Metacommunication Versus Conversational Practices of Teaching Personnel at a Constituent Campus of a Southern Tagalog State University, the Philippines: A Study on Manifestation and Their Relationship

Richard M.  Bañez; Gen Gen P. Contante; Lui Anne May C.  Revadavia; Julie Ann Mae V.  Tan

doi:10.57260/csdj.2024.268395

Authors

Richard M. Bañez Batangas State University - The National Engineering University, JPLPC-Malvar Campus, Philippines
Gen Gen P. Contante Batangas State University - The National Engineering University, JPLPC-Malvar Campus, Philippines
Lui Anne May C. Revadavia Batangas State University - The National Engineering University, JPLPC-Malvar Campus, Philippines
Julie Ann Mae V. Tan Batangas State University - The National Engineering University, JPLPC-Malvar Campus, Philippines

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.57260/csdj.2024.268395

Keywords:

Conversational practices, Higher education, Metacommunication, Pedagogic interaction, Positive classroom environment

Abstract

This study examines the intricacies of metacommunication and conversational practices of an incidental sample of 106 teaching personnel engaged in remote teaching at a constituent campus of a Southern Tagalog state university, the Philippines. The primary objective of this study is to measure the extent to which teaching personnel manifest metacommunication across different forms of communication, including verbal, non-verbal, and written expressions, and how they exhibit conversational behaviors during pedagogic interactions. These behaviors encompass openness, empathy, positivity, immediacy, interaction management, and expressiveness. The research also endeavors to test if a significant relationship exists between metacommunication and these conversational practices. Employing a correlational research design, a survey questionnaire, and utilizing statistical tools such as mean, standard deviation, and Pearson r to analyze the quantitative data collected, the findings reveal heightened levels of metacommunication and a prevalent presence of conversational practices among educators in the higher education context. Furthermore, the research identifies a correlation between metacommunication and conversational practices. In light of these findings, it is recommended that educators proactively nurture a positive and professional classroom environment while considering individualized student assessments. This approach can foster more constructive pedagogic interactions within the higher education teaching community while enhancing the learning experience for both educators and students. The study also emphasizes the vital link between metacommunication and conversational practices in education while illustrating its impact on communication quality, learning experiences, and societal dialogue for enhanced empathy and positivity for broader societal benefits.

References

Alyammahi, A., Alshurideh, M., Kurdi, B.A., Salloum, S.A. (2021). The impacts of communication ethics on workplace decision making and productivity. In: Hassanien, A.E., Slowik, A., Snášel, V., El-Deeb, H., Tolba, F.M. (eds) Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Systems and Informatics 2020. AISI 2020. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 1261. Springer, Cham. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58669-0_44

Bahri, H., & Williams, R. (2017). Interconnectivity and metacommunication. Training, Language and Culture, 1(3), 8-29. DOI: 10.29366/2017tlc.1.3.1

Baltzersen, R. K. (2013). The importance of metacommunication in supervision processes in higher education. International Journal of Higher Education, 2(2), 128-140. DOI:10.5430/ijhe.v2n2p128

Behrens, F., & Kret, M. E. (2019). The interplay between face-to-face contact and feedback on cooperation during real-life interactions. J Nonverbal Behav 43, 513–528. DOI:10.1007/s10919-019-00314-1

Bojesen, E. (2019). Conversation as educational research. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 51(6), 650-659. DOI:10.1080/00131857.2018.1508995

Calvert, F. L., Deane, F. P., & Grenyer, B. F. S. (2020). Supervisee perceptions of the use of metacommunication in the supervisory relationship. Psychotherapy Research, 30(2), 228-238. DOI:10.1080/10503307.2018.1524169

Cardullo, V. M. & Burton, M. (2016). Building relationship through learning communities and participation in online learning environments: Building interactions in online learning. In L. Kyei-Blankson, J. Blankson, E. Ntuli, & C. Agyeman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Strategic Management of Interaction, Presence, and Participation in Online Courses (pp. 448-471). IGI Global. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-9582-5.ch018

Corrales, A., Goldberg, F., Turpen, C., & Price, E. (2018, August 1-2). Conversational norms in faculty communities enable and constrain opportunities to learn. Paper presented at Physics Education Research Conference 2018, Washington, DC. Retrieved from https://www.compadre.org/Repository/document/ServeFile.cfm?ID=14772&DocID=4919

Creswell, J. (2010). Educational research—planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. (4thed.). Pearson Merril Prentice Hall.

DeVito, J. A. (2016). The Interpersonal Communication Book. (14thed.). Pearson Education. Retrieved from https://slims.bakrie.ac.id/repository/f7d4f28f39e8b9d8cb794f6c4eb9cb0f.pdf

Eddy, A. (2019). Is technology killing human emotion? How computer-mediated communication compares to face-to-face interactions. In Proceedings of Mensch und Computer 2019 (MuC ‘19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 527–530. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1145/3340764.3344451

Fox, W. (1993). What does the recognition of intrinsic value entail? The Trumpeter: Journal of Ecosophy, 10(3), 101-102. Retrieved from https://trumpeter.athabascau.ca/index.php/trumpet/article/view/379

Garcia-Vedrenne, AE., Orland, C., Ballare, KM., Shapiro, B., & Wayne, RK. (2020). Ten strategies for a successful transition to remote learning: Lessons learned with a flipped course. Ecol Evol., 10(22), 12620–12634. DOI:10.1002/ece3.6760

Goldman, S. E., Finn, J. B., & Leslie, M. J. (2022). Classroom management and remote teaching: tools for defining and teaching expectations. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 54(6), 404-413. DOI:10.1177/00400599211025555

Ivaldi, A., Sanderson, A., Hall, G., & Forrester, M. (2021). Learning to perform: A conversation analytic systematic review of learning and teaching practices in performing arts lesson interactions. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 28, 100459. DOI:10.1016/j.lcsi.2020.100459

Kotlyar, I., & Ariely, D. (2013). The effect of nonverbal cues on relationship formation. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 544-551. DOI:10.1016/j.chb.2012.11.020

Macsuga-Gage, A. S., Simonsen, B., & Briere, D. E. (2012). Effective teaching practices: Effective teaching practices that promote a positive classroom environment. Beyond Behavior, 22(1), 14-22. DOI:10.1177/107429561202200104

Müller, F. A., & Wulf, T. (2022). Blended learning environments and learning outcomes: The mediating role of flow experience. The International Journal of Management Education, 20(3), 100694. DOI:10.1016/j.ijme.2022.100694

Reidhead, C. (2021). Effective communication as a tool for achieving organizational goals and objectives. Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Studies, 4(4), 265-273. DOI:10.47191/jefms/v4-i4-07

Scott, T., & Twyman, T. (2018). Considering visual arts practices at the secondary level: Extending cross-curricular conversations among secondary educators. Art Education, 71(2), 16-20. DOI: 10.1080/00043125.2018.1414533

Shkurko, Y. (2022). Naturalness of face-to-face medium and video-mediated online communication: Doubts about evolutionary mismatch. Front. Socio, 7, 788447. DOI:10.3389/fsoc.2022.788447

Simpson, A. (2016). Designing pedagogic strategies for dialogic learning in higher education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 25(2), 135-151. DOI:10.1080/1475939X.2015.1038580

Stavholm, E., Lagerlöf, P., & Wallerstedt, C. (2021). Appropriating the concept of metacommunication: An empirical study of the professional learning of an early childhood education work-team. Teaching and Teacher Education, 102, 103306. DOI:10.1016/j.tate.2021.103306

Tili, T. R., & Barker, G. G. (2015). Communication in intercultural marriages: Managing cultural differences and conflicts. Southern Communication Journal, 80(3), 189-210. DOI:10.1080/1041794X.2015.1023826

Wagner, T., Hirzle, T., Huckauf, A., & Rukzio, E. (2023). Exploring gesture and gaze proxies to communicate instructor’s nonverbal cues in lecture videos. In Extended Abstracts of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ‘23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 113, 1–7. DOI:10.1145/3544549.3585842

Ward, A., & Darling, L. (1996). Learning through conversation: A reflection on collaboration. Action in Teacher Education, 18(3), 80-86. DOI:10.1080/01626620.1996.10462846

Wiggill, M. N. & Van der Waldt, G. (2020). Incorporating cultural diversity, nation building and social cohesion when teaching communication and relationship management. Verčič, A.T., Tench, R. and Einwiller, S. (Ed.) Joy (Advances in Public Relations and Communication Management, Vol. 5), Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 169-182. DOI:10.1108/S2398-391420200000005012