The alleged values of the basic speech course are numerous and varied.¹ Not the least of the values frequently attributed to the basic course is that it improves students' confidence in themselves as speakers. Since students presumably learn what constitutes good speaking and engage in speech making in most basic courses, they are presumed to become more confident in their speaking ability by the end of a basic course than they were at its beginning.

Although most of us in the speech profession probably agree that the basic speech course increases students' confidence in their speaking ability, some scholars, both inside and outside our profession, doubt that the basic speech course as it is usually taught has any value whatsoever. An examination of the literature indicates the availability of little empirical support for the belief that the basic speech course increases students' confidence in themselves as speakers. In order to obtain some evidence on this question, a study of the effect of the basic course on students' attitudes toward themselves as speakers was conducted.²

Procedure

Eight hundred twenty-three students enrolled in fifty sections of the basic speech course at Pennsylvania State University during the Fall term, 1965, were involved in the study.³ The students' attitudes toward themselves as speakers were measured at the beginning and end of the term. A six-item semantic differential for the concept "My Speaking Ability" was the measure in both cases. The polarized adjectives composing the semantic differential were good-bad, unqualified-qualified, admirable-deplorable, inferior-superior, expert-inexpert, and negative-positive. This semantic differential was administered along with four other attitude measures during the first week and the last week of the course.

Factor analysis of the semantic differential responses indicated that the measure was single factored. The only significant factor accounted for 87 percent of the response variance. Hoyt internal consistency reliability estimates for the first week and tenth-week measures were .92 and .93 respectively.⁴

The major hypothesis tested was: There is no difference between students' attitude toward themselves as speakers at the beginning of a basic speech course and their attitude toward themselves as speakers at the end of the course.

A secondary hypothesis was also generated. Some members of our profession have expressed the opinion that students who are taught the basic speech course by graduate students do not receive as much benefit from the course as do students who are taught by instructors or senior staff members. This justification is frequently alleged for instituting televised or "mass lecture" basic speech courses. Therefore, the second hypothesis tested was: There are no differences in end-of-course attitudes of students toward their speaking ability among students taught by senior staff members, students taught by instructors, and students taught by graduate assistants.

Hypothesis one was tested by computing correlated t-tests of the differences between the mean beginning-of-course attitudes and the mean end-of-course attitudes and the mean end-of-course attitudes of the male students, the female students, and the total group.⁵ In order to test hypothesis two, one-factor analysis of covariance of end-of-course attitudes was computed. The covariate was beginning-of-course attitudes. The three levels of course instructor were analyzed.⁶ Subsequent t-tests were computed for each instructor level.

Results

Hypothesis One: There is no difference between students' attitudes toward themselves as speakers at the beginning of a basic speech course and their attitude toward themselves as speakers at the end of the course. This hypothesis was rejected. As indicated in Table I, t-tests of mean differences in beginning and end-of-term attitudes for males, females, and the total group resulted in t's significant at the .001 level in all three cases. The students attitudes toward themselves as speakers were considerably more favorable at the end of the course than they were at the beginning of it.

*The lower the score the more favorable the attitude. The hypothetical neutral point on the measure is 24.0.

**p < .001.

Hypothesis Two: There are no differences in end-of-course attitudes of students toward their speaking ability among students taught by senior staff members, students taught by instructors, and students taught by graduate assistants. This hypothesis cannot be rejected. The analysis of covariance of the end-of-term attitudes of the students taught by the three levels of basic course instructors resulted in an "F" of .83, which is clearly non-significant. A subsequent analysis, as reported in Table 2, indicated that students taught by all three levels of course instructor were significantly more confident in their speaking ability at the end of the term than they were at the beginning. Although an observed difference between instructor levels was not statistically significant, the direction of the difference indicates that students taught by graduate students may have improved their confidence in their speaking ability slightly more than either of the other two groups. While this finding certainly is not evidence of the superiority of graduate student teachers over other basic course instructors, it provides no support for the allegation that students who are taught by graduate students receive reduced benefits from the course.⁷

Conclusions

On the basis of the results reported here, we may conclude that one of the benefits derived by a student in a basic course in speech is increased confidence in his speaking ability. While this conclusion does not necessarily mean that the student will improve his speaking ability, we may suspect that this will be the case. If confidence is closely related to effective speaking, as suggested in many of our textbooks, it seems reasonable to believe that the speaking ability of the students in the above study was also improved by the basic course.

*The lower the score the more favorable the attitude. The hypothetical neutral point on the measure is 24.0.

**p < .001.

Finally, on the basis of the results of this report, we have no reason to believe that students taught by graduate assistants receive less benefit from a basic speech course than do students taught by other course instructors.

1. Donald E. Hargis, "The First Course in Speech," Speech Teacher, V (January, 1956), 26-33 and Hugh F. Seabury, "Objectives and Scope of the Fundamentals Course in Speech in High School," Speech Teacher, III (March, 1954), 117-120.

2. The study underlying this report was part of a broader study of the effect of the basic speech course on student attitudes conducted on behalf of the Department of Speech of Pennsylvania State University. See James C. McCroskey, "Speech 200 Student Attitude Survey," Research Report 66-I, Department of Speech, Pennsylvania State University, January, 1966.

3. The basic speech course at the Pennsylvania State University is required of all students attending the University. Students from all curricula, from first term freshmen through twelfth term seniors, were enrolled in the sections studied.

4. This reliability estimate is based on an analysis of variance model. J. P. Guilford, Psychometric Methods, 2nd ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1954).

5. All computations were completed with the assistance of the Computation Center at Pennsylvania State University. The Computation Center Library program T-CE, was used in this analysis.

6. The Computation Center Library program, COV, was used in this analysis.

7. The generalizability of this finding beyond the institution in which the study was conducted may be limited. Inexperienced graduate assistantships in the Department of Speech at the Pennsylvania State University must complete a teaching internship program before they are permitted to teach the basic course without supervision by a senior staff member. All graduate assistants in this study had completed the internship program during the year previous to the study underlying this report.

Click Here To Go Back To PERIODICALS