The effect of distance learning classroom design on student perceptions

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of camera angle and monitor placement in a simulated distance-learning environment. Of particular interest were the effects on perceived instructor credibility and immediacy behaviors. A videotape of a lecture on an academically relevant topic was produced using a high-angle and an eye-level camera. Participants viewed one of the presentations in either a traditional classroom design (one monitor, front center of room) or in small groups with a monitor for each group. Partkipants were observed as they viewed the videotape of interest,following which they completed a questionnaire and posttest. Results suggest that an eye-level camera, and multiple monitors with groups of 4-5 students positively influence instructor credibility, immediacy, and interactions. The implications of these findings and recommendations for design of a distance-learning classroom are discussed.

Enhancing Instructor Credibility and Immediacy in the Design of Distance Learning Systems and Virtual Classroom Environments

“…The camera positioned 15-degrees above line-of-sight would not have been able to record these cues. This 15-degree angle is not as pronounced as the 40-degree angle used in Jayasinghe et al (1997), though the decreased credibility and immediacy response is similar. A deeper analysis did appear to show an impact of low-resolution (340x240) and high-definition (1920x1080) when combined with camera angle.…”

“…Immediacy is the learner's perception of an instructor's nonverbal and verbal communication skills (Dixon et al, 2017;McCroskey et al, 2006). Earlier research using camera angle and display sizes and locations found that participants rated their instructor higher in terms of credibility and immediacy when they viewed the eye-level versions of four video treatments (Jayasinghe et al, 1997). Similar to Jayasinghe et al (1997), Teven and Hanson (2004), measured for instructor credibility in video trials, and used four different videos.…”

“…Earlier research using camera angle and display sizes and locations found that participants rated their instructor higher in terms of credibility and immediacy when they viewed the eye-level versions of four video treatments (Jayasinghe et al, 1997). Similar to Jayasinghe et al (1997), Teven and Hanson (2004), measured for instructor credibility in video trials, and used four different videos. These 7-minute scripted videos were kept as consistent as possible and only varied the presenter's camera eye-contact, movement around the classroom, gestures, and natural levels of enthusiasm.…”

“…This tool measures how study participants perceived the credibility of a communication source, or the instructor in the video, and was implemented on a 7point Likert Scale. This instrument is based on earlier instruments such as the Semantic Differential Scale for Dimensions of Source Credibility for Spouses and Peers used in previous research studies that focused on the use of mass media to communicate the credibility of presenters (McCain et al, 1977;McCroskey et al, 1974;Jayasinghe et al, 1997;McCroskey & Jenson, 1975). The revised version recommends how to score and present 18 indicators such as the learner's description of the instructor's Competence (e.g., intelligent/unintelligent, inexpert/expert), Goodwill (e.g., self-centered/not selfcentered, concerned/unconcerned) and Trustworthiness (e.g., untrustworthy/trustworthy, and unethical/ethical).…”

Comparison of Conventional and Computer-aided Drafting Methods from the View of Time and Drafting Quality

“…The Cronbach's alpha coefficient estimate of internal consistency for the scale, including the average scores for the three items, was 0.67. The coefficient of all items was above 0.60, representing good reliability according to some researchers (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988;Jayasinghe et al, 1997;Grewal et al, 1998;Kim & Yin, 2001;Pektas & Erkip, 2006;Ahmad et al, 2010). Therefore, the scale was considered to be reliable.…”