nach oben

Educational Research for Policy and Practice

Erschienen in:

07.09.2020 | Original Article

Out-of-class communication: are students and faculty interested and engaged? (A study at a Russian university)

verfasst von: Maria Kuryan, Elena Voronina

Erschienen in: Educational Research for Policy and Practice | Ausgabe 2/2021

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The study looks into the problem of student–faculty communication. It addresses the issue of claimed scarcity of such interaction that exists despite the recognized benefits it can bring to students and instructors. It is suggested that examination and comparison of the participants’ interest and actual engagement in out-of-class communication (OCC) may shed light on this. Two populations from a university in Russia: 148 students and 35 instructors, were analyzed to measure their overall interest and engagement in OCC. The paper also addressed the question whether the studied populations are interested and engage in the same types of OCC. The results demonstrate that the reported overall interest in OCC was higher than the actual engagement in it among both groups of the respondents. Besides, students and faculty chose different types of OCC as most interest evincing and most frequently practiced. The research outcomes may help the parties concerned (scholars, teaching staff, educational managers and students) enhance understanding of the nature of OCC and its specifics and consider ways of harmonizing it in the best interests of all stakeholders.

Vorheriger Artikel Determinants of student achievement at lower secondary schools in rural Cambodia

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Ahnert, L., Harwardt-Heinecke, E., Kappler, G., Eckstein-Madry, T., & Milatz, A. (2012). Student–teacher relationships and classroom climate in first grade: how do they relate to students’ stress regulation? Attachment and Human Development, 14(3), 249–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2012.673277.CrossRef

Ainley, M. (2006). Connecting with learning: Motivation, affect and cognition in interest processes. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), 391–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9033-0.CrossRef

Ainley, M., Hidi, S., & Berndorff, D. (2002). Interest, learning, and the psychological processes that mediate their relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 545–561. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.545.CrossRef

Ajzen, I., & Fisbbein, M. (1974). Factors influencing intentions and the intention-behavior relation. Human Relations, 27(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872677402700101.CrossRef

Alderman, R. V. (2008). Faculty and student out-of-classroom interaction: Student perceptions of quality of interaction. Doctoral dissertation. Texas A&M University. Texas A&M University. Available electronically from http://hdl.handle.net/1969.1/85919.

Al-Hussami, M., Saleh, M., Hayajneh, F., Abdalkader, H., & Mahadeen, A. (2011). The effects of undergraduate nursing student–faculty interaction outside the classroom on college grade point average. Nurse Education in Practice, 11(5), 320–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2011.02.004.CrossRef

Anaya, G., & Cole, D. (2001). Latina/o student achievement: Exploring the influence of student-faculty interactions on college grades. Journal of College Student Development, 42, 3–14.

Astin, A. (1999). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 40(5), 518–529.

Baringer, D. K., & McCroskey, J. C. (2000). Immediacy in the classroom: Student immediacy. Communication-Education, 49, 178–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520009379204.CrossRef

Bempechat, J., Ronfard, S., Mirny, A., Li, J., & Holloway, S. (2013). “She Always Gives Grades Lower than One Deserves:” A Qualitative Study of Russian Adolescents’ Perceptions of Fairness in the Classroom. Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research, 7, 169-187. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259188283_She_always_gives_grades_lower_than_one_deserves_A_qualitative_study_of_Russian_adolescents%27_perceptions_of_fairness_in_the_classroom.

Beymer, P. N., Rosenberg, J. M., & Schmidt, J. A. (2020). Does choice matter or is it all about interest? An investigation using an experience sampling approach in high school science classrooms. Learning and Individual Differences, 78, 101812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2019.101812.CrossRef

Chory, R. M., & Offstein, E. H. (2017). Your professor will know you as a person Evaluating and rethinking the relational boundaries between faculty and students. Journal of Management Education, 41(1), 9–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562916647986.CrossRef

Claessens, L. C., van Tartwijk, J., van der Want, A. C., Pennings, H. J., Verloop, N., den Brok, P., et al. (2017). Positive teacher–student relationships go beyond the classroom, problematic ones stay inside. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(5), 478–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2015.1129595.CrossRef

Clynes, M., Sheridan, A., & Frazer, K. (2020). Ref: NET_2019_1563: Working while studying: The impact of term-time employment on undergraduate nursing students’ engagement in the Republic of Ireland: A cross-sectional study. Nurse Education Today. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104513.CrossRef

Cole, D. (1999). Faculty-student interactions of African-American and White college students at predominantly White institutions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.

Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical assessment, research & evaluation, 10, 1–9. Retrieved 10 May, 2019 from, http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=10&n=7.

Cotten, S. R., & Wilson, B. (2006). Student–faculty interactions: Dynamics and determinants. Higher Education, 51, 487–519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-1705-4.CrossRef

Cox, B. E., & Orehovec, E. (2007). Faculty-student interaction outside the classroom: A typology from a residential college. The Review of Higher Education, 30(4), 343–362. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2007.0033.CrossRef

Davis, B. G. (2009). Tools for teaching (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Den Brok, P., Bergen, T., & Brekelmans, M. (2003). Comparing students’ and teachers’ perceptions of instructional behavior in dutch secondary education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, April, 2003.

Den Brok, P., Levy, J., Rodriguez, R., & Wubbels, T. (2002). Perceptions of Asian-American and Hispanic-American teachers and their students on teacher interpersonal communication style. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(4), 447–467. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00009-4.CrossRef

DiVerniero, R. A., & Hosek, A. M. (2011). Students’ perceptions and communicative management of instructors’ online self–disclosure. Communication Quarterly, 59(4), 428–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2011.597275.CrossRef

Docan-Morgan, T. (2011). “Everything changed”: Relational turning point events in college teacher-student relationships from teachers’ perspectives. Communication Education, 60(1), 20–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2010.497223.CrossRef

Docan-Morgan, T., & Manusov, V. (2009). Relational turning point events and their outcomes in college teacher-student relationships from students’ perspectives. Communication Education, 58, 155–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520802515713.CrossRef

Einarson, M. K., & Clarkberg, M. E. (2004). Understanding faculty out-of-class interaction with undergraduate students at a research university. (CHERI Working Paper № 57). Retrieved 11 December, 2018 from http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cheri/20/.

Endo, J., & Harpel, R. (1982). The effect of student-faculty interaction on students educational outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 16(2), 115–138.CrossRef

Farris, K. L., Houser, M. L., & Hosek, A. M. (2017). Historical roots and trajectories of instructional communication. In Handbook of Instructional Communication (pp. 19–38). Routledge.

Frenzel, A. C., Dicke, A. L., Pekrun, R., & Goetz, T. (2009). Development of mathematics interest in adolescence: Quantitative and qualitative insights. Paper presented at the meeting of the European Association on Learning and Instruction, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Frisby, B. N., & Martin, M. M. (2010). Instructor–student and student–student rapport in the classroom. Communication Education, 59(2), 146–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520903564362.CrossRef

Froumin, I., Kouzminov, Y., & Semyonov, D. (2014). Institutional diversity in Russian higher education: Revolutions and evolution. European Journal of Higher Education, 4(3), 209–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2014.916532.CrossRef

Fusani, D. S. (1994). “Extra-class” communication: Frequency, immediacy, self-disclosure and satisfaction in student-faculty interaction outside the classroom. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 22, 232–255.CrossRef

Gehlbach, H., Brinkworth, M., & Juraschek, A. (2012). Changes in teacher-student relationships. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 690–704. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.2011.02058.x.CrossRef

Golde, C. M., & Pribbenow, D. A. (2000). Understanding faculty involvement in residential learning communities. Journal of College Student Development, 41(1), 27–40.

Goodboy, A. K., Myers, S. A., & Bolkan, S. (2012). Personalized education and student motives for communicating with instructors: An examination of Chinese and American classrooms. China Media Research, 8(2), 94–100.

Gorham, J., & Zakahi, W. R. (1990). A comparison of teacher and student perceptions of immediacy and learning: Monitoring process and product. Communication Education, 39(4), 354–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529009378815.CrossRef

Grantham, A., Robinson, E., & Chapman, D. (2015). “That truly meant a lot to me”: A qualitative examination of meaningful faculty-student interactions. College Teaching, 63(3), 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2014.985285.CrossRef

Hagenauer, G., & Volet, S. E. (2014). Teacher–student relationship at university: An important yet under-researched field. Oxford Review of Education, 40(3), 370–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2014.921613.CrossRef

Harris, A., & Jones, M. (2018). Why context matters: a comparative perspective on education reform and policy implementation. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 17, 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-018-9231-9.CrossRef

Hawk, T. F., & Lyons, P. R. (2008). Please don’t give up on me: When faculty fail to care. Journal of Management Education, 32(3), 316–338. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562908314194.CrossRef

Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4.CrossRef

Hirschy, A. S., & Wilson, M. E. (2002). The sociology of the classroom and its influence on student learning. Peabody Journal of Education, 77(3), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327930PJE7703_5.CrossRef

Hoffman, E. M. (2014). Faculty and student relationships: Context matters. College Teaching, 62(1), 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2013.817379.CrossRef

Hsu, P., & Yen, Y. (2012). Facebook as a teaching enhancement tool to facilitate college student learning: A case study. Latest Advances in Educational Technologies.

Huang, S. Y. L. (2012). Learning environments at higher education institutions: Relationships with academic aspirations and satisfaction. Learning Environments Research, 15(3), 363–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-012-9114-6.CrossRef

Iverson, K. B., Pascarella, E., & Terenzini, T. P. (1984). Informal faculty-student contact and commuter college freshmen. Research in Higher Education, 21, 123–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00975100.CrossRef

Jaasma, M. A., & Koper, R. J. (1999). The relationship of student-faculty out-of-class communication to instructor immediacy and trust and to student motivation. Communication Education, 48(1), 41–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529909379151.CrossRef

Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758–773. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.598505.CrossRef

Karpouza, E., & Emvalotis, A. (2019). Exploring the teacher-student relationship in graduate education: A constructivist grounded theory. Teaching in Higher Education, 24(2), 121–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1468319.CrossRef

Kim, Y. K. (2006). Student-faculty interaction in college: Examining its causalities, predictors, and racial differences (Doctoral dissertation). Los Angeles: University of California.

Kim, Y. K., & Sax, L. J. (2011). Are the effects of student–faculty interaction dependent on academic major? An examination using multilevel modeling. Research in Higher Education, 52(6), 589–615. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-010-9209-9.CrossRef

Knapp, J. L., Martin, M. M., & Myers, S. A. (2005). Perceived instructor in-class communication behaviors as a predictor of student initiated out-of-class communication. Communication Quarterly, 53, 437–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463370500102046.CrossRef

Komarraju, M., Musulkin, S., & Bhattacharya, G. (2010). The role of student-faculty interactions in developing college students’ academic self-concept, motivation, and achievement. Journal of College Student Development, 51(3), 332–342. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0137.CrossRef

Könings, K. D., Seidel, T., Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2014). Differences between students’ and teachers’ perceptions of education: Profiles to describe congruence and friction. Instructional science, 42(1), 11–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-013-9294-1.CrossRef

Krapp, A. (1999). Interest, motivation and learning: An educational-psychological perspective. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14(1), 23–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173109.CrossRef

Krapp, A. (2002). Structural and dynamic aspects of interest development: theoretical considerations from an ontogenetic perspective. Learning and Instruction, 12, 383–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00011-1.CrossRef

Krapp, A., & Prenzel, M. (2011). Research on interest in science: Theories, methods, and findings. International Journal of Science Education, 33(1), 27–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.518645.CrossRef

Kuh, G. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning: Inside the national survey of student engagement. Change, 33(3), 10–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380109601795.CrossRef

Kuh, G. D., & Hu, S. (2001). The effects of student-faculty interaction in the 1990s. The Review of Higher Education, 24(3), 309–332. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2001.0005.CrossRef

Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J., Whitt, E. J., & Associates. (2010). Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Laird, T. S., & Kuh, G. D. (2005). Student experiences with information technology and their relationship to other aspects of student engagement. Research in Higher Education, 46, 211–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-004-1600-y.CrossRef

Levy, J., Wubbels, T., Den Brok, P., & Brekelman, S. (2003). Students’ perceptions of interpersonal aspects of the learning environment. Learning Environments Research, 6(1), 5–36. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022967927037.CrossRef

Li, L., Finley, J. & Pitts, J. (2011) Which is a better choice for student-faculty interaction: Synchronous or asynchronous communication? Journal of Technology Research. Retrieved 5 May, 2019, from http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/10682.pdf.

Li, L., & Pitts, J. (2009). Does it really matter? Using virtual office hours to enhance student-faculty interaction. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20, 175–185.

Martin, A. (2014). Interpersonal relationships and students’ academic and non-academic development: What outcomes peers, parents, and teachers do and do not impact. In D. Zandvliet, P. den Brok, & T. Mainhard (Eds.), Interpersonal relationships in education: From theory to practice (pp. 9–24). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.CrossRef

Master, A., Butler, L. P., & Walton, G. M. (2017). How the subjective relationship between the self, others, and a task drives interest. In The science of interest (pp. 209–226). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55509-6.

McArthur, J. A., & Bostedo-Conway, K. (2012). Exploring the relationship between student-instructor interaction on twitter and student perceptions of teacher behaviors. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 24(3), 286–292.

McCroskey, J. C., & McCroskey, L. L. (1985). The affinity-seeking of classroom teachers.

Mottet, T. P., Beebe, S. A., & Fleuriet, C. A. (2006). Students’ influence messages. In T. P. Mottet, V. P. Richmond, & J. C. McCroskey (Eds.), Handbook of instructional communication: Rhetorical and relational perspectives (pp. 143–165). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Mottet, T. P., Beebe, S. A., Raffeld, P. C., & Medlock, A. L. (2004). The effects of student verbal and nonverbal responsiveness on teacher self-efficacy and job satisfaction. Communication Education, 53, 150–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520410001682410.CrossRef

Myers, S. A. (2010). Instructional communication: The emergence of a field. In D. L. Fassett, D. L. & J. T. Warren, (Eds.). The SAGE handbook of communication and instruction (pp. 149–159). Sage.

Nadler, M. K., & Nadler, L. B. (2000). Out of class communication between faculty and students: A faculty perspective. Communication Studies, 51(2), 176–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510970009388517.CrossRef

Nadler, M., & Nadler, L. (2001). The roles of sex, empathy, and credibility in out-of-class communication between faculty and students. Women’s Studies in Communication, 24(2), 241–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/07491409.2001.10162436.CrossRef

NSSE 2019: Excerpts from the Institutional Report. (2019). Ithaca College. Retrieved 15 November, 2019, from https://www.ithaca.edu/ir/docs/NSSE/NSSE19excerpts.pdf.

NSSE Annual Results. Engagement Insights. Survey Findings on the Quality of Undergraduate Education (2018). Indiana University Bloomington. Retrieved 1 March, 2019, from http://nsse.indiana.edu/pdf/NSSE_Annual_Results_2018.pdf.

NSSE Overview. The College Student Report. (2003). Indiana University Bloomington. Retrieved 1 March, 2019, from http://nsse.indiana.edu/pdf/2003_inst_report/NSSE_2003_Overview.pdf.

Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (1991). Instructional discourse, student engagement, and literature achievement. Research in the Teaching of English, pp. 261–290. Retrieved 1 May, 2020, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/40171413.

O’Keefe, P. A., Horberg, E. J., & Plante, I. (2017). The multifaceted role of interest in motivation and engagement. In The science of interest (pp. 49–67). Springer international Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55509-6

O’Keefe, P. A., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (Eds.). (2017). The science of interest. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55509-6.

Palmer, D., Dixon, J., & Archer, J. (2016). Using situational interest to enhance individual interest and science-related behaviours. Research in Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9526-x.CrossRef

Parker, E. (2017). Do non classroom interactions with faculty affect moral development among college students? College Student Affairs Journal, 35(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1353/csj.2017.0001.CrossRef

Pascarella, E. (1980). Student-faculty informal contact and college outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 50(4), 545–595. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025115612484.CrossRef

Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research (Vol. 2). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Paul, P., & Mukhopadhyay, K. (2001). Using information technology for active learning in international business education. Marketing Education Review, 11, 81–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2001.11488759.CrossRef

Pike, G. R., Kuh, G. D., & McCormick, A. C. (2011). An investigation of the contingent relationships between learning community participation and student engagement. Research in Higher Education, 52(3), 300–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-010-9192-1.CrossRef

Plecha, M. (2002). The impact of motivation, student-peer, and student-faculty interaction on academic self-confidence. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. (New Orleans, LA, April 1-5, 2002). Retrieved 13 June, 2018, from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED464149.

Polyanskaya, M. (2015). Rol prepodavatelya v povyshenii kachestva obrazovatelnogo protsessa v vysshem uchebnom zavedenii. Mir nauki. Pedagogika i psihologija 3, 3–40. Retrieved 07 January, 2020, from https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/rol-prepodavatelya-v-povyshenii-kachestva-obrazovatelnogo-protsessa-v-vysshem-uchebnom-zavedenii/viewer.

Ponamareva, N., Levchenkova, O., & Kulagin, K. (2015). Rol lichnosti prepodavatelya v obrazovatelnom protsesse. Smolenskiy meditsinskiy almanakh 2, 222–224. Retrieved 19 January, 2020, from https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/rol-lichnosti-prepodavatelya-v-obrazovatelnom-protsesse/viewer.

Price, M., Handley, K., Millar, J., & O’donovan, B. (2010). Feedback: all that effort, but what is the effect? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(3), 277–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930903541007.CrossRef

Pushnykh, V., & Chemeris, V. (2006). Study of a Russian university’s organisational culture in transition from planned to market economy. Tertiary Education and Management, 12(2), 161–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11233-006-0005-1.CrossRef

Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. (2011). Revisiting the conceptualization, measurement, and generation of interest. Educational Psychologist, 46(3), 168–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.587723.CrossRef

Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. E. (2016). The power of interest for motivation and engagement. Abingdon: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315771045.CrossRef

Russell, S. L., Wentzel, K. R., & Donlan, A. E. (2016). Teachers’ beliefs about the development of teacher-adolescent trust. Learning Environments Research, 19(2), 241–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-016-9207-8.CrossRef

Sanders, A. J. (2014). Exploring the construct of teacher self-disclosure and its connection to situational interest, intended effort, and the learning experience in a foreign language learning context (Doctoral dissertation).

Sax, L. J., Bryant, A. N., & Harper, C. E. (2005). The differential effects of student-faculty interaction on college outcomes for women and men. Journal of College Student Development, 46(6), 642–657. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2005.0067.CrossRef

Scherzinger, M., & Wettstein, A. (2019). Classroom disruptions, the teacher–student relationship and classroom management from the perspective of teachers, students and external observers: A multimethod approach. Learning Environments Research, 22(1), 101–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-018-9269-x.CrossRef

Schiefele, U., Krapp, A., & Winteler, A. (1992). Interest as a predictor of academic achievement: A meta–analysis of research. In K. A. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and development (pp. 183–212). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Shafranova, O. (2007). Sovremennyy prepodavatel: zadacha tsennostnogo samoopredeleniya. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossiji 7, pp. 127–131. Retrieved 29 January, 2020, from https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/sovremennyy-prepodavatel-zadacha-tsennostnogo-samoopredeleniya.

Sheeran, P., & Webb, T. L. (2016). The intention–behavior gap. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10(9), 503–518. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12265.CrossRef

Sidelinger, R. J. (2008). Does student passivity exist? The impact of the student and instructor on involvement in and outside of the college classroom. (Doctoral dissertation). West Virginia University.

Silvia, P. J. (2006). Exploring the psychology of interest. Oxford: Oxford university Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195158557.001.0001.CrossRef

Silvia, P. J. (2017). Curiosity. In The science of interest (pp. 97–108). Springer international Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55509-6.

Stephens, K. K., Houser, M. L., & Cowan, R. L. (2009). RU able to meat me: The impact of students’ overly casual email messages to instructors. Communication Education, 58, 303–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520802582598.CrossRef

Tan, A. H., Muskat, B., & Zehrer, A. (2016). A systematic review of quality of student experience in higher education. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 8(2), 209–228. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQSS-08-2015-0058.CrossRef

Terekhova, G. (2017). Izmenenie statusa prepodavatelja v sovremennom vuze. Retrieved 29 January, 2020, from http://conference.osu.ru/assets/files/conf_info/conf6/20.pdf.

Terenzini, P., & Pascarella, E. (1977). Voluntary freshman attrition and patterns of social and academic integration in a university: A test of a conceptual model. Research in Higher Education, 6(1), 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992014.CrossRef

Tinto, V. (2004). Student retention and graduation: Facing the truth, living with the consequences. Occasional Paper 1. Washington DC: Pell Institution for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education.

Trolian, T. L., Jach, E. A., Hanson, J. M., & Pascarella, E. T. (2016). Influencing academic motivation: The effects of student–faculty interaction. Journal of College Student Development, 57(7), 810–826. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2016.0080.CrossRef

Vermetten, Y. J., Vermunt, J. D., & Lodewijks, H. G. (2002). Powerful learning environments? How university students differ in their response to instructional measures. Learning and Instruction, 12, 263–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00013-5.CrossRef

Vito, M. M. (2007). The impact of faculty-student interaction outside the classroom on faculty satisfaction, engagement, and retention (Doctoral dissertation). Northern Arizona University.

Waldeck, J. H., Kearney, P., & Plax, T. G. (2001). Instructional and developmental communication theory and research in the 1990s: Extending the agenda for the 21st century. Annals of the International Communication Association, 24(1), 207–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2001.11678987.CrossRef

Wang, H., & Grimes, J. W. (2000). A systematic approach to assessing retention programs: Identifying critical points for meaningful interventions and validating outcomes assessment. Journal of College Student Retention, 2(1), 59–68. https://doi.org/10.2190/HYY4-XTBH-RJFD-LU5Y.CrossRef

Wilson L.T. (2009). Statistical correlation. Retrieved Jan 06, 2019 from https://explorable.com/statistical-correlation

Wilson, R. C., Woods, L., & Gaff, J. G. (1974). Social-psychological accessibility and faculty-student interaction beyond the classroom. Sociology of Education, 47, 74–92. https://doi.org/10.2307/2112167.CrossRef

Wood, L., & Wilson, R. C. (1972). Teachers with impact. Research Reporter, 7(2), 1–4.

Wubbels, T., Brekelmans, M., den Brok, P., Levy, J., Mainhard, T., & van Tartwijk, J. (2012). Let’s make things better. In T. Wubbels, P. Den Brok, J. Van Tartwijk, & J. Levy (Eds.), Interpersonal relationships in education: an overview of contemporary research (pp. 225–250). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.CrossRef

Young, S. L., Pulido, M. D., & Brooks, C. F. (2018). Reasons for student engagement in extra-class communication. Communication Research Reports, 35(2), 172–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2017.1383234.CrossRef

Yudkevich, M. (2014). The Russian University: recovery and rehabilitation. Studies in Higher Education, 39(8), 1463–1474. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.949537.CrossRef

Titel: Out-of-class communication: are students and faculty interested and engaged? (A study at a Russian university)
verfasst von: Maria Kuryan
Elena Voronina
Publikationsdatum: 07.09.2020
Verlag: Springer Singapore
Erschienen in: Educational Research for Policy and Practice / Ausgabe 2/2021
Print ISSN: 1570-2081
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-1723
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-020-09277-3

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2021

Correction to: Implementing a parental involvement policy to enhance Physical Sciences learner’s academic achievement in rural secondary schools

Teachers’ views on effective classroom management: a mixed-methods investigation in Western Australian high schools

Girls’ participation in formal education: a case of Maasai pastoralists in Tanzania

Transformative instruction as affirmation intervention: an activity-theoretical study of children’s agency and responsible learning in a Japanese elementary school

Determinants of student achievement at lower secondary schools in rural Cambodia

Implementing a national policy initiative to support education for sustainable development: lessons from Taiwan’s Environmental Education Act