A Digital Divide? Assessing Self-Perceived Communication Competency in an Online and Face-to-Face Basic Public Speaking Course

Basic Communication Course Annual Volume 28 Article 11 2016 A Digital Divide? Assessing Self-Perceived Communication Competency in an Online and Face-to-Face Basic Public Speaking Course Joshua N. Westwick South Dakota State University Karla M. Hunter South Dakota State University Laurie L. Haleta South Dakota State University Follow this and additional works at: http://ecommons.udayton.edu/bcca Part of the Higher Education Commons, Interpersonal and Small Group Communication Commons, Mass Communication Commons, Other Communication Commons, and the Speech and Rhetorical Studies Commons Recommended Citation Westwick, Joshua N.; Hunter, Karla M.; and Haleta, Laurie L. (2016) "A Digital Divide? Assessing Self-Perceived Communication Competency in an Online and Face-to-Face Basic Public Speaking Course," Basic Communication Course Annual: Vol. 28 , Article 11. Available at: http://ecommons.udayton.edu/bcca/vol28/iss1/11 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Communication at eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Basic Communication Course Annual by an authorized editor of eCommons. For more information, please contact , . Westwick et al.: A Digital Divide? Assessing Self-Perceived Communication Competen 48 Essays A Digital Divide? Assessing Self-Perceived Communication Competency in an Online and Face-to-Face Basic Public Speaking Course Joshua N. Westwick Karla M. Hunter Laurie L. Haleta South Dakota State University A 2010 meta-analysis of online learning studies conducted by the U.S. Department of Education (USDOE) compared online and face-to-face (F2F) instruction in a variety of educational disciplines, finding that “on average, students in online learning conditions performed modestly better than those receiving face-to-face instruction” (p. ix). Helms (2014) summarized these findings saying, “Interestingly then, it appears that, if done ‘correctly,’ the online delivery modality can provide the same (or at least not significantly different) learning environment/opportunity as the F2F (traditional) modality” (p. 147). While we would argue that there may be a multitude of options for an instructor to achieve student learning outcomes comparable to F2F delivery rather than a single “correct” way as Helms suggested, we do agree that certain best practices are likely to yield optimal results. Arguably, public speaking educators have been more reticent to adapt courses to the online environment than instructors in non-performance based disciplines BASIC COMMUNICATION COURSE ANNUAL Published by eCommons, 2016 1 Basic Communication Course Annual, Vol. 28 [2016], Art. 11 Communication Competency 49 (Helvie-Mason, 2010; Hunt, 2012; Vanhorn, Pearson, & Child, 2008). For this reason, there is a dearth of research assessing online public speaking courses. Authors such as Johnson-Curiskis (2006) and Linardopoulos (2010) have published case studies relating their experiences and recommendations regarding teaching the course, but the process of fleshing out more generalizable best practices is likely to require a great deal more research. The purpose of this article is to extend research assessing online delivery of the basic public speaking course. This research contributes to a broader conversation focused on the need for assessment of online courses. Such a conversation can help establish a record of best instructional practices designed to increase student growth and development in this ever-changing course modality. Vanhorn, Pearson, and Child (2008) called for additional research assessing the effectiveness of the online course, especially with regard to the effectiveness of skill development and student growth. In answer to that call, the current analysis was motivated by the striking and, perhaps, surprising results of a recent case study assessing student outcomes in an online basic public speaking course (Westwick, Hunter, & Haleta, 2015). That initial study’s predictions were based on two decades of communication research in the F2F classroom showing that as public speaking anxiety (PSA) decreases, self-perceived communication competence (SPCC) increases (Ellis, 1995; MacIntyre & MacDonald, 1998; Rubin, Rubin, & Jordan, 1997). While that study predicted the online course would yield similar results, findings revealed that, even though the online course Volume 28, 2016 http://ecommons.udayton.edu/bcca/vol28/iss1/11 2 Westwick et al.: A Digital Divide? Assessing Self-Perceived Communication Competen 50 Communication Competency had produced the expected significant reductions of PSA, it failed to produce the predicted inverse relationship between PSA and SPCC. Furthermore, that study found no significant increase in SPCC, as compared with the significant SPCC increases shown in the multiple previous works assessing F2F courses (Ellis, 1995; MacIntyre & MacDonald, 1998; Rubin et al., 1997). Self-perceived communication competence merits analysis, especially in the basic course, due to its value as a predictor of student success and retention (Richmond, Wrench, & McCroskey, 2013; Rubin et al., 1997). Based on their research, and that of Chesebro et al. (1992), Rosenfeld, Grant, and McCroskey (1995) found two variables they asserted “might be the key communication variables affecting communication success: apprehension about speaking in groups and self-perceived communication competency in speaking to strangers” (p. 79). They stated that students enter the classroom— F2F or online—as strangers to one another. Furthermore, to many students, their instructors are strangers long into the semester—sometimes during the entire term. Given this assertion, it follows that enhancing SPCC, especially with strangers, during one of the earliest college courses in one’s academic career is a worthy goal for consideration in programmatic assessment for departments to maximize student success even beyond the classroom in a single, given semester. The intriguing finding of the initial assessment, and the value of SPCC to students’ academic success, prompted the current study assessing a direct, head-tohead comparison between SPCC of online and F2F student outcomes from the basic public speaking course. First, we tested whether our online and F2F students BASIC COMMUNICATION COURSE ANNUAL Published by eCommons, 2016 3 Basic Communication Course Annual, Vol. 28 [2016], Art. 11 Communication Competency 51 differed in their communication competency upon entering the course. We then used a pretest/posttest design to assess any differences in the change among students’ self-perceived communication competency from the beginning to the conclusion of the course in F2F versus online contexts. To frame the importance of this study, we explored the relevant literature on communication competency, and F2F versus online public speaking instruction and identified four research questions based on that examination. The methods sectio (...truncated)