See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312021719

Developing a Positive Classroom Climate

Article · January 2016

CITATION READS

1 680

1 author:

Jason J. Barr
Rowan University
19 PUBLICATIONS 135 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Jason J. Barr on 01 January 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Developing a Positive Classroom
Climate
IDEA Paper #61 • October 2016

Jason J. Barr • The IDEA Center

Abstract
Classroom climate is a broad construct, made up of students’ feelings about their instructor and peers.
Although there is a plethora of research on the effects of classroom climate on student outcomes at
the secondary level, there is a relative dearth of such research on the postsecondary level. However,
much of the research that does exist shows that students’ perceptions of classroom climate at the
postsecondary level have a great impact on learning, motivation, satisfaction, and achievement. This
paper will thus provide strategies to help instructors promote positive interpersonal relationships
in the classroom, which increases student connectedness, thereby improving classroom climate.
Instructors should always consider how their behaviors may be interpreted by their students and
keep the classroom climate in mind when developing courses and lesson plans. Doing so is likely to
increase positive outcomes for students as well as levels of satisfaction for the instructor.

Although the goal of any higher education instructor is to class peers, and their involvement in the class. Although
encourage students to learn, learning involves more than each student will develop his or her individual sense of
just being exposed to information. The higher education the classroom environment, there is also a community, or
classroom is a multidimensional environment comprising collective, sense among the students and the instructor, so
psychological and social interactions among a diverse the classroom climate is a general feeling shared by all in
academic community. Moos (1979) concluded that “the the class (Fraser & Treagust, 1986). Students’ perceptions
social-ecological setting in which students function can affect often define the classroom climate because their exposure to
their attitudes and moods, their behavior and performance, multiple learning environments and their many opportunities
their self-concept and general sense of well-being” (p. 3). The to form impressions give them a credible vantage point
social-ecological setting of the classroom, often referred to from which to make judgments (Fraser & Treagust, 1986).
as classroom climate, encompasses its social and emotional Some researchers have attempted to define and measure
aspects. According to Norton (2008), the association classroom climate in higher education. For example, Fraser
between classroom climate and students’ academic and Treagust developed the College and University Classroom
performance has been well researched. Classroom climate Environment Inventory (CUCEI) to assess students’ and
is also the best predictor of students’ overall satisfaction instructors’ perceptions of actual and preferred classroom
with their college (Graham & Gisi, 2000). Instructors help environments. Administration of the 49-item CUCEI to 372
develop the classroom climate and can engage in several students and 20 instructors in 34 classes found seven
interpersonal behaviors that contribute to a positive one internally consistent dimensions of the higher education
(Frisby, Berger, Burchett, Herovic, & Strawser, 2014); classroom climate:
specifically, those behaviors that build a strong rapport with
students. Good rapport between instructors and students • Personalization. The instructor provides opportunities for
is essential to a positive classroom climate and leads to student-to-teacher interaction and expresses concern for
better student outcomes. Therefore, the goal of this paper is students’ welfare.
to provide instructors with strategies that promote positive • Involvement. The instructor encourages active student
interpersonal relationships in the classroom while also participation in class.
focusing on instructional practices. • Student cohesiveness. Students know one another, help
one another, and are friendly toward one another.
What Is Classroom Climate? • Satisfaction. Students enjoy class.
The classroom climate is a reflection of students’ opinions • Task orientation. Class activities are clear and well
of their academic experience (Reid & Radhakrishnan, organized.
2003). This includes students’ perceptions of the rigor • Innovation. The instructor utilizes unique teaching
of the class, their interactions with their instructor and methods, activities, or assignments.
• Individualization. Students are permitted to make characteristic of any successful instructor (Catt, Miller, &
decisions and treated differentially based upon ability Schallenkamp, 2007). Teaching is a rapport-intensive field
and interests. (Jorgenson, 1992) where both instructor and students enter
the classroom with relational goals (Frymier, 2007). Rapport
When creating the CUCEI, Fraser and Treagust found that five is built and a positive classroom climate is developed when
of the seven dimensions of classroom climate—involvement, instructors and students coconstruct a learning environment
personalization, student cohesiveness, task orientation, and that encourages active student participation (Sidelinger &
individualization—were positively correlated with student Booth-Butterfield, 2010). The development of rapport and
overall class satisfaction. a positive classroom climate has been linked to positive
student outcomes, such as promoting student motivation
Similarly, Winston, Vahala, Nichols, Gillis, and Rome (1994) and diminishing student apprehension (Ellis, 2004). Engaging
developed the College Classroom Environment Scales. Factor in rapport-building behaviors has been shown to positively
analysis of the original 143 items yielded a 52-item scale influence students’ opinions of instructor credibility and
with 6 factors: students’ evaluations of instruction (Schrodt, Turman, & Soliz,
2006). For example, using the Professor-Student Rapport
• Cathectic learning climate. An environment that Scale (Wilson, Ryan, & Pugh, 2010), instructor rapport
stimulates students to be active participants. was found to account for 54% of the variance in end-of-
• Professorial concern. Students perceive the instructor as semester student ratings of instruction (Richmond, Berglund,
personally concerned about them as individuals. Epelbaum, & Kelin, 2015). Additionally, Richmond et al. found
• Inimical ambiance. Students view the environment as that students’ self-reported course engagement and their
hostile, competitive, and rigid. perceptions of professor humor added only 4% and 1% of
• Academic rigor. An environment that is intellectually variance respectively to end-of-semester student ratings of
challenging and demanding. instruction. Instructors should remember that communication
• Affiliation. The environment promotes informal interaction with their students is both interpersonal as well as content-
that is highly supportive, friendly, and student-centered. driven (Frymier & Houser, 2000), meaning that instructors
• Structure. Students see evaluation criteria and course not only influence what students learn but play a crucial
content clearly articulated. role in developing rapport and a positive classroom climate.
Students who rate their instructors high in rapport also report
Fraser and Treagust (1986) and Winston et al. (1994) that their instructors convey caring by expressing concern for
each differ in the factors they identified that contribute how well they learn, create an atmosphere that encourages
to classroom climate. However, there is one overarching student effort and commitment, clearly communicate course
similarity among all the factors: They represent those expectations, and stimulate their interest in and enthusiasm
characteristics of interpersonal relationships that for the subject (Hoyt & Eun-Joo, 2002). Such rapport-building
instructors can control, such as listening to and respecting communication behaviors include confirming behaviors,
students, expressing interest in student ideas, encouraging which are ‘‘the transactional process by which teachers
participation, and offering help to students inside and outside communicate to students that they are endorsed, recognized,
of the classroom. Classroom climate also doesn’t include and acknowledged as valuable, significant individuals’’ (Ellis,
those aspects that instructors are not able to control such 2000, p. 266).
as the physical setting of the classroom and equipment,
background of the students, and organizational structures Instructors can utilize several confirming behaviors to
such as class scheduling and sequencing. Frisby and Martin convey care and develop rapport (Ellis, 2000, 2004).
(2010) state that the ability to develop an interpersonal First, instructors respond to questions, which verbally and
relationship based on harmony, connection, and mutual nonverbally communicates interest in students’ comments.
trust—or to develop rapport—enhances the instructor- This occurs in class, during office hours, or electronically,
student relationship as well as student-student relationships, demonstrating the instructors’ accessibility outside of
and therefore helps develop a positive classroom climate. class. Instructors demonstrate interest in and communicate
Classroom climate is fundamentally interpersonal in nature, concern for students, whether regarding academic or
which is why it is expressed through the perceptions of the personal matters. Such interest can be expressed toward
students and demonstrated to have such a profound impact the whole class (e.g., “Because of the low quiz grades, I
on student outcomes. The instructor can use all these want to review the material from last week to make sure it
rapport-building strategies regardless of who or what they is clear before we move on) or individually (e.g., “Your high
teach. Therefore, an essential component of teaching is absenteeism is concerning because I’m afraid you won’t
building strong relationships with and among students. be able to complete the required assignments”). Students
have reported that instructors who help build rapport
Beyond Instruction: Focusing on the and communicate concern and interest do so by praising
student work, actions, or participation; engaging in informal
Interpersonal Aspects of Teaching conversation with students before or after class; utilizing
Rapport is a feeling between two people encompassing
the terms we or our class; and asking students about their
a mutual, trusting, and prosocial bond, and students
feelings regarding assignments (Ellis, 2000, 2004).
have reported that rapport with pupils is a fundamental

Page 2
Instructors can also adjust their teaching style as needed 2014). Engaging in these disconfirming behaviors may lead
to help students understand material, which includes using to more negative student outcomes. For example, if an
a variety of instructional techniques, periodically confirming instructor engages in offensive behaviors, such as verbal
students’ understanding of the material, and providing aggression, they are evaluated less positively and are viewed
feedback on students’ work. By employing the appropriate as less trustworthy by students, because these behaviors
teaching style, instructors can communicate their interest are negatively associated with students’ perception of
in and desire to share that material with the students. In the classroom climate (Myers & Rocca, 2001). Students
addition, when instructors ask students if they understand who perceive the classroom climate as less personalized,
the material, they communicate that they care about the satisfying, task oriented, involving, cohesive, and
students’ academic performance. individualized are more likely to cheat and to justify cheating
behaviors (Pulvers & Diekhoff, 1999).
Instructors can engage in many teaching practices to help
develop rapport with their students and demonstrate warmth As the preceding research shows, instructors who develop
and openness, reinforce student participation, and show positive rapport with their students help create a positive
clear organization (Freeman, Anderman, & Jensen, 2007). classroom climate. When instructors engage in interpersonal
For example, the use of humor can aid in building rapport interactions that demonstrate that students are valued and
with students, possibly because it makes professors seem cared for, it has a profound impact on student outcomes.
more approachable (Frymier, Wanzer, & Wojtaszcyk, 2007). Just as it would be difficult to develop an exhaustive list of
Humor may also help clarify the content, which, in turn, may all rapport-building behaviors, it would be equally difficult for
increase students’ capability to process the information instructors to engage in all such behaviors in every class.
(Wanzer, Frymier, & Irwin, 2010). Rather than infusing humor Rather, the goal is to keep some rapport-building behaviors
into all aspects of the class, instructors can find subtle ways in mind and infuse them into the teaching of course material
to add humor wherever they feel comfortable. Humor can and communications with students. When instructors
include funny stories and comments, appropriate jokes, or establish positive instructor-student relationships, focus on
professional humor, such as mnemonic devices, cartoons to the students and their needs, and strike a balance between
illustrate course content, puns or riddles, top 10 lists, and being challenging and being caring (Pratt, 2002), their
comic verses. Students can also use humor, such as sharing students will demonstrate better academic outcomes.
their experience about a comical moment in a classroom
(Berk, 1996). Interestingly, instructor use of self-deprecating Beyond Learning: Focusing on Creating a
humor is positively associated with learning, possibly
because it may be unexpected and therefore gains students’
Connected Classroom
Although instructor-student rapport plays a critical
attention (Wanzer, et al., 2010).
role in classroom climate, student-student rapport
may also contribute as well (Frisby & Martin, 2010). A
Another way for instructors to develop rapport and
connected classroom climate is perceived by students
communicate interest and concern to students is by talking
as a compassionate and supportive student-to-student
openly about themselves in class, using appropriate self-
environment (Dwyer et al., 2004). Student-to-student
disclosure (Hosek & Thompson, 2009), which increases
connectedness is built on a collection of behaviors—including
students’ perception of a comfortable classroom climate
praise, smiling, or sharing personal stories or experiences—
(Mazer, Murphy, & Simonds, 2007). Brookfield (2006) claims
that have positive effects on educational processes and
that instructor self-disclosure illuminates an instructor’s
outcomes (Sidelinger, Bolen, Frisby, & McMullen, 2012).
personhood to students, which is “the perceptions students
have that their teachers are flesh and blood human beings
Teaching and learning do not occur only between the
with lives and identities outside the classroom” (p. 71).
instructor and students, but also among students themselves
Another way for instructors to reveal their personal identities
(Hirschy & Wilson, 2002), and instructors are critical in
to their students is to show how they apply course material
modeling positive interactions and demonstrating supportive
and skills in their own work and lives and to describe their
behaviors in the classroom (Johnson, 2009). For example,
own fears and struggles related to learning new material.
instructor behaviors such as calling on students by name,
In fact, online self-disclosure (e.g., via web pages or social
asking probing questions, smiling, and nodding (Crombie,
media) has been found to have the same positive effects on
Pyke, Silverthorn, Jones, & Piccinin, 2003), as well as
students’ learning and motivation as in-class self-disclosure
disclosing personal opinions and posing questions to the
(O’Sullivan, Hunt, & Lippert, 2004; Mazer et al., 2007).
class (West & Pearson, 1994), can help increase student
participation. Such behaviors aid in the development of
Conversely, instructors who engage in disconfirming
student trust in the instructor, which makes it easier for
behaviors may not develop a good rapport with their
students to take risks in class (Frymier & Houser, 2000).
students, and their classroom climate may not be as positive.
For example, students have reported that it is difficult to
Fassinger (1997) claims that instructors’ interpersonal
build rapport with instructors who neglect to learn students’
style might not affect student interaction as much as do
names, are inconsistent in their policies or practices, or
the structures they create to encourage it. For example, to
are unresponsive to student questions (Webb & Barrett,

Page 3
promote interaction and participation, students should be are less likely to attend class, participate (Rocca, 2009), and
encouraged to engage in one-on-one conversations with communicate with their instructor (Goodboy, Myers, & Bolkan,
one another, moving next to small-group interactions and 2010).
eventually to whole-class involvement (Sidelinger & Booth-
Butterfield, 2010). This contrasts with how interaction and Although it is important for instructors and students to
connectedness are typically developed in the classroom: establish a positive rapport with one another, it is equally
asking whole-class questions initially and then focusing more important for students to develop a positive rapport with
on small-group and one-on-one interactions as the class their peers in order to foster a positive classroom climate.
progresses (Howard & Henney, 1998). Instructors could also A climate where students and the instructor respect one
articulate expectations for behaviors at the beginning of the another, the students respect one another, and the instructor
class, as well as structure the class into smaller learning demonstrates that he or she cares about students is
communities, encouraging debate and constructive conflict conducive to high levels of class participation (Dallimore et
within these smaller groups before doing so within the larger al., 2004). Moreover, students who participate more in class
classroom (Book & Putman, 1992). Fassinger suggests value the course and subject more (Messman & Jones-
developing in-class exercises that increase students’ Corley, 2001). Similar to building rapport with students,
confidence and encourage active participation, such as when instructors model interpersonal interactions that
asking students to work together to develop strategies for demonstrate students are valued and cared for, students are
conquering the fear of public speaking or to discuss what it more inclined to treat their instructors and one another with
means to be prepared for class. respect.

Research indicates that students benefit from a connected Implications

classroom climate. Instructors who create connected Instructors and administrators realize that several factors
environments may help motivate students to learn and influence academic outcomes. One such factor is instructor
discourage cheating (Bouville, 2010). A connected classroom interpersonal characteristics, which play a vital role in student
climate is linked to students’ increased preparedness for motivation, cognitive and affective learning, and overall
class (Sidelinger & Booth-Butterfield, 2010) and participation academic performance. This corpus of research suggests
in class (Frisby & Martin, 2010). Students have recognized that students believe their learning is greatly enhanced
the importance that supportive peers play in creating a through personal interaction with their instructors and with
participatory environment (Dallimore, Hertenstein, & Platt, other students. Ultimately, students want instructors who are
2004). In fact, students’ perceptions of peer friendliness are respectful, supportive, available, and display enthusiasm for
a greater influence on their decision to participate in class teaching. This objective could help guide faculty development
than their perceptions of the instructor (Fassinger, 2000). efforts as well as individual instructors’ efforts, which
There are positive relationships between student-to-student usually place more emphasis on the instructional aspects
connectedness and learning, specifically affective learning of teaching, and less on the interpersonal aspects of the
(feelings toward course material and instructor) (Johnson, classroom. Instead, a learner-centered manner of instruction
2009); cognitive learning (recall, knowledge, and skills related would be adopted, whereby the instructor focuses on the
to the course) (Prisbell, Dwyer, Carlson, Bingham, & Cruz, students’ perspectives, experiences, interests, capacities,
2009); and self-regulated learning (being active in one’s own and needs (McCombs, 1997); establishes positive instructor-
learning and goal setting) (Sidelinger & Booth-Butterfield, student relationships; fosters student self-efficacy, and
2010). The combination of supportive peers and a supportive strikes a balance between being challenging and being
instructor increases attendance, study time, school caring (Pratt, 2002). This contrasts with a teacher-centered
satisfaction, and academic engagement and leads to higher manner of instruction, which focuses on teaching and
academic efficacy (Rosenfeld, Richman, & Bowman, 2000). assessing learning objectives solely through course content
Such results are consistent regardless of the size of the class and delivery. Although not all instructors feel comfortable
(Sidelinger & Booth-Butterfield, 2010). engaging in every type of interpersonal interaction with
students, they should be made aware of the importance
In contrast, Sidelinger, Bolen, Frisby, and McMullen (2011) of such interactions. For example, some instructors might
found that instructor misbehaviors such as irresponsibility, feel more comfortable interacting with students in a typical
derisiveness, and apathy are negatively associated with classroom environment or during office hours, whereas
student-to-student connectedness in higher education others might use tools such as social media to communicate
classrooms. Instructor behaviors such as not paying attention with students outside the classroom.
to students, making fun of students, or being overly critical
can reduce student participation (Wade, 1994). Instructors Another aspect of faculty development could focus on
who are described by students as boring, bored, pushy, encouraging instructors and students to discuss their
moody, close-minded, too opinionated, condescending, and expectations of the classroom environment at the beginning
unfriendly also have students who report reduced classroom of a course. Although both instructors and students want
participation (Berdine, 1986). Overall, if students perceive more positive interactions in the classroom, instructors
their instructors as verbally aggressive or overly critical, they view the classroom environment as more positive than do

Page 4
students (Fraser & Treagust, 1986). Instructors can benefit
from assessing their students’ views of the classroom Jason Barr is Dean of the College of Education and
environment as well as their own, using one of several Rehabilitation at Salus University. Previously, he was a
measurement instruments readily available (e.g., Fraser & member of The IDEA Center’s research team, where he
Treagust, 1986; Winston et al., 1994; Wilkie, 2000). The helped to edit IDEA Papers. Prior to joining IDEA, he was
assessments might expose disparities between students’ a professor, department chair, and associate dean at
and instructors’ perceptions of the classroom climate. Monmouth University in New Jersey, where he worked
Such feedback could help instructors engage students in extensively on student and faculty assessment and national
discussions about the classroom social systems, individual accreditation. He has published widely on the positive
and collective behavior, and instructors’ and students’ effects of school culture on the development of empathy and
expectations for interaction inside and outside the classroom. altruism in adolescents.
Exposing and discussing the differences in perceptions of
the classroom environment could lead to greater course
satisfaction for both students and instructors and improve Acknowledgments
instruction through greater respect and responsiveness. The author would like to acknowledge and thank Dr. JoAnne
Cascia of Kean University in New Jersey for her critiques
Conclusion of previous versions of this paper, as well as for her good
The goal of this paper was to explore the elements of a nature and humor during the process. She exemplifies all the
positive classroom climate. Although it does not provide an characteristics of the excellent educator this paper conveys.
exhaustive list of important interpersonal classroom skills,
it does demonstrate that interpersonal skills influence the
classroom climate, which has a profound impact on student
academic outcomes. Specifically, developing a positive
rapport with students improves students’ learning and
motivation. It also creates a model for how students should
behave in class toward their peers, which increases student
connectedness and also leads to greater student learning
and motivation. Instructors should always consider how their
behaviors may be interpreted by their students and keep the
classroom climate and interpersonal interactions in mind
when developing courses and lesson plans. Doing so is likely
to increase positive academic outcomes for students as well
as higher levels of satisfaction for the instructor.

Page 5
References
Berdine, R. (1986). Why some students fail to participate in class.
Marketing News, 20, 23–24.

Berk, R. A. (1996). Student ratings of ten strategies for using humor

in college teaching. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 7(3),
71–92.

Book, C. L., & Putman, J. G. (1992). Organization and management of

a classroom as a learning community culture. In V. P. Richmond & J.
C. McCroskey, Power in the classroom: Communication, control, and
concern. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bouville, M. (2010). Why is cheating wrong? Studies in Philiosophy

and Education, 29(1), 67–76.

Brookfield, S. (2006). The skillful teacher: On technique, trust, and

responsiveness in the classroom (2nd ed). San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.

Catt, S., Miller, D., & Schallenkamp, K. (2007). You are the key:
Communicate for learning effectiveness. Education, 127, 369–377.

Crombie, G., Pyke, S. W., Silverthorn, N., Jones, A., & Piccinin, S.
(2003). Students’ perceptions of their classroom participation and
instructor as a function of gender and context. Journal of Higher
Education, 74, 51–76.

Dallimore, E. J., Hertenstein, J. H., & Platt, M. B. (2004). Classroom

participation and discussion effectiveness: Student-generated
strategies. Communication Education, 53, 103–115.

Dwyer, K. K., Bingham, S. G., Carlson, R. E., Prisbell, M., Cruz, A.

M., & Fus, D. A. (2004). Communication and connectedness in
the classroom: Development of the connected classroom climate
inventory. Communication Research Reports, 21, 264–272.

Ellis, K. (2000). Perceived teacher confirmation: The development

and validation of an instrument and two studies of the relationship to
cognitive and affective learning. Human Communication Research,
26(2), 264–291.

Ellis, K. (2004). The impact of perceived teacher confirmation on

receiver apprehension, motivation, and learning. Communication
Education, 53(1), 1–20.

Fassinger, P. A. (1997). Classes are groups. College Teaching, 45(1),

22–26.

Fassinger, P. A. (2000). How classes influence students’ participation

in college classrooms. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 35, 38–47.

Fraser, B. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1986). Validity and use of an instrument

for assessing classroom psychological environment in higher
education. Higher Education, 15, 37–57.

Freeman, T. M., Anderman, L. H., & Jensen, J. J. (2007). Sense of

belonging in college freshmen at the classroom and campus level.
Journal of Experimental Education, 75(3), 203–220.

Page 6
Frisby, B. N., & Martin, M. M. (2010). Instructor-student and student-
student rapport in the classroom. Communication Education, 59(2),
146–164.

Frisby, B. N., Berger, E., Burchett, M., Herovic, E., & Strawser, M. G.
(2014). Participation apprehensive students: The influence of face
support and instructor-student rapport on classroom participation.
Communication Education, 63(2), 105–123.

Frymier, A. B. (2007). Teachers’ and students’ goals in the teaching-

learning process. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
National Communication Association. Chicago, IL.

Frymier, A. B., & Houser, M. L. (2000). The teacher-student

relationship as an interpersonal relationship. Communication
Education, 49, 207–219.

Frymier, A. B., Wanzer, M. B., & Wojtaszcyk, A. M. (2007). Assessing

students’ perceptions of inappropriate and appropriate teacher
humor. Communication Education, 57, 266–288.

Goodboy, A. K., Myers, S. A., & Bolkan, S. (2010). Student motives for
communicating with instructors as a function of perceived instructor
misbehaviors. Communication Research Reports, 27, 11–19.

Graham, S. W., & Gisi, S. L. (2000). The effects of instructional climate

and student affairs services on college outcomes and satisfaction.
Journal of College Student Development, 41, 279–291.

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.

Hosek, A. M., & Thompson, J. (2009). Communication privacy

management and college instruction: Exploring the rules and
boundaries that frame instructor private disclosures. Communication
Education, 58(3), 327–349.

Howard, J. R., & Henney, A. L. (1998). Student participation and

instructor gender in the mixed-age college classroom. Journal of
Higher Education, 69, 384–405.

Hoyt, D. P., & Eun-Joo, L. (2002). Teaching “styles” and learning

outcomes. IDEA Research Report #4. Retrieved from http://ideaedu.
org//wp-content/uploads/2014/11/research4.pdf.

Johnson, D. I. (2009). Connected classroom climate: A validity study.

Communication Research Reports, 26, 146–157.

Jorgenson, J. (1992). Social approaches: Communication, rapport,

and the interview: A social perspective. Communication Theory, 2,
148–156.

Mazer, J. P., Murphy, R. E., & Simonds, C. J. (2007). I’ll see you on
“Facebook”: The effects of computer-mediated teacher self-disclosure
on student motivation, affective learning, and classroom climate.
Communication Education, 56(1), 1–17.

Page 7
McCombs, B. L. (1997). Self-assessment and reflection: Tools for
promoting teacher changes toward learner-centered practices. NASSP
Bulletin, 81, pp. 1–14.

Messman, S. J., & Jones-Corley, J. (2001). Effects of communication

environment, immediacy, and communication apprehension on
cognitive and affective learning. Communication Monographs, 68,
184–200.

Moos, R. H. (1979). Evaluating educational environments. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Myers, S. A., & Rocca, K. A. (2001). Perceived instructor

argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness in the college
classroom: Effects on student perceptions of climate, apprehension,
and state motivation. Western Journal of Communication, 65(2),
113–137.

Norton, M. S. (2008). Human resource administration for educational

leaders. New York: Sage.

O’Sullivan, P. B., Hunt, S. K., & Lippert, L. R. (2004). Mediated

immediacy: A language of affiliation in a technological age. Journal of
Language and Social Psychology, 23, 464–490.

Pratt, D. (2002). Analyzing perspectives: Identifying commitments and

belief structures. In D. Pratt, Five perspectives on teaching in adult
and higher education (pp. 217–255). Malabar, FL: Krieger Publishing
Company.

Prisbell, M., Dwyer, K. K., Carlson, R. E., Bingham, S. G., & Cruz,
A. M. (2009). Connected classroom climate in the basic course:
Associations with learning. Basic Communication Course Annual, 21,
145–165.

Pulvers, K., & Diekhoff, G. M. (1999). The relationship between

academic dishonesty and college classroom environment. Research
in Higher Education, 40(4), 487–498.

Reid, L. D., & Radhakrishnan, P. (2003). Race matters: The relation

between race and general campus climate. Cultural Diversity and
Ethnic Minority Psychology, 9(3), 263–275.

Richmond, A. S., Berglund, M. B., Epelbaum, V. B., & Kelin, E. M.

(2015). a + (b1) professor-student rapport + (b2) humor = (b3)
student engagement = (Y) student ratings of instructors. Teaching of
Psychology, 42(2), 119–125.

Rocca, K. A. (2009). Participation in the college classroom: The impact

of instructor immediacy and verbal aggression. Journal of Classroom
Interaction, 43(2), 22–33.

Rosenfeld, L. B., Richman, J. M., & Bowman, G. L. (2000). Social

support networks and school outcomes: The centrality of the teacher.
Child and Adolescent Social Work, 17, 205–226.

Schrodt, P., Turman, P., & Soliz, J. (2006). Perceived understanding as

a mediator of perceived teacher confirmation and students’ rating of
instruction. Communication Education, 55, 370–388.

Page 8
Sidelinger, R. J., & Booth-Butterfield, M. (2010). Co-constructing
student involvement: An examination of teacher confirmation T: 800.255.2757
and student-to-student connectedness in the college classroom. T: 785.320.2400
Communication Education, 59(2), 165–184.

Sidelinger, R. J., Bolen, D. M., Frisby, B. N., & McMullen, A. L.

(2011). When instructors misbahave: An examination of student- 301 South Fourth St., Suite 200
to-student connectedness as a mediator in the college classroom.
Manhattan, KS 66502-6209
Communication Education, 60(3), 340–361.
E: [email protected]
Sidelinger, R. J., Bolen, D. M., Frisby, B. N., & McMullen, A. L. (2012). IDEAedu.org
Instructor compliance to student requests: An examination of student-
to-student connectedness as power in the classroom. Communication
Education, 61(3), 290–308.

Wade, R. (1994). Teacher education students’ views on class

discussion: Implications for fostering critical reflection. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 10, 231–243.

Wanzer, M. B., Frymier, A. B., & Irwin, J. (2010). An explanation of

the relationship between instructor humor and student learning:
Instructional humor processing theory. Communication Education,
59(1), 1–18.

Webb, N. G., & Barrett, L. O. (2014). Student views of instructor-

student rapport in the college classroom. Journal of the Scholarship of
Teaching and Learning, 14(2), 15–28.

West, R., & Pearson, J. C. (1994). Antecedent and consequent

conditions of student questioning: An analysis of classroom discourse
across the university. Communication Education, 43, 299–311.

Wilkie, C. J. (2000). Preferred college classroom environment scale:

Creating positive classroom environments. Journal of the First-Year
Experience, 12(2), 7–32.

Wilson, J. H., Ryan, R. G., & Pugh, J. L. (2010). Professor-student

rapport scale predicts student outcomes. Teaching of Psychology, 37,
246–251.

Winston, R. B., Vahala, M. E., Nichols, E. C., Gillis, M. E., & Rome,
K. D. (1994). A measure of college classroom climate: The college
classroom environment scales. Journal of College Student
Development, 35, 11–18.

Our research and publications, which benefit the higher education community, are supported by
charitable contributions like yours. Please consider making a tax-deductible donation to IDEA to
sustain our research now and into the future.

Page 9

View publication stats