Dis watermelon ain't gonna eat itself.
Ham-bone ham-bone ham-bone yeah!
Ham-bone ham-bone ham-bone yeah!
Masta, is coming. Masta is coming.
STOP!
The previous text comes from a YouTube video called Shuck N Jive produced by NAS. The group made the effort to highlight growing trends in racial misrepresentation and stereotyping within hip-hop culture. The use of nonverbal communication in the video (particularly their artifacts) help emphasize the message of the video and makes it far more memorable than the use of text alone.
As another example of the importance of nonverbal communication in conveying a message, I turn to one of my favorite standup comedians. Demetri Martin's effectiveness as a comedian suffers significantly without the presence of nonverbal communication found in his standup special Person (posted directly below). Listening to the text without a visual reference impedes online audiences to enjoy Martin's performance. Similarly, nonverbal communication enhances certain experiences, going to sporting events or musical concerts, for example.
Nonverbal communication plays an integral role in the education process, seeing as how the majority of our communication is nonverbal. Garrison and Vaughan explain the benefits and challenges of blended learning in their book Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines (2008). I would like to take some time to discuss the dangers of relying too heavily on online materials in place of face-to-face classes. Ironically enough, I'm utilizing the tools of a blended learning course to argue on the dangers of relying too heavily on online methods.
Garrison and Vaughan (2008) emphasize the importance of creating a community of inquiry (CoI) (9). The researchers (Garrison and Vaughan, 2008) found that "face-to-face interaction has significant advantages in the early stages of community building (group identity) and establishing trust to support collaborative learning" (34). Such a community develops through a number of nonverbal communication categories. Through tactile feedback and the physical submersion in a classroom environment, students may fall more readily into their roles as students. From the academic buildings to the feeling of a new pack of markers in your hands, the physical presence in a classroom brings with it a mentality of community and learning.
I am not trying to say that online tools and blended learning have no value, but I am defending the importance of nonverbal communication as an integral part of the learning process. The mere idea of a communication studies class, in particular COMM 1010, as completely online really defeats the purpose of developing well-rounded students capable of critical thinking that can apply the concepts learned in class to participate in public advocacy.
The importance of nonverbal communication in face-to-face classroom settings deals directly with conveying messages, clarifying them, and engaging in a dialogic encounter as a group. As a facilitator, my immediate presence and ability to clarify both verbally and non-verbally (through kinesics and paralinguistics) provides an environment in which ideas can be spoken freely, but guided quickly and efficiently. However, as with all face-to-face classroom environments, the biggest enemy is time.
In the case of guided online discussions, I feel that time delayed responses pose their own set of problems. While the increased time allowed for reflection on assignments may be a positive exercise, that time creates potential discord and anxiety amongst students in discussion posts and similar exercises if posts are misinterpreted or have a lack of direction provided by the instructor.
Overall, I find that Garrison and Vaughan (2008) provide insightful points regarding the development of blended learning courses, especially with the drastic increase of such courses offered at universities across the nation. However, with nonverbal communication making up over 60% of the overall message, social presence and face-to-face classroom interaction provides the cornerstone and the foundation for a successful educational experience.
B.L.
I am a strong opponent of online classes, if only because of my own bad experiences with them, however as I see it, the problems facing online classes and blended classes are a little more complex (more complex than one post could ever cover). It is occurring to me that one of the biggest problems is the programs that are used for online learning. Facebook and other social networking sites have established the community that is needed to achieve higher learning, as Garrison and Vaughen explain, but these sites lack the educational portals that sites like Blackboard or Angel provide. This leaves me with the question, how can these forms be combined? I have seen private wiki pages used that seemed to be at least partially effective. But how do we add the nonverbal aspect of learning to an online learning space, if it is so imperative?
ReplyDeleteI’d like to bring into consideration the role of courses such as ITV (instructional television) courses in higher education. In my experience, ITV courses existed as a form of credit by correspondence. I would watch a DVD of a lecture, read the assignments, write my essays, and test in the college’s testing center. The DVD was a recording of a real instructor, complete with her own nonverbal characteristics. I heard her voice, watched her gestures, and analyzed her artifacts. Chronemics and proxemics existed differently, but I would argue they existed. Still, this experience falls flat when compared to the dialogic encounter of a face-to-face classroom experience. Because my experience lacked collaboration and discourse, my experience does not fall within the parameters of a “community of inquiry.”
ReplyDeleteIn this instance, would you still argue the importance of nonverbal communication? Is it the nonverbal communication that makes for a “successful educational experience,” or is it the immediate response time present in a traditional classroom experience?
Garrison and Vaughan (2008) characterized the lecture format “a method of disseminating information that emerged before the advent of the printing press” as they argued for the expansion of blended learning (p. 4). How does the role of services like FaceTime or Skype affect your desire for nonverbal communication?
C.H.
I'd like to caution against the idea that a blended communication class is attempting to shift the dynamics to conducting in as little in-person time as possible--which is the tendency many have to frame the conversation as, especially in arguments against online formats (actually, components.)
ReplyDeleteMr. L, I agree with you on nearly all points that nonverbal communication enhances the learning experience and even accounts for the most prominent source of instructor-given messages that aid in the understanding and engagement of the students, especially since we're talking about -Communication Studies- classes! Of course it's necessary, and relevant, and all of that good stuff.
But while nonverbal communication makes the difference in things like lecture and synchronous, fast-paced dialogue, there are other aspects of the learning experience (and course structure) that may not suffer so completely from the lack of nonverbal cues as to override their benefit when shifted to the online contexts of blended learning, like the more in-depth, critical discussions.
Garrison and Vaughan argued, and I tend to agree, that in-person "dialogue" is great for the lower-order levels of learning: Explaining the concepts, calling for examples to demonstrate the students' abilities to recognize the concepts in action, etc (28) . In this case responses tend to be short and sweet, and build off one another's responses in relatively rapid succession--and these lower-order objectives must be reached before we can get at the higher-order ones. But once we move ahead into that territory (higher-order), Garrison and Vaughan claimed that the asynchronous context of online discussions may be more beneficial because it allows students to take the time for careful and critical reflection, and also stimulates them to feel less inhibited about providing honest and constructive feedback to one another without endangering each others' face. (7, 31, 90)
So basically, I find it a just a little premature to write off virtual teaching tools rather than consider that there may be a place and time for everything, depending on what our exact objectives are.
Both teaching/learning approaches (virtual and face-to-face) are important. However, I think hat evaluating their benefits depend on the course material, assignments, and objectives of the course. Take for instance COMM 2020. It is a blended course in which they are supposed to complete a blog assignment every Friday. At first, I was very excited at the idea that they do not need to show up and that all they need to do can be done from the comfort of their homes. However, I have realized that I still cannot memorize their names, nor am I able to discuss all that I need to discuss in just 50 minutes a week. This is why email is the primary mode of communicating with them. Indeed, it is beneficial, but when I think of such benefit and compare it to the benefits that I can gain from face-to-face communication with them, I feel frustrated.
ReplyDeleteTrue, my role in this course is limited to a teaching assistant who has to explain the assignments, grade, and cover basic concepts through some activities. However, I think that that dedicating one more day in the classroom can enhance their performance, reduce the distance between us, and eventually provide more chances for dialogic communication that is one core concept we always emphasize in our department.