Perceptions of Situational Factors of Willingness to Communicate inside and outside the classroom: Thai EFL First-Year University Students’ Reflections

封面

如何引用文章

全文:

详细

Background: Although previous studies have reported WTC variables in the EFL context, limited studies have investigated learners’ perceptions of WTC outside the classroom. In addition, insights into learners’ perceptions from qualitative data have rarely been presented in this study area.

Purpose: This study investigated the perceptions of willingness to communicate (WTC) of Thai English as a Foreign Language (EFL) first-year university students. It focused on their perceptions of situational factors of WTC inside and outside the classroom. Also, it investigated the reasons behind the perceptions.

Methods: As a mixed-method study, a questionnaire adapted from Baghaei’s (2013) and Peng and Woodrow’s (2010) was used to collect quantitative data, while reflective reports and semi-structured interviews were used to reveal explanations for the quantitative data.

Results: The present study found that the students were more willing to speak outside the classroom than inside the classroom. Interlocutors were significant factors affecting WTC both inside and outside the classroom. Also, speaking topics that are suitable for students' perceived level of proficiency but still pose a challenge for their language development have the potential to increase WTC in the classroom.  At the same time, a stimulating environment was powerful for WTC outside the classroom due to a lack of an English-speaking environment in the EFL context. The qualitative data revealed that foreign language anxiety concerning the interlocutor’s competence, familiarity with the interlocutor, and language classroom experiences, as well as social support from friends, were the rationale behind the impact of the situational factors.

Conclusion: Teachers can apply the results of this present study to enhance WTC in the classroom and increase students’ opportunities to speak inside and outside the classroom through pedagogical support.

作者简介

S. Rotjanawongchai

Prince of Songkla University, Trang Campus, Thailand

编辑信件的主要联系方式.
Email: katibbchan@gmail.com

参考

  1. Ahn, T. Y., & Lee, S. M. (2016). User experience of a mobile speaking application with automatic speech recognition for EFL learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(4), 778-786. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12354
  2. Aomr, J. A., Seng, G. H., & Kapol, N. (2020). Relationship between willingness to communicate in English and classroom environment among Libyan EFL Learners. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(2), 605-610. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080232
  3. Baghaei, P. (2013). Development and psychometric evaluation of a multidimensional scale of willingness to communicate in a foreign language. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28(3), 1087-1103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-012-0157-y
  4. Baker, S. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2000). The role of gender and immersion in communication and Second language orientations. Language Learning, 50(2), 311-341. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00119
  5. Barjesteh, H., Vaseghi, R., & Neissi, S. (2012). Iranian EFL Learners' willingness to communicate across different context- and receiver-types. International Journal of English Linguistics, 2(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v2n1p47
  6. Barrios, E., & Acosta-Manzano, I. (2021). Factors predicting classroom WTC in English and French as foreign languages among adult learners in Spain. Language Teaching Research, 0(0). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211054046
  7. Basoz, T., & Erten, I. H. (2018). Investigating tertiary level EFL learners' willingness to communicate in English. English Language Teaching, 11(3), 78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v11n3p78
  8. Birkner, V. (2021). Determination of revisiting input and output hypotheses in second language learning. Modern Perspectives in Language, Literature and Education, 9, 22-26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9734/bpi/mplle/v9/4158f
  9. Cao, Y., & Philp, J. (2006).Interactional context and willingness to communicate: A comparison of behavior in whole class, group and dyadic interaction. System, 34(4), 480-493. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2006.05.002
  10. Chang, F. (2011). The causes of learners' reticence and passivity in English classrooms in Taiwan. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 8(1), 1-22.
  11. Chung, J. H. (2021). We Participate, Silently: Explicating Thai university students' perceptions of their classroom participation and communication. Qualitative Research in Education, 10(1), 62-87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17583/qre.2021.7159
  12. Clark, R. (2017). Convenience Sample. In G. Ritzer (Ed), The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology (pp. 1-2). John Wiley & Sons.
  13. Clément, R., Baker, S.C., & MacIntyre, P.D. (2003). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The effects of context, norms, and vitality. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 22(2), 190-209. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927x03022002003
  14. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education. Routledge.
  15. Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage Publications.
  16. Croasmun, J. T., & Ostrom, L. (2011). Using Likert-type scales in the social sciences. Journal of Adult Education, 40(1), 19-22.
  17. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2013).Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer Science & Business Media.
  18. Denies, K., Yashima, T., & Janssen, R. (2015). Classroom versus societal willingness to communicate: Investigating French as a second language in Flanders. The Modern Language Journal, 99(4), 718-739. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12276
  19. Dewaele, J.M., & Dewaele, L. (2018) Learner-internal and learner-external predictors of willingness to communicate in the FL classroom. Journal of the European Second Language Association, 2(1), 24-37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22599/jesla.37
  20. Donald, S. (2010). Learning how to speak: Reticence in the ESL classroom. The Annual Review of Education, Communication, and Language Sciences, 7, 41-58.
  21. Doqaruni, V. R. (2015). Increasing Confidence to Decrease Reticence: A Qualitative Action Research in Second Language Education. The Canadian Journal of Action Research, 16(3), 42-60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33524/cjar.v16i3.227
  22. Dorman, J. P., Fisher, D. L., & Waldrip, B. G. (2006). Learning environments, attitudes, efficacy and perceptions of assessment: A LISREL analysis. In D. L. Fisher & M. S. Khine (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to research on learning environments (pp. 1-28). World Scientific.
  23. Evers, K., & Chen, S. (2022). Effects of an automatic speech recognition system with peer feedback on pronunciation instruction for adults.Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(8), 1869-1889. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1839504
  24. Harumi, S. (2020). Approaches to interacting with classroom silence: the role of teacher talk. In J. King and S. Harumi (Eds.), East Asian Perspectives on Silence in English Language Education (pp. 37-59). Multilingual Matters.
  25. Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70, 125-132.
  26. Jackson, J. (2002). Reticence in second language case discussion: Anxiety and aspirations. System, 30, 65-84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0346-251x(01)00051-3
  27. Jager, J., Putnick, D. L., & Bornstein, M. H. (2017). II. More than just convenient: The scientific merits of homogeneous convenience samples. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 82(2), 13-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/mono.12296
  28. Jung, H. K. (2011). The correction of learner's English pronunciation errors through speech recognition reading program. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning, 14(3), 291-314.
  29. Kang, S. J. (2005). Dynamic emergence of situational willingness to communicate in a second language. System, 33(2), 277-292. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.10.004
  30. Karnchanachari, S. (2019). An investigation into learners' willingness to communicate in English in the classroom: A study of Thai EFL students in the Thai and international programs. rEFLections, 26(2), 84-106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.61508/refl.v26i2.241757
  31. Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Addison-Wesley Longman Limited.
  32. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2001). Toward a postmethod pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 35(4), 537-560. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3588427
  33. Lee, J. S., & Hsieh, J. S. (2019). Affective variables and willingness to communicate of EFL learners in in-class, out-of-class, and digital contexts. System, 82, 63-73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.03.002
  34. Li, H., & Liu, Y. (2011). A brief study of reticence in ESL class. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1(8), 961-965. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.1.8.961-965
  35. Liu, M., & Jackson, J. (2008). An exploration of Chinese EFL learners' unwillingness to communicate and foreign language anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 92, 71-86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00687.x
  36. MacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clément, R., & Conrod, S. (2001). Willingness to communicate, social support, and language-learning orientations of immersion students. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23(3), 369-388. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263101003035
  37. MacIntyre, P. D., Dörnyei, Z., Clément, R., & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 545-562. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb05543.x
  38. MacIntyre, P. D., & Charos, C. (1996). Personality, attitudes, and affect as predictors of second language communication.
  39. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15, 3-26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X960151001
  40. MacIntyre, P.D. (2007). Willingness to Communicate in the second language: Understanding the decision to speak as a volitional process. The Modern Language Journal, 91, 564-576. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00623.x
  41. Mai, X., & Fan, Y. (2021). An empirical study of the willingness to communicate in college English classes from an ecological perspective. Creative Education, 12(9), 2056-2065. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2021.129157
  42. McCroskey, J. C. (1992). Reliability and validity of the willingness to communicate scale.Communication Quarterly, 40(1), 16-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379209369817
  43. Mills, A. J., Durepos, G. & Wiebe, E. (2010). Encyclopedia of case study research. Sage Publications.
  44. Nemoto, T., & Beglar, D. (2014). Developing Likert-scale questionnaires. In N. Sonda & A. Krause (Eds.), JALT2013 Conference Proceedings (pp. 1-8). JALT.
  45. Pattapong, K. (2015).Complex Interactions of Factors Underlying Thai EFL Learners' willingness to communicate in English. PASAA: Journal of Language Teaching and Learning in Thailand, 49, 105-136.
  46. Pattapong, K. (2010). Willingness to communicate in a second language: A qualitative study of issues affecting Thai EFL learners from students' and teachers' point of view [Doctoral dissertation, University of Sydney]. Sydney Digital Thesis. https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/handle/2123/9244.
  47. Pawlak, M., Mystkowska-Wiertelak, A., & Bielak, J. (2016). Investigating the nature of classroom willingness to communicate (WTC): A micro-perspective. Language Teaching Research, 20(5), 654-671. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815609615
  48. Peng, J., & Woodrow, L. J. (2010). Willingness to communicate in English: A model in Chinese EFL classroom context. Language Learning, 60(4), 834 876. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00576.x
  49. Peng, J. (2019). The roles of multimodal pedagogic effects and classroom environment in willingness to communicate in English, System, 82, 161-173. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.04.006
  50. Peng, J. E. (2014). Willingness to communicate in the Chinese EFL university classroom: An ecological perspective (vol. 76). Multilingual Matters. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783091560
  51. Revilla, M. A., Saris, W. E., & Krosnick, J. A. (2014). Choosing the number of categories in agree-disagree scales. Sociological Methods & Research, 43(1), 73-97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124113509605
  52. Riasati, M. J. (2012). EFL learners' perception of factors influencing willingness to speak English in language classrooms: A qualitative study. World Applied Sciences Journal, 17(10), 1287-1297.
  53. Riasati, M. J. (2014). Causes of reticence: Engendering willingness to speak in language classrooms.International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 3(1), 115-122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsll.2013.410
  54. Schiefele, U. (1991).Interest, learning, and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(3-4), 299-323.
  55. Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford University Press.
  56. Sudina, E. (2023). Scale quality in second-language anxiety and WTC: A methodological synthesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1-29. https://. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263122000560
  57. Talandis, G., & Stout, M. (2015). Getting EFL students to speak: An action research approach. ELT Journal, 69(1), 11-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccu037
  58. Tanaka, K. (2007). Japanese students' contact with English outside the classroom during study abroad. New Zealand Studies in Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 36-54.
  59. Tantiwich, K., & Sinwongsuwat, K. (2021). Thai university students' problems of language use in English conversation. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 14(2), 598-626.
  60. Tavakoli, M., & Zarrinabadi, N. (2018). Differential effects of explicit and implicit corrective feedback on EFL learners' willingness to communicate. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 12(3), 247-259. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2016.1195391
  61. Todd, R. W. (2011). Analyzing and interpreting rating scale data from questionnaires. rEFLections, 14, 69-77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.61508/refl.v14i0.114230
  62. Vanderlinde, R., & van Braak, J. (2010). The gap between educational research and practice: Views of teachers, school leaders, intermediaries and researchers. British Educational Research Journal, 36(2), 299-316. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920902919257
  63. Weda, S., Atmowardoyo, H., Rahman, F., Said, M. M., & Sakti, A. E. F. (2021). Factors affecting students' willingness to communicate in EFL classroom at higher institution in Indonesia.International Journal of Instruction, 14(2), 719-734. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14240a
  64. Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Child Psychiatry, 17, 89-100.
  65. Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 54-66.
  66. Yashima, T., MacIntyre, P. D., & Ikeda, M. (2016). Situated willingness to communicate in an L2: Interplay of individual characteristics and context. Language Teaching Research, 22(1), 115-137. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816657851
  67. Zarrinabadi, N. (2014).Communicating in a second language: Investigating the effect of teacher on learners' willingness to communicate. System, 42, 288-295. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.12.014
  68. Zhang, X., & Head, K. (2010). Dealing with learner reticence in the speaking class. ELT Journal, 64(1), 1-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp018

补充文件

附件文件
动作
1. JATS XML
下载


Creative Commons License
此作品已接受知识共享署名 4.0国际许可协议的许可