Journal of Agricultural Education - Vol. 40

The purpose of this study was to establish a quantitative baseline analysis and description of the verbal interaction between instructors and students in simultaneous two-way audio and video distance education settings. Additionally, the nature of the interactions of students and instructors based upon their physical location in this distance learning environment was investigated The design was causalcomparative with data collected using observational methods, distinguished by a lack of random assignment of subjects and nonequivalent groups. The sample was purposefully drawn from classes taught over a videoconferencing network during the spring semester of 1995. The classroom observation instrument used was an expanded version of Johnson’s (I986) Cognitive Interaction Analysis System. Descriptive statistics are reportedfor all IO categories in the CIAS. The levels of classroom interaction found in these settings were not fundamentally different than those found in traditional classroom settings described in the literature. Significantly different levels of both total and cognitive student talk were found The interaction between the instructor and the location of the student was significant in determining the total amount of student talk and the amount of cognitive student talk. Diff erences among instructors contributed to both amount and type of student talk at local and remote sites. Students at remote sites contributed significantly higher levels of non-cognitive student talk. Introduction Shale and Garrison (1990) reported that In a recent national survey, researchers found that the public increasingly expects educational opportunities to be available offcampus (Christenson, Dillman, Warner, & Salant, 1995). In this same study, the researchers noted that, Land-grant universities have an enormous advantage when compared to other higher education institutions; they have a long tradition of providing outreach, as well as offering the kind of continuous, lifelong learning that is becoming essential to success in the information age. (p. 39) Many land grant institutions have been moving to meet this new public expectation. “the growth of university level distance education in recent times has been striking with regard to both the number of students undertaking study at a distance and the numbers of institutions providing distance education” (p. 1). The Iowa Communications Network connected sites in each of Iowa’s 99 counties via fiber optics, creating a network for distance education (Simonson, Schlosser, & Anderson, 1994). Iowa’s efforts, while impressive, were not unique. Many states were building such networks. In Texas, a total of 74 telecourses were carried over the Trans-Texas Videoconference Network (TTVN) during the 1993-94 academic year (Annual Report, 1994). The move by institutions to adopt these technologies and to develop a distance education system has been rapid. These systems constitute new teaching and learning environments. The analysis of educational efficacy in these environments has been limited in scope. Journal of Agricultural Education 50 Vol. 40, No. 3 1999 Recognizing this situation, the Boyer Commission (1998) reported that technology “can be expected to alter the manner of teaching at every educational level and in every conceivable setting [and] it is the role of universities to make technology positive” (p. 1). They further noted that, “the best teachers and researchers should be thinking about how to design courses in which technology enriches teaching rather than substitutes for it” (p. 2). Theoretical Framework emphasized the importance of observing and modeling the behaviors, attitudes, and emotional reactions of others. Although addressing primarily children, the major theme of Vygotsky’s (1978) social development theory was that social interaction plays a fundamental role in the development of cognition. Vygotsky (1978) stated, “Every function in the child’s cultural development appears twice: first, on the social level, and later, on the individual level; first, between people (interpsychological) and then inside the child (intrapsychological)” (p. 57). In Bloom’s (1976) Theory of School Learning, he posited that 25% of the variability in achievement found among learners might be explained by what he called the quality of instruction. In Bloom’s model, the quality of instruction incorporated four factors. Three of these factors were instructor behaviors. Cues, properly used to guide learners to appropriate conclusions, the reinforcement of correct responses and behaviors, and timely and effective feedback or correctives provided to inform learners of their progress were all believed to contribute to learning. The fourth factor was described as the overt and covert participation of the students. Of the four factors this fourth one, the participation of the students, was described as the most important. In Alexander Astin's (1993) study of more than 11,000 students, he found that “retention (completing the degree) is facilitated by both student-student and faculty-student interaction” (p. 196). Further, he noted that GPA is positively correlated with “tutoring other students” and “hours per week spent talking with faculty outside of class” (p. 190). Astin stated that "studentfaculty interaction has significant positive correlations with every [sic] academic attainment outcome” (p. 3 83). Clearly, student-student and faculty-student interaction is a crucial element in effective instruction. Describing faculty-student interaction in distance learning environments is a necessary and prerequisite step in assessing their effectiveness. Purpose We believe that a crude but effective method of estimating the quality of instruction for a group or individual is to note the extent of overt or covert participation of students in the learning process. Where the overall quality of instruction is poor, only a few students will be actively participating in the learning. (Bloom, 1976, p. 123) The purpose of this study was to establish a quantitative baseline analysis and description of the verbal interaction between instructors and students in a simultaneous two-way audio and video distance education setting. Additionally, the nature of the interactions of students and instructors based upon their physical location in this distance learning environment was investigated. Methods The positive effects of classroom interaction enjoys wide support in the literature. The social learning theory of Bandura (1977) To accomplish this purpose, three primary objectives, broadly stated as research questions, Journal of Agricultural Education J a 5 1 Vol. 40, No. 3 1999 were established. These were: 1. What is the amount of verbal interaction in each of the categories described by the Distance Interaction Analysis System (DIAS), in selected two-way-audio twoway-video teleconference classes? 2 . What interaction patterns and ratios are present in this setting? was an expanded version of Johnson’s (1976) 1 0category Cognitive Interaction Analysis System (CIAS) called the Distance Interaction Analysis System (DIAS). Descriptive statistics were reported for all 12 categories in the DIAS. These categories are described in Table 1. The three research hypotheses were tested using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) w i t h b a c k w a r d elimination. 3 . Are the verbal interaction patterns and ratios between students and instructors consistent when they are separated by distance? This third primary objective was accomplished by testing three null hypotheses. These are enumerated in the findings as Ho,, Ho,, and Ho,. Borg & Gall’s (1989) recommendations for controlling observer “effects and errors” (p. 496) were followed. Inter-rater reliability was established and maintained. The results of both the preand post-coding measures of inter-rater reliability can be found in Table 2.