EFL learners’ willingness to communicate in speaking activities in online and face-to-face English lessons in Turkish context

Yıl 2023, Sayı: Ö12, 515 - 529, 23.07.2023

Melike Bozca , Didem Koban Koç

https://doi.org/10.29000/rumelide.1330568

Öz

The purpose of this study is to explore the participants’ general willingness to communicate (WTC) levels in communicative pair or small group activities in English lessons which were taught via different mediums like face-to-face or online (during the COVID-19 pandemic). In order to address this aim, a quantitative research method was adopted in the study. A total of 88 students enrolled at the School of Foreign Languages of Izmir Institute of Technology participated in the study. The quantitative data were gathered from the participants through a questionnaire (WTC in English scale, by Peng & Woodrow, 2010). The results showed that all the participants had a moderate level of WTC in English. The study provides several recommendations for researchers, institutions and language teachers.

Anahtar Kelimeler

English as a foreign language, willingness to communicate, communicative activities, speaking, face-to-face education, online education

Kaynakça

• Başöz, T., & Erten, I. H. (2018). Investigating tertiary level EFL learners' willingness to communicate in English. English Language Teaching, 11(3), 78-87.
• Bektas-Cetinkaya, Y. (2005). Turkish college students' willingness to communicate in English as a foreign language (Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University).
• Bergil, A. S. (2016). The influence of willingness to communicate on overall speaking skills among EFL learners. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 177-187.
• Burgoon, J. K. (1976). The unwillingness‐to‐communicate scale: Development and validation. Communications Monographs, 43(1), 60-69.
• Bursali, N., & Öz, H. (2017). The Relationship between ideal L2 self and willingness to communicate inside the classroom. International Journal of Higher Education, 6(4), 229-239.
• 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.
• Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
• Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.
• Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Kang, S. J. (2005). Dynamic emergence of situational willingness to communicate in a second language. System, 33, 277-292
• Lee, J. S. (2019). EFL students’ views of willingness to communicate in the extramural digital context. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(7), 692-712.
• Littlewood, W. (2004). Students’ Perspectives on Interactive Learning. In O.Kwo, T.Moore & J.Jones (Eds). Developing Environments in Higher Education. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
• MacIntyre, P. D. (1994). Variables underlying willingness to communicate: A causal analysis. Communication Research Reports, 11(2), 135-142.
• 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(4), 564-576.
• 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. The Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 545-562.
• MacIntyre, P., & Charos, C. (1996). Personality, attitudes, and affect as predictors of second language communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15(1), 3- 26.
• McCroskey, J. C. (1992). Reliability and validity of the willingness to communicate scale. Communication Quarterly, 40(1), 16-25.
• McCroskey, J. C., & Baer, J. E. (1985). Willingness to communicate: The construct and its measurement. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Speech Communication Association, Denver. 3-11.
• McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1982). Communication apprehension and shyness: Conceptual and operational distinctions. Central States Speech Journal,33(3), 458-468.
• McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1987). Willingness to communicate. In J. C.McCroskey & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Personality and interpersonal communication (pp. 129-156). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Öz, H., Demirezen, M., & Pourfeiz, J. (2015). Willingness to communicate of EFL learners in Turkish context. Learning and Individual Differences, 37, 269-275.
• Peng, J. & Woodrow, L. (2010). Willingness to communicate in English: A model in the Chinese EFL classroom context. Language Learning, 60(4), 834-876.
• Savaşçı, M. (2014). Why are Some Students Reluctant to Use L2 in EFL Speaking Classes? An Action Research at Tertiary Level. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 2682-2686.
• Weaver, C. (2005). Using the Rasch model to develop a measure of second language learners’ willingness to communicate within a language classroom. Journal of Applied Measurement, 6(4), 396–415.
• Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 54-66