Advertisement

Classroom Interactions in the Target Language: Learners’ Perceptions, Willingness to Communicate, and Communication Behavior

  • Chaochang Wang
  • Wen-Ta Tseng
  • Yih-Lan Chen
  • Hsing-Fu ChengEmail author
Regular Article
  • 12 Downloads

Abstract

Research has provided evidence in support of the importance of the predictive effect of the willingness to communicate (WTC) on interactions in the classroom and shed light on the predictive sources of WTC. However, few studies have investigated learners’ perceptions of classroom interaction in the target language (L2 PCI), and few have considered how these perceptions relate to L2 WTC and actual classroom interaction. Hence, the present study aims at examining the causal relationships between L2 PCI, L2 WTC, and interaction behavior. Based on a critical review of literature, a structural equation model theorizing the causal links among the three factors was proposed for empirical testing. Three hundred and twenty-nine university students participated in the study. The results suggested that learners’ perceptions of group interaction and interaction with the teacher significantly predicted L2 WTC and classroom communication in the target language. It was further argued that the research findings had pronounced implications for both language pedagogy and research.

Keywords

Classroom interaction L2 willingness to communicate L2 communication behavior Learners’ perceptions SEM 

Notes

References

  1. Alemi, M., & Pahmforoosh, R. (2013). EFL learners’ willingness to communicate: The interplay between language learning anxiety and language proficiency. International Journal of English Linguistics,11(2), 23–34.Google Scholar
  2. Bentler, P. M., & Wu, E. (2006). EQS for Windows V6.1. Los Angeles, CA: Multivariate Software.Google Scholar
  3. Bollen, K. A. (1987). Total, direct, and indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology,17, 37–69.  https://doi.org/10.2307/271028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown, A. V. (2009). Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of effective foreign language teaching: A comparison of ideals. Modern Language Journal,93(1), 46–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin,112, 155–159.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dörnyei, Z., & Kormos, J. (2000). The role of individual and social variables in oral task performance. Language Teaching Research,4(3), 275–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwa, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  9. Ellis, R., Tanaka, Y., & Yamazaki, A. (1994). Classroom interaction, comprehension, and the acquisition of L2 word meanings. Language Learning,44(3), 449–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research,18(3), 382–388.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3150980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fushino, K. (2010). Causal relationships between communication confidence, beliefs about group work, and willingness to communicate in foreign language group work. TESOL Quarterly: A Journal For Teachers Of English To Speakers Of Other Languages And Of Standard English As A Second Dialect,44(4), 700–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2001). SPSS for windows: A simple guide and reference. Needham Heights, MA: Pearson Education Company.Google Scholar
  13. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). London: Pearson.Google Scholar
  14. Hashimoto, Y. (2002). Motivation and willingness to communicate as predictors of reported L2 use: The Japanese ESL context. Second Language Studies,20(2), 29–70.Google Scholar
  15. Hawkey, R. (2006). Teacher and learner perceptions of language learning activity. ELT Journal,60(3), 242–252.  https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccl004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hymes, D. (1971). Competence and performance in linguistic theory. In R. Huxley & E. Ingram (Eds.), Language acquisition: Models and methods (pp. 3–24). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  17. Khajavy, G. H., Ghonsooly, B., Hosseini Fatemi, A., & Choi, C. W. (2016). Willingness to communicate in english: A microsystem model in the Iranian EFL classroom context. TESOL Q,50, 154–180.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
  19. Kuhl, P. K., Tsao, F. M., & Liu, H. M. (2003). Foreign-language experience in infancy: Effects of short-term exposure and social interaction on phonetic learning. PNAS,100(15), 9096–9101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kuo, I. (2011). Student perceptions of student interaction in a British EFL setting. ELT Journal: English Language Teaching Journal,65(3), 281–290.  https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccq063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lantolf, J., & Thorn, S. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  23. Lu, Y. W. (2010). Interaction, motivation, and effectiveness (Unpublished MA paper). Taiwan: Ming Chuan University.Google Scholar
  24. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 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.  https://doi.org/10.2307/330224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction, and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,21(4), 557–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mackey, A. (2006). Feedback, noticing and instructed second language learning. Applied Linguistics,27(3), 405–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McCroskey, J. C. (1992). Reliability and validity of the willingness to communicate scale. Communication Quarterly,40(1), 16–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Peacock, M. (1998). The links between learner beliefs, teacher beliefs, and EFL proficiency. Perspectives: Working Papers,10(1), 125–159.Google Scholar
  30. Peng, J., & Woodrow, L. (2010). Willingness to communicate in english: A model in the Chinese EFL Classroom Context. Language Learning,60, 834–876.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00576.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Peng, J. (2014). Willingness to communicate in the Chinese EFL university classroom: An ecological perspective. Tonawanda, NY: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Polio, C. G., & Gass, S. M. (1997). Replication and reporting: A commentary. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,19(4), 499–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Polio, C. G., & Gass, S. M. (1998). The role of interaction on native speaker comprehension of nonnative speaker speech. The Modern Language Journal,82(3), 308–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sun, Y. F. (2008). Motivation to speak: Perception and attitude of non-Englishmajor students in Taiwan (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Indiana University.Google Scholar
  35. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–256). Newbury House: Rowley, MA.Google Scholar
  36. Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Social cultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97–114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Wang, C. (2017). Two affective variables and language learners’ perceptions of classroom interaction. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 14(1), 16–31.  https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2017.14.1.2.16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zhou, N. (2015). Oral participation in EFL classroom: Perspectives from the administrator, teachers and learners at a Chinese university. System,53, 35–46.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.06.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© De La Salle University 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chaochang Wang
    • 1
  • Wen-Ta Tseng
    • 2
  • Yih-Lan Chen
    • 1
  • Hsing-Fu Cheng
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Applied EnglishMing Chuan UniversityTaoyuan CityTaiwan, ROC
  2. 2.Department of Applied Foreign LanguagesNational Taiwan University of Science and TechnologyTaipei CityTaiwan, ROC

Personalised recommendations