”I fear being exposed as an imposter who cannot really speak English”
Foreign Language Anxiety among Finnish University Learners of English
Oravuo, Saara Pro gradu thesis
University of Eastern Finland Philosophical Faculty
School of Humanities English Language and Culture
2021
ITÄ-SUOMEN YLIOPISTO – UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND
Tiedekunta – Faculty
Filosofinen tiedekunta – Philosophical Faculty
Osasto – School
Humanistinen osasto – School of Humanities Tekijät – Author
Saara Oravuo Työn nimi – Title
”I fear being exposed as an imposter, who cannot really speak English” Foreign Language Anxiety among Finnish University Learners of English
Pääaine – Main subject Englannin kieli ja kulttuuri – English language and culture
Työn laji – Level Päivämäärä –
Date Sivumäärä – Number of pages
Pro gradu -tutkielma x 24.5.2021 I–VII Sivuainetutkielma 118
Kandidaatin tutkielma Aineopintojen tutkielma Tiivistelmä – Abstract
Tutkin pro gradu -tutkielmassani suomalaisten yliopisto-opiskelijoiden kokeman kieliahdistuksen (foreign language anxiety, lyh. FLA) määrää, piirteitä, lähteitä, sekä siihen vaikuttavia tekijöitä. Vertailin tutkimuksessani Itä-Suomen yliopistossa Joensuun kampuksella opiskelevien ja suomea äidinkielenään puhuvien englannin kielen pääaineopiskelijoiden sekä muiden aineiden pääaineopiskelijoiden kokemaa kieliahdistusta. Aiemmat tutkimukset ovat osoittaneet, että kieliahdistus vaikuttaa kielen oppimiseen ja että pahimmillaan kieliahdistus voi heikentää kielen oppimista. Kieliahdistusta on tutkittu Suomessa melko vähän, ja vain muutamissa Suomessa tehdyissä tutkimuksissa on tutkittu yliopistotason englannin oppijoita. Tämä tutkimus vastaa kyseiseen tutkimuksen puutteeseen. Tutkimus pyrkii vastamaan seuraaviin tutkimuskysymyksiin:
1. Kuinka paljon kieliahdistusta suomalaiset yliopistotason englannin oppijat kokevat?
2. Mitkä ovat suomalaisten yliopistotason englannin oppijoiden kokeman kieliahdistuksen merkittävimpiä piirteitä tai siihen vaikuttavia tekijöitä, ja mistä kieliahdistus johtuu?
3. Miten englannin pääaineopiskelijoiden ja muiden aineiden pääaineopiskelijoiden kieliahdistuksen määrä, piirteet, lähteet sekä siihen vaikuttavat tekijät eroavat?
Tutkimuksessa hyödynnettiin pääasiassa kvantitatiivisia tutkimusmenetelmiä (tilastollinen analyysi), mutta niitä täydennettiin myös kvalitatiivisella menetelmillä (sisällönanalyysi). Aineistonkeruumenetelmänä käytettiin kyselylomaketta, joka koostui taustatietokyselystä, Finnish Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale -mittarista (Finnish FLCAS), sekä avokysymyksistä. Kyselyyn vastanneista 125 opiskelijaa (73 englannin kielen pääaineopiskelijaa ja 52 muiden aineiden pääaineopiskelijaa) soveltui tutkimushenkilöiksi.
Tulokset osoittivat, että sekä englannin kielen pääaineopiskelijat että muiden aineiden pääaineopiskelijat olivat suurimmaksi osaksi vain hieman ahdistuneita englannin kielen luennoilla tai harjoitustapaamisissa. Kuitenkin muiden aineiden opiskelijat kokivat merkittävästi enemmän ahdistusta kuin englannin kielen opiskelijat, ja kieliahdistuksen määrä osoittautuikin merkittävimmäksi eroksi näiden kahden ryhmän välillä. Lisäksi tuloksista selvisi, että kyseisten opiskelijoiden keskuudessa kieliahdistuksen merkittävimmät piirteet liittyvät puhutun kielen tuottamiseen, virheiden tekemisen tai huonojen arviointien pelkoon, sekä luokkahuonetilanteeseen. Tulokset osoittivat myös, että opiskelijat kokevat kieliahdistuksen johtuvan persoonaan liittyvistä ominaisuuksista (esim. perfektionismi), puutteellisesta kielitaidosta, tai opettajan käytöksestä ja opetusmenetelmistä (esim. opiskelijan nöyryyttäminen muiden opiskelijoiden edessä).
Onnistuneen aineistonkeruun sekä monipuolisten tutkimusmenetelmien ansiosta tutkielmani antaa uutta ja yleistettävää tietoa suomalaisten yliopisto-opiskelijoiden kokemasta kieliahdistuksesta. Tutkimustuloksia voidaan hyödyntää esimerkiksi yliopistoissa kielten opetuksen kehittämisessä. Lisäksi tutkielmassa sovellettu Finnish FLCAS -mittari osoittautui toimivaksi ja luotettavaksi suomalaisten englannin kieltä opiskelevien yliopisto-opiskelijoiden kieliahdistuksen mittariksi, joten tätä mittaria voidaan hyödyntää vastaavissa tutkimuksissa tulevaisuudessa.
Tiivistelmä – Abstract
The aim of this pro gradu thesis is to study the degree of foreign language anxiety (FLA) its features, sources, and the factors that affect it among Finnish university learners of English. This study compares the FLA between English major and non-English major students in the University of Eastern Finland. Earlier studies suggest that FLA affects language learning, and that high levels of FLA can have debilitating effects on learning. FLA is not very widely researched in Finland, and only a few studies have focused on Finnish university learners of English. This study strives to bridge these gaps in research. This study aims to answer the following research questions:
1. What is the degree of FLA among Finnish university learners of English?
2. What are the most prominent features and sources of FLA among Finnish university learners of English and what factors affect it?
3. What differences can be found in the degree, features and sources of FLA between English majors and non- English majors?
The methods of analysis are mainly quantitative (statistical analysis), but also some qualitative methods (content analysis) were also utilized. The data was gathered via online questionnaire form, which consisted of a background questionnaire, the Finnish Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (Finnish FLCAS), and open-ended questions.
125 participants were found suitable for the study, of which 73 were English majors and 52 non-English majors.
The results suggest that both the English and the non-English majors experience relatively low levels of FLA in their English language lectures or classes in the university. However, the non-English majors were found to carry significantly higher levels of FLA than the English majors. Consequently, the most significant difference between the two learner groups was the degree of FLA. Furthermore, the results indicate the most prominent features of FLA among these learners are: fear of spoken communication, fear of negative evaluation or failure, and general anxiousness related to the classroom situation. The findings also suggest that the sources of FLA and the factors affecting it are related to personality (e.g. perfectionism), self-perceived TL skills, and the teachers’ behavior and instructional methods (e.g.
humiliating one student in front of other students).
Because of a successful data collection process and a versatile use of analysis methods this study provides us with new and generalizable information about the Finnish university students’ FLA. The findings may be utilized, for example, in the development of language teaching in Finnish universities. Moreover, the Finnish FLCAS proved to be a functional and reliable measurement tool of FLA experienced by Finnish university students, and therefore it can be utilized in similar studies in the future.
Avainsanat – Keywords
Foreign language anxiety, language learning, advanced language learners, FLCAS
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ... 1
2. Definitions and previous studies ... 6
2.1 Defining foreign language anxiety ... 6
2.2 The beginning of foreign language anxiety studies ... 10
2.3 Perspectives and approaches in foreign language anxiety studies ... 11
2.4 Recent studies in Finland and around the world ... 16
2.5 Measurements of foreign language anxiety ... 20
2.6 Pedagogical perspectives on the sources and implications of foreign language anxiety ... 23
3. Research questions ... 27
4. Methods and data ... 30
4.1 Research design ... 30
4.2 The participants ... 32
4.3 The instrument and the data collection procedure ... 34
4.4 Research ethics ... 40
5. Analysis and results ... 42
5.1 Implementation of the data collection and the reliability of the Finnish FLCAS ... 42
5.2 Analysis of the main variables ... 43
5.3 The degree of foreign language anxiety among Finnish university learners of English ... 55
5.4 The most prominent features and sources of foreign language anxiety and the factors affecting it among Finnish university learners of English ... 60
5.4.1 The most prominent features of foreign language anxiety ... 61
5.4.2 The sources of foreign language anxiety and the factors affecting it ... 66
5.5 The differences in degree, features and sources of foreign language anxiety between English majors and non-English majors ... 75
6. Discussion and conclusion ... 81
6.1 Overcoming foreign language anxiety ... 86
6.2 Limitations, accomplishments, and ideas for future research ... 90
References ... 93
Appendices ... 100
List of Tables
Table 1. English language competence level self-evaluations according to the CEFR levels ... 53
Table 2. Anxious personality self-evaluations ... 54
Table 3. Descriptive statistics for item-ratings and FLCAS scores: English majors ... 56
Table 4. Distribution of English majors according to item-ratings and FLCAS scores ... 57
Table 5. Descriptive statistics for item-ratings and FLCAS scores: Non-English majors ... 58
Table 6. Distribution of non-English majors according to item-ratings and FLCAS scores ... 58
Table 7. Finnish FLCAS items with the highest frequency of responses coded as 4 or 5: English majors ... 62
Table 8. Finnish FLCAS items with the highest frequency of responses coded as 4 or 5: Non- English majors ... 64
Table 9. Classification of learner-identified sources of FLA and the factors affecting it ... 67
Table 10. Results of the content analysis of the first open-ended question ... 68
Table 11. Classification of learner-identified situations that cause FLA ... 71
Table 12. Results of the content analysis of the second open-ended question ... 72
Table 13. Finnish FLCAS items with significant differences between English and non-English majors ... 76
Table 14. A list of learner-identified means to overcome FLA ... 87
List of Figures
Figure 1. Influence of FLA on learning ... 12
Figure 2. A mind map of the perspectives and approaches to FLA in earlier research ... 15
Figure 3. Correlation between age and FLCAS scores ... 44
Figure 4. Sex and FLCAS scores ... 45
Figure 5. Level of degree and FLCAS scores ... 46
Figure 6. Correlation between starting year of university studies and FLCAS scores ... 47
Figure 7. Language minor and FLCAS scores ... 48
Figure 8. Experience of staying or living in an English-speaking country and FLCAS scores ... 50
List of Appendices
Appendix 1. Cover letter and the online questionnaire form ... 100
Appendix 2. The Finnish FLCAS items ... 108
Appendix 3. List of the participants' major and minor subjects ... 109
Appendix 4. Participant Information Sheet ... 110
Appendix 5. Privacy Statement ... 114
List of abbreviations
CEFR Common European Framework of Reference CLIL Content and Language Integrated Learning FLA, FL anxiety Foreign language anxiety
FLCAS Foreign language classroom anxiety scale ID
L1
Individual difference First or native language
L2 Second or foreign language
SLA TL UEF
Second language acquisition Target language
University of Eastern Finland
1. Introduction
For decades language researchers have known that anxiety is associated with language learning.
Anxiety is defined as the feeling of worry, fear, nervousness or even panic (Abu-Rabia, 2004: 711;
Horwitz, Horwitz and Cope, 1986: 125; Toth, 2010: 5). In the worst-case scenario, anxiety related to language learning can prevent the learner from reaching desired goals (Horwitz, Horwitz and Cope, 1986: 125). For example, Phillips suggests that language anxiety negatively affects the oral exam performance of university level L2 learners of French (1992: 16, 21–22). Educators should be able to identify signs of foreign language anxiety and support the learners.
Understanding the uniqueness of the individual human mind has long been the focus of psychological studies (Dörnyei, 2005: 1). Because psychology is a focal part of language studies, individual differences have naturally also been researched in the field of linguistics, particularly in the SLA context (Dörnyei, 2005: 2). In the field of psychology this has led to the formation of a subdiscipline called individual difference research (ibid.). Individual differences (IDs) are stable personal characteristics, such as, personality and intelligence, that make us different from one another, and these IDs are variables that affect language learning (Dörnyei, 2005: 1–8). Anxiety is an ID variable in which the current study focuses on. Anxiety in the SLA or L2 context has been researched since the 1970s along with ID and learner characteristics studies (Tikkanen, 2014: 10).
The research has proven, inter alia, that language learning related anxiety is a unique type of anxiety that interferes with language learning and language performance (Gardner, 1985: 34; Horwitz et al., 1986: 127).
I chose to investigate foreign language anxiety in my pro gradu thesis, because I have personal experiences of anxiety related to foreign language learning and foreign language usage situations.
I remember having feelings of anxiety in English lectures, especially in my first years of university studies: I felt nervous when I was called to speak in front of other students. I felt that I did not have a vast enough vocabulary or did not pronounce English sufficiently enough. I was scared that other students might laugh at me. I felt like an imposter among the other English majors, even though in reality I was a proficient English language user. These feelings, or rather, symptoms fit to the description of foreign language anxiety described in Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety (Horwitz et al., 1986) and in several other studies conducted later. After reviewing literature on foreign language anxiety, I discovered that anxiety in the L2 context is a quite commonly researched and a rather interesting phenomenon. However, there are gaps in research and consequently, this topic needs to be researched further.
The aim of this study is to examine the foreign language anxiety of Finnish university learners of English. More specifically, the aim is to study the degree, features, and sources of foreign language anxiety, and the factors affecting it among a group of English and non-English major Finnish university students. The focus of this study is on the learners’ own experiences of foreign language anxiety, and therefore the data for the current study is derived from a questionnaire. Students who are studying a foreign language at the university level, i.e. advanced language learners, are a neglected group in foreign language anxiety studies (Toth, 2010: 3). Thus, there is a need for the study of foreign language anxiety experienced by advanced language learners. Furthermore, as this study compares the experiences of two different learner groups, English and non-English majors, and therefore provides us with more fruitful and generalizable results. My ambition is that this study produces research results that may be utilized in the development of language teaching in
Finnish universities. I also aim to aid language learners in overcoming foreign language anxiety by raising awareness on this phenomenon.
From here on out the abbreviation FLA and FL anxiety is used to refer to foreign language anxiety.
These two abbreviations are used interchangeably in the present study. The abbreviation FLA is also commonly used for foreign language acquisition in linguistic research. To avoid confusion, I do not use this term for foreign language acquisition in the current study.
As mentioned earlier, FLA has been studied since the 1970s. However, there are gaps in research, especially related to the FLA of language learners from different proficiency levels and from different countries or cultures. My ambition is to bridge some of these gaps with this study.
Previous studies on FLA have mostly been conducted in the United States and Canada (Toth, 2010:
2; Tikkanen, 2014: 29) and only a handful of studies, such as Pihko (2008, 2009), Renko (2012), Tikkanen (2014), and Mäkinen (2019) have been conducted in Finland. Tikkanen’s Master’s thesis (2014) on advanced language learners' experiences of foreign language anxiety is, to the best of my knowledge, the only extensive study on the FLA of university level English learners conducted in Finland in the 2010s, as Renko (2012) focused on Finnish primary school EFL learners’
perceptions on errors, corrective feedback and foreign language anxiety, and Mäkinen’s (2019) aim was to examine the relationship of communication apprehension and the length of full-time employment among university graduates. Therefore, there is a need for the study of FLA of advanced English learners in the Finnish context. In addition, as mentioned earlier advanced language learners have been a neglected group in earlier FLA studies (Toth, 2010: 3). By diversifying the field of FLA studies, we are able to provide the educators and learners better tools
to cope with FLA. Horwitz et al. (1986: 131) state the following regarding the pedagogical implications of FLA:
“[E]ducators have two options when dealing with anxious students: 1) they can help them learn to cope with the existing anxiety-provoking situation; or 2) they can make the learning context less stressful. But before either option is viable, the teacher must first acknowledge the existence of foreign language anxiety.”
Indeed, recognizing the students’ individual needs and providing students with a safe and supportive learning environment is the basis of high-quality education and comprehensive learning.
The research questions first examine the degree, features and sources of FLA as well as the factors affecting it as experienced by Finnish university learners of English. Second, the research questions compare the differences in the degree, features and sources of FLA between English major and non-English major learners. These research questions are designed in a way that they are in line with Toth’s study (2010) and Tikkanen’s Master’s thesis (2014). Thus, the results of the current study are easily comparable to earlier studies, and will contribute to earlier research of FLA. The research questions are elaborated further in chapter 3.
This study consists of six main chapters. Chapter 2, explains the key terms and conceptualizations, such as FLA and different types of anxieties. This chapter also includes the theoretical background of this thesis consisting of a review of previous studies of FLA, a review of the perspectives and approaches adopted in earlier studies, a review of tests and scales used to measure FLA, as well as a summary of the findings on the sources and implications of FLA from a pedagogical perspective.
Chapter 3 presents the research questions, and chapter 4 describes the data collection process and methods of this study. Moreover, chapter 5 consists of my report on the data analysis process as well as the results of the study. Finally, chapter 6 summarizes the main findings, presents the
limitations and discusses the main accomplishments of the study, as well as presents ideas for further research.
2. Definitions and previous studies
This section defines the key terms including foreign learning anxiety, the different types of performance anxieties, and terms related to the nature and outcomes of FLA. This section also reviews the relevant earlier research. In addition, this section covers the perspectives and approaches adopted in earlier research of FLA, and reviews the methods that were used to measure FLA in earlier studies. Lastly, this section assesses relevant earlier findings on FLA and its’
sources, as well as its’ implications on learning from a pedagogical perspective.
2.1 Defining foreign language anxiety
All people experience anxiety sometimes. According to Cambridge Online Dictionary anxiety is
“an uncomfortable feeling of nervousness or worry about something that is happening or might happen in the future”. In other words, anxiety is an unpleasant state of mind that causes both physical and psychological symptoms. Horwitz et al. report (1986: 125) that anxiety is an obstacle in language learning, and that language anxiety can, for example, be the feeling of freezing when called upon to speak in a language classroom. According to Horwitz et al. (1986: 125) a typical comment from someone who is experiencing FL anxiety is, for instance: "When I'm in my Spanish class I just freeze! I can't think of a thing when my teacher calls on me. My mind goes blank. ".
They (1986: 125) define anxiety as a “subjective feeling of tension, apprehension, nervousness and worry associated with an arousal of the autonomic nervous system”. It is important to point out that Horwitz et al. (1986: 128) propose that foreign language anxiety is not merely a combination
of fears transferred to foreign language learning. They believe that it is “a distinct complex of self- perceptions, beliefs, feelings, and behaviors related to classroom language learning arising from the uniqueness of the language learning process” (ibid.). MacIntyre and Gardner (1994: 284) characterize foreign language anxiety “as the feeling of tension and apprehension specifically associated with second language contexts, including speaking, listening, and learning.” According to Pihko (2009: 61) foreign language anxiety is a feeling of anxiety and nervousness related to a foreign language learning situation. Furthermore, according to Young (1991: 430) avoiding eye contact, short answer responses, coming unprepared to class, cutting class, or avoiding having to speak in the foreign language class are some examples of the manifestations of FLA. According to Huang (2012: 9) “the most commonly affected areas [in learning] include communication apprehension, reading comprehension, speaking abilities, communicative skills, listening skills, and writing skills”. Thus, it can be concluded that FLA is a distinct and complex phenomenon that occurs specifically in the language learning or acquisition context, and it affects virtually all aspects of language learning.
Saito et al. (1999: 202) describe FLA as follows: “The essence of FL anxiety, according to Horwitz et al., is the threat to an individual’s self-concept caused by the inherent limitations of communication in an imperfectly mastered second language”. Indeed, a threat to one’s self-concept is what can be found in the core of any feeling of anxiety. When one’s self-concept is threatened, they fear “losing face”. The phenomenon of “losing face” in linguistic research is related to the term proficiency face, which refers to a persons’ aspiration to express their autonomy, ability to co-operate, sense of solidarity, and skills and competencies (Ahvenainen, 2010: 2). When anxiety interferes with a persons’ language production, they are unable to express these aspirations and therefore can lose face. Receiving low evaluations or criticism are an example of this (Huang,
2012: 106). Participants in previous studies have reported experiencing feelings of nervousness or even panic because of the fear of being ridiculed by others in the classroom because of, for example, the wrong choice of words (Gregersen and Horwitz, 2002; Horwitz et al., 1986; Toth 2010). In other words, one dreads errors because of the fear of losing face, which is why they aim for perfection in their language performance. Hence, foreign language anxiety is linked to performance: particularly, the evaluation of academic and, social performance. In reference to this, Horwitz et al. (1986: 127) state the following: “Because foreign language anxiety concerns performance evaluation within an academic and social context, it is useful to draw parallels between it and three related performance anxieties: 1) communication apprehension; 2) test anxiety; and 3) fear of negative evaluation”. These performance anxieties are defined in the following paragraph.
Communication apprehension (1) refers to an individuals’ fears and uncomfortable feelings towards communicating in a foreign language: manifestations of this are the fear of speaking in front of or with others, and the difficulty in understanding spoken language (Horwitz et al., 1986:
127; Gregersen and Horwitz, 2002: 562). These fears and uncomfortable feelings arise when an individual is aware of the fact that they have difficulty in understanding others or making themselves understood (Horwitz et al., 1986: 127). As a result, a student suffering from communication apprehension in a foreign language classroom is likely to avoid communication even if they were otherwise talkative (ibid.). Interestingly, a normally shy and quiet student “may find that communicating in a foreign language makes them feel as if someone else is speaking and they therefore feel less anxious” (Horwitz et al., 1986: 127). Test anxiety (2) derives from the fear of failure (ibid.). Test anxious students dread errors and accept nothing less than perfection in their foreign language test performance and evaluations. As a consequence, they are unable to perceive
foreign language tests as learning opportunities, which is counterproductive from the viewpoint of language learning (Horwitz et al., 1986: 127–128; Gregersen and Horwitz, 2002: 563). The fear of negative evaluation (3) is similar to test anxiety, but it is much broader in the sense that it is not only related to test situations (Horwitz et al., 1986: 128). Language students who suffer from the fear negative evaluations avoid evaluations, have apprehensions towards evaluative situations, and assume that others will give them negative evaluations (ibid.). An example of this is a student who fears being ridiculed because of a pronunciation mistake in a language classroom. The concept of the fear of negative evaluation means that these individuals do not only fear the teachers’ negative evaluations, but all evaluations (e.g. peer evaluations) related to their foreign language performance (Horwitz et al., 1986: 128; Gregersen and Horwitz, 2002: 562–563).
As these characterizations suggest, the manifestations of these performance anxieties overlap to some extent. Still, this tripartition is paramount, as it creates the base for the conceptualization of FLA and lays the groundwork for the methodology behind the measurement tool of FLA, Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS) (Horwitz et al., 1986: 128). Based on Horwitz et al.
(1986) three performance anxieties, Huang (2012: 52) presents an alternative categorization of the anxieties: 1) communication apprehension, 2) fear of negative evaluation, and 3) general feelings of anxiety. This categorization, which, in my opinion, better reflects the items of the FLCAS, is applied in the current study. This categorization is discussed in more detail in chapter 2.5.
In conclusion, all of the aforementioned definitions and conceptualizations of FL anxiety share a common ground. Researchers seem to be unanimous on the fact that anxiety causes a reaction in the learner that results to both physical and psychological symptoms. However, researchers have had different views on whether FLA leads to negative or positive outcomes. This has led to the
categorization of two different types of anxiety, debilitating and facilitating anxiety. Furthermore, researchers have categorized anxiety into trait, state, and situation specific anxiety to convey the difference between stable and continual personality related anxiety versus transient and situation- specific anxiety (MacIntyre and Gardner, 1991; Dörnyei, 2005: 198; Toth, 2010: 5). These categorizations are described in more detail in chapter 2.3.
2.2 The beginning of foreign language anxiety studies
Research in FLA began in the 1970s when scholars became interested in the language learners’
individual differences (IDs) (Tikkanen, 2014: 10). IDs are factors that make one person different from another so that “ID constructs refer to dimensions of enduring personal characteristics that are assumed to apply to everybody and on which people differ by degree” (Dörnyei 2005: 4). In a language learning context these differences are the reason why some individuals thrive in language studies while others struggle. Learner characteristics that support learning, such as language aptitude and language learning motivation, are examples of IDs that have been in the center of focus in L2 studies since the 1960s (Dörnyei, 2005: 6). Language aptitude “refers to one’s ability to learn another language” (Gass et al., 2013: 445) and language learning motivation or L2 motivation “is a sociopsychological factor frequently used to account for differential success in learning” (Gass et al., 2013: 452). More importantly, ID research has proven that also other learner characteristics, such as, language learning strategies, help students excel in language learning (ibid.). Anxiety is one of the learner characteristics that “have been identified to influence learning”
(Tikkanen, 2014: 10).
One cannot describe the beginning of language learning anxiety studies without mentioning one of the most significant studies in this research area, Horwitz et al. (1986), which is a seminal study in the field of foreign language anxiety or language learning anxiety studies. The aim of the study was to examine the FLA of university level foreign language students, and consequently, a measurement tool of FLA, The Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS), was created.
The methodology behind the scale is discussed in more detail in chapter 2.5. According to their results “[a] majority of the statements reflective of foreign language anxiety (nineteen of thirty- three items) were supported by a third or more of the students surveyed, and seven statements were supported by over half [of] the students” (Horwitz et al. 1986: 130). To summarize, their study suggests that FLA is common at a university level, especially in the beginning of the studies (Horwitz et al., 1986: 131). This study can be considered groundbreaking as it provided us with a measurement tool that is still viable thirty some years later.
2.3 Perspectives and approaches in foreign language anxiety studies
Whether the influence of anxiety on learning is positive or negative has been under debate among FLA researchers. This has led to the distinction of two types of anxiety: (1) debilitating and (2) facilitating anxiety: “(1) [D]ebilitating anxiety…negatively affects the learner's engagement in the learning situation, and (2) facilitating anxiety…motivates the learner to cope with the new assignment” (Abu-Rabia, 2004: 712). This distinction is illustrated in Figure 1 in below.
Figure 1. Influence of FLA on learning
Figure 1 presents a simple summary on the facilitating i.e. beneficial and debilitating i.e. inhibitory effects that FLA has on learning. The terms used in Figure 1 are derived from Abu-Rabia (2004), Dörnyei (2005), and Gass and Selinker (2008). Gass and Selinker (2008: 400, cited in Tikkanen, 2014: 11) “describe the relationship between anxiety and performance as curvilinear”: they elaborate that low levels of anxiety lead to positive outcomes, but high levels of anxiety lead to negative outcomes. In other words, “too much concern about failure can get in the way of success”
Gass and Selinker explain (2008: 401). What then is considered a low level of anxiety and what is considered a high level of anxiety? This depends on the method, and particularly, the measurement used to quantify anxiety. The current study utilizes a version of the Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS) (Horwitz et al., 1986) as well as open-ended questions to measure the level FLA and uncover learner-identified sources of FLA and factors that affect it. With the help of the FLCAS the participants can be divided into non-anxious, slightly anxious, considerably anxious, and very anxious learners based on their FLCAS scores. Generally speaking, the learners who rank non- or slightly anxious on the FLCAS experience facilitating anxiety because they display low levels of FLA, while the learners who rank considerably- or very anxious experience debilitating anxiety because they display high levels of FLA. Of course, in the end it is the researchers’ task to interpret
Foreign language anxiety
Low levels of anxiety
Facilitating anxiety (beneficial)
Positive effects on learning High levels of
anxiety
Debilitating anxiety (inhibitory)
Negative effects on learning
which participants experienced facilitating and which debilitating anxiety. To make this interpretation easier I have chosen to complement the FLCAS with two open-ended questions.
Chapter 2.5 discusses the FLCAS in more detail, and chapter 4 discusses the method of the current study.
Psychologists, linguists and the like have examined anxiety from three different perspectives: Trait anxiety, state anxiety, and situation specific anxiety (MacIntyre and Gardner, 1991: 87; Toth 2010:
5). The first refers to anxiety as a personality trait, the second refers to anxiety as a momentary emotional state, and the third refers to anxiety that occurs repeatedly in specific situations (MacIntyre and Gardner, 1991: 87). Essentially, these perspectives are different conceptualizations that researchers have used to define the theory behind anxiety. In earlier research of FLA, these differences in the conceptualization of anxiety have led to contradictory results (MacIntyre and Gardner, 1991: 87). Trait anxiety perspective in FLA research has proved itself problematic because it does not distinguish FLA from other anxieties, when in fact FLA has been proven to be separate from other forms of anxiety (MacIntyre and Gardner, 1991: 87–90, 113). State anxiety scales have received criticism for not focusing on the source of the anxiety: “Instead of asking,
“Did this situation make you nervous?”, they ask, “Are you nervous now?”” (MacIntyre and Gardner, 1991: 90). Studies adopting the situation specific perspective have conceptualized FLA as an independent phenomenon and examined anxiety in specified situations, such as participating in French class, that tap into the source of the reported anxiety (MacIntyre and Gardner, 1991). As a result, the situation specific perspective has proven to be more advantageous and diverse in the study of FLA than the other two perspectives (ibid.).
In essence, two different theoretical approaches to FLA stemmed from the two different conceptualizations of anxiety: The (1) anxiety transfer and the (2) unique anxiety approach (Horwitz and Young, 1991; MacIntyre, 1999; Toth, 2010: 15). The first approach refers to the
“transfer of other forms of anxiety into the L2 domain” (Toth, 2010: 15). According to this approach FLA “has been viewed either (1) as the manifestation of a general trait of anxiety…or (2) as the transfer of some situation-specific anxiety”, Toth specifies (ibid.). In other words, this approach does not view FLA as an independent and unique type of anxiety, but rather is based on the assumption that generally anxious individuals have an inclination to FLA (ibid.). Studies that used this approach used various measures of trait/state anxiety, such as, the State/Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) (Spielberger et al., 1970; Spielberger, 1983) or test anxiety (Sarason and Ganzer, 1962). Toth (2010: 16) points out that the various and mixed measurements of anxiety used in studies adopting the anxiety transfer approach resulted in confusing results, that made the comparison across studies difficult. The assumption behind the second approach, unique anxiety approach, is that “language learning produces a unique type of anxiety” (Toth, 2010:16). This means that anxiety is situation-specific and is a result of the language learning or usage situation (ibid.). Studies adopting this approach have used measures, such as the FLCAS (Horwitz et al., 1986), that were specifically designed to examine anxiety occurring in foreign language learning or usage situations (ibid.). The unique anxiety approach is based on Gardner’s conclusion (1985:
34), according to which FLA is not a transfer of general anxiety to the language learning or acquisition context because “[t]here does not appear to be much justification to conclude that in general anxious individuals are less successful than non-anxious ones in acquiring a second language, but rather that individuals who become anxious in the second language learning context will be less successful than those who do not”.
Earlier studies seem to suggest that the unique anxiety approach has been found to be more fruitful in the study of FLA. Consequently, I apply the unique anxiety approach in the present study. I have devised a mind map (Figure 2 below) to illustrate the different perspectives and approaches that earlier research has had to FLA, and to summarize what I covered in the last chapter. The mind map makes it easier to perceive the progression of the different conceptualizations and approaches in the earlier research of FLA. All the elements and concepts in the mind map are based on the following studies: Gardner (1985), MacIntyre and Gardner (1991), Horwitz and Young (1991), MacIntyre (1999), and Toth (2010).
Figure 2. A mind map of the perspectives and approaches to FLA in earlier research FLA: Perspectives
and approaches
Trait anxiety=
Anxiety as a personality trait
State anxiety=
Anxiety as a momentary emotional
state
Anxiety transfer=
FLA is a manifestation of trait anxiety or the
transfer of some situation specific anxiety into the language learning
domain
Discarded because of lack of consistent
results
Situation specific anxiety=
Recurring anxiety in specific situations
Unique anxiety=
FLA is situation specific and a result of
the language learning or usage situation
Proved applicable for the study of FLA
2.4 Recent studies in Finland and around the world
In the last few decades extensive studies on advanced language learners’ FLA have mostly been conducted in North America, South America and Asia (see e.g. Huang, 2012: 21–24). These studies include, for instance, Liu and Jackson (2008) who studied 547 non-English major university level English learners in China. Their quantitative study focused on FLA and its’ relationship to the unwillingness to communicate. The results indicate that “more than one third of the students felt anxious in their English language classrooms” (Liu and Jackson, 2008: 71), and that their FLA and unwillingness to communicate “correlated significantly with each other and with their self-rated English proficiency and access to English” (ibid.). Another example is Yan and Horwitz’ (2008) study, which also focused on Chinese university level learners of English (N=532). This qualitative study aimed at exploring the impact of FLA and other variables on language learning. The results show that according to the grounded-theory model created from student interviews the primary sources of FLA were: Comparison with Peers, Learning Strategies, and Language Learning Interest and Motivation (Yan and Horwitz, 2008: 170, 173). Gregersen and Horwitz (2002) conducted a qualitative study on the relationship between FLA and perfectionism with 78 university English majors in Chile. Their results suggest that same procedures that are used to aid people overcome perfectionism can help in overcoming FLA, because both perfectionism and FLA were found to have similar manifestations (Gregersen and Horwitz, 2002: 568). Moreover, Kitano (2001) studied 212 university level L2 learners of Japanese in the United States. This quantitative study focused on the relationship between FLA and the fear of negative evaluation and speaking ability. Results of this study suggest that the level of FLA correlated with the fear of negative evaluation. However,
“the fear of negative evaluation and the self-perceived speaking ability did not interact to influence the anxiety level” (Kitano 2001: 549). Also, students who felt that they had lower abilities than
their peers or native speakers, had higher levels of FLA (ibid.). The results also show that the tendency to fear negative evaluation “depended on the instructional level and the experience of going to Japan” (ibid.).
A few studies on FLA have also been conducted in Europe. An example of one large-scale study conducted in Europe is Toth’s study Foreign Language Anxiety and the Advanced Language Learner: A Study of Hungarian Students of English As a Foreign Language (2010), which acts as an anchor study of this pro gradu thesis. Toth (2010) bridges the gap in the literature regarding the research of FLA in the Central European region. The aim of their study was ”(1) to find out how advanced EFL learners’ foreign language anxiety can be characterized, (2) to examine what factors affect anxiety level, and (3) to explore the relationship between FLA and various aspects of learners’ performance and communication experience in EFL” (Toth, 2010: 3).
They utilized various data collection methods such as language aptitude tests, interviews, and a questionnaire (Toth, 2010). This study combined both quantitative and qualitative research methods. Furthermore, the participants consisted of 117 English majors of a Hungarian university and a comparison group of 66 non-English majors from the same university (Toth, 2010: 37, 39).
The results indicate that altogether the group of English majors did not show high levels of FLA, although according to Toth “every fifth of them was found to display considerably high levels of anxiety with rather severe affective, psycho-physiological as well as behavioural symptoms”
(2010: 182). Interestingly, Toth also uncovered that the non-English majors were significantly less anxious than the English majors:
According to the results of the independent samples t-test, students majoring in English were significantly more anxious than non-English majors (t = 2.373, p = .019). The significant difference between the two populations in terms of anxiety
score means (M = 84.59, SD = 19.34 vs. M = 77.72, SD = 17.75) was also reflected in the distribution of students according to anxiety level (2010: 55).
To elaborate, 22,2% of the English majors were found to be considerably or very anxious, whereas only 12,1% of the non-English majors were considerably anxious and none were very anxious (Toth, 2010: 54, 55). Thus, these results confirm that anxiety is not a consequence of low L2 proficiency (Toth, 2010: 182).
One of the most extensive studies on FLA in the Finnish context has been conducted by Pihko (2007, 2009). However, as Pihko’s studies (2007, 2009) focused on elementary school students, there still remains a gap in the research of FLA of advanced language learners in Finland and in the Northern European region. Pihko (2009) examined the occurrences of FLA in (1) traditional language teaching and in (2) CLIL-teaching (Content and Language Integrated Learning). Pihko compared these two language learning environments, and their results show that a significant number of students (30% of the students in traditional language teaching and 34% in CLIL- teaching) experience FLA (Pihko, 2009: 67). Another study on FLA conducted in Finland is Tikkanen’s master’s thesis on advanced language learners' experiences with foreign language anxiety (2014), from which I took inspiration to the current study. Tikkanen’s thesis is qualitative in nature and focuses on the experiences of 13 FL majors from the University of Jyväskylä, Finland (2014: 33, 34). Tikkanen’s aim was to explore the (1) situations, (2) causes, (3) self-perceived effects of FLA, as well as the (4) coping strategies that advanced learners use to cope with FLA (2014: 31). The results, derived from interviews, suggest that the most anxiety-inducing situations are related oral language production (Tikkanen, 2014: 81). The causes of FLA were found to be related to the learner, the teacher, and the peers, and FLA was found to affect the learners’
emotions, thoughts, and actions (Tikkanen, 2014: 82). According to Tikkanen examples of the
causes related to the learner were factors such as being a language student, perceived inadequacy/fraudulence, and perfectionism (2014: 44). Examples of teacher related causes of FLA were associated with the teachers’ behavior and instructional methods, such as ways of correcting mistakes (Tikkanen, 2014: 57), and the causes related to the peers were factors such as comparing one’s own skills to others (2014: 66). Furthermore, Tikkanen’s results indicate that the learners seemed to believe that improving their FL skills would alleviate their anxiety (Tikkanen, 2014: 82).
Tikkanen’s master’s thesis, is one of the few (if not the only) extensive studies on the FLA of Finnish advanced foreign language learners. Therefore, there is a need for more research on the FLA of advanced foreign language learners in the Finnish context.
In conclusion, anxiety related to language learning has been studied mostly in North America, South America and Asia, few extensive studies have been conducted in Finland. FLA research in the last decades has shown that sources of FLA are associated with the learners’ (1) personal attributes, (e.g. learning strategies, motivation, perfectionism, and perceived inadequacy or fraudulence) (2) the peers (e.g. anxiety as the consequence of comparing oneself to others) and (3) the teacher (e.g. the teachers behavior or instructional methods) (Yan and Horwitz, 2008;
Gregersen and Horwitz, 2002; Tikkanen, 2014). Furthermore, earlier studies have found that in some cases FLA significantly correlates with the unwillingness to communicate (Liu and Jackson, 2008), self-rated TL competence or ability (Liu and Jackson, 2008; Kitano, 2001), fear of negative evaluation (Kitano 2001), and the experience of visiting the TL country (Kitano 2001). However, it must be underlined that according to Toth (2010: 182) high levels of anxiety did not correlate with low TL proficiency. In addition, Liu and Jackson (2008), Pihko (2009) and Toth (2010) suggest that a significant minority of learners experience debilitating anxiety. It is also noteworthy to point out, that virtually all of the referred studies in this chapter have shown that FLA is an
intricate phenomenon that is affected by multiple variables, and, in the worst-case-scenario, causes debilitating psycho-physiological symptoms.
2.5 Measurements of foreign language anxiety
Earlier research of FLA has mostly been quantitative and utilized data from self-report questionnaires (Horwitz, 2001; MacIntyre, 1999; MacIntyre and Gardner, 1991; Young, 1991, 1994), but some qualitative studies (Phillips, 1992; Price, 1991; Yan and Horwitz, 2008) relying on interviews have also been conducted (Toth, 2010: 35–36). Other instruments used in measuring FLA have ranged from small-group sessions, open-ended questionnaires and language learning diaries to combinations of all the above-mentioned methods (Toth 2010: 35, 36). However, the most distinguished of all measurement tools is the FLCAS.
Horwitz et al. (1986) created a measurement tool for foreign language learning anxiety, so that researchers and educators would be able to identify the students who experience anxiety during language class (Horwitz et al., 1986: 128). From student discussions, didactic presentations and anxiety management exercises the researchers formulated the FLCAS, which is still used in linguistic or pedagogical research of FLA (see e.g. Toth 2010 and Huang 2012). The FLCAS is comprised of a 33-item 5-point Likert-scale with responses ranging from “strongly disagree” (=1) to “strongly agree” (=5). The items of the FLCAS are statements, which reflect the language learners’ personal experiences of FL anxiety (e.g. item #9 I start to panic when I have to speak without preparation in language class).
The 33-item-scale is designed to give the researcher a multifaceted depiction of the participants’
experiences. In relation to the items of the FLCAS Toth points out that “[t]he items of the scale are reflective of the three anxieties that are regarded as conceptually important aspects of FLA according to Horwitz et al.’s (1986) theory” (2010: 38). Indeed, as mentioned earlier in chapter 2.1 the methodology behind the scale derives from the three performance anxieties originally presented in Horwitz et al. (1986): 1) communication apprehension (e.g. item #9 I start to panic when I have to speak without preparation in language class); 2) test anxiety (e.g. item #21 The more I study for a language test, the more confused I get); and 3) fear of negative evaluation (e.g. item #31 I am afraid that the other students will laugh at me when I speak the foreign language). However, because the items related to test anxiety and fear of negative evaluation are very much overlapping, a categorization by Huang (2012: 52) gives a clearer distinction of the nature of each item:
“communication apprehension (items #1, 3, 4, 9, 13, 14, 18, 20, 24, 27, 29, 33), fear of negative evaluation (items # 2, 7, 8, 15, 19, 21, 23, 31), and general feeling of anxiety (items # 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 16, 17, 22, 25, 26, 28, 30, 32)”. I will resort to this categorization in the analysis of the Finnish FLCAS results in chapter 5.
The analysis of the FLCAS is quite straightforward. The Likert-scale responses (1–5) are summed up to calculate the anxiety score for each participant, which ranges from a minimum score of 33 to a maximum score of 165. The individual anxiety scores and the corresponding means form four groups: non-anxious (M=1–2), slightly anxious (M=2–3), considerably anxious (M=3–4), and very anxious (M=4–5). However, items 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, 18, 22, 28, 32 need to be reverse-scored, as these items indicate a lack of anxiety. In this case, strongly disagree=5 and strongly agree=1.
Consequently, a high score in the anxiety scale always indicates high levels of anxiety (Toth, 2010:
50, 53–54; Huang 2012: 52). As mentioned in chapter 2.3 low levels of anxiety have a facilitating
influence on learning, and therefore learners who fall into the non-anxious and slightly anxious categories on the FLCAS experience facilitating anxiety. Respectively, learners who fall into the considerably anxious or very anxious category experience debilitating anxiety. However, as previously noted FLA is an intricate phenomenon, so it may be difficult to draw clear cut lines between those who experience facilitating and those who experience debilitating anxiety.
Horwitz et al. (1986) have argued that the FLCAS is a reliable measurement tool: “The scale has demonstrated internal reliability, achieving an alpha coefficient of .93 with all items producing significant corrected item-total scale correlations. Test-retest reliability over eight weeks yielded an r=.83 (p<.001)” Horwitz et al. state (1986: 129). Alpha coefficient, or Cronbach’s alpha, and the test-retest reliability measure the consistency of the measurement. The greater the value of alpha the more reliable the results (Mittaaminen: Mittarin luotettavuus, 2019). Also, there is evidence that the scale works in other languages as well. One example of a translated FLCAS is the Hungarian FCLAS (HFCLAS), which proved to be “satisfactorily reliable in terms of its internal consistency (its alpha coefficient for this administration coincided with that of the original scale)” (Toth, 2010: 39).
Horwitz et al. note (1986: 129) that “[t]he results (of the FLCAS) demonstrate that students with debilitating anxiety in the foreign language classroom setting can be identified and that they share a number of characteristics in common.” They go on to argue that once language teachers are able to identify FLA, they can either help the student to cope with anxiety or make the learning situation less stressful (1986: 131). Despite the fact that the study by Horwitz et al. (1986) is now fairly old, the importance of the research of FLA is still very much topical from the viewpoint of language education, and the FLCAS is still a viable measurement tool of FLA.
2.6 Pedagogical perspectives on the sources and implications of foreign language anxiety
As has been stated before, earlier research on FLA has proved that anxiety has implications on language learning. In order to understand these implications, we need to examine the sources of anxiety from a pedagogical perspective. This chapter summarizes the findings of relevant earlier studies related to the sources of FLA and the factors affecting it, and discusses these sources of anxiety from a pedagogical point of view. The results and discussion sections in chapters 5 and 6 reflect on the findings discussed here.
Based on the analysis of their study, Young theorizes the following: “language anxiety arises from:
1) personal and interpersonal anxieties; 2) learner beliefs about language learning; 3) instructor beliefs about language teaching; 4) instructor-learner interactions; 5) classroom procedures; and 6) language testing” (1991: 427). Examples of learner-related beliefs, personal or interpersonal anxieties are: low self-esteem, competitiveness or comparison to peers, low self-perceived foreign language ability, and unrealistic beliefs, such as, memorizing all grammar rules or pronouncing the TL “perfectly” (Young, 1991: 427–428). Teachers who believe that intimidation promotes students’ performance or object being too friendly with the students because they fear losing authority are examples of instructor beliefs that contribute to FLA, while “a harsh manner of correcting student errors” is a good example of the instructor-learner interactions that cause FLA (Young, 1991: 428–429). Examples of classroom procedures, or in other words, certain situations in the classroom that cause anxiety are mostly related to oral language production in front of others, such as, giving presentations or having to volunteer an answer (Young, 1991: 429). Language testing situations cause the most anxiety in learners when the test situation is new, ambiguous or highly evaluative (ibid.).
One of Toth’s most crucial findings related to the pedagogical implications of FLA was, that a high level of L2 proficiency does not always amount to a confident second language user. They claim that advanced L2 learners face high expectations from others as well as from themselves and therefore have a high ambition to speak the foreign language as effortlessly and as elaborately as native speakers do. Therefore “discrepancies between this ambition and their actual L2-related self- perceptions can be a great source of anxiety and frustration for them”. What is more, Toth’s open- ended question and interview results indicate that “instructional practices, classroom atmosphere, classroom procedures, instructor qualities, teacher attitudes toward learners, methods of error correction and other teacher behaviours…are seen by learners as factors that…affect how much anxiety they experience in the L2 classroom” (Toth, 2010: 189).
Huang points out that from a pedagogical perspective FLA stems from the students’ personal factors, the teachers’ instructional methods, and the learning environment, which is of course, strongly affected by the instructional methods (2012: 7, 106–107). The open-ended questions in Huang’s two studies on the FLA of Chinese university freshmen proved that the greatest self- perceived sources of FLA for them were related to self-perceived insufficient English/foreign language skills, personal issues (e.g. lack of motivation, lack of confidence, or shyness), lack of effective learning strategies (e.g. insufficient class preparation), teacher factors (e.g. teachers’
excessively strict behavior or unclear instructions), grading/testing concerns (e.g. test anxiety or worry about receiving negative feedback), difficulty of the foreign language, and poor attitude towards learning (Huang, 2012: 108–117). The former of these categories proved to be the greatest source of anxiety for the participants with 43,3% of the responses in the first study, and 32,1% of the responses in the second study (ibid.). Grading/testing concerns (6,7% of responses) as well as
poor attitude towards learning (5,4% of responses) were the smallest sources of anxiety for the studied groups of Chinese university students (ibid.).
Tikkanen’s semi-structured theme interviews with 13 Finnish foreign language university students proved, that the causes (or sources) of anxiety are related to the learner, the teacher, and the peers (2014: 31–34, 44–73). The identified causes of FLA related to the learner were: being a language student, perceived inadequacy/fraudulence, i.e. imposter syndrome, perfectionism, and inability to express authentic personality (Tikkanen, 2014: 44–57). The causes of FLA connected to the teacher had to do with the teachers’ behavior or the learners’ beliefs about the teacher: “The participants feel anxious when they see the teacher as an observer who sees and corrects all language errors and demands perfect language output from his or her students” Tikkanen explains (2014: 57).
Tikkanen’s results also suggest that factors related to the peers cause FLA in some learners: The participants reported that if they know the other students in the class, they feel less anxious because they feel more comfortable about making mistakes around familiar people (2014: 63–65).
Furthermore, they reported that their anxiety stems from the belief that the peers are more skilled in the TL than they are (Tikkanen, 2014: 66–67). Regarding the implications of FL anxiety on learning Tikkanen states the following: “anxiety severely affects learners’ eagerness to persevere with their efforts to learn” (2014: 73).
To summarize and to simplify, the sources of FLA in the language classroom are related to the learner, the teacher (or the instructional methods), and the learning environment, and FLA interferes with the students’ ability to learn the TL. Fortunately, teachers can also aid learners in overcoming FLA. Acknowledging the existence of FLA is the first step teachers must take to eliminate or minimize anxiety in the foreign language classroom (Horwitz et al., 1986: 131). Young
advices the teachers in this matter as follows: “It might be useful for instructors to consciously examine their own language teaching beliefs to help dispel those beliefs that negatively impact learners” (1991: 431). As earlier studies have demonstrated, the teachers’ role in helping the learners overcome FLA cannot be neglected. Therefore, chapter 6.1 discusses some of the actions that teachers can take in order to help learners who suffer from symptoms of FLA.
3. Research questions
First, this section reflects on the research questions of relevant earlier studies, because the research frame and method of the current study follow the example of Toth (2010). Second, this section presents the research questions of this pro gradu thesis.
The research frame builds on Toth’s study (2010). Toth examined the characteristics of advanced EFL learners’ FLA, the factors that affect their anxiety level, and the relationship between FLA, performance, and communication experience (2010: 3). Toth collected their data by measuring the FLA of Hungarian English majors using questionnaires and interviews including the HFLCAS.
The results show that altogether the investigated group of English learners “did not carry high levels of FLA”. However, a comparison group of non-English majors from the same university was found to have significantly lower levels of FLA. The results also suggest that a sizeable minority of English students experienced “considerably high levels of anxiety with rather severe affective, psycho-physiological as well as behavioral symptoms”. Toth recognizes the generalizability of the findings as a limitation of their study, since the group of participants consisted of students of only one Hungarian university (Toth, 2010: 187).
Tikkanen (2014) focuses on FLA experienced by Finnish university students of languages. They aimed at examining FLA from four viewpoints: (1) the situations that induce anxiety, (2) causes of anxiety, (3) self-perceived effects of anxiety and (4) coping with anxiety. The results suggest that the most anxiety-inducing situations are speaking and writing in the TL, and that the causes of FLA are related to the learner, the teacher, and the peers. For instance, the participants were worried about being judged because of poor language production, and they felt the pressure to be “perfect”
in the TL. (2014: 81–82). The participants reported that improving their TL skills would help them cope with anxiety better, Tikkanen elaborates (2014: 82). Tikkanen proposes that replicating a study paradigm similar to theirs in a different university would give us more knowledge on whether her findings are applicable in other contexts as well (2014: 84). Tikkanen recognizes some limitations in their study: For instance, they point out that they had difficulties in “separating different types of anxieties” (2014: 84). In other words, there were problems in identifying FLA and then separating it from general anxieties, such as, social anxiety.
Thus, it seems that the generalizability of the findings turned out to be a limitation in both Toth (2010) and in Tikkanen (2014). This limitation is understandable, because few studies have focused on the FLA of university level language learners. The current study bridges the gap in research and increases generalizability. Moreover, I designed the research methods of the current study in ways that allow me to tackle the issue of separating FLA from general anxieties: Not only is the data collected via FLCAS, a tool that was particularly designed to measure FL anxiety, but the participants’ personalities are also assessed via anxious personality self-evaluations (see Table 2).
Chapter 4 elaborates on the methods and data collection of this study.
In order to produce a study that contributes to earlier research of FLA of advanced EFL learners in Finland and around the world, the research questions need to be in line with earlier studies.
Therefore, the research questions for the current study are:
1. What is the degree of FLA among Finnish university learners of English?
2. What are the most prominent features and sources of FLA among Finnish university learners of English and what factors affect it?
3. What differences can be found in the degree, features and sources of FLA between English majors and non-English majors?
Research question (1) aims at mapping the scope and severity of FLA among Finnish university learners of English. Research question (1) also gives us information on whether the learners are experiencing facilitating or debilitating anxiety. Research question (2) gives insight on the most prominent features and sources of FLA among the studied group of learners. Furthermore, research question (2) also looks into the factors that contribute to FLA, since it is important that these factors are identified in the study of FLA. Research question (3) aims at analyzing the differences in the degree, features and sources of FLA between English major and non-English major learners.
Altogether, the research questions aim at studying the learners’ own interpretations of their anxiety, and therefore the data was gathered via questionnaire.
4. Methods and data
This section presents the methods and data used in the present study. To elaborate, this section describes the research design, the participants, the data collection instrument and procedure, as well as the research ethics. As this pro gradu thesis compares English and non-English major university students, the data was collected from both learner groups. The instrument used to collect the data was an online questionnaire form, which was based on the FLCAS with some modifications to suit the Finnish university context. In addition, the questionnaire form included a background questionnaire, two open-ended questions regarding FLA, its’ features and sources, as well as a third extra open-ended question on ways to reduce FLA. The data was collected at the University of Eastern Finland (UEF), Joensuu Campus.
4.1 Research design
The current study is mainly quantitative in nature, but in order to yield comprehensive answers to the research questions, it was necessary to incorporate some qualitative methods into the analysis.
Hence, the research design is constructed around (1) the quantitative analysis of the FLCAS scores derived from the Finnish FLCAS, (2) the quantitative analysis of the relationship of the background questionnaire and the Finnish FLCAS scores, and (3) the quantitative and qualitative analysis of the open-ended questions. The first method (1) provides answers to research question 1, and the second (2) yields answers to research questions 2 and 3. The third method (3) complements the first two and provides more information on research questions 2 and 3. The first two modes of research (1 and 2) primarily replicate Toth’s research design and methods of analysis. The data
collection instrument used in the current study was an online questionnaire form, which is described in more detail in chapter 4.3.
As previously mentioned, the research design of the current study takes inspiration from Toth’s (2010) research design. In other words, Toth (2010) acts as an anchor study for this thesis. Much like Toth’s, the research design of the current study relies on various elements of data collection, which complement each other: a background questionnaire, the FLCAS, and open-ended questions.
However, it is not an exact replication of Toth’s study, as their study was a large-scale study with a wide scope of research, whereas the current study is designed to fit the smaller framework of a thesis. To elaborate, while Toth incorporated various different data collection sources, such as interviews (Toth, 2010: 42) and language aptitude tests (Toth, 2010: 40), I took example of these methods and procedures and integrated them into one questionnaire. This practice avoids some of the pitfalls in Toth (2010) such as “drawing the various lines together from various sources in an attempt to provide a portrait of the anxious English major may have resulted in some degree of overgeneralization” (2010: 188). In other words, they had difficulties in drawing conclusions from the various different qualitative and quantitative data sources. Toth also points out, that they had problems with attrition as the data collection stretched over one year and “some of the quantitative findings may have been affected by the unequal number of cases for different variables” (ibid). My attempt was to take these limitations into account and create a data collection method that would, firstly, make integrating the qualitative and quantitative data easier, secondly, utilize only one data collection instrument (the online questionnaire form), and thirdly, be user-friendly and fast to carry out.
