A Survey of Secondary Choir Teachers’ Immediacy,Ensemble Setup,and Use of Classroom Space

Abstract

In every music classroom, nonverbal forces—including immediacy, ensemble setups, and teacher use of space—may impact student outcomes. Immediacy refers to a collection of nonverbal behaviors that communicate psychological closeness. The purpose of this survey study was to examine secondary choir teachers’ (N = 137) self-reported immediacy behaviors, ensemble setups, and use of classroom space when teaching. Women reported significantly higher levels of immediacy than men, and all participants reported using proximity-related behaviors the least. Most participants reported using choir setups that limited teacher movement in contrast to setups that might help teachers move toward or among students. Participants reported spending most of their time at the piano instead of in other areas of the room. Finally, men spent significantly more time at the podium or behind the conductor’s stand than women. Recommendations for choir teachers to improve their immediacy, ensemble setup, and use of space are presented.

Keywords

choir immediacy nonverbal behaviors proximity space

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Andersen

J. F.

(1978). The relationship between teacher immediacy and teaching effectiveness (UMI No. 7900859) [Doctoral dissertation, West Virginia University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

Andersen

J. F.

Norton

R. W.

Nussbaum

J. F.

(1981). Three investigations exploring relationships between perceived teacher communication behaviors and student learning. Communication Education, 30(4), 377–392. http://doi.org/10.1080/03634528109378493

Axelrod

Hall

R. V.

Tams

(1979). Comparison of two common classroom seating arrangements. Academic Therapy, 15(1), 29–36. http://doi.org/10.1177/105345127901500103

Baringer

D. K.

McCroskey

J. C.

(2000). Immediacy in the classroom: Student immediacy. Communication Education, 49(2), 178–186. http://doi.org/10.1080/03634520009379204

Brewer

W. D.

Rickels

D. A.

(2014). A content analysis of social media interactions in the Facebook band directors group. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 201, 7–22. http://doi.org/10.5406/bulcouresmusedu.201.0007

Burgess

Kaya

(2007). Gender differences in student attitude for seating layout in college classrooms. College Student Journal, 41(4), 940–947.

Byo

J. L.

Austin

K. R.

(1994). Comparison of expert and novice conductors: An approach to the analysis of nonverbal behaviors. Journal of Band Research, 30(1), 11–34.

Christophel

D. M.

(1990). The relationships among teacher immediacy behaviors, student motivation, and learning. Communication Education, 39(4), 323–340. http://doi.org/10.1080/03634529009378813

Comstock

Rowell

Bowers

J. W.

(1995). Food for thought: Teacher nonverbal immediacy, student learning, and curvilinearity. Communication Education, 44(3), 251–266. http://doi.org/10.1080/03634529509379015

10.

Daugherty

J. F.

(1999). Spacing, formation, and choral sound: Preferences and perceptions of auditors and choristers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 47(3), 224–238. http://doi.org/10.2307/3345781

11.

Ekholm

(2000). The effect of singing mode and seating arrangement on choral blend and overall choral sound. Journal of Research in Music Education, 48(2), 123–135. http://doi.org/10.2307/3345571

12.

Elpus

(2015). National estimates of male and female enrolment in American high school choirs, bands and orchestra. Music Education Research, 17(1), 88–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2014.972923

13.

Elpus

Abril

C. R.

(2019). Who enrolls in high school music? A national profile of U.S. students, 2009–2013. Journal of Research in Music Education, 67(3), 323–338. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429419862837

14.

Frymier

A. B.

(1993). The impact of teacher immediacy on students’ motivation: Is it the same for all students? Communication Quarterly, 41(4), 454–464. http://doi.org/10.1080/01463379309369905

15.

Gall

M. D.

Gall

J. P.

Borg

W. R.

(2007). Educational research: An introduction (8th ed.). Pearson.

16.

Goodboy

A. K.

Weber

Bolkan

(2009). The effects of nonverbal and verbal immediacy on recall and multiple student learning indicators. The Journal of Classroom Interaction, 44(1), 4–12. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23869286

17.

Gorham

Cohen

S. H.

Morris

T. L.

(1997). Fashion in the classroom II: Instructor immediacy and attire. Communication Research Reports, 14(1), 11–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824099709388641

18.

Gorham

Cohen

S. H.

Morris

T. L.

(1999). Fashion in the classroom III: Effects of instructor attire and immediacy in natural classroom interactions. Communication Quarterly, 47(3), 281–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379909385560

19.

Hamann

D. L.

Baker

D. S.

McAllister

P. A.

Bauer

W. I.

(2000). Factors affecting university music students’ perceptions of lesson quality and teaching effectiveness. Journal of Research in Music Education, 48(2), 102–113. http://doi.org/10.2307/3345569

20.

Hesler

M. W.

(1972). An investigation of instructor use of space. (UMI No. 64125687) [Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

21.

Kelley

D. H.

Gorham

(1988). Effects of immediacy on recall of information. Communication Education, 37(3), 198–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634528809378719

22.

Kurkul

W. W.

(2007). Nonverbal communication in one-to-one music performance instruction. Psychology of Music, 35(2), 327–362. http://doi.org/10.1177/0305735607070385

23.

Lambson

A. R.

(1961). An evaluation of various seating plans used in choral singing. Journal of Research in Music Education, 9(1), 47–54. http://doi.org/10.2307/3344394

24.

Levasseur

S. J.

(1994). Nonverbal communication in the applied voice studio. (UMI No. 9432541) [Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

25.

Martin

S. H.

(2002). The classroom environment and its effects on the practice of teachers. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 22(1-2), 139–156. http://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2001.0239

26.

Marx

Fuhrer

Hartig

(1999). Effects of classroom seating arrangements on children’s question-asking. Learning Environments Research, 2(3), 249–263. http://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009901922191

27.

Parker

Hoopes

Eggett

(2011). The effect of seat location and movement or permanence on student-initiated participation. College Teaching, 59(2), 79–84. http://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2010.538766

28.

Patterson

M. L.

(1973). Stability of nonverbal immediacy behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 9(2), 97–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(73)90002-4

29.

Pogue

L. L.

Ahyun

(2006). The effect of teacher nonverbal immediacy and credibility on student motivation and affective learning. Communication Education, 55(3), 331–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520600748623

30.

Price

H. E.

Winter

(1991). Effect of strict and expressive conducting on performances and opinions of eighth-grade band students. Journal of Band Research, 27(1), 30–43.

31.

Richmond

V. P.

McCroskey

J. C.

Johnson

A. D.

(2003). Development of the nonverbal immediacy scale (NIS): Measures of self-and other-perceived nonverbal immediacy. Communication Quarterly, 51(4), 504–517. http://doi.org/10.1080/01463370309370170

32.

Roseth

N. E.

(2020). A survey of secondary instrumental teachers’ immediacy, ensemble setup, and use of classroom space in Colorado and Indiana. Journal of Research in Music Education, 68(3), 305–327. http://doi.org/10.1177/0022429420944227

33.

Schwebel

A. I.

Cherlin

D. L.

(1972). Physical and social distancing in teacher-pupil relationships. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(6), 543–550. http://doi.org/10.1037/h0034081

34.

Teachout

D. J.

(1997). Preservice and experienced teachers’ opinions of skills and behaviors important to successful music teaching. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45(1), 41–50. http://doi.org/10.2307/3345464

35.

Titsworth

B. S.

(2001). The effects of teacher immediacy, use of organization lecture cues, and students’ notetaking on cognitive learning. Communication Education, 50(4), 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520109379256

36.

VanWeelden

(2002). Relationships between perceptions of conducting effectiveness and ensemble performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50(2), 165–176. http://doi.org/10.2307/3345820

37.

Wang

(2001). Verbal versus nonverbal communication in music performance instruction. Contributions to Music Education, 28(1), 41–60. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24126965

38.

Wheldall

Morris

Vaughan

Y. Y.

(1981). Rows versus tables: An example of the use of behavioural ecology in two classes of eleven-year-old children. Educational Psychology, 1(2), 171–184. http://doi.org/10.1080/0144341810010206

39.

Witt

P. L.

Wheeless

L. R.

(2001). An experimental study of teachers’ verbal and nonverbal immediacy and students’ affective and cognitive learning. Communication Education, 50(4), 327–342. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520109379259

40.

M.-J.

Zhao

Fils-Aime

(2022). Response rates of online surveys in published research: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 7, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2022.100206

41.

Yarbrough

(1975). Effect of magnitude of conductor behavior on students in selected mixed choruses. Journal of Research in Music Education, 23(2), 134–146. http://doi.org/10.2307/3345286

42.

Yarbrough

Price

H. E.

(1981). Prediction of performer attentiveness based on rehearsal activity and teacher behavior. Journal of Research in Music Education, 29(3), 209–217. http://doi.org/10.2307/3344994

43.

Zhukov

(2012). Interpersonal interactions in instrumental lessons: Teacher/student verbal and non-verbal behaviours. Psychology of Music, 41(4), 466–483. http://doi.org/10.1177/0305735611430434