Using Asynchronous Audio Communication (AAC) in the Online Classroom: A Comparative Study

Facilitating learning online requires an evolving set of teaching skills that embrace Web 2.0 technologies. Asynchronous Audio Communication (AAC) may bridge the virtual “communication divide” between instructors and students. The purpose of this study was multi-faceted: first, to assess students’ and instructors’ satisfaction with asynchronous audio instructor feedback as a teaching strategy in the online courseroom; second, to determine the perceived effect of AAC on student satisfaction, learning outcomes, student engagement, and perceived instructor presence; and third, to examine whether there was a significant difference in the way AAC was perceived by undergraduate and graduate students attending two southern state universities. Asynchronous Audio Communication in the form of instructor feedback was utilized in graduate and undergraduate online courses in the areas of reading, health education, and family studies across a 9-month period. The total sample included 156 participants. Instructors sent out both group and individual audio communication throughout the course. At the end of the semester, students completed an online survey that collected quantitative and qualitative data. Descriptive, inferential, and qualitative data analyses demonstrated that the majority of students and instructors reported that AAC can improve online students’ perceptions of instructor presence, student engagement, knowledge of course content, and the instructor-student interaction.

[1]  D. Garrison,et al.  Assessing Social Presence In Asynchronous Text-based Computer Conferencing , 1999 .

[2]  John Short,et al.  The social psychology of telecommunications , 1976 .

[3]  Janet C. Moore,et al.  The Sloan Consortium , 2005 .

[4]  J. Gorham.  The relationship between verbal teacher immediacy behaviors and student learning , 1988 .

[5]  Jody Oomen-Early,et al.  Personalized Versus Collective Instructor Feedback in the Online Courseroom: Does Type of Feedback , 2008 .

[6]  B. L. Bower,et al.  Distance Education: Facing the Faculty Challenge , 2001 .

[7]  J. Arbaugh.  How Instructor Immediacy Behaviors Affect Student Satisfaction and Learning in Web-Based Courses , 2001 .

[8]  C. Gunawardena,et al.  Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer‐mediated conferencing environment , 1997 .

[9]  David Mason.  Online Assessment and Measurement: Case Studies From Higher Education, K‐12 and Corporate , 2006 .

[10]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives , 2000 .

[11]  J. Walther,et al.  Relational communication in computer-mediated interaction , 1990 .

[12]  Joachim Hasebrook,et al.  WebNet 2001 World Conference on the WWW and Internet Proceedings (Orlando, Florida, October 23-27, 2001). , 2001 .

[13]  Jody Oomen-Early,et al.  Self-Actualization and E-Learning: A Qualitative Investigation of University Faculty’s Perceived Barriers to Effective Online Instruction , 2009 .

[14]  J. D. Baker,et al.  Interaction and Immediacy in Online Learning , 2004 .

[15]  E. Taylor-Powell,et al.  Analyzing Qualitative Data , 2003 .

[16]  Michael Z. Hackman,et al.  Instructional communication in the televised classroom: The effects of system design and teacher immediacy on student learning and satisfaction , 1990 .

[17]  Brian Newberry,et al.  Raising Student Social Presence in Online Classes , 2001, WebNet.

[18]  Elizabeth Bennett,et al.  Needs, Concerns and Practices of Online Instructors , 2000 .

[19]  I. E. Allen,et al.  Making the Grade: Online Education in the United States, 2006. , 2006 .

[20]  R. Rubin,et al.  Internet and face‐to‐face communication: Not functional alternatives , 1998 .