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

net/publication/353305375

Communication Skills in Practice

Article · May 2019

DOI: 10.26803/ijlter.18.6.1

CITATIONS READS

3 8,305

4 authors:

Muhammad Al-alawneh Mahir Al-Hawamleh

Sohar University Al al-Bayt University
14 PUBLICATIONS   35 CITATIONS    11 PUBLICATIONS   28 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Dina al-jamal Ghada Sasa

Yarmouk University Yarmouk University
55 PUBLICATIONS   257 CITATIONS    16 PUBLICATIONS   22 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Translation & Production of Knowledge View project

‫ اﺗﺠﺎﻫﺎت ﻃﺎﻟﺒﺎت ﻛﻠﻴﺔ ارﺑﺪ اﻟﺠﺎﻣﻌﻴﺔ ﻧﺤﻮ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻢ اﻟﻤﻬﻨﻲ وﻋﻼﻗﺘﻪ ﺑﻤﺴﺘﻮى اﻟﻄﻤﻮح ﻟﺪﻳﻬﻦ‬View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Dina al-jamal on 11 January 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 1

International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research

Vol. 18, No. 6, pp. 1-19, June 2019
https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.18.6.1

Communication Skills in Practice

Muhammad Khaled Al-Alawneh

Yarmouk University
Irbid, Jordan

Mahir Shafeeq Hawamleh

Al al-Bayt University
Al-Mafraq, Jordan

Dina AH Al-Jamal and Ghada Suleiman Sasa

Yarmouk University
Irbid, Jordan

Abstract. This study aimed at infusing top-notch communication skills,

among students enrolled at Effective Communication Skills course. The
course is elective for all Yarmouk University specialties (viz. medicine,
art, science…etc.) for the academic year 2017/2018. A descriptive
analytical research design was followed by the means of a survey
questionnaire administered randomly on 546 students in order to assess
their repository of effective communication skills. The study reported
significant impact on participants' personal traits, social and
presentation skills and on their relations with the others. This
effectiveness was not affected by factors of gender or academic year.

Keywords: Communication skills; Yarmouk University; Jordan.

Introduction
Communication skills are the qualities required for achieving goals that include
personal and interpersonal qualities and social abilities. Such skills are referred
to as 'soft' because they are comparable to sentiments or visions that enable
individuals to “read” others. These skills are required in workplace as almost all
careers require engagement or interaction with others in a way or in another
(Gioiosa & Kinkela, 2019; Al- Eiadeh, Al-Sobh, Al-Zoubi, & Al-Khasawneh,
2016; Nitonde, 2014; Harlak, Gemalmaz, Gurel, Dereboy, & Ertekin, 2008;
Cleland, Foster, and Moffat, 2005; Hagmann, 2002). These skills are crucial for
any human action. It's true that some individuals are born with the ability to
communicate; but others need more efforts to make it feasible. In higher
education institutions, very often, students only develop their academic
attainment without any consideration of their 'soft skills'.

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 2

Any effective and meaningful interaction among individuals is referred to as

communication. Very often, it follows some plain stages such as: purpose
creation, composing, encoding, transmission, decoding and lastly interpretation
of the message by the addressee (Novik, 2015; Gooden & Kearns, 2013; Mischel
& Shoda, 2008; McKay, Davis & Fanning, 1995). The features of communication
take in quite a lot of details. These details reflect the nature of communication as
a 2-way process which incorporates sending and receiving messages. Such 2-
way process is active, lively and complex as it varies in light of the level of
reaching the designated shared appreciation, in which communicators not only
give-and-take ideas and feelings but also construct meaning. So, sharing is a key
feature of effective communication. Of course, sharing involves using a code
through the initiation of a message by a sender, by the means of a channel, to a
receiver. Here, noise is very much expected. Nevertheless, feedback is a crucial
element in communication as encourages\discourages the continuation of
communication. Definitely, communication is irreversible, that is, a
communicator can't retract what has been said verbally or indicated non-
verbally (Mahajan, 2015; Seema, 2012; Bruner, 1960).

Communication has several functions that are sometimes steered towards

modifying or even changing in behaviour. Specifically, communication is held to
share feelings and thoughts for several purposes that aim to connect with others
such as: inspiring, motivating, making orders, entertaining, directing,
controlling, informing, educating (Muste, 2016; Keyton, 2011). Communication
can't be effective with one form excluding the other; that is both forms of
communication (verbal and nonverbal) are extremely needed to carry out
communication successfully. These forms are further segmented into either
spoken\vocal or non-vocal\gestures; for example, presentations, meetings, job
interviews, and emails. Very much often, paralinguistic characteristics like
stress, intonation, volume, passion, and rate convey different types of meanings
without involving words per se. Body language, further, adds substantial
meanings by opting for the appropriate sensing of facial expression, posture, or
any gesture. Both verbal and non-verbal communication need to be consistent
(Muste, 2016; Mahajan, 2015; Prasad, 2014; Hasson, 2012; Wilson & Nias, 1999)
Much of the roles of universities were stated by Castells (2001) as steered
towards shaping ideologies, building knowledge, making research, and
preparing graduates for workplace. To Castells, these roles are pertinent to all
countries.

It is possible that most, if not all, effective communication skills are central to
teaching and learning at university level. Generally, tutors not only like students
who can perform well in the subject matter, but also who can share their study
reflections plainly and effectively. Tutors perceptions on students can be related
to their communication capability to communicate (Gooden & Kearns, 2013;
Mischel & Shoda, 2008; McKay, Davis & Fanning, 1995; Burns, 1985). Self-esteem
is enhanced by effective communication skills; as individuals become more
confident once interconnecting vocally or non-vocally in or outside the lecture
hall, similarly, the manner they perform discussions and presentations. Here,

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 3

they thrive as they predict their success, so, their self-fulfilling insight influences
the manner they perform (Adler, Rosenfeld, & Proctor, 2010).

Earlier research on communication skills among university students has

reported the significance learning of such skills. Worldwide examples
demonstrate the latter. Let's say in California, Kim and Wright (1989) mapped
community college students' and employers' perceptions on abilities needed
most for workplace. 2,330 participant students and 306 participant employers
responded to a 46-workplace skill survey questionnaire. The study reported that
interpersonal skills, communication skills, and problem solving are exclusively
essential in workplace. Similarly in Romania, Iordache -Platis and Josan (2009)
evaluated the communication competence within Romanian universities and
proposed conducts to improve such competence in line with European Union
competence. Findings asserted the significant role of university as a trigger for
amendment and development in culture and society. In Hong Kong, however,
Bankowski (2010) trained students, enrolled at English for Academic Purposes
(EAP) course, on oral presentations skills. Findings revealed that presentation
skill training helped students to perform research, understand themes, speak to
audience, use formats and structures, and to that end motivated them to
embrace different ways of study.

Correspondingly as part of a greater scale study on Language and Social

Cohesion in the Formation of National Identity sponsored by University
Kebangsaan in Malaysia, Idris, Hassan, Ya’acob & Gill, (2012) investigated the
roles of universities in shaping the national identity of the youth; where 375
individuals took part and filled in a survey questionnaire. Results asserted the
crucial role of universities in development of national identity. Nevertheless, In
Brazil, Feitosa, Del Prette & Del Prette (2012) examined the relationship between
social skills and academic ability. 80 male and female students were assessed by
three tests; namely: intelligence test, social skills test and an achievement test
(viz. SAT). Findings established that cognitive competence enables social skills
to develop students' academic attainment. In the same vein in Philippines,
Comedis (2014) ascertained the relationship of De La Salle Araneta university
students' social skills with their academic ability. A correlational research
design was followed as to correlate 103 sociology freshman students' academic
ability with their social skills of: cooperation, assertiveness, empathy and self-
control for two successive years. Findings revealed that self-control and whole
social skills improved students' academic ability.

In Malaysia, Mey, Abdullah and Yin (2014) summarized and observed

personality traits of graduate and undergraduate research university students.
The authors followed a quantitative research design of personality traits by the
means of the Behavioral Management Information System (BeMIS) to hold
distinction, novelty and vitality measures. Findings confirmed that students'
personality profile helped them to handle the formal change; as their personality
turns out to be extra powerfully expressed and developed during the change
phases. Likewise in Australia, Schurer, Kassenboehmer and Leung (2015)
examined the role of universities in shaping graduates' personality in light of

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 4

human capital investment model. The participants, 369 youth, were examined
throughout eight years. Findings pinpointed that university does not form
graduates who have a strong personality qualities in terms of ethics or
intelligence. Nevertheless, it fades as they get older. In the same vein in Saudi
Arabia, Ismail et al. (2016) investigated 941 students university students'
“personality” who are enrolled in dissimilar departments of five different
universities. To collect data, retrospective and extracurricular activities to help
students develop their personalities (Big Fives). Findings were crystal clear
concerning the effectiveness of the given activities in assisting students build
their potentials in leadership in addition to sport.

Another example comes from Romania, Simona (2015) considered foreign

language skills along with communication kills as crucial for engineering career
in knowledge community. 100 students took part in the study. Data were
collected by interviews containing replicated job interviews together with case
study analyses. Findings confirmed that presentation skills in English assisted
students to achieve their career ends. Likewise in Ghana, Asemanyi (2015)
investigated the reasons behind students' low achievement in, Communication
Skills course at the University of Education, Winneba, in order to publicize
recommendations on its teaching and learning. The sample consisted of 35
students and 5 lectures who are concerned with the course under study. To
collect data, interviews, observations, and documents were used. Findings
revealed students' negative attitudes towards the course because of language
incompetency, lack of facilities related to the lecture hall, and irregular meetings
devoted to the course.

Context
Higher education institutions can take part in equipping graduates with social
and work skills along with academic one. Here, over the last three semesters,
Yarmouk University, a Jordanian public university, added Effective
Communication Skills as a basic skills course as a prerequisite for graduation.
Upon graduation, communication skills are central particularly throughout job
interviews. Now, the researchers had the opportunity to teach this course for
three successive semesters. Actually, its teaching has a palpable passion for
fostering effective communication that may change their own world when it
comes to different settings inside or outside the lecture hall. In this way,
universities can support and improve communities.

This study is significant as communication skills assessment obtained by the

current study was taken further in proposing teaching guideline for
Communication Skills course. This study is limited to the analysis of
communication forms that embrace verbal and non-verbal communication.
Specifically, the surveyed top-notch communication categories included
personal traits, social and presentation skills and relations with others.
Furthermore, the study limits its generalization of the findings to students at
public universities, in Jordan, in the academic year of 2017/2018.

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 5

Purpose and Questions

The present study aimed at infusing top-notch communicative skills among
university students and evaluates students’ use of such skills. In order to fulfil
the purposes of the study, the present study answered the following two
questions:
1- To what extent, if any, does Effective Communication Skills course develop
university students' top-notch communication skills?
2- Are there any significant differences between students' responses due to
the variables (gender, level of the study, type of colleges, nature of the
course, and the usefulness of the course) regarding the effect of the
course on their communication skills?

Methodology
This study aligns with the vision and the mission of Yarmouk University which
to equip students with pedagogical, behavioural, skills, and experiences to
enhance students' abilities that qualify them to lead in the workplace.
Communication skill is considered one of these skills that assist student to be
prepared for the employment process. Today, employers need graduates who
can present, interview, and work in team.

A high percentage of students who were enrolled in the communication skills

course in the academic year 2017-2018 participated in this study. The total
number was 959 students distributed into 15 sections taught by 11 instructors
from the college of education, department of curriculum and instruction. The
Questionnaires distributed to the all participants, however, the number of
returned questionnaire was 566 as rate of return 59%. The sample is the
population of the study per se; thereby all students who were enrolled Effective
Communication Skills were selected. There were 546 students after the researchers
excluded 20 questionnaires for the pilot study. Table 1 shows the demographic
variables of the students who participated in the study.

Table 1: Demographic of Sample by Gender, Academic Year, and Type of College

IV and its Levels Frequency %
Gender Male 203 37.18
Female 343 62.82
Total 546 100.00
Academic Year First 121 22.16
Second 212 38.83
Third 112 20.51
Fourth 84 15.38
Fifth 17 3.11
Total 546 100.00
Faculty Scientific 328 60.07
Humanities 218 39.93
Total 546 100.00
Nature of Subject Theoretic 177 32.42
Practical 33 6.04
Theoretic and Practical 336 61.54
Total 546 100.00

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 6

Usefulness of Subject Little 38 6.96

Great 203 37.18
Very Great 305 55.86
Total 546 100.00

Table 1 also shows students' perspectives toward the nature of the subject
(course), and their perspectives toward the usefulness of the communication
skills course that they attended. In terms of the demographic variables, about
two-third (343) of the participants were female students. A notable number (212)
are in their second year of study. Moreover, the number of the students who
participated from scientific colleges was (328) versus (218) from social sciences
and humanities colleges. In terms of the students' perspectives toward the
nature of the course, about 61% of the participants reported that the course is
presented in a mixed method (theoretical and practical). In terms of the
usefulness of the course, about 56% of the participants rated the course they
attend as "Very Great".

Instrumentation and procedures

The data for this study was collected by a questionnaire that developed by the
researchers based on the previous literature. The questionnaire was divided into
three sections: the first section was instructions for the participants, the second
section was the demographic data of the participants, and the third section was
the study's dimensions which includes 36 items distributed into four domains;
specifically, the impact of the course on the relations with the others (17 items),
the impact of the course on the personal traits (6 items), social skills (6 items),
and presentation skills (7 items).

Concerning the procedures of the study, theoretical and practical literature was
reviewed; then various communication strategies were identified. After that,
appropriate time for class depends on the communication skill stage was
allocated. In the first meeting, the students’ attention was drawn to the skills
under the study. In the following meetings (number 20 hours), the participants,
who got their permission signed, were taught the skills. In the last meeting, they
filled in the survey questionnaire.

Validity and Reliability

The questionnaire was tested for reliability and validity. In terms of validity, to
make sure that this instrument measures what it has developed for, three types
of validity were applied: Facial, construction, and content validity. The validity
was tested by 12 faculty members who are specialized in social education,
science education, vocational education, management and economy, psychology
and measurement, educational technology, and workforce education and
development. Table 2 shows the construct validity.

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 7

Table 2: Instrument's Construct Validity

Corrected Item Corr.
Dimension and its Items With:
Dimension Scale
ID The impact of the course on the relations with the
others
1 I give my full attention to others when they talk to me 0.52 0.49
2 I maintain eye contact throughout a conversation 0.47 0.46
3 I display empathy 0.42 0.42
4 I encourage others to talk when appropriate 0.51 0.50
5 I ask the best questions to invite the best answers from 0.48 0.48
others
6 I ask for clarification of whatever I don't fully 0.46 0.45
understand
7 I treat others respectfully 0.56 0.54
8 I deal with conflicts and differences appropriately 0.42 0.42
9 I share my feelings and needs when appropriate 0.37 0.32
10 I optimize non-verbal communications 0.48 0.47
11 I discover what is in the best interest of others 0.52 0.51
12 I respect myself in my communications with others 0.55 0.52
13 I respect the dignity and rights of others 0.52 0.49
14 I motivate others to do their best 0.55 0.53
15 I minimize others' unwanted behaviors effectively 0.31 0.24
16 I cooperate with others to create the best results 0.61 0.58
17 I deal optimally with complain, criticize, blame and 0.41 0.40
make excuses
ID The Impact of the Course on the Personal Traits
18 Positive attitude 0.57 0.47
19 Physical appearance 0.52 0.52
20 Enthusiasm for career planning 0.53 0.52
21 Take responsibility of your own 0.51 0.50
22 Self-confidence/self- esteem 0.59 0.57
23 Personal time management 0.44 0.44
ID Social Skills
24 Cooperative 0.53 0.50
25 Respect cultural, religious, ethnic etc. diversity 0.54 0.52
26 Understand other feelings 0.59 0.55
27 Ability to work in team 0.50 0.48
28 Tolerance for others view point 0.54 0.52
29 Flexible and adaptable to change 0.45 0.41
ID Presentation Skills
30 Maintain eye contact with the audience 0.49 0.46
31 Speaking with clarity 0.55 0.46
32 Appropriate voice tone 0.60 0.47
33 Using body language appropriately 0.54 0.51
34 Preparation 0.51 0.50
35 Standing appropriately 0.60 0.50
36 Listening attentively 0.52 0.49

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 8

Table 2 shows the correlation within the items and with each item and the whole
scale. The lowest correlation within items was (0.31) and the lowest for the
whole scale was (0.24) for the item "I minimize others' unwanted behaviors
effectively". However, the highest correlation within the items was (0.61), and
the correlation for the whole scale was (0.58) for the item "I cooperate with
others to create the best results ". Furthermore, the internal construction validity
was calculated to reveal the correlation within and between the instrument's
domains as presented in Table 3.

Table 3: Overall Correlations for the Domains and the Scale

The impact The Impact
Correlation relations on the Social Presentation
Statistic
Among with the Personal Skills Skills
others Traits
The Impact on the Personal Ρ 0.66
Traits Sig. 0.00
Social Skills Ρ 0.67 0.61
Sig. 0.00 0.00
Presentation Skills Ρ 0.59 0.63 0.60
Sig. 0.00 0.00 0.00
WHOLE SCALE Ρ 0.92 0.82 0.82 0.80
Sig. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Table 3 shows that the correlation between the impact of the course on the
relations with others and the impact of the course on the personal traits was 0.66,
the correlation between the impact of the course on the personal traits and social
skills was 0.61, the correlation between social skills and presentation skills was
0.60, and the correlation for the whole scale with the four domains ranged
between 0.80 and 0.92. Moreover, reliability was tested using responses from 546
students. The Cronbach's Alpha reliability was 0.92 and the Stability index for
the entire questionnaire 36 items was 0.83. Table 4 shows the Cronbach's Alpha
Coefficient for the scale and its domains (n=546).

Table 4: Cronbach's Alpha Coefficient for the Scale and its Domains (n=546)
Cronbach' Stabilit N of
Scale and its Dimensions s y Item
Alpha Index s
The impact of the course on the relations with the
0.85 0.81 17
others
The Impact of the Course on the Personal Traits 0.76 0.89 6
Social Skills 0.76 0.88 6
Presentation Skills 0.80 0.85 7
Whole Scale 0.92 0.80 36

Data Collection
The researchers distributed the questionnaire to all students who were enrolled
in Effective Communication Skills class in the first semester 2017-2018. Specifically,
in the 15 involved sections, students were informed about the nature of the
study and the instructions on how to respond to the questionnaire. The

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 9

researchers obtained permission from all the 15 instructors and their students to
apply this study. Students have been selected based on their interest to
participate.

Results
This study was conducted to explore the impact of Effective Communication Skills
course on students' personal traits, social skills, presentation skills, and their
relation with the others. This section exhibits results in light of the questions of
the study respectively.

Communication skills development

The first question reads as: to what extent, if any, does Effective Communication
Skills course develop university students' communication skills? Table 5 shows
Yarmouk University's students perception toward effective communication
skills course.

Table 5: Students' Perspectives toward the Impact of the Communication Skills

Course
Rank ID Scale and its Dimensions Mean Std. Dev. Degree
1 2 The Impact of the Course on the Personal Traits 3.54 0.44 High
2 3 Social Skills 3.47 0.44 High
3 4 Presentation Skills 3.45 0.45 High
The impact of the course on the relations with the
4 1 3.37 0.38 High
others
Whole Scale 3.43 0.35 High

Table 5 shows the means and standard deviations of the four domains. The
impact of the course on the personal traits was ranked "high" at the top with
M=3.54, whereas the impact of the course on the relations with the others was
ranked at the bottom of the list with M=3.37. However, the social skills ranked at
the second place with M=3.47 and the presentation skills ranked in the third
place with M=3.45. The whole scale was ranked "high" as well.

Table 6: Means and Standard Deviations of the Impact of the Course on the Relations
with Others
Items of the impact of the Std.
Rank ID Mean Degree
course on the personal traits Dev.
1 19 Physical appearance 3.68 0.58 High
2 22 Self-confidence/self-esteem 3.61 0.62 High
3 20 Enthusiasm for career planning 3.58 0.68 High
4 18 Positive attitude 3.47 0.63 High
5 21 Take responsibility of your own 3.47 0.65 High
6 23 Personal time management 3.42 0.71 High

Table 6 shows that all items were ranked "high". The item "physical appearance"
ranked at the top of the items in this domain. However, the item “personal time
management" was ranked at the bottom of the items. In terms of the impact of
the course on the social skills, Table 7 shows the mean and standard deviations
on social skills.

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 10

Table 7: Means and Standard Deviations of the Impact of the Course on Social Skills
Std.
Rank ID Items of social skills Mean Degree
Dev.
1 25 Respect cultural, religious, ethnic etc. diversity 3.68 0.58 High
2 26 Understand other feelings 3.53 0.66 High
3 24 Cooperative 3.44 0.63 High
4 27 Ability to work in team 3.44 0.69 High
5 28 Tolerance for others view point 3.41 0.66 High
6 29 Flexible and adaptable to change 3.30 0.70 High

Table 7 shows that the item "Respect cultural, religious, ethnic etc. diversity" was
ranked at the top of the list, nevertheless, the item "flexible and adaptable to
change" was ranked at the bottom of the list in this domain. In terms of the
presentation skills, Table 8 shows the students perspectives toward the impact of
this course on their presentation skills.

Table 8: Means and Standard Deviations of the Students' Perspectives on Presentation

Skills
Std.
Rank ID Items of presentation skills Mean Degree
Dev.
1 36 Listening attentively 3.54 0.66 High
2 32 Appropriate voice tone 3.52 0.67 High
3 31 Speaking with clarity 3.49 0.65 High
4 34 Preparation 3.47 0.70 High
5 35 Standing appropriately 3.47 0.66 High
6 33 Using body language appropriately 3.38 0.71 High
7 30 Maintain eye contact with the audience 3.28 0.71 High

Table 8 shows that the all items of presentation skills were ranked "high". The
item "listening attentively" was ranked at the top of the items in this domain.
Whereas, the item "maintain eye contact with the audience" was ranked at the
bottom of the items. Concerning the impact of the course on the relations with
the others, Table 9 shows the means and the standard deviations of the students'
perspectives in this domain.

Table 9: Means and Standard Deviations of Impact of the Course on the Relations
with the Others
Items of the impact of course Std.
Rank ID Mean Degree
on the relations with the others Dev.
1 13 I respect the dignity and rights of others 3.77 0.51 High
2 7 I treat others respectfully 3.73 0.57 High
I respect myself in my communications with
3 12 3.71 0.57 High
others
4 14 I motivate others to do their best 3.51 0.64 High
5 4 I encourage others to talk when appropriate 3.45 0.70 High
I give my full attention to others when they talk
6 1 3.43 0.61 High
to me
7 3 I display empathy 3.40 0.72 High
8 2 I maintain eye contact throughout a 3.36 0.66 High

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 11

conversation
9 11 I discover what is in the best interest of others 3.36 0.69 High
10 16 I cooperate with others to create the best results 3.35 0.69 High
I deal with conflicts and differences
11 8 3.33 0.65 High
appropriately
I ask the best questions to invite the best
12 5 3.32 0.70 High
answers from others
13 10 I optimize non-verbal communications 3.32 0.75 High
I ask for clarification of whatever I don't fully
14 6 3.30 0.75 High
understand
I deal optimally with complain, criticize, blame
15 17 3.05 0.81 High
and make excuses
16 9 I share my feelings and needs when appropriate 2.97 0.91 Moderate
I minimize others' unwanted behaviours
17 15 2.92 0.85 Moderate
effectively

Table 9 shows the means and standard deviations of the students' perspectives
on the impact of the course on the relations with others. Item (13) "I respect the
dignity and rights of others" was ranked "high" at the top of the domains' items,
whereas, item (15) "I minimize others' unwanted behaviors effectively" was
ranked "moderate" at the bottom of this domain.

Students' Variables and Communication Skills

The second question reads as: Are there any significant differences between
students' responses due to the variables (gender, level of the study, type of
colleges, nature of the course, and the usefulness of the course) regarding the
effect of the course on their communication skills? To answer this question, the
means and the standard deviations was calculated to find the impact of the
course on the relations with the others, on the personal traits, on the social skills,
and on the presentation skills as Table 10 shows.

Table 10: Means and Standard Deviations of impact of the Course on the Students'
Communication Skills based on the Independence Variables
95% C.I.
Levels Std. Adj. Std.
Dimensions IV Mean U.B
of IV Dev. Mean Error L.B.
.
The impact Gender Male 3.32 0.42 3.24 0.04 3.16 3.31
of Female 3.40 0.35 3.28 0.04 3.21 3.36
the course Academic First 3.42 0.32 3.33 0.04 3.25 3.41
on Year Second 3.36 0.41 3.26 0.03 3.19 3.33
the relations Third 3.34 0.38 3.26 0.04 3.17 3.34
with the Fourth 3.36 0.38 3.23 0.05 3.14 3.32
others Fifth 3.34 0.26 3.22 0.09 3.04 3.40
Faculty Scientific 3.36 0.37 3.25 0.03 3.18 3.32
Humanities 3.38 0.38 3.27 0.04 3.19 3.34
Nature of Theoretic 3.37 0.38 3.30 0.03 3.24 3.37
the Course Practical 3.32 0.38 3.21 0.07 3.08 3.34
Theoretic
and 3.38 0.38 3.26 0.03 3.20 3.32
Practical

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 12

95% C.I.
Levels Std. Adj. Std.
Dimensions IV Mean U.B
of IV Dev. Mean Error L.B.
.
Usefulness Little 3.16 0.53 3.12 0.06 3.00 3.24
of the Great 3.23 0.32 3.20 0.03 3.13 3.27
Course Very Great 3.49 0.35 3.46 0.03 3.40 3.53
Total 3.37 0.38 3.26 0.03 3.20 3.32
The Impact Gender Male 3.52 0.47 3.47 0.04 3.38 3.55
of Female 3.55 0.42 3.49 0.04 3.40 3.57
the Course Academic First 3.60 0.37 3.55 0.05 3.45 3.64
on Year Second 3.52 0.47 3.46 0.04 3.38 3.54
the Personal Third 3.55 0.43 3.49 0.05 3.39 3.59
Traits Fourth 3.47 0.46 3.38 0.05 3.28 3.49
Fifth 3.60 0.35 3.51 0.11 3.30 3.73
Faculty Scientific 3.53 0.44 3.46 0.04 3.38 3.54
Humanities 3.56 0.43 3.50 0.05 3.41 3.58
Nature of Theoretic 3.50 0.47 3.47 0.04 3.39 3.55
the Course Practical 3.56 0.44 3.50 0.08 3.34 3.65
Theoretic
and 3.56 0.42 3.47 0.04 3.40 3.54
Practical
Usefulness Little 3.34 0.60 3.35 0.08 3.20 3.49
of the Great 3.44 0.40 3.44 0.04 3.36 3.52
Course Very Great 3.63 0.41 3.65 0.04 3.57 3.72
Total 3.54 0.44 3.48 0.04 3.40 3.56
Social Gender Male 3.41 0.50 3.35 0.05 3.26 3.44
Skills Female 3.50 0.40 3.42 0.04 3.34 3.51
Academic First 3.50 0.39 3.45 0.05 3.35 3.55
Year Second 3.47 0.45 3.42 0.04 3.34 3.50
Third 3.42 0.46 3.37 0.05 3.27 3.47
Fourth 3.49 0.41 3.41 0.06 3.30 3.52
Fifth 3.32 0.59 3.28 0.11 3.06 3.50
Faculty Scientific 3.46 0.43 3.38 0.04 3.30 3.47
Humanities 3.47 0.45 3.39 0.05 3.30 3.48
Nature of Theoretic 3.45 0.45 3.38 0.04 3.30 3.46
the Course Practical 3.52 0.39 3.42 0.08 3.26 3.58
Theoretic
and 3.47 0.44 3.37 0.04 3.29 3.44
Practical
Usefulness Little 3.30 0.53 3.42 0.04 3.33 3.50
of the Great 3.38 0.39 3.28 0.08 3.12 3.45
Course Very Great 3.54 0.45 3.39 0.04 3.32 3.47
Total 3.47 0.44 3.39 0.04 3.31 3.47
Presentation Gender Male 3.43 0.46 3.36 0.05 3.27 3.45
Skills Female 3.46 0.45 3.37 0.05 3.28 3.46
Academic First 3.45 0.42 3.37 0.05 3.27 3.47
Year Second 3.46 0.46 3.37 0.04 3.28 3.45
Third 3.46 0.46 3.38 0.05 3.28 3.48
Fourth 3.39 0.48 3.28 0.06 3.17 3.40
Fifth 3.54 0.32 3.42 0.11 3.20 3.64
Faculty Scientific 3.42 0.45 3.32 0.04 3.23 3.41

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 13

95% C.I.
Levels Std. Adj. Std.
Dimensions IV Mean U.B
of IV Dev. Mean Error L.B.
.
Humanities 3.50 0.45 3.41 0.05 3.32 3.50
Nature of Theoretic 3.44 0.44 3.28 0.08 3.13 3.43
the Course Practical 3.33 0.53 3.36 0.04 3.28 3.45
Theoretic
and 3.47 0.45 3.52 0.04 3.45 3.60
Practical
Usefulness Little 3.27 0.40 3.23 0.08 3.08 3.39
of the Great 3.36 0.41 3.34 0.04 3.25 3.43
Course Very Great 3.53 0.47 3.52 0.04 3.44 3.60
Total 3.45 0.45 3.37 0.04 3.28 3.45
Total Gender Male 3.42 0.46 3.35 0.04 3.28 3.43
Female 3.48 0.40 3.39 0.04 3.32 3.46
Academic First 3.49 0.37 3.43 0.04 3.35 3.50
Year Second 3.45 0.45 3.38 0.03 3.31 3.44
Third 3.44 0.43 3.38 0.04 3.29 3.46
Fourth 3.43 0.43 3.33 0.04 3.24 3.41
Fifth 3.45 0.38 3.36 0.09 3.18 3.53
Faculty Scientific 3.44 0.42 3.35 0.03 3.29 3.42
Humanities 3.48 0.43 3.39 0.04 3.32 3.46
Nature of Theoretic 3.44 0.44 3.39 0.03 3.33 3.46
the Course Practical 3.43 0.43 3.35 0.07 3.22 3.48
Theoretic
and 3.47 0.42 3.37 0.03 3.32 3.43
Practical
Usefulness Little 3.27 0.51 3.24 0.06 3.12 3.37
of Great 3.35 0.38 3.34 0.03 3.27 3.40
the Course Very Great 3.55 0.42 3.54 0.03 3.48 3.60

Table 10 shows that there are significant differences between the mean scores
regarding the impact of the communication skills course on the students based
on the variables (gender, level of study, type of the college, nature of the course,
and the usefulness of the course). To make sure that the differences are real, the
researchers run a 7-way mixed ANOVA with one within-subject and with six
between-groups to explore the impact of the course on personal traits, social
skills, presentation skills, and on the relations with others. Table 11 shows the 7-
way mixed ANOVA.

Table 11: Seven-Way Mixed ANOVA in the Mean Scores between and within Groups
Tests of Source of Sum of Mean
df F Sig.
Effects Variance Squares Square
Within-the Subjects [Mauchly's W(0.95); Approx. χ2(30.07); df(5); Sig(0.00); ε(Greenhouse-
Geisser)(0.97)]
Dimensions 2.78 2.90 0.96 13.61 0.00
Dimensions×Gender 0.30 2.90 0.10 1.45 0.23
Dimensions×Academic
1.38 11.60 0.12 1.70 0.06
Year

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 14

Dimensions×Faculty 0.56 2.90 0.19 2.73 0.04

Dimensions×Nature of
0.70 5.80 0.12 1.71 0.12
the Course
Dimensions×Usefulnes
0.78 5.80 0.13 1.91 0.08
s of the Course
1551.2
Error(Dimensions) 109.12 0.07
2
1583.1
Total 115.61 0.07
1
Between-the Subjects
Gender 0.72 1.00 0.72 1.51 0.22
Academic Year 1.95 4.00 0.49 1.02 0.40
Faculty 0.68 1.00 0.68 1.41 0.24
Nature of the Course 0.23 2.00 0.12 0.24 0.79
Usefulness of the
25.28 2.00 12.64 26.33 0.00
Course
Error 256.84 535.00 0.48
Total 285.70 545.00 0.52
2128.1
Total 401.31 0.19
1

Table 11 shows that there are significant differences (at α= 0.05 ) in the mean
scores based on the communication skills domains, as the impact of the course
on the students comes on multi levels, the researchers applied Bonferroni post
hoc test between mean scores as Table 12 shows.

Table 12: Bonferroni Post Hoc Test between the Mean Scores based on
Communication Skills Dimensions

The impact of the course

Presentation Social
Dimensions on the relations with the
Skills Skills
others
Adj.
{Bonferroni} 3.26 3.37 3.39
Mean
Presentation Skills 3.37 0.10
Social Skills 3.39 0.13 0.02
The impact of the course
3.48 0.22 0.11 0.09
on the Personal Traits

Evidently as displayed in Table 12, the real differences between the mean scores
regarding the impacts of the course on the students' communication skills
domains came in the following order: a) the impact of the course on the personal
traits, b) the impact of the course on the social skills, c) the impact of the course
on the presentation skills. Table 11 shows that there are no significant differences
(α= 0.05) between the mean scores regarding the impact of the course on
interaction of the dimensions with the variable (gender). Also, Table 12 shows
that there are no significant differences (α= 0.05) between the mean scores
regarding the impact of the course (personal traits, social skills, presentation
skills) due to the interaction the variable ( level of study). Moreover, table 12
shows that there are no significant differences (α= 0.05) between the mean scores

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 15

regarding the impact of the course (personal traits, social skills, presentation
skills) due to the interaction the variable (type of the college) as Figure 1 shows.

Figure 1: Ordinal Interaction of the Mean Scores of the Impact of the Course on the
Students based on the College Type

Figure 1 shows that the impact of the four-dimension of the communication

skills on the students from humanity colleges was higher than their colleagues in
the scientific colleges and the impact was notable in two of the communication
skills domains (the impact of the course on the personal traits and presentation
skills). Also, Figure 1 shows that the impact of the course on the students from
humanity colleges came developing according to mean scores: The impact of the
course on the relations with the others, Social Skills, Presentation Skills, and the
impact of the course on the Personal Traits. However, for the students form the
scientific colleges, the ascending order was: The impact of the course on the
relations with the others, Presentation Skills, Social Skills, and the impact of the
course on the Personal Traits. Finally, the impact of the course on the students
from the humanity colleges was higher than the impact of the course on the
students from the scientific colleges at (α= 0.05).

Discussion
Uuniversity setting is very demanding as it entails students to have an
acceptable level of personal traits, social skills, presentation skills, and relation
with others. In practice, improved communication abilities were perceived by
the participants in the current study. One possible contributor to the
effectiveness of this course may be relevant to its applied mode of delivery,
rather than a theoretical lecture manner. In consequence, students' perception of

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 16

the success of the course under the study was reported as high signifying their
satisfaction as well as attainment of the intended aims of the course. This result
is in congruence with Rider and Keefer (2006) who similarly recommended
functional demonstrations of communication skills.

Another explanation, of the obtained perception of the great effect of the course
on students' communication, may be contributed to tutors' focus on not only the
plain components of communication, but also on how communication occurs
and why it occasionally fails. This is in accordance with Shannon’s Theory
Model (1948). According to this sender-message-receiver model, the context
where communicating takes place in, is very significant and thereby an
informative source of info. For that reason, interaction between tutors and
students is boundless. Or possibly, class interactions are always fruitful where
meaning is shared between the tutor and the student; actions and responses
signal effective established connections. These include a sender and a receiver
through the means of a channel (Mahajan, 2015).

The effectiveness of development of communication skills may be touched by

students' variables as each student has his/her own personal traits; thus
evaluating communication skills can't be far from demographic factors
(Doganay & Keskin, 2008). The results obtained from the analysis revealed how
these variables affected students' communication ability.

Research shows that students held contrasting views concerning gendered

communication. Some say that females are better in communication than males
(e.g. Holmes, 1995); others say the opposite (Lakoff, 1973). Nevertheless, the
present study demonstrated an impact on both. This may be attribute to the non-
defensive kind of communication held in classes. In all taught sections, the
tutors defined communicative situations while acknowledging the students'
feelings (be empathetic). The researchers believe that the course is properly
delivered because of the tutors in focus believe that communication is fruitful
whenever it is indirect and non-defensive.

In this study, students' perceptions towards the significance of communication

skills were great to a large extent. This signals the likeliness of developing
communication skills over suitable activities. In the same vein, Ihmeideh, Al-
Omari and Al-Dababneh (2010) who asserted that constructive communication
settings afford more prospects for effective communication.

Conclusions and Recommendations

This study explored the effects of infusing top-notch communication skills on
university students. Here, effective communication encompasses not only being
thoughtful to talk plainly and absolutely, but also valuing others and paying
attention to what others share. In conclusion, the study found out that:
 Students’ responses showed their feelings of bonding with their tutors.
 Infusing communication skills among university students is likely to
inspire their personal, academic and social exchanges.

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 17

 Effective communication is a combination of verbal and non-verbal

communication.
 Students' personal traits, social skills, presentation skills, and relations
with others were the top-notch skills imparted the participants in this
study.
 This course demonstrated confident perceptions effectiveness which
will, in turn, has a societal impact through the discovery of opportunities
to create social change.

The findings gained in this study may give insight to some recommendations
which are beneficial for university context as it can improve the condition and
status of effective communication for undergraduates. Students, who can
communicate well, are responsible for their own learning and become more
confident about their communication ability. This can be best achieved through
being alert who lets the students complete what they started saying. Of course,
attending students’ non-verbal language is crucial for encouraging the
scaffolding of their ideas.

References
Adler, R. B., Rosenfeld, L. B., & Proctor, R. F. (2010). Interplay: The process of interpersonal
communication. New York: Oxford University Press.
Al-Eiadeh, A-R., Al-Sobh, M. A., Al-Zoubi, S. M., & Al-Khasawneh, F. (2016). Improving
English language speaking skills of Ajloun National University students.
International Journal of English and Education. 5(I3), 181-195.
Asemanyi, Abena Abokoma (2015). An assessment of students’ performance in
communication skills: A case study of the university of education. Journal of
Education and Practice, 6(35).
Bankowski, E. (2010). Developing skills for effective academic presentations in EAP.
International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 22(2), 187-196.
Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Harvard University, Cambridge,
Massuchusetts. doi:10.1002/bs.3830090108
Burns, D. D. (1985). Intimate Connections. New York: Signet (Penguin Books).
Castells, M. (2001). Universities as dynamic systems of contradictory functions in J.
Muller et al. (eds) Challenges of globalisation. South African debates with Manuel
Castells, (pp. 206-223). Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman.
Cleland, J., Foster, K., & Moffat, M. (2005). Undergraduate students' attitudes to
communication skills learning differ depending on year of study and gender.
Medical Teacher, 27(3), 246-251. doi:10.1080/01421590400029541
Comedis, J. E. (2014). The role of social skills in the academic performance of De La Salle
Araneta University freshmen students: Creating a culture. The DLSU Research
Congress, De La Salle University, Manila, Philippines.
Doganay, U., & Keskin, F. (2008). A study on the interpersonal communication education
in Turkey. Culture and Communication, 11(1), 9-32.
Feitosa, F. B., Del Prette, Z. A. P., & Del Prette, A. (2012). Social skills and academic
achievement: The mediating function of cognitive competence. Temas em
Psicologia 20(1), 61–70.
Gioiosa, M. E., & Kinkela, K. (2019). Classroom exercises with technology and
communication skills: Students’ perceptions. Journal of International Education
in Business. 12(1), 2-13. doi:10.1108/JIEB-02-2018-0005.

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 18

Gooden, C., & Kearns, J. (2013). The importance of communication skills in young
children. Research Brief, Human Development Institute, University of Kentucky.
Retrieved from
http://www.hdi.uky.edu/media/default/documents/research/researchbrief_s
ummer2013.pdf
Hagmann, J. (2002). Competence development in soft skills/personal mastery. Report on
design of a learning programme at Makerere University, Uganda, Rockefeller
Foundation, Nairobi.
Harlak, H., Gemalmaz, A., Gurel, F. S., Dereboy, C., & Ertekin, K. (2008).
Communication skills training: Effects on attitudes toward communication skills
and empathic tendency. Education for Health: Change in Learning and Practice,
21(2), 62.
Hasson, Gill. (2012). Brilliant communication skills. Great Britain: Pearson Education.
Holmes, Janet (1995). Women, Men and Politeness. London: Longman.
doi:10.1017/S0272263100015278
Idris, F., Hassan, Z., Ya’acob, A., & Gill, S. K. (2012).The role of education in shaping
youth’s national identity. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 59, 443–450.
Ihmeideh, F. M., Al-Omari, A. A., & Al-Dababneh, K. A. (2010). Attitude toward
communication skills among students' teachers' in Jordanian Public Universities.
Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35(4). doi:10.14221/ajte.2010v35n4.1
Iordache-Platis, M., & Josan, I. (2009). Communication efficiency within higher education
institutions: The case of Romania. European Research Studies, XII(2), 55-66.
Ismail, M., Nadeem, M., Thind, M. H. H., Shaheen, M. A., Shahid, M., & Ahmad, R.
(2016). Role of ECA’s (Extra Curricular Activities) in Personality Development.
International Journal of Research Studies in Biosciences, 4(11), 47-56. Retrieved from
https://www.arcjournals.org/pdfs/ijrsb/v4-i11/8.pdf
Keyton, J. (2011). Communication and organizational culture: A key to understanding work
experience. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kim, Y., & Wright, C. E. (1989). A study of general education requirements in vocational
education programs. Menlo Park, CA: Educational Evaluation and Research.
(ERIC) Document Reproduction Service No. ED 312482.
Lakoff, R. (1973). Language and women’s place. Language in Society, 2(1), 45-80.
doi:10.1017/S0047404500000051
Mahajan, R. (2015). The Key role of communication skills in the life of professionals.
IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IOSR-JHSS), 20(12), 36-39.
doi:10.9790/0837-201223639
McKay, M., Davis, M., & Fanning, P. (1995). Messages: The communication skills book.
Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.
Mey, S. Ch., Abdullah, M. N. L. Y., & Yin, C. J. (2014). Profiling the personality traits of
University undergraduate and postgraduate students at a research university in
Malaysia. The Professional Counsellor, 4(4), 378–389. doi:10.15241/scm.4.4.378
Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (2008). Towards a unified theory of personality: integrating
dispositions and processing dynamics within the cognitive-affective processing
system. In L. A. Pervin, O. P. John & R. W. Robins (Eds.) Handbook of Personality:
Theory and research (pp. 208-241). New York: The Guilford Press.
Muste, D. (2016). The Role of Communication Skills in Teaching Process. Selection and
peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of the
conference. The European Proceedings of Behavioral and Social Sciences EpSBS.
Nitonde, Rohidas (2014). Soft skills and personality development. Paper presented at the
National Level Seminar on Soft Skills and Personality Development. Retrieved
from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269390471_Soft_Skills_and_Persona
lity_Development

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

 19

Novik N. N. (2015). A model of developing communication skills among adolescents

with behavioral problems. International Journal of Environmental & Science
Education, 10(4), 579-587. doi:10.12973/ijese.2015.272a.
Prasad, P. (2014). The functional aspects of communication skills. New Delhi: S. K. Kataria &
Sons.
Rider, E. A., & Keefer, C. (2006). Communication skills competencies: definitions and a
teaching toolbox. Medical Education, 40(7), 624-629. doi:10.1111/j.1365-
2929.2006.02500.x
Schurer, S., Kassenboehmer, S. C., & Leung, F. (2015). Do universities shape their
students’ personality? Discussion Paper No. 8873, Germany. Retrieved from
http://ftp.iza.org/dp8873.pdf
Seema, G. (2012). Emotional intelligence in classroom, Advances in Management, 5(10), 16-
25.
Shannon, C. E. A. (1948). Mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System
Technical Journal, 27(1), 379-423. doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x
Simona, C. E. (2015). Developing presentation skills in the English language courses for
the engineering students of the 21st century knowledge society. Procedia - Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 203, 69–74. doi.10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.08.261
Wilson, G., & Nias, D. (1999). Beauty can’t be beat. In L. Guerrero and J. DeVito, (Eds.)
The nonverbal communication reader: Classic and contemporary readings. Prospect
Heights, IL: Waveland Press.

© 2019 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.

View publication stats