The Influence of Ideal L2 self, Academic Self- Concept and Intercultural Communicative Competence on Willingness to Communicate in a Foreign Language

Year 2016, Volume: 2 Issue: 2, 27 - 46, 15.09.2016

Arzu Kanat-mutluoğlu

https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.461012

Cited By: 11

Abstract

The intriguing nature of willingness to communicate in a second/foreign language (L2 WTC) inspires

researchers to explore the concepts affecting the development of L2 WTC. In line with this tendency, the

current study aimed to find out the predicting effect of three self-guided motivational units, namely, ideal

L2 self, academic self-concept and levels of intercultural communicative competence (ICC) on L2 WTC.

173 university-level learners of English, who enrolled in an intensive English language program,

participated in this quantitative study. The concern of participants related to their own ideal L2 self was

measured by means of Ideal L2 Self Measurement while academic self-concept and ICC levels were

elicited through specifically developed questionnaires. L2 WTC was measured by a WTC scale. Through

the statistical analysis of data, it was discovered that each of the self-guided motivational units had

positive correlations with each other. Moreover, multiple regression analysis indicated that ideal L2 self

was the best predictor of L2 WTC while academic self-concept also had a significant predicting effect on

L2 WTC. The study concludes that the knowledge of learners’ ideal L2 self and academic self-concept

would enable teachers to have a clearer idea of learners’ L2 WTC and to take necessary precautions in order to increase learners’ willingness.

Keywords

L2 willingness to communicate; ideal L2 self; academic self-concept; intercultural communicative competence

References

• Alptekin, C. (2002). Towards intercultural communicative competence. ELT Journal, 56(1), 57-64. doi: 10.1093/elt/56.1.57
• Bandura, S. A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Barraclough, R.A., Christophel, D.M., & McCroskey, J. C. (1988). Willingness to communicate: A cross‐cultural investigation. Communication Research Reports, 5(2), 187-192.
• Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really? Educational Psychology Review, 5(1), 1-40.
• Brown, E. L. (2004). The relationship of self-concepts to changes in cultural diversity awareness: Implications for urban teacher educators. The Urban View, 36(2), 119-145.
• Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching. New York: Pearson.
• Burden, R. L. (2012). Handbook to the myself-as-a-learner-scale (MALS). Exeter: Exeter Cognitive Education Centre.
• Byram, M. (1997) ‘Culture awareness’ as vocabulary learning. Language Learning Journal, 16, 51–57.
• Byrne, B. M. (1984). The general/academic self-concept nomological network: A review of construct validation research. Review of Educational Research, 54(3), 427-456.
• Canagarajah, A. (1999). Interrogating the “native speaker fallacy”: Non-linguistic roots, non-pedagogical results. In Braine, G. (1999) (Ed.), Non-native educators in English language teaching (pp. 77-92). Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
• Chen, G.M., & Starosta, W. J. (1999). A review of the concept of intercultural awareness. Human Communication, 2, 27-54.
• Clément, R., Baker, S. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2003). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The effects of contexts, norms, and vitality. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 22(2), 190-209.
• Csizer, K., & Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The internal structure of language learning motivation and its relationship with language choice and learning effort. The Modern Language Journal 89(1), 19-36.
• Csizer, K., & Lukacs, G. (2010). The comparative analysis of motivation, attitudes and selves: The case of English and German in Hungary. System, 38, 1–13.
• De Fraine, B., Van Damme, J., & Onghena, P. (2007). A longitudinal analysis of gender differences in academic self-concept and language achievement: A multivariate multilevel latent growth approach. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 132–150.
• Demir-Ayaz, A. (2016). The relationship between foreign language learners' future second language (L2) self-guides, language learning motivation and achievement. Unpublished master's thesis. Hacettepe University, Turkey.
• De Saint Leger, D., & Storch, N. (2009). Learners perceptions and attitudes: Implications for willingness to communicate in an L2 classroom. System, 37(2), 269-285.
• Deardorff, D.K. (2006). Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization. Journal of Studies in International Education, 10, 241-266.
• Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Dörnyei, & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 9-42). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
• Dörnyei, Z. (2014). Motivation in second language learning. In M. Celce-Murcia, D. M. Brinton & M. A. Snow (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 518-531). Boston, MA: National Geographic Learning/Cengage Learning.
• Dörnyei, Z., & Taguchi, T. (2010). Questionnaires in second language research: construction, administration, and processing (2nd ed.). London: Taylor and Francis.
• Dweck, C.S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality and development. Taylor & Francis: Philadelphia, PA.
• Erten, İ. H., & Burden, R. L. (2014). The relationship between academic self-concept, attributions, and L2 achievement. System, 42, 391-401.
• Gu, M. M., & Cheung, D. S. (2016). Ideal L2 self, acculturation, and Chinese language learning among South Asian students in Hong Kong: A structural equation modeling analysis. System, 57, 14-24.
• 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.
• Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94 (3), 319-340.
• Huang, C. (2011). Self-concept and academic achievement: A meta-analysis of longitudinal relations. Journal of School Psychology, 49 (5), 505-528.
• Huang, H.T., Hsu, C.C., & Chen, S.W. (2015). Identification with social role obligations, possible selves, and L2 motivation in foreign language learning. System, 51, 28-38.
• Hymes, D. (1967). Models of the interaction of language and social setting. Journal of Social Issues, 23(2), 8-28.
• Jonkmann, K., Becker, M., Marsh, H. W. Lüdtke, O., & Trautwein, U. (2012). Personality traits moderate the Big-Fish-Little-Pond-Effect of academic self-concept. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 736-746.
• Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and culture in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Lanvers, U. (2016). Lots of selves, some rebellious: Developing the self-discrepancy model for language learners. System, 60, 79-92.
• Liddicoat, A. (2002). Static and dynamic views of culture and intercultural language acquisition. Babel, 36(3), 4-11.
• Linder, R. (2010). Introducing a micro-skills approach to intercultural approach to intercultural learning to an English for specific purposes course for students of sociology. Scripta Mament, 5(1-2), 9-24.
• Liu, W. C., & Wang, C. K. J. (2005). Academic self-concept: A cross-sectional study of grade and gender differences in a Singapore secondary school. Asia Pacific Education Review, 6(1), 20-27.
• MacIntyre, P. (1994). Variables underlying willingness to communicate: A causal analysis. Communication Research Reports, 11(2), 135-142.
• MacIntyre, P. (2007). Willingness to communicate in the second language: Understanding the decision to speak as a volitional process. The Modern Language Journal, 91(iv), 564-576.
• MacIntyre, P., & Charos, C. (1996). Personality, attitudes, and affect as predictors of second language communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 5, 3-26.
• MacIntyre, P., Baker, S. C., Clément, R., & Conrod, S. (2001). Willingness to communicate, social support, and language-learning orientations of immersion students. Studies on Second Language Acquisition, 23, 369-388.
• MacIntyre, P., Baker, S. C., Clement, R., & Donovan, L. A. (2002). Sex and age effects on willingness to communicate, anxiety, perceived competence, and L2 motivation among junior high school French immersion students. Language Learning, 52(3), 537-564.
• MacIntyre, P., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. Modern Language Journal, 82, 545-562.
• Markus, H.R. & Nurius, P. (1986) Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41, 954-969.
• Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T. and Kong, C.K. (2002). Multilevel casual ordering of academic self-concept and achievement: Influence of language of instruction (English compared with Chinese) for Hong Kong students. American Educational Research Journal, 39(3), 727-763.
• Marsh, H.W. and Craven, R.G. (2006).Reciprocal effects of self-concept and performance from a multidimensional perspective: Beyond seductive pleasure and unidimensional perspectives. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 133-163.
• McCroskey, J. C. (1992). Reliability and validity of the willingness to communicate scale. Communication Quarterly, 40, 16-25.
• McCroskey, J. C., & Baer, J. E. (1985). Willingness to communicate: The construct and its measurement. Paper presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Denwer, Co, USA.
• McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1987). Willingness to communicate. In J. C. McCroskey and J. A. Daly (Eds.), Personality and interpersonal communication (pp. 129-156). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1990). Willingness to communicate: a cognitive view. In M. Both-Butterfield (Ed.), Communication, cognition and anxiety (pp. 19–44). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Mirzaei A., & Forouzandeh, F. (2013). Relationship between intercultural communicative competence and L2- learning motivation of Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 42, 300-318.
• Nieto, S. (2010). Language, culture, and teaching: Critical perspectives (2nd ed.) New York: Routledge.
• Öz, H. (2015). Ideal L2 self as a predictor of intercultural communicative competence. Anthropologist, 19(1), 41-53.
• Öz, H. (2016). Role of the ideal L2 self in predicting willingness to communicate of EFL students. In İ. H. Mirici, İ. H. Erten, H. Öz, & I. Vodopija-Krstanovic (Eds.), Research papers as an Additional Language (pp. 163-182). Rijeka: Faculty of Humanities and Social Research.
• Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual. New York: Open University Press.
• Papi, M. (2010). The L2 motivational self system, L2 anxiety, and motivated behavior: A structural equation modeling approach. System, 38, 467–479.
• Pawlak, M., & Mystkowska-Wiertelak, A. (2015). Investigating the dynamic of L2 willingness to communicate. System, 50, 1-9.
• Peng, J. E. (2007). Willingness to communicate in an L2 and integrative motivation among college students in an Intensive English Language Program in China. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL, 2, 33-59.
• Pintrich, P.R., Smith, D.A.F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W.J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor, MI: National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning.
• Roach, K. D., & Olaniran, B. A. (2001). Intercultural willingness to communicate and communication anxiety in international teaching assistants. Communication Research Reports, 18(1), 26-35.
• Ryan, S. & Dörnyei, Z. (2013). The long-term evolution of language motivation and the L2 self. In A. Berndt (Ed.), Fremdsprachen in der perspektive lebenslangen lernens (pp. 89-100). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
• Ryan, S. (2006). Language learning motivation within the context of globalisation: An L2 self within an imagined global community. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 3(1), 23-45.
• Sert, O. (2015). Social interaction and L2 classroom discourse. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
• Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J. & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-concept: validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46(3), 407-441.
• Swales, J. M. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Weiner, B. (1992). Human motivation: Metaphors, theories, and research. Newbury Park: Sage.
• Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. The Modern Language Journal, 80(1), 55-66.
• Yashima, T., Zenuk-Nishide, L and Shimuzi, K. (2004). The influence of attitudes and affect on willingness to communicate and second language communication. Language Learning, 54(1), 119-152.