This study was initiated to find out why students seemed uninterested in learning public speaking

Transcription

1 Tony Arduini Fundamentals of Oral Communication CASTLE Case Study Analysis: A Survey of Students Motivations Toward Public Speaking Instruction August 14, 2011 This study was initiated to find out why students seemed uninterested in learning public speaking skills. This study assumes that students enter their first college-level communication class with experiences and goals that may influence their desire to learn about public speaking. Students were given a pre- and post-test survey to discover their initial views of public speaking and to find out if those views changed. This survey included qualitative and quantitative measures of their experience, public speaking anxiety, motivation to learn about public speaking, and general motivation toward schoolwork. The ultimate goal is to use the findings from this study as a basis for designing effective instructional strategies to increase motivation and learning. The Classroom Scenario I teach Fundamentals of Oral Communication, a core communication course. This is one of two courses that satisfy the oral communication requirement. The other course is focused entirely on public speaking. Part of the challenge of teaching this course is that it is required for students completing many programs at Kirkwood Community, so the group is diverse in terms of their goals and program expectations. This course is taught face-to-face, but I do use Angel, a webbased course management system, for reference and a few small discussion forum assignments. The course is designed to have a variety of learning outcomes, covering many aspects of communication. It examines communication theories and develops skills in interpersonal communication, small group communication, and public speaking. The focus of the current study is the public speaking portion of the course. Public speaking is an important skill, but students seem to have negative attitudes toward it. Many students express that it is not a skill they will use. Students don't always listen to others speeches and attendance 1

2 seems to drop during this portion of the semester (roughly the last half of the semester). This particular pattern is not widely reported. In fact a recent study of student participation in college classes surveyed a number of reasons to explain patterns of participation. It reported a finding that communication classes, generally, had higher participation than other classes (Rocca, 2010). A partial explanation of the resistance to public speaking in this course is that it has many students who are consciously avoiding the other core course that is devoted exclusively to public speaking. There are several possible interventions that I could introduce. When I started the CASTLE process, I thought that I might make this section of the course more efficient, through developing portions of it into a mastery format. This could improve instruction since students have a variety of previous training in public speaking from previous classes and high school. Using mastery learning, students could move quickly through sections in which they already had experience/skill. This approach assumes students negative affect is due to the fact that students already understand some concepts and are bored when the ideas are repeated. Another idea would be to develop a speech assignment where students would learn how public speaking skills might be used in their chosen career. The problem with this idea is that I have many undecided students, so this may not be effective for them, since they don t have a career goal. This approach assumes that students don't see the relevance of public speaking. Ultimately, I decided it would be better to try to understand the negative affect toward public speaking, rather than assume what the problem was. This study's goal, then, is to understand that negative emotional response, with the assumption that an intervention would be based on what is found in this study. 2

3 Motivation Research One of the CREOLE meta-goals for learning is to become motivated to succeed. This is the most relevant theoretical basis for this study. My informal observations suggest that a lack of motivation and a negative affect seem to get in the way of students efforts to learn concepts and develop skills related to public speaking. Theories related to motivation and self-efficacy are important given the goal of understanding student s interest or disinterest in learning public speaking concepts and skills. Pintrich describes motivation theories as theories that attempt to answer questions about what gets individuals moving (energization) and toward what activities or tasks (2003). Many motivations, including students career goals and their perception of their abilities, may influence by students perception of public speaking instruction. These and several other factors will be investigated to see what motivations are at work. CREOLE includes a discussion motivation theory, including Bandura's theory of self-efficacy. It is described as follows: "[I]f self-efficacy is high, learners will achieve. In other words, if they believe they can perform, they will. Bandura discusses enactive influences on this belief and persuasory influences. Enactive influences are based on past behavior. If a student notices a pattern of success, then they will have a sense of self-efficacy. Persuasory influences are the effect of others' comments about one's performance. If others notice one's success then this also creates self-efficacy. Another motivation Bandura mentions is observational learning. Students learn by observing and imitating models of behavior. In public speaking, particularly, students have familiarity with other speakers and respond to those experiences. I think all of these concepts are important in understanding students views of public speaking based on their view of their efficacy and past experiences of feedback and role models for public speaking. My 3

4 informal observations suggest that students past experiences varies greatly and this can affect their motivation. Besides students expectations about their performance in learning public speaking, other factors will be checked for any significant influence. Communication apprehension influences students perceptions of communication tasks as well as their performance as communicators (McCroskey & Richmond, 1990, pp ). A more specific type of apprehension, Public Speaking Anxiety, is described by Bodie (2010) as a a subtype of social anxiety, exhibiting physical, cognitive, and behavioral responding (p. 77). Teaching students to manage apprehension, or anxiety, about public speaking is an important part of teaching public speaking. This nervousness can be a limiting factor, reducing motivation, and it needs to be measured so it can be addressed. Hardré and Sullivan (2008) study a number of factors that influence the success of students in rural schools. Similarly, Kirkwood Community College has a large student poulation from rural Midwest. Several significant factors from their study could impact students' motivation in public speaking. The present study will include consideration of several of the characteristics of individual students that Hardré and Sullivan looked at in terms of their high school experience. These will be adapted to examine students perceptions of public speaking instruction, rather than their view of school in general. One is the students' perceived competence and expectation of success. Students past experience can affect these attitudes and encourage or discourage their engagement in learning public speaking. Other dimensions of motivation that Hardré and Sullivan investigate are students perception of the utility and value of their high school instruction. These also can be applied to public speaking instruction attitudes that may affect motivation. 4

5 Hardré and Sullivan consider students' overall motivation toward school as a factor affecting motivation in high school. Similarly college students have many social and economic pressures that may push students into college. While it is not compulsory, students don't always have clear goals beyond satisfying family expectations or delaying entry into a difficult job market. Christophel (1990) surveys motivation research and discusses several aspects of student motivation in the process of determining if teacher immediacy cues might influence student motivation. Her explanation is based on several theorists. She describes it as a process including stimulative and directive effects. This process "can lead students to arousal and instigative behaviors, give direction and purpose to their behavior, allow behaviors to persist, and lead to choices of preferred behavior. (p. 324) Two important distinctions in her discussion include the notion of trait versus state motivation. This suggests that some motivations occur in the moment, while others are more stable. She also discusses the interactive process of state motivation, developing before, during, and after the learning experience. Her discussion is the basis of two of assumptions of this study. First, motivation can be based on past experiences with learning. Second, the study is investigating what Christophel calls trait motivation, which are attitudes that have been developed over time. Study Design Data on students attitudes and experiences were gathered in the fall of A survey included quantitative and qualitative questions and a 24-question research instrument to measure fear of public speaking. The survey was administered through the Perception system, a web-based assessment system. Students were given a few participation points for completing the same survey before and after the public speaking portion of the course. This system had the advantage of not needing class time to complete the surveys and time is a significant consideration in this 5

6 course. There was a disadvantage to the arrangement, in that students were not monitored and complete parts of surveys. There was also no way to be sure that students took both pre- and post tests. Some students only took the post-test and the test was given near final exam week so many student chose not to take it. The pretest was designed to measure students' incoming attitudes. The post-test was given and compared to the post-test to see what effect the current teaching techniques have on attitudes. The study had three parts divided into two Perception instruments. The first is the Personal Report of Public Speaking Anxiety (McCroskey, 2007). This survey scores the student and provides students some feedback on their nervousness and, in the pre-test, gives them some guidance in preparing for speech assignments. The second survey contains several brief measures. There are two open-ended questions concerning students' previous public speaking experience. There are also several quantitative measures of students' expectations of success in public speaking, motivation to learn public speaking, perception of the utility of public speaking, and motivation to learn in school in general. Research Questions Two research questions will be investigated. First, what attitudes and experiences do students possess as they enter the fundamentals of communication course? Second, to what degree do attitudes change after students complete the current public speaking instruction? Data will consist of self-reports of a variety of attitudes and experiences. Classroom Assessment Data Collection Data will be in the form of students self-reports of their experience and attitudes. The first question will be investigated through the PRPSA, the Personal Report of Public Speaking Apprehension and second survey, developed using measures from Christophel and Hardré and 6

7 Sullivan s work. Questions on this survey were designed to determine students expectation of success in giving speeches, students' perception of the utility of public speaking skills, how students value public speaking instruction, and students' perception of their efficacy as speakers. Questions on this survey also included items from Christophel s (1990) Student Motivation Scale to determine student attitudes about school in general. Items relating to students effort in school in general were adapted from Hardré and Sullivan s study. Two open-ended questions asking students about past experiences that have encouraged or discouraged them from learning more about public speaking were also included on this instrument, the Public Speaking Survey developed for Perception by Richard Edwards and Matt Kempf. The second question was investigated through a comparison of the pre- and post-test to see the effect of the current instruction. The post-test was designed to see if the current public speaking instruction made any difference in attitudes, which may also be useful later for comparisons with post-tests after an intervention is tried. Conclusion Summary of findings. PRPSA.The PRPSA is a standard self-report of anxiety about public speaking. The measure was given before public speaking instruction (n=74) and after (n=44). Scores are calculated between 34 and 170. McCroskey scores the instrument as follows: High anxiety is equal or greater than 131, moderate anxiety is , and low anxiety is less than 98. The table below lists how many students fit each category. 7

8 Descriptive Statistics for PRPSA Pre-Test Value Frequency Per cent Low Moderate High While the number in the high category is only about 20 per cent, the large number in the moderate category is important. At that moderate level, public speaking can still be an uncomfortable experience, and this, combined with low motivation to learn the skill, partly accounts for resistance to giving speeches. Comparison of pre- and post-test. Pre- and post tests were conducted to see if the current instruction helps relieve some of the anxiety. Results of the pre- and post test and matched sample t-test (n=36) is listed below: Paired Samples Statistics Mean N Std. Std. Error Mean Pair 1 pretest posttest Paired Samples Correlations N Correlation Sig. Pair 1 pretest & posttest Paired Samples Test Paired Differences 95% Confidence Interval Std. Std. Error of the Difference Sig. (2- Mean Mean Lower Upper t df tailed) 8

9 Paired Samples Test Paired Differences 95% Confidence Interval Std. Std. Error of the Difference Sig. (2- Mean Mean Lower Upper t df tailed) Pair 1 pretest - posttest This comparison suggests that there is some improvement in anxiety due to the instruction. The mean change of 11.5 is statistically significant, and, since the difference between high and low anxiety is only 43 points, the effect of the mean change (11.5) is meaningful, I think. There is some limitation to this finding, since the matched sample is based on 36 students who took both the pre- and post-test, out of the initial 74 students. Public Speaking Survey measures. Several two to five item scales were combined to create 20 Likert scale items for the pre- and post-test. Since the number of students who took both the pre- and post-test was 32 compared to the 76 students who took the pre-test, the posttest scores may not accurately reflect changes. Because of the small sample in the post-test, only pre-test items are reported below. Public Speaking Survey Results Items were rated from one to six: 0= not answered, 1=not at all true, 2=not true, 3=slightly not true, 4=slightly true, 5=true and 6=very true. Items with an asterisk are reverse scored. Lower score indicate high motivation for these items. 9

10 Items for efficacy in speaking scale. 1. When I am preparing to give a speech, I feel capable. Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard When I am preparing a speech I feel unskilled.* Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard When I am preparing to give a speech, I feel I can achieve. Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard

11 4. When I am preparing to give a speech I feel competent. Value Frequenc y Percent Mean Mode Standard Speaker efficacy is not particularly high. The modes of 4 (and 4 in item 2, which is the reverse scored item) suggests some efficacy but not a strong perception of self-efficacy. Items for utility of public speaking scale. 5. I will rarely give a speech in the future.* Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard I won t use any skills related to public speaking.* Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard

12 7. Public speaking will be an important part of my career. Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard Results for this scale were surprising to me. Informal comments before doing this study, and some comments in the open-ended section of this survey, suggested that students see little utility in public speaking. The score on item 6, with 67 out of 76 students responding with not true and not at all true regarding the use of public speaking skills, contradicts my impression that students don t see the utility of public speaking. Items for the expectation of success in public speaking scale. 8. In terms of the upcoming speeches, I expect to do well. Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard

13 9. In terms of the upcoming speeches, I expect to do better than the majority of my classmates. Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard This scale measures students anticipation that they will do well in their speeches. Scores are a bit higher than the self-efficacy scale. It indicates some expectation of success but it is not a high degree of confidence. Items for value of public speaking scale. 10. Learning public speaking skills is valuable. Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard Learning public speaking skills is really pointless a big waste of time.* Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard

14 12. It is very clear to me how useful public speaking skills will be. Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard The value of instruction is surprisingly high to me. Modes for each item suggest that students feel strongly that learning about public speaking is valuable. Items for effort in school scale. 13. If it were up to me, I would do just what my teacher asked me to do and no more.* Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard I participate a lot (get involved) in classroom activities. Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard

15 15. I put forth high effort in school-related activities. Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard The last two scales look at students attitudes toward school in general, rather than the subject of public speaking. I interpret the mode score in item 13 (slightly false) and 14 (slightly true) as important in that these are not particularly strong affirmations of effort and involvement in school. Also, note that a sizable group (28 students) report true or slightly true to item 13 about not wanting to do any more than the instructor asks. Items for motivation toward school scale. 16. I feel motivated about schoolwork in general. Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard

16 17. I dread school work in general.* Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard I am interested in schoolwork in general. Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard I am involved in schoolwork in general. Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard I am excited about schoolwork in general. Value Frequency Percent Mean Mode Standard

17 The last scale, based on Christophel s motivation scale, also suggests a limited engagement in school in general. Particularly telling is item 17, with a mode of 4 (slightly true). Responses of slightly true and true made up 40 of the 76 responses to this item. The reaction to this item and the responses to the PRPSA both suggest an emotional response that may be de-motivating for both public speaking instruction and school in general. Public Speaking Survey open-ended questions. Students were asked to answer two questions. I assume that it is possible that students could have experiences that could encourage, discourage or both. 72 students responded to the question on encouraging experience and 71 students answered the question on discouraging experiences. Answers were examined inductively for patterns of repeated themes. There were several clear themes that were repeated and these themes will be described in the following discussion. Another interesting finding in these responses is that students responding to the question about discouraging experience sometimes discussed good experience (n=3) and sometimes students, in the responding to the question about experiences that discouraged them sometimes discussed encouraging events (n=8), possibly because they could only think of one type of experience or the other. There were also many students who had little or no experiences. Many of them discussed their current experience in our course and their current view of public speaking in place of discussing experiences. Themes related to encouragement. Some students discussed encouragement in their observation of what I would call public figures. Students described people who gave speeches that they admired and stated that they wanted to learn about public speaking to emulate them. Students mentioned teachers, other students, coaches, and Barack Obama as people they 17

18 observed and wished to emulate. Bandura s observational learning is confirmed by this finding and it may suggest a good method to use to maintain motivation in instruction. Students also discussed a variety of experiences that encouraged them to learn more. Several mention high school and middle school experiences, as well as presentations in other college classes. They describe positive experiences in terms of positive verbal feedback teachers, good grades and generally enjoying giving speeches. A variety of other experiences were mentioned less frequently related to enjoying speaking, including work experience, speech training in the workplace, 4-H, American Legion, and family events. Students responding to this question who had little experience discussed some positive attitudes. Students discussed their anticipation that they would need skills in their career. Some discussed the need for these skills in a specific career, while others discussed the skill is important in general in the workplace. Others discussed the desire to improve in a general way, not directly related to public speaking skills as useful in a career. For example, one student hoped to get over shyness through being a successful public speaker. Themes related to discouragement. Some of the patterns of responses have some overlap, but the responses varied in categories and number of responses for some themes. One student, for example, did express that a coach who embarrassed himself in a public speech discouraged him, but there were many fewer responses related to observing speakers' performances. More frequently, school experiences were discussed as discouraging. Several students mentioned low grades from teachers as a source of discouragement. A variety of other responses suggest a general disinterest in public speaking. Some students mentioned that the class is required and they had no interest in public speaking beyond completing the requirement. Others disliked previous speech experiences for a variety of reasons. 18

19 They said speeches required a lot of effort to prepare. They said they had no interest in the topics, which I assume were assigned to them. One student expressed a general indifference to public speaking, saying he doesn't mind speeches, but he doesn't "have an overwhelming desire to do public speaking. He states, "There are other interests in my life." Another set of themes concerned, not specific experiences, but students' perceptions of themselves as not suited to public speaking. These could help increase the feelings of anxiety, which many themes also concern. Some of their personal characteristics that they see as ill-suited to speaking included not liking to talk to in front of others, being "soft spoken," shyness, and being unable to say in words what they are thinking. Another set of themes revolves around anxiety. Some students simply describe this as a personal trait, while others discuss anxiety-producing experiences. Most of these experiences concern feedback from the audience as they gave speeches. The feedback included audience members, usually other students, not paying attention to their speeches, and others described how fellow students made fun of students for how they presented their speeches. One student mentioned being made fun of due to his lisp. Others described being made fun of for "messing up" and exhibiting nervous hand movements during the speech. The last set of responses concerned a low expectation of success in upcoming speeches. One student stated, "I know this class will help me in some way but I don't see myself ever feeling completely comfortable. Another student states that there was no particular experience that discouraged them "but I think I don't want to give speeches because I'm not very good at them." Discussion. PRPSA. Nervousness about public speaking is clearly an issue and this makes sense given the two courses that satisfy the communication requirement. The options are this course or 19

20 a course that is exclusively devoted public speaking, so for nervous students this course is the lesser of two evils. Public Speaking Survey scales. Students perception of the utility and value of instruction in public speaking was higher than I expected. Motivations toward school in general were lower than I expected, particularly in response to the item about dreading schoolwork. The other important finding is the results of the efficacy scale. Responses are consistently moderate. Given the social desirability of answering positively, I think rating these items as only slightly true suggests a problem with confidence in abilities that may need to be addressed in changes to instruction. Questions on encouraging/discouraging experiences. Many themes were uncovered and most of the findings reinforce my understanding that, prior to this class, students have widely varying experiences in terms of amount and quality of public speaking training. Encouraging experiences match much of Bandura s theory, in terms of receiving positive feedback and observing effective models of public speaking training. Some students with no experience still projected positive motivation in terms of expecting instruction to be useful in their career or useful for their self-development in general. Discouraging experiences concerned teachers negative feedback and observing fellow students negative feedback. Students also discussed personal traits that they felt limited their success in speaking, such as shyness. Students without experience also discussed their perception that they would not succeed in giving speeches. Lastly, students discussed the nature of the class and public speaking with indifference. They didn t have much interest in learning public speaking, which may be related to a general indifference to school. 20

21 Assessing research findings. The research questions were generally answered, though the post-test of the Public Speaking Survey may not indicate clear findings due to the low number of students taking it compared to those taking the pre-test. Also, many of the quantitative measures resulted in findings in the middle of the scale. Given the social desirability of answering at the higher range of the scale, I am interpreting slightly true as a relatively low score for a question about how excited you are about school, for example. Possible de-motivating factors. First, students anxiety about public speaking, and about school in general, seems evident in the finding in the Public Speaking Survey open-ended questions and the motivation scales, as well as the PRPSA. Second, at least some students expressed indifference toward learning public speaking and school in general, as seen in the motivation scale and the open-ended questions. Third, some students expressed a limited degree of self-efficacy and expectation of success in the quantitative scales and the open-ended items. Possible positive factors. Students expressed relatively strong belief in the utility and value of public speaking in the quantitative and open-ended measures. Following Bandura s theory, positive feedback and observation of positive models also encouraged student to engage in public speaking instruction, as shown in their responses to the open-ended questions. Future plans. Both strengthening the positive factors and remediating the negative factors should be considered in future changes to the public speaking portion of this course. In the short term, I will work on integrating more information about college to reduce uncertainty about the college experience. Also, greater emphasis on controlling public speaking anxiety is suggested. In the long term, a mastery approach to some of the public speaking material has some merit based on these findings. Though not part of the research questions, the open-ended items confirm my understanding that students have a wide variety of previous public speaking 21

22 experience, which results in a variety of skill and motivation levels. Mastery learning could help address individual differences. 22

23 References Bodie, G. D. (2010). A racing heart, rattling knees, and ruminative thoughts: Defining, explaining and treating public speaking anxiety. Communication Education, 59, Christophel, D. M. (1990). The relationships among teacher immediacy, behaviors, student motivation, and learning. Communication Education, 19, Hardré, P. L. & Sullivan, D. W. (2008). Student differences and environment perceptions: How they contribute to student motivation in rural high schools. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, McCroskey, J. C. (2007, February 2). Personal Report of Public Speaking Anxiety (PRPSA). Retrieved from McCroskey, J. C. & Richmond, V. P. (1990). Willingness to communicate: A cognitive view. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5, Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, Rocca, K. A. (2010). Student participation in the college classroom: An extended multidisciplinary literature review. Communication Education, 59,