Running head: LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
Where is Listening Instruction Today: Survey Research of Colleges and State Universities in the
Western Association of Schools and Colleges Senior Commission
Robert L. Kehoe
International Listening Association
Certified Listening Professional Program
Dr. Richard Halley and Dr. Andrew Wolvin
March 6, 2016
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
2
Abstract
The need for college level listening instruction has long been emphasized and
documented. However, there is a dearth of current information where one may go to find
instruction in the colleges and universities in the United States, and there is a lack of information
on the location, quality of instruction, or instructor qualifications. In order to fill these gaps in
information, 105 colleges and universities were contacted through Communication Department
chairs, Deans, Directors, and others by email. Surveys (see Appendix A) are attached to the
email letters requesting participation. 4.7 percent of the total number surveyed answered
positively to no standalone listening courses offered. 0 percent of the total number surveyed
answered positively to standalone listening courses being offered. A small percentage of the
respondents (.952) answered positively to listening being taught as a unit. The training of
instructors was answered by the majority of the respondents as none.
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
3
Where is Listening Instruction Today: Survey Research of Colleges and State Universities in the
Western Association of Schools and Colleges Senior Commission
The significance of learning how to listen effectively has expanded in the past eight
decades. It has reached a lofty position in the minds of educators and business owners
everywhere. Any argument in reference to whether or not there is a need for listening skills
training is settled. Business leaders have agreed that effective listening skills are valuable in the
workplace (Flynn, Valikoski, & Grau, 2008; Smeltzer, & Watson, 1985). In a recent study of
education and the workforce in the United States, communication skills were assessed for their
importance within different career opportunities. According to Carnevale, Smith, and Strohl
(2013) “Active listening is extremely important to almost all jobs that require working in
hierarchical teams and serving customers. Research claimed 48% of jobs require high levels of
active listening. Other communication skills follow closely behind; reading, comprehension,
speaking, and critical thinking” (p.28). Finally, it appears that listening skills are being
recognized as essential for securing employment. Educators have signed on to the fact that a
student’s performance and academic success is related to the learning of effective listening skills
(Conaway, 1982; Brown, 1987; Wolvin & Coakley, 2001; Brownell, 2013). The agreement
between these two groups stems from the recognition of “the centrality of listening in human
communication” and from the broad documentation of the importance of effective listening in
studies by listening scholars (Wolvin, Coakley, & Disburg, 1990).
The consensus is high, but are we convincing college administrators to add this most
needed communication curriculum? Where is listening instruction available in higher education,
how is it taught, and how are the instructors qualified to teach listening? Searching the internet
using the search terms “colleges that offer listening courses” yielded over 272 million items.
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
4
Obviously, that would be a time consuming task. The problem is there is a gap in information
when one wants to find which colleges offer a course in listening, the context of the listening
course, and information on the instructors and their experience. Research in this area of
communication could provide a resource for locating listening instruction in colleges and
universities.
Purpose
According to Babbie (2007) “much of social research conducted is to explore a topic”
(p.88). . In this research, the topic of exploration is listening instruction in colleges and
universities. The reason for this exploratory research is to satisfy the curiosity and desire for
better understanding. That understanding is associated with the premise that listening instruction
is not a priority within the colleges and universities in the United States. Past research has shown
that few schools are concerned with this type of instruction. Considering the dates of the last
research in listening instruction of the schools and colleges of United States there is a need for a
gap to be filled for this information.
An additional purpose for the exploration is to provide a guide for those students
searching for listening instruction. Currently there is little information as to where a student
would go for listening instruction. Other than searching through university catalogs for course
offerings there is no other method for finding this data. Even internet searches produce very little
information on the topic.
A shortcomings expected with this type of research is the collection of data. Surveys in
this area of research are sometimes difficult to acquire from respondents. Additionally the
educational environment has changed radically due to funding and the economic environment.
Considering the importance given to reading and speaking listening instruction could easily fall
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
5
prey to the cuts in funding for education. In this research a location of the colleges or universities
that offer listening instruction will be given. Standalone or units in listening instruction will be
analyzed for their content. Finally, instructors will be analyzed for the amount of listening
training they have received prior to teaching a listening course. It is hoped that the data received
will give listening instruction advocates and students a sense of where listening is taught, how it
is presented, and an idea of the instructors training.
Literature Review
Research to locate listening courses in institutions of higher education is sparse. Research
describing how listening instruction is performed in higher education courses also has suffered
from a dearth of information. Search of the Internet using two different browsers yielded four
such research articles. Two of the studies focused on where listening instruction is taking place
in higher education. The other two studies focused on the content of the listening instruction in
higher education classroom.
Each research study emphasized the need for listening instruction. Wolvin, Coakley, and
Ginsberg (1990) suggest students need listening skills for academic survival and that listening is
central to human communication thereby citing the value of listening instruction. Wacker and
Hawkins (1995) make the point that much of a person's time communicating is listening and
suggest, "Listening should definitely be part of the communication curriculum"(p.15). Again,
Wolvin, Coakley, and Dinsburg (1992) observe that“Listening plays a critical role in the lives of
students” (p.59). Finally, Perkins (1994) contends that ”students could benefit from instruction in
listening” while citing the numbers of students who do not receive any instruction (p. 82).
Locating listening instruction is offered in American colleges and universities is explicit in
the purpose of two of the articles. “It is the purpose of this study, then, to update developments in
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
6
listening course and units in American colleges and universities………….”( Wolvin, Coakley,
and Dinsburg, 1990, p.3). “[It] would be useful to go beyond the ILA membership to ascertain if
listening is being offered in other colleges and universities” (Wolvin, Coakley, and Dinsburg,
1992, p. 59).
The how and what of listening instruction in higher education is answered in the research
of Perkins (1994) and Wacker and Hawkins (1995). While these researchers were interested in
the where of listening instruction, their primary focus was on matters of curriculum. Perkins
(1994) considered his work to be a benchmark for future research in listening instruction.
Perkin’s study asked who takes the basic speech course, what types of listening are taught, how
is listening taught, who teaches the basic speech course with what kind of training in listening
does the instructor have. Wacker and Hawkins (1994) focused on a comparison of different
listening instruction programs. Their study asks instructors what areas of listening instruction
they feel are high average, and low. Thirteen critical areas of teaching listening are analyzed for
the emphasis given by the instructor. Wacker and Hawkins (1995) considered theses thirteen
areas ac critical for listening instruction: “(a) listening as part of the of communication process;
(b) the physiological process; (c) the psychological aspect the listening process; (d) being
committed to listening; (e) setting a goal to listen; (f) paying attention to non verbal ques; (g)
classroom listening and note taking; (h) critical listening; (i) aesthetic listening; (j)
comprehensive listening; (k) relational listening; (l) gender differences in listening; and (m)
practicing listening skills” (p. 15).
A look at how the researchers disagreed and agreed will be used to discuss the findings of
these research studies. There are fewer places where the research findings disagreed than not.
Disagreement centered around three items of what is taught in a listening course, what level of
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
7
college student participates most, and which colleges should be surveyed. Agreement centered
on finding listening instruction as a unit in another course, the dimension most frequently used a
focal point for the instruction, and the degree of training the instructor of the listening course
had.
The disagreement of what is taught can be found in the research by Perkins (1994) and
Wacker and Hawkins (1995). Perkins (1994) found less time is spent teaching listening skills and
more time was devoted to theory and basic information on listening. However, Wacker and
Hawkins (1995) contend in their study that practicing skills received a very high emphasis in the
course work they analyzed.
The college level of the students in a listening class is another point of disagreement. In the
research by Wolvin, Coakley, and Dinsburg (1990) lower level college students were found as
the most likely students to be enrolled. Wacker and Hackers (1995) findings differed. Their
results indicated there are more upper levels students in the listening programs they analyzed.
Lastly, the researchers disagreed on which colleges and universities should be surveyed. Three of
the studies relied heavily on the institutions listed in the Speech Communication Association’s
directory. Researchers Wacker and Hawkins (1995) compiled a list from the research. The work
by Smith and Turner (1993) which revealed colleges that had listening courses. This research
became the list for the research by Wacker and Hawkins.
On the agreement side of the research, we have the following. All of the articles were in
agreement that the most likely place to find listening instruction is in Speech Communication
courses. Listening instruction is most often taught as unit in another communication course.
Teaching critical listening occurred at a higher frequency and received a strong emphasis in the
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
8
listening courses surveyed. Most instructors of the listening courses were lacking training in
listening. Finally, researchers agreed that listening instruction needed to have more research.
From the agreement and disagreement perspective of the articles reviewed, a decision can
be made for a direction for the research in listening instruction. The agreement perspective tells
me that most listening is taught as a unit in another course. If listening has become more
important in a student’s education, will an increase in stand alone courses, be found? Therefore,
we might ask if this has changed by asking the following research question:
R¹ Which regionally accredited colleges has a stand alone listening course or a listening a
unit within another course?
The literature review revealed that critical listening was highly emphasized in course work
and frequently was what was taught in a listening unit or course. Is the growth in listening
importance changing this trend to give equal instruction time for the affective and behavioral
dimensions of listening? What could be found is a more balanced approach to listening
instruction that includes the concepts of empathy and attending behaviors of listening? In this
way, listening instruction would include the affective and behavioral dimensions of listening.
Therefore, a second research question could be:
R² What percentage of time is spent in each of the three listening dimensions of affective,
cognitive, and behavioral?
Researchers have found that most instructors who teach listening have not had formal
training. It would seem that this statistic could have changed due to increased awareness of
listening education in the communication discipline A third research question may ask:
R³ To what degree has the instructor of the listening course had training in listening
instruction?
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
9
Methods
The population for this study is the universities and colleges in the United States. The
sampling frame for this study is the universities and colleges within the Western Association of
Schools and Colleges Senior Commission of University and Colleges. This means that all junior
colleges or community colleges are not a part of the sampling frame. Only four year universities
and colleges were sent the survey.
Sampling Procedures
The sampling frame was formed using the Counsel of Higher Education Accreditation
web site (http://www.chea.org/). The colleges and universities listed under the Western
Association of Schools and Colleges Senior Commission of University and Colleges are
selected. There are 209 colleges and universities in the sampling frame. A purposive sample was
taken from the sampling frame. Only the colleges and universities that had Communication
courses or Communication Departments are surveyed.
Using these criteria, a sample size of 104 colleges and universities is achieved. The group
included 66 private and 38 public institutions of higher education. Within the private sector, 10
universities are associated to seminary, theological, and religious affiliations, two (2) universities
are women’s universities, and one (1) maritime university. The participation rate for the survey
was 7.6%
The setting for the data collection was a home office the researcher. E-mail letters are
sent as a request for participation. One mail is sent to each of the universities. Each letter had a
survey attached for those wanting to participate. In all 54 letters were sent to communication
department chairs, 17 request letters were sent to the deans of colleges, 3 to the chairs of the
liberal arts department, 6 University presidents, 3 psychology department chairs, 2 humanities
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
10
department chairs, 19 professors, directors and chancellors. Conditions for the subject were
manipulated by the survey questions. Multiple conditions did not exist for the participants. All
individuals were asked to complete identical surveys.
Surveys were collected by return email from individuals. One researcher analyzed each
survey. Answers to the survey questions were logged into a spreadsheet chart for analysis.
Survey questions ask participants the college or university name and physical location. The
percentage of time of the whole course spent in the three dimensions of listening (behavioral,
cognitive and affective) is asked as a method to determine the quality of the listening instruction.
Those courses with an equal distribution of the dimensions will be deemed to have a higher level
of quality than those with unequal studies of the dimensions. The survey questions are
formulated from past research by Terry M. Perkins (1994) and from the experience of the
researcher.
The final question for the survey asked for information regarding the training the
instructor had experienced prior to teaching the course. Three options were given: none, general
overview, certification. Instructor training is a key to understanding the importance instruction is
given by the institution.
Rationale for Analysis
The rationale for the analysis of this data has to do with its strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities, and threats. One strength of the data is its origin. Each of these questions has been
answered by a credible source from the university. These sources have access to reliable
information that is asked in the survey questions. It is expected that the subject would have upto-date and correct information. Weaknesses associated with this analysis are few. The main
objection to the analysis is there is only one opinion of the answered questions. Bias by the
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
11
researcher could be an implication in the final analysis. An opportunity associated with this
analysis is the sharing of information as a learning experience. Not only the participants will
learn from this data, but also an additional opportunity is associated with what can be done with
the information once it is analyzed. Knowing where listening instruction is being offered can
benefit the students who see the importance of this type of instruction. Finally, the opportunity to
publish reliable information of this sort is a benefit to the community. The information can be
shared with a large audience by using the resources of the researcher. Providing this information
on a website makes information accessible to a multitude of audiences. Threats associated to this
analysis are a continuing decline in the funds available for education. The gradual elimination of
certain courses and classes could take place immediately after this information is published. It
may be necessary to continuously update the information which could be time-consuming and
costly.
Univariate analysis is an additional aspect of the analysis. According to Babbie (2007)
univariate analysis is the “simplest form of quantitative analysis” ( p. 409). By using univariate
analysis a frequency distribution is created for the number of colleges offering listening
instruction as a standalone course or as a unit of another course and the amount of time the three
dimensions of listening are taught in a standalone or unit of a course. Additionally univariate
analysis is used to create the frequency distribution for training of the instructor. Training of the
instructor and the optional answers, none, general overview, and certification all add to the
understanding of the instructors qualifications.
Interpretation
The purpose for presenting the data in Table 1 is to provide the reader a guide to
understand the results of this research. The table includes the responses to all the questions in the
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
12
survey. One of the aims of this research was to provide a list of colleges, information on the
courses in listening, and the qualifications of the teacher. Data from Table 1 will include the
information for the amount of time each dimension of listening is taught in a standalone or unit
course. This approach is taken to retain the individuality of each institution that offers a listening
course.
Table1. Survey Questions Distributions
Name of
Institution
Point
Loma
Nazarene
University
Santa
Clara
University
UC Santa
Barbara
Location
Santa
Clara
CA
Santa
Barbara
CA
None
Cal Poly
Pomona
National
University
Pomona
CA
San
Diego
CA
San
Diego,
CA
Standalone
course
none
%
Cognitive
20% I C
%
Behavioral
20% NV
%
Affective
20% NV
Trained
None
Trained
G.O.
X
Trained
Certificate
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
no
no
no
no
no
no
none
Unit of a
Course Y/N
Yes
Interpersonal
and non
verbal com
Addressed in
Interpersonal
Com
No
Discussed in
Interviewing
course
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
Possibly
in COM
600
none
none
none
none
none
Examination of the information in Table 1 shows that none of the colleges have a
standalone listen course offered. The majority of respondents did not have a unit in listening in
another course. As we can see from the chart above no training had been given to instructors in
the majority of the respondents.
The following Tables 2 and Table 3 are presented to show the frequency of the standalone and
listening as a unit variables.
Table 2. Standalone Listening Course
Standalone Listening Course
Value Labe
Frequency
percent
Offered/Not Offered
valid percent
Cum percent
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
Offered
Not Offered
NA
Totals
Valid cases
105
0
5
100
105
0
4.7
95.2
99.9
0
4.7
95.2
99.9
13
0
4.7
95.2
99.9
Table 3. Listening Course as a Unit
Unit Listening Course
Value Label
Frequency
Offered
Not Offered
NA
Totals
Valid cases
105
1
4
100
105
Offered/Not Offered
percent
valid percent
.952
3.8
95.2
100
.952
3.8
95.2
100
Cum percent
.952
3.8
95.2
100
Table 2 and Table 3 explain the distributions of the listening instruction as a standalone
or unit course . The majority of the respondents answered negatively to a standalone course
being offered. One respondent answered positively to a unit in an interpersonal or nonverbal
communication course. This may suggest that schools offering communication courses are not
providing listening training within these communication courses.
Table 4. Instructor Training
Instructor Training
Value Labe
Frequency
None
4
General
1
Overview
Certificate
0
NA
100
Totals
5
None, General Overview, Certificate
Percent
Valid percent
Cum perc
3.8
3.8
3.8
.952
.952
.952
0
95.2
100
0
95.2
100
0
95.2
100
Table 4 provides information on instructor training. Instructor training is answered
negatively by the majority of the respondents. The instructor training received a positive
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
14
response for a general overview. The data suggest that few instructors have had any previous
training. However, some instructors may have considered training on their own without
divulging the information.
Conclusion
Data from this research implies that listening is not a subject of great importance in the
colleges and universities within the Western Association of Schools and Colleges. It is
interesting to note however that none of the respondents said that listening was taught in the
basic speech course. According to Perkins (1999), many schools provide a general overview of
listening within the basic speech courses. At the onset of this investigation the expectation was to
find backing for this previous research. However, it is true the past research may not have been
concerned with the colleges and universities in this region.
A small minority of the respondents suggested that listening courses may be found in
other departments. In one case, a respondent suggested contacting the Schools of Education for
listening courses within teacher education. Another respondent suggested contacting the
Psychology Departments. This is because it was believed that counseling techniques often have
chapters or lessons in listening for counselors.
The shortcomings of this research are associated with the issue of a small return on the
request for participation. At this point, it would be useful to know in the future that requests for
participation may involve more than an email letter. Future research should involve snail mail
letters, email letters, and phone calls in an effort to receive a commitment for participation.
Another direction for future research in listening instruction should involve more than
solely Communication Departments. As suggested by respondents it may be prudent to contact
Psychology departments and Schools of Education. The School of Education contact maybe
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
15
useful considering most K-12 elementary schools are mandated by local and the Federal
Government to teach listening to students starting in grade one. This being so, one may find that
future teachers are being taught listening skills in their credentialing programs.
A final direction for research may be to ask the question of how can we convince students
and administrators alike about listening instruction becoming an integral part of a college
education? What ways can we get this point across to administrators and students? How can we
as listening instruction advocates help students and administrators understand the importance of
listening?
Recent experience has illuminated the importance given to speaking. A local State
University has started requiring all graduates to pass a basic public speaking course. Within that
course, teaching listening is culminated in one chapter and one lecture. Considering this, it seems
there is a priority for communication in the colleges and universities. Perhaps the time for
listening instruction as a requirement is not far away.
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
16
References
Babbie, E. (2007). The practice of social research (11th ed.). Belmont, CA:Thomson Wadsworth.
Brown, J.I. (1987). Listening ubiquitous yet obscure. International Journal of Listening, 1,(1), 314. Retrieved from www.listen.org
Carnevale, A.P., Smith, N., & Strohl, J. (2013). Recovery: Job growth and education
requierments through 202. Retrieved from Georgetown University, Center on Education
and the Workforce website: http://cew.georgetown.edu/recovery2020
Flynn, J., Valikoski, T., & Grau, J. (2008). Listening in the business context: Reviewing the state
of research. International Journal of Listening, 22(2), 141-151. doi:
10.1080/10904010802174800
Ford, W. S. Z., Wolvin, A. D., & Chung, S. (2000): Students' self-perceived listening
competencies in the basic speech communication course. International Journal of
Listening, 14(1), 1-13. doi: 10.1080/10904018.2000.10499032
Hogue, J.L. (20120. Theories – descriptive/prescriptive learning theories / instructional design
theories. Retrieved from http://rjh.goingeast.ca/2012/03/04/theoriesdescriptiveprescriptive-learning-theories-instructional-design-theories/
Hopper, J. E. (2007): An exploratory essay on listening instruction in the K-12 curriculum,
International Journal of Listening, 21(1), 50-56. doi: 10.1080/10904010709336846
Johnson, I. D., & Long, K.M. (2007). Student listening gains in the basic communication course:
A comparison of self-report and performance-based measure. International Journal of
Listening, 21(2), 92-101. doi: 10.1080/10904010701301990
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
17
Rankin, P.T. (1926). The measurement of the ability to understand spoken language.
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Michigan, Detroit, MI
Perkins, T. M. (1994). A survey of listening instruction in the basic speech course. International
Journal of Listening, 8(1), 80-97. doi: 10.1080/10904018.1994.10499132
Smeltzer, L.R., & Watson, K. W. (1985). A test of instructional strategies for listening
improvement in a simulated business setting. Journal of Business Communication, 22(4)
33-42. doi:1177/002194368502200405
Wacker, K.G., & Hawkins, K. (1995). Curricula comparison for classes in listening.
International Journal of Listening, 9(1), 15-28. doi: 10.1080/10904018.1995.10499139
Wolvin, A. D., & Coakley,C.G. (2001). Listening education in the 21st century. International
Journal of Listening, 14, 143-152. doi: 10.1080/10904018.2000.10499040
Wolvin, A. D., Coakley C. G., &. Disburg, J. E. (1992). Listening instruction in selected colleges
and universities. International Listening Association Journal. 6:1, 59-65
doi:10.1080/10904018.1992.10499108
Wolvin, A. D., Coakley C. G., &. Disburg, J. E. (1990). The status of listening instruction in
American colleges and universities. International Listening Association Journal.
LISTENING INSTRUCTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
18
Appendix A
Listening Instruction Survey Questions
R¹ Which regionally accredited colleges has a standalone listening course or listening as a
unit within another course ?
1. What is the name of your institution?
2. Where is its location? City_________ State__________
3. Is listening instruction offered as a standalone course?
4. Is listening instruction offered as a unit within another course?
R² What percentage of time is spent in each of the three listening dimensions of affective,
cognitive, and behavioral?
5. What percentage of time of the whole course or unit is spent teaching the affective dimension
of listening?
6. What percentage of time of the whole course or unit is spent teaching the cognitive dimension
of listening?
7. What percentage of time of the whole course or unit is spent teaching the behavioral
dimension of listening?
R³ To what degree has the instructor(s) of the listening course had training in listening
instruction?
8. General overview?
9. Certification, special classes, seminars?
10. No training?