Co-constructing Student Involvement: An Examination of Teacher Confirmation and Student-to-Student Connectedness in the College Classroom

Abstract

In order for students to succeed academically instructors must foster a supportive and connected learning environment. Importantly, not only do instructors need to connect with students, they also need to allow students the opportunity to connect with one another. Following that framework, aligned with the Dimensions of Learning model, we examined teacher confirmation behaviors and student-to-student connectedness as predictors of students' willingness to talk in class and preparedness for class (e.g., reading assigned chapters). Results found student-to-student connectedness mediated the relationships between teacher confirmation behaviors and in-class student involvement. Thus, this co-constructed, positive classroom climate nurtures student involvement. Student-to-student connectedness also served as a stronger predictor of student involvement than class size. Regardless of class size, student-to-student connectedness is an important classroom resource that instructors need to tap into as they try to engage their students.

Keywords:

• Student Involvement
• Teacher Confirmation
• Student-to-Student Connectedness
• Willingness to Talk in Class
• Self-Regulated Learning

Acknowledgements

This study is adapted from data collected for the first author's dissertation, and an earlier version of this manuscript was presented as Top Three Paper in Instructional Communication at the 2009 annual meeting of the Eastern Communication Association, Philadelphia, PA.

Notes

1. The adapted Metacognitive Self-Regulation (Pintrich et al., 1991): (1) During study/reading time I often miss important points because I'm thinking of other things; (2) When reading for this course, I make up questions to help focus my reading; (3) When I become confused about something I'm reading for this class, I go back and try to figure it out; (4) If course readings are difficult to understand, I change the way I read the material; (5) Before I study new course material thoroughly, I often skim it to see how it is organized; (6) I ask myself questions to make sure I understand the material I have been studying in this class; (7) I try to change the way I study in order to fit the course requirements and the instructor's teaching style; (8) I often find that I have been reading for this class but don't know what it was all about; (9) I try to think through a topic and decide what I am supposed to learn from it rather than just reading it over when studying for this course; (10) When studying for this course I try to determine which concepts I don't understand well; (11) When I study for this class, I set goals for myself in order to direct my activities in each study period; (12) If I get confused taking notes in class, I make sure I sort it out afterwards.

2. Class size was treated as an interval/ratio scale, based on a heavily rounded off scale.

3. Following Seibold and McPhee (1979)Seibold and McPhee (1979a) decomposition analysis quantified the impact of the causal factors student-to-student connectedness and class size on students' willingness to talk in class. Regardless of the order entered, results revealed the sum of squares for connectedness (entered first, SS = 8446, entered second, SS = 6257) are much greater than the sum of squares for class size (entered first, SS = 3420, entered second, SS = 1231). Connectedness impacts students' willingness to talk in class more so than class size.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Robert J. Sidelinger

Robert J. Sidelinger (Ed.D., West Virginia University, 2008) is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication and Journalism at Oakland University

Melanie Booth-Butterfield

Melanie Booth-Butterfield (Ph.D., University of Missouri-Columbia, 1985) is a Professor and the Peggy Rardin McConnell Chair of Speech Communication, in the Department of Communication Studies at West Virginia University