Carsten, L. (2010). Applying the scholarship of teaching and learning: Student perceptions, behaviors, and success online and face-to-face. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(1), 73–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602935.2010.496532

Joshi, O., Chapagain, B., Kharel, G., Poudyal, N. C., Murray, B. D., Mehmood, S. R. (2020). Benefits and challenges of online instruction in agriculture and natural resource education. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(8), 1402–1413. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1725896

Kuzma, A., Kuzma, J., & Thiews, H. (2015). Business students’ attitudes, experience, and satisfaction with online courses. American Journal of Business Education, 8(2), 121–130. https://doi.org/10.19030/ajne.v8i2.9134

McPartlan, P., Rutherford, T., Rodriguez, F., Shaffer, J. F., & Holton, A. (2021). Modality motivation: Selection effects and motivational differences in students who choose to take courses online. The Internet and Higher Education, 49, 100793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2021.100793

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. Jossey-Bass.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2022). Undergraduate Enrollment. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cha

National Center for Education Statistics. (2023). Student enrollment: What is the percent of students enrolled in distance education courses in postsecondary institutions in the fall [data set]. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/TrendGenerator/app/build-table/2/42?rid=6&cid=85

O’Neill, K., Lopes, N., Reinhardt, S., & Jayasundera, K. (2021). Modeling undergraduates’ selection of course modality: A large sample, multi-discipline study. The Internet and Higher Education, 48, 10076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.202.1006

O’Neill, D. K., Reinhardt, S., & Jayasundera, K. (2022). What undergraduates say about choosing an online or in-person course: Qualitative results from a large-sample, multi-discipline survey. Higher Education Research & Development, 41(4), 1199–1214. https://doi.org/1080/07294360.2021.1896484

Ortagus, J. C. (2017). From the periphery to prominence: An examination of the changing profile of online students in American higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 32, 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.09.002

Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Stevens, G. J., Bienz, T., Wali, N., Condie, J., & Schismenos, S. (2021). Online university education is the new normal: But is face-to-face better? Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 18(3), 278–297. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-08-2020-0181

Ward, S. (2016). It’s not the same thing: Considering a path forward for teaching public speaking online. Review of Communication, 16(2-3), 222–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2016.1187458