Communication skills are an increasingly important component of college students’ education because these skills are in high demand from employers. This study provides a close examination of communication instruction in both a typical landscape architecture class and a modified one (i.e., with the addition of formalized communication instruction that is grounded in design), analyzing changes in students’ perceptions of their own communication abilities (self-efficacy). The study reveals that in the typical class, students had a decrease in self-efficacy whereas in the modified class, students had a significant increase in self-efficacy. Viewing these results through the lens of self-efficacy and situated learning provides a complex understanding of the influences on students’ experiences. For both teaching and research in communication across the curriculum, this study has implications about the importance of the nature of instruction.
AnthonyK. H. (1991). Design juries on trial: The Renaissance of the design studio. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
2.
BanduraA. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.
3.
BanduraA.SchunkD. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 586–598.
4.
BazermanC.LittleJ.BethelL.ChavkinT.FouquetteD.GarufisJ. (2005). Reference guide to writing across the curriculum. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press.
5.
BelcherD. (1994). The apprenticeship approach to advanced academic literacy: Graduate students and their mentors. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 23–34.
6.
BresóE.SchaufeliW. B.SalanovaM. (2011). Can a self-efficacy-based intervention decrease burnout, increase engagement, and enhance performance? A quasi-experimental study. Higher Education, 61, 339–355.
7.
BrownJ. S.CollinsA.DuguidP. (1996). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. In McLellanH. (Ed.), Situated learning perspectives (pp. 19–44). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.
CollinsA.BrownJ. S.NewmanS. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching students the craft of reading, writing, and mathematics. In ResnickL. B. (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453–494). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10.
CroninM. W.GriceG.PalmertonP. (2000). Oral communication across the curriculum: The state of the art after twenty-five years of experience. Journal of the Association for Communication Administration, 29, 66–87.
11.
DannelsD. P. (2001). Time to speak up: A theoretical framework of situated pedagogy and practice for communication across the curriculum. Communication Education, 50, 144–158.
12.
DannelsD. P. (2003). Teaching and learning design presentations in engineering: Contradictions between academic and workplace activity systems. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 17, 139–169.
13.
DannelsD. P. (2005). Performing tribal rituals: A genre analysis of “crits” in design studios. Communication Education, 54, 136–160.
14.
DannelsD. P.AnsonC. M.BullardL.PerettiS. (2003). Challenges in learning communication skills in chemical engineering. Communication Education, 52, 50–56.
15.
DannelsD. P.Housley GaffneyA. L. (2009). Communication across the curriculum and in the disciplines: A call for scholarly cross-curricular advocacy. Communication Education, 58, 124–153.
16.
DannelsD. P.Housley GaffneyA. L.Norris MartinK. (2008). Beyond content, deeper than delivery: What critique feedback reflects about communication expectations in design education. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2
. Retrieved fromhttp://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/v2n2.html
17.
DannelsD. P.Housley GaffneyA. L.Norris MartinK. (2011). Students’ talk about the climate of feedback interventions in the critique. Communication Education, 60, 95–114.
18.
DannelsD. P.Norris MartinK. (2008). Critiquing critiques: A genre analysis of feedback across novice to expert design studios. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 22, 135–159.
19.
DrewL. (2000). A disciplined approach: Learning to practice as design teachers in the university. In SwannC.YoungE. (Eds.), Reinventing design education in the university (pp. 187–193). Perth, Western Australia: Curtin University of Technology.
20.
DwyerK.FusD. A. (2002). Perceptions of communication competence, self-efficacy, and trait communication apprehension: Is there an impact on basic course success?Communication Research Reports, 19, 29–37.
21.
HackettG.BetzN. E. (1989). An exploration of the mathematics self-efficacy/mathematics performance correspondence. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 263–271.
22.
Hart Research Associates. (2009). Raising the bar: Employers’ views on college learning in the wake of the economic downturn. Retrieved fromhttp://www.aacu.org
23.
HendricksC. C. (2001). Teaching causal reasoning through cognitive apprenticeship: What are results from situated learning?Journal of Educational Research, 94, 302–311.
24.
Housley GaffneyA. L. (2011). Measuring students’ self-efficacy for communication. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 30, 211–225.
25.
KedrowiczA. A.BlevinsM. D. (2011, June). 100 Freshman civil engineers: A model for integrating communication and teamwork in large engineering courses. Retrieved from http://www.asee.org
26.
KlugerA. N.DeNisiA. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254–284.
LaveJ. (1997). The culture of acquisition and the practice of understanding. In KirschnerD.WhitsonJ. A. (Eds.), Situated cognition: Social, semiotic, and psychological perspectives (pp. 17–36). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
McCarthyP.MeierS.RindererR. (1985). Self-efficacy and writing: A different view of self-evaluation. College Composition and Communication, 36, 465–471.
31.
MillerG. A.GildeaP. M. (1987). How children learn words. Scientific American, 257, 94–99.
32.
MortonJ.O’BrienD. (2005). Selling your design: Oral communication pedagogy in design education. Communication Education, 54, 6–19.
33.
NicolD.PillingS. (2000). Changing architectural education: Towards a new professionalism. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
34.
O’DonnellV. L.TobbellJ. (2007). The transition of adult students to higher education: Legitimate peripheral participation in a community of practice?Adult Education Quarterly, 57, 312–328.
35.
PajaresF.JohnsonM. J. (1994). Confidence and competence in writing: The role of self-efficacy, outcome expectancy, and apprehension. Research in the Teaching of English, 28, 313–331.
36.
PajaresF.KranzlerJ. (1995). Self-efficacy beliefs and general mental ability in mathematical problem-solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 426–443.
37.
PapastergiouM.GerodimosV.AntoniouP. (2011). Multimedia blogging in physical education: Effects on student knowledge and ICT self-efficacy. Computers & Education, 57, 1998–2010.
38.
PintrichP. R.SchunkD. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
39.
PoddarK. H.HosigK. W.AndersonE. S.Nickols-RichardsonS. M.DuncanS. E. (2010). Web-based nutrition education intervention improves self-efficacy and self-regulation related to increased dairy intake in college students. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 110, 1723–1727.
40.
RanelliP. L.NelsonJ. V. (1998). Assessing writing perceptions and practice of pharmacy students. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 62, 426–432.
41.
SawyerR. K.GreenoJ. G. (2009). Situativity and learning. In RobbinsP.AydedeM. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of situated cognition (pp. 347–367). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
42.
SchunkD. H. (1984). Self-efficacy perspective on achievement behavior. Educational Psychologist, 19, 48–58.
43.
SchunkD. H. (1989). Self-efficacy and achievement behaviors. Educational Psychology Review, 1, 173–208.
44.
SiegelR. G.GalassiJ. P.WareW. B. (1985). A comparison of two models for predicting mathematics performance: Social learning versus math aptitude–anxiety. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 531–538.
45.
StajkovicA. D.LuthansF. (1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A metaanalysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 240–261.
46.
SteinD. (1998). Situated learning in adult education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED418250). Retrieved from Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation websitehttp://ericae.net
47.
ThomasJ. W.IventoschL.RohwerW. D. (1987). Relationships among student characteristics, study activities, and achievement as a function of course characteristics. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 12, 344–364.
48.
TuckerM. L.McCarthyA. M. (2001). Presentation self-efficacy: Increasing communication skills through service-learning. Journal of Managerial Issues, 13, 227–244.
49.
ZimmermanB. (1985). The development of “intrinsic” motivation: A social learning analysis. Annals of Child Development, 2, 117–160.
