1

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the study and rationale for the present study
This research project is rooted in a long interest in what it is that makes
English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) learners anxious during the process of classroom
language learning. Researchers take the position that language anxiety (LA)
1

constitutes a distinct emotional response that is different from general, global anxiety.
Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope (1986, p. 128) have in fact postulated that LA does not
emanate from a simple transfer of anxiety from other domains, but could best be
defined as a distinct complex of self-perceptions, beliefs, feelings, and behaviours
related to classroom language learning arising from the uniqueness of the language
learning process.
It is rather telling that many people have a love-hate relationship with foreign
language learning. Indeed, while they may be keen on learning a new language, they
consider it a challenging task and report uncomfortable experiences with relation to it.
Early research into second language acquisition (SLA) sought to associate cognitive
abilities with academic success (Carroll and Sapon, 1959). Language teachers too
tend to assume that students lack motivation, find the lessons uninteresting, or simply
do not have the mental acuity to grasp even rudimentary aspects of the foreign
language, and are therefore incapable of performing satisfactorily in class.
However, Gardner and Lamberts (1972) seminal research on learners
motivation and attitudes towards the target language, has triggered much research in

1
Although the present study investigates anxiety about classroom language learning, I have eschewed
terms such as language learning anxiety in favour of the more general term, language anxiety,
which I am using throughout the thesis, given the potential for confusion in light of the LA theory
nomenclature.
2

individual learner differences and affectivity in language learning. Posing the
following question, how is it that some people can learn a second or foreign
language so easily and do so well while others, given what seem to be the same
opportunities to learn, find it almost impossible? (ibid., p. 130), the two Canadian
social psychologists urged researchers to shift their focus on individual learner
differences, and, in particular, on learners emotional responses to language learning
and their impact on classroom performance and success. According to Drnyei
(2005), individual differences refer to any aspect that defines each person as different
from the others. Young (1999, p. 21) contended that the human mind consists of
thoughts and emotions which do not function independently of the body. Therefore,
when learning a foreign language, emotions or affect, including LA, may interplay
with cognition and the process of learning, and should be taken into account by
language educators. By the same token, when researching language acquisition,
research should not be detached from individual differences and affective factors,
neither should the existence of LA be ignored, given the strong links between
acquisition and affectivity.
Much research has focused on the anxiety associated with second language
speaking, which undoubtedly constitutes one of the most prominent causes of LA
having well-defined, detrimental effects on learning. Fear of losing face in the
presence of the teacher and the peers seems to be of primary concern to students in
most educational contexts where LA research has been conducted. As Guiora and
Acton (1979, p. 199) argued, a different self (i.e., the language ego) exists when
using a foreign language, based on the psychological experience that one feels like a
different person when speaking a second language and often indeed acts very
differently as well. However, as this thesis will show, LA is a much more complex
3

and multidimensional construct, displaying a wide array of layers of interactions
between students and of factors outside of each individual learner. Additionally, the
possibility of anxiety specific to other skill areas should also be taken into account. At
the outset of my doctoral studies in the UK, I expressed an interest in investigating
LA about writing, an idea that, research-wise, was not conceived of as promising,
given that most people tend to think that anxiety is non-existent in writing situations.
As the present thesis will reveal though, this may not always be the case, as anxiety
about writing in a foreign language truly exists, paving the way for innovative,
constructive approaches to theorising and analysing writing in a foreign language.
What is more, additional research into writing anxiety in foreign language settings is
warranted (Manchn, 2009; Schoonen, Snellings, Stevenson, and van Gelderen,
2009), given that most writing-anxiety-related research has explored first language
(Daly and Miller, 1975a, 1975b) or second language writing (Rinnert and Kobayashi,
2009).
Further, it is notable that no focused studies examining the nature and
development of the LA of Greek EFL learners have been conducted. Within the Greek
English language teaching (ELT) context, research into LA has examined the nature
of anxiety and the use of affective strategies among Greek university students in
English for specific purposes (ESP) and English for academic purposes (EAP)
contexts only (Karras, 2012). Considering more international perspectives on anxiety,
research to date has primarily concentrated on the anxiety of students enrolled in
language courses in American Higher Education Institutions (e.g., Horwitz et al.,
1986; Pappamihiel, 2002; Yan and Horwitz, 2008), or student LA over foreign
languages other than English (e.g., Elkhafaifi, 2005; Kitano, 2001; Marcos-Llinas and
Garau, 2009). Contextualised studies involving students enrolled in English courses in
4

private language centres and taking into account the peculiarities of the Greek foreign
language education system, discussed in Chapters 3 and 7, could extend our
understandings of LA and build on existent studies in both SLA and psychology.
Thus, what makes the current study distinctive is that it takes into account the local
teaching-learning context as well as local concerns when reflecting on anxiety.

1.2 Personal motivation to undertake the study
I started to learn English at a young age and I still remember how anxious and
self-conscious I was in the classroom. My anxiety would remain stable no matter what
activities the teacher would implement in the classroom, or how many peers would be
present, or whether an upcoming exam or a deadline I would have to meet were
looming. I then moved on to learn French, a process which lasted for a number of
years leading me to an in-depth study of French literature, political history, and the
so-called francophonie. Studying Italian was my next, and perhaps understandably
easiest step, as I could constantly see many similarities between Italian and French
mainly in terms of both languages morphosyntactic rules and regularities. The
comparative approach that I adopted towards both languages facilitated my levelling
up to an intermediate class of Italian as a foreign language. Despite my gradually
developing profound love for foreign languages, and my aptitude and success at them,
the anxiety-related parameter would still affect me.
When I first arrived in the UK, being a holder of a Bachelors degree in
English language and literature already, I could again sense a precarious level of
anxiety manifested primarily during my attempts to speak within the L2 community.
Back then, I felt as though I was an EFL learner again. I tried to speculate on the
causes of my speaking anxiety, and thought that my personality and low self-
5

confidence combined with the limited opportunities I had to practise speaking in
Greece could be potential anxiety-inducing factors.
My experience of teaching EFL at the University of Essex brought me into
contact with an innumerable number of students from very different backgrounds,
each one carrying unique life experiences, and, clearly, having different affordances
to learn English. I was always interested to know what students liked or disliked about
English and our lessons, and also what was troubling them and thrilling them. I soon
realised that it was not just the linguistic input per se that would ignite feelings of
anxiety among the learners, but non-linguistic factors too, such as the UK Border
Agency regulations about IELTS band scores that would accordingly allow students
to extend their visas or bring their families to the UK. I soon learned that alleviating
students LA about EFL learning was not as easy as I thought it would be. It was at
that moment that my curiosity in LA over EFL was born. Starting from such
considerations about my students, and given my different experiences as an EFL
teacher both in Greece and in the UK, as well as my personal profile of an anxious
language learner, an investigation of what exactly makes students anxious in the EFL
classroom was a natural continuation for my research interests and teaching practice.
My negative affective experiences with relation to speaking in EFL were
definitely a stepping stone to research into speaking anxiety, which arguably
constitutes an integral part of this project. However, while reading the literature on
LA, I noticed a paucity of publications into writing anxiety. Given that EFL learning
in Greece relies heavily on students writing competence, I felt that research into EFL
writing anxiety could lead to promising insights into how students experience writing
in a foreign language, and could subsequently supplement my research findings of
speaking anxiety, thereby offering a holistic perspective on anxiety about the two
6

productive skills. The data I collected have also shown that participants tended to
distinguish between general classroom LA and skill-specific LA. The present study
therefore follows this line of thought as well.

1.3 Purpose of the study
The project responded to the scarcity of research into the LA of Greek EFL
learners, and aimed at:
exploring the links between LA and language-skill specificity
examining the causes of skill-specific LA
looking at the interrelationship between skill-specific LA and different
proficiency levels, and
investigating the strategies deployed by EFL teachers and learners in order to
minimise students classroom and skill-specific LA.
These aims were further split into five research questions:
1. Which factors contribute to the speaking anxiety of Greek EFL learners?
2. Which factors influence Greek EFL learners writing anxiety?
3. What is the difference in skill-specific LA among students at different
proficiency levels?
4. What aspects are perceived as the main causes of classroom LA?
5. What strategies do Greek EFL students deploy to minimise their classroom
and skill-specific LA and how do their teachers choose to intervene?
These questions were addressed through a sequential explanatory investigation
using a standardised questionnaire followed by a diary study and in-depth interviews
with the students, as well as in-depth interviews with their EFL tutors, and guided by
a pragmatic research paradigm.
7

1.4 Thesis outline
The thesis consists of eight chapters. The present chapter offers an
introduction to the thesis, providing the background of and rationale for the present
study, delineating my personal motivation to investigate LA, and stating the overall
aims of the project defined through both confirmatory and exploratory research
questions.
Chapter Two constitutes a review of the theories and research that shape
current conceptualisations of classroom LA. The chapter discusses skill-specific LA,
with an emphasis on the productive skills of speaking and writing in EFL. Anxiety-
ensuing factors as well as strategies implemented to allay students LA are presented
next. The literature review concludes with a set of reasons why I consider that more
research is needed in the field.
Chapter Three offers background information about my research site aiming to
facilitate a better understanding of the project. The Greek foreign language education
system is described, and the role played by EFL learning on the national curriculum,
on professional development, and on Greek learners intentionality to learn EFL, is
emphasised.
Chapter Four details the methodology of the study. Epistemological
assumptions forming the basis of the study are defined first, together with the reasons
why a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design was deemed most appropriate for
answering my research questions. Chapter Four also provides information about my
participants, the data collection instruments, and the procedures of collecting and
analysing data, for the quantitative and qualitative component separately. Research
validity and reliability as well as ethical issues in research involving human
participants are then discussed.
8

The findings are presented in two chapters. Chapter Five Quantitative
Results covers descriptive statistics, that is, measures of central tendency, and
inferential statistics: one-way analysis of variance, exploratory factor analysis, and
correlational results. Chapter Six Qualitative Findings begins with student
participant profiles including their total LA scores and summaries of their interviews
and, where applicable, their diaries. The interview and diary data are presented in
detail in the remainder of this chapter.
The quantitative and qualitative findings are integrated and discussed in
Chapter Seven, which is dedicated to a discussion of the most salient emerging
themes. Sections in this chapter also present the implications of the study for language
educators and researchers.
Finally, the Conclusion in Chapter Eight sums up the research findings by
revisiting each research question, discusses the limitations of the study, and suggests
ideas for further research. In this chapter, I also conclude that the aims I had set out at
the beginning were achieved.










9

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction
The present chapter aims at reviewing existing research into anxiety-related
phenomena in the foreign language classroom. My research has adopted a linear
approach to investigating anxiety, by measuring learners levels of anxiety first
despite the difficulties of such a measurement , identifying their sources of anxiety
second, and recommending the implementation of anxiety-reducing strategies third.
This stance was adopted given the conceptual links between LA and anxiety that
manifests in our modern world, as well as the close ties of LA with the discipline of
psychology.
The review therefore consists of six sections: 1. The notion of LA (defining
LA and associated concepts, and discussing the different types of LA and how they
interact with classroom language learning). 2. Skill-specific anxiety with particular
emphasis on the productive language skills (explicating differences in the medium of
communication, before analysing when, why, and how LA appears in EFL speaking
and writing classes). 3. The major stressors (listing a set of interpersonal,
intrapersonal, environmental, cognitive, and affective sources of LA in foreign
language classrooms). 4. LA and its relation to other learner variables, such as level of
proficiency in English (reviewing primarily quantitative, correlational research into
the links between age and LA, and proficiency levels and LA). 5. Anxiety
management and reduction techniques (discussing advice offered in the existing
literature on how language educators could help students minimise their LA in class,
as well as research results from few empirical intervention studies conducted in the
10

field). 6. Research needed (arguing that there is insufficient research in foreign
language learning that addresses LA associated with language skills other speaking,
contextual sources of LA and intervention methods, and concluding that more
qualitative research is also needed).

2.2 Language anxiety: From mainstream psychology to language education
Many different words in the English language relate to the subjective
experience of anxiety, such as dread, panic, apprehension, nervousness,
worry, and fear (Clark and Beck, 2010). This has therefore somehow led to
confusion in the use of the term anxious. As will be explained below, SLA
researchers have treated the anxiety-related words listed above as some of the main
psychosomatic symptoms of anxiety arousal. In fact, anxiety is often presented as a
variant of fear (MacIntyre, 2002) or even panic (Ehrman, 1996).Within psychology-
based research, however, most emphasis has been placed on distinguishing between
anxiety and fear in any theoretical discussions about anxiety. Fear could best be
conceived of as an antecedent of anxiety, and anxiety is an emotional response
triggered by fear (Clark and Beck, 2010, p. 5). As Barlow (2002, p. 104) stated, fear
is a primitive alarm in response to present danger, characterised by strong arousal and
action tendencies, while anxiety is defined as a future-oriented emotion,
characterised by perceptions of uncontrollability and unpredictability over potentially
aversive events and a rapid shift in attention to the focus of potentially dangerous
events or ones own affective response to these events. What fear and anxiety do
have in common though is a future orientation, with what if? questions
predominating (Clark and Beck, 2010). In the EFL learning context, for instance,
questions such as What if I fail the course?, or What if I am not able to understand
11

what the teacher is asking me in English?, can engender feelings of LA among
students. Rachman (1998) attributed anxiety to subjective unidentified sources, which,
exactly because indeterminate, cause a range of symptoms. Anxiety then persists
because anxious people refrain from entering anxiety-provoking situations, but, on the
contrary, tend to insist on endless reminiscences of past threats, hence being unable to
set emotional processing into action (Rachman, 1998).
Within education, cognition and affect are seen as inextricably entwined and
complementary in nature. Damasio (2000, p. 36) argued that it is through feelings,
which are inwardly directed and private, that emotions, which are outwardly directed
and public, begin their impact on the mind. According to MacIntyre (2002),
cognition refers to intelligence, language aptitude, and language learning strategies, as
opposed to affect which encompasses attitudes, motivation, anxiety, self-confidence,
as well as social aspects of language learning. Language learning, therefore, could be
thought of as a symbiosis of body, mind, and emotions (Young, 1999).
Affective factors in the language classroom were highlighted by proponents of
teaching methods, such as Total Physical Response (TPR) and Suggestopedia, who
argued that an important condition for successful language learning is the absence of
stress (Richards and Rodgers, 2001). Interest in affect in general, and in anxiety in
particular, was also augmented by Krashens (1981) affective filter hypothesis, which
posits that negative emotions, that is, low integrative motivation, low self-confidence,
and high anxiety, signify a strong filter, which is not conducive to SLA. As Krashen
(1981, p. 31) explained, even if students understand the target message, the input
will not reach that part of the brain responsible for language acquisition, or the
language acquisition device, only because their negative psychology will impede
their receptivity and ability to process linguistic input. Krashen (1981) concluded that
12

the combination of comprehensible input that is one degree higher than the learners
current proficiency level (i + 1) and a low affective filter are likely to contribute to
successful language acquisition.
The humanistic movement also contributed towards shifting the focus of
language teaching to the affective domain. The inner world of the individual,
including thoughts, feelings, and emotions, while considering cognition to a much
lesser extent, was placed at the forefront of language teaching (Tudor, 2001; Williams
and Burden, 1997). Within language education, humanism intends to build a positive
affective relation between the learner and the materials, as well as between the
learner, the teacher, and the peers. Humanistic teaching is learner-centred and
person-centred, largely mirroring ones self and underlining the social dynamics of
the language classroom. As Williams and Burden (1997, p. 115) succinctly put it,
language, after all, belongs to a persons whole social being; it is a part of ones
identity, and is used to convey this identity to other people.

2.3 Defining language anxiety
Emotions can be particularly difficult to define and measure given the fact that
they constitute inner-learner, unconscious variables, and LA is no exception. Indeed,
SLA researchers have underlined that defining, measuring, and researching affective
factors remains a formidable challenge (Nunan and Lamb, 1996; Scovel, 2001).
Nunan and Lamb (1996, p. 208), in particular, commented on the ubiquity of affective
variables, summing up the challenge researchers face as follows:

Within the field of education, there seems to be almost universal agreement that
affective factors are critical to effective learning. [] Because they are difficult to
define, they are extremely difficult to measure, and it is almost impossible to specify
the contribution they make to the learning process. Despite all this, they refuse to go
13

away, and so it is necessary for us to deal with them, doing the best we can with the
blunt instruments at our disposal.

As will be explained in the methodological decisions and considerations in
chapter 4, my own alignment with the social turn in SLA has led me not to rely solely
on self-reports as a means of furthering understanding of LA, but to also design
context-specific instruments and attach great importance to them in order to explore
and conceptualise the complicated and multifaceted nature of LA.
As indicated in the previous section of this chapter, anxiety, fear, and panic
often constitute topics of close proximity, despite psychology researchers call for the
need to distinguish between them. Within SLA too, coming to an acceptable
definition of LA is an important step to achieve a greater understanding of LA and its
influence on learning. This section, therefore, will focus on how LA has been defined.
Generally speaking, anxiety in both the psychological and language learning
literature is characterised as a negative emotion with a negative impact on learning. In
SLA, the definitions and conceptualisation of LA have been significantly influenced
by the field of cognitive psychology, yet drawing on this discipline has not reduced
the difficulty of capturing the nature of this psychological construct. Brown (1994, p.
141) argued that anxiety is almost impossible to define in a single sentence. Arnold
and Brown (1999, p. 8) opted for a qualitative description, claiming that anxiety is
associated with negative feelings such as uneasiness, frustration, self-doubt,
apprehension and tension. Much in the same vein, Spielberger (1983, p. 3) defined
anxiety as the subjective feeling of tension, apprehension, nervousness, and worry
associated with an arousal of the autonomic nervous system.
The great majority of early LA research falls into two broad approaches to
identifying anxiety (Horwitz and Young, 1991). The first approach views LA as a
14

transfer of anxieties from other domains, for example, stage fright or test anxiety. In
the second approach, researchers claim that there is something unique about language
learning which makes LA a unique experience too. However, as MacIntyre (1999, p.
26) suggested, these two approaches are not necessarily opposing positions but
represent different perspectives from which to define language anxiety.
In their seminal research into foreign language classroom anxiety, Horwitz,
Horwitz, and Cope (1986, p. 128) defined LA as a distinct complex of self-
perceptions, beliefs, feelings, and behaviours related to classroom language learning,
arising from the uniqueness of the language learning process. Horwitz and Young
(1991) further suggested that LA could best be conceived of as situation-specific,
explaining that there is something unique about the language learning process that
makes students anxious about it. Those students may be confident and resilient in
most other contexts, for example, history or maths classes, but rather nervous in the
language class.
MacIntyre and Gardner (1993, 1994) attempted to further delimit LA by
offering two more definitions. The first stated that language anxiety is fear or
apprehension occurring when a learner is expected to perform in the second or foreign
language (Gardner and MacIntyre, 1993, p. 159). It is important to note that student
performance is often expected to be satisfactory, and students are also expected to
perform through the use of a severely restricted language code (Drnyei, 2001, p.
91), thus aggravating their mounting sensation of anxiety. This definition, however,
seems to encapsulate anxiety that appears before language tasks, somehow ignoring
the possibility of aggravating anxiety while a task unfolds. Their second definition
was thought of as providing for a more comprehensive, narrowed-down, language-
skill-specific description of LA: the feeling of tension and apprehension specifically
15

associated with second language contexts, including speaking, listening, and learning
(MacIntyre and Gardner, 1994, p. 284). The problem with this latter definition though
is that it encompasses LA specific to speaking and listening only, negating the
existence of LA during writing and/or reading tasks.
Horwitz et al.s (1986) definition seems to be the most comprehensive of all,
stressing the significance of the unique nature of language learning and language
classrooms and pointing towards a view of LA as a dynamic system, where beliefs,
self-concepts, emotions, and behavioural responses come into play. Thus, throughout
the thesis, LA will be conceptualised on the basis of Horwitz et al.s (1986)
illuminating definition.

2.4 The nature of language anxiety
2.4.1 Conceptualisation
An important contribution to the conceptualization of LA was made by
Horwitz et al.s (1986) contention that LA is conceptually similar to three related
performance anxieties, namely communication apprehension, fear of negative
evaluation, and test anxiety.
Communication apprehension is described as a feeling of shyness emanating
from fear or anxiety about speaking in pairs or groups (oral communication anxiety),
in public (stage fright), and in listening to a spoken stimulus (receiver anxiety)
(Horwitz et al., 1986). Test anxiety mainly stems from fear of failure in tests, and
consists of two constructs: worry, referring to focusing of attention on concerns
about performance, consequences of failure, negative self-evaluation, evaluation of
ones ability relative to others, and the like, and emotionality defined as the
affective-physiological experience generated from increased autonomic arousal
16

(Deffenbacher, 1980, p. 112). Worry is mostly to do with the psychological and
behavioural dimensions of anxiety, while emotionality encompasses a range of
physical symptoms (Deffenbacher, 1980). Zeidner (2007) further argued that, when
tested, students are likely to feel that their capabilities are inferior to the demands
evoked by the evaluative situation. Fear of negative evaluation appears during social
evaluative situations, where students worry that significant others (i.e. the teacher
and/or the peers) would criticize them. Examples of behavioural reactions to fear of
negative evaluation include sitting passively in the classroom, withdrawing from
activities, or entirely cutting classes (Aida, 1994). Since language learning requires
communication, often through the use of a limited linguistic code, it seems logical
that students who fear communicating or being viewed negatively by others would
find language learning a particularly stressful experience.
Horwitz (1986) examined the relationships between these three anxieties and
LA, and found that the correlations between communication apprehension, fear of
negative evaluation, and LA were non-significant (r = .28 and .36, respectively),
while the correlation between test anxiety and LA was significant but moderate (r =
.53, p=.001). Whilst recognizing the three categories as a potentially useful instrument
to approach LA, Horwitz, Tallon, and Luo (2010, p. 97) still urge caution:

Taken together, these findings indicate that although foreign language anxiety may
share some variance with several other types of anxieties, it is also clearly
distinguishable from these other anxieties and should be considered as an impediment
to language learning in and of itself.

Therefore, whilst these three concepts employed by Horwitz et al. (1986) allow to
better describe LA, it can be deduced that LA should not be seen as a combination of
17

them. In fact, these three categories could function as useful clues as to possible
causes of LA in the language classroom.
MacIntyre and Gardner (1994b) constructed a different theory, which posited
that LA occurs at each of the three stages of the SLA process, namely input,
processing, and output. Firstly, input anxiety refers to negative feelings students may
experience when they are presented with a new word or structure in the foreign
language for the first time. Here, anxiety stems from a joint effort to receive,
comprehend, and encode external information about the language, leading to
approaching input inefficiently. This leads to processing anxiety, where apprehensive
students exercise cognitive power on the material presented to them in an attempt to
mentally organise it and transform it into material they will eventually acquire. Lastly,
output anxiety impedes most attempts to produce the already learned aspects of the
language.

2.4.2 An interdisciplinary approach to LA
To understand what LA means, it is important to place it in the general context
of research into anxiety through the use of an interdisciplinary approach that has leant
heavily on the categorisation of the types of anxiety found in psychology. As
MacIntyre (1999, p. 28) suggested, even if one views language anxiety as being a
unique form of anxiety, specific to second language contexts, it is still instructive to
explore the links between it and the rest of the anxiety literature.
Within psychology-based research, two perspectives have been identified as
trait and state anxiety (Spielberger, 1983). Trait anxiety views anxiety as a distinct
personality trait, which remains stable over time and across a variety of situations. By
contrast, state anxiety is the moment-to-moment experience of anxiety; it is the
18

transient emotional state of feeling nervous that can fluctuate over time and vary in
intensity (MacIntyre, 1999, p. 28). Working in the field of general education,
Croznier (1997, p. 124) included descriptions of both trait and state anxiety in his
discussion about anxiety:

Personality theorists distinguish state and trait anxiety. Many situations, like
examinations, public speaking, interviews, and going to the dentist are likely to evoke
a state of anxiety in most people. The trait position proposes that some people are
more prone to anxiety than others, in that they react to more situations with anxiety or
react to particular situations with more intense emotion.

The intensity of both state and trait anxiety depends on the vulnerability of
each person (Rachman, 1998, p. 27). For example, personality-wise, individuals can
be either introverted or extraverted, and, anxiety-wise, they can be either a little bit
vulnerable or very vulnerable. The interplay between trait and state anxieties about
language learning was elaborated on by Oxford (1999), who suggested that, at the
early stages of the language learning process, LA constitutes a simple state; if
repeated, unpleasant, and negative events lead students to associate anxiety with
performance, then LA will turn into a trait, which can have deleterious effects on
language learning.
SLA researchers, however, have conceptualised LA as situation-specific
(Ellis, 2008; Horwitz et al., 1986; MacIntyre, 1999). To put it simply, LA is neither a
trait nor a state (Bailey, Daley, and Onwuegbuzie, 1999; Bailey, Onwuegbuzie, and
Daley, 2000). It may be stable over time but not necessarily applicable to various
situations, as it only refers to the specific context of using a foreign language.
MacIntyre and Gardner (1989, 1991a, 1991b) have suggested a model that
could potentially be applied to the emergence and maintenance of LA as a latent
variable, and which illustrates how LA can best be conceived of as situation-specific.
19

At the initial stages of language learning, anxiety constitutes an undifferentiated,
stable personality trait, which is not specific to the language learning situation.
Students who are still at those stages of learning a language are therefore not expected
to be able to differentiate their anxiety, because their experiences in language class
have not had sufficient time to become reliably discriminated from other types of
anxiety experiences (MacIntyre and Gardner, 1991b, p. 303). However, after
repeated experiences with the second language environment, students may begin to
associate feelings of anxiety with the language class. If negative experiences have
occurred, LA is likely to develop.

2.4.3 Boon or burden?
An important distinction in research into LA has been made between
debilitating/inhibitory and facilitating/beneficial anxiety. As previously discussed, the
prevailing view in SLA is that anxiety hinders students performance. However, LA
may also be viewed as having a facilitating effect or even no effect at all on learners
performance (Drnyei, 2005). The no-effect position largely originated from Sparks
and Ganschows (1991) Linguistic Coding Deficit/Differences Hypothesis (LCDH),
which suggested that high performance in foreign language learning depends on
learners cognitive abilities, L1 deficiencies, and aptitude. This section will focus on
the controversial debate about anxiety having a positive effect on people or not.
Debilitating anxiety can affect learners either indirectly, causing a range of
psychosomatic symptoms such as worry and self-doubt, or directly through impaired
performance and avoidance behavior (Oxford, 1990). Horwitz et al. (1986) and
Horwitz (2000, 2001) have argued that low self-esteem, demanding classroom tasks,
20

and unfriendly lockstep instructions may cause debilitating anxiety, resulting in
learners low achievement in EFL.
However, some emphasis in the existing literature has been placed on
facilitating anxiety, otherwise termed alertness (Young, 1992), positive energy (Aida,
1994), and tension or arousal (Ehrman, 1996). Generally speaking, certain individuals
may appear to thrive in pressure situations. Ehrman (1996) explained that the main
function of this type of anxiety is to create an adequate amount of anxiety relative to
zero anxiety in order to activate cognition and ameliorate performance in the long run.
Two prominent examples of research that examined the nature of facilitating
anxiety are Chastains (1975) and Kleinmanns (1977) studies. In a comparative study
on the influence of anxiety on student test scores in audiolingual classes and in classes
using the traditional approach, Chastain (1975) found a negative correlation between
test scores and anxiety of students enrolled in French classes using the audiolingual
method. However, the results indicated a positive correlation between anxiety and the
scores of German and Spanish students using the traditional method. Chastain (1975,
p. 160) concluded that perhaps some concern about a test is a plus while too much
anxiety can produce negative results.
Kleinmann (1977) used a variety of tests to examine the relationship between
the English linguistic structures that were avoided by Arabic and Spanish students and
the linguistic structures of the students native languages. The hypothesis was that the
English structures that contrasted most markedly with the native language of the
student would be avoided most frequently. Kleinmann (1977) also hypothesized that
facilitating anxiety would urge learners to use those English structures that their
native peers would tend to avoid. Both hypotheses were confirmed. Spanish students
who scored high on facilitating anxiety measures often used infinitive complements
21

and direct object pronouns in English, structures that were difficult in English and
were therefore avoided by the other Spanish-speaking peers. By the same token,
Arabic learners who scored high on facilitating anxiety measures employed passive
constructions that were usually avoided by the other Arabic-speaking students due to
their divergence from the Arabic syntax. Kleinmann (1977, p. 105) concluded that
certain affective measures influenced learner behaviour in a foreign language. In his
review of the research into anxiety, Scovel (1978) commented that Kleinmanns and
Chastains empirical insights into facilitating anxiety have paved the way for re-
theorising and thinking of LA as a complex construct, which is influenced by factors
that are both intrinsic and extrinsic to the learner.
More recently, the facilitating side of LA was empirically investigated by
Spielmann and Radnofsky (2001), challenging once again many of the established
assumptions of LA research, and especially its strongly emphasised debilitating
dimension. The researchers conducted an ethnographic study of a full beginners class
and a false beginners class of students learning French in a summer school in
Vermont, USA. The most notable finding of this study was the researchers
suggestion that the term language anxiety inevitably has negative connotations,
which has led towards the acceptance of a one-dimensional view of LA. The authors
also suggested a shift from anxiety to tension, differentiating between euphoric
and dysphoric tension. The former poses a challenge to the learners, but is
controllable and promotes positive and successful encounters with the language. An
example of euphoric tension that the authors cited referred to learners being taught
through an inductive, more communicative approach, and feeling quite gratified
(ibid., p. 268) when being able to choose study materials. Students positive
experience was further enhanced by increased attempts to communicate.
22

Nevertheless, the same learners also experienced dysphoric tension, which appeared
as dissatisfaction and frustration arising from their beliefs about which aspects of the
target language they should have focused on in class in order to accelerate their
progress.
Scovel (1978) suggested that facilitating anxiety and debilitating anxiety
should work in tandem. Young (1992) presented a number of different perspectives
on the role that facilitating anxiety plays on SLA by interviewing specialists in the
field. Krashen argued that facilitating anxiety is crucial for activities that promote
conscious learning; Terrell suggested that facilitating anxiety should best be
conceived of as attention to input (ibid., p. 161); and, Rardin explained that
facilitating anxiety is always present and operative, resulting in a type of defensive
learning (ibid., p. 162), where protective mechanisms are activated in an attempt to
strike a balance between learners negative psychology and the ultimate goal of
learning. Bailey (1983), after reflecting in her diary on her own experiences of
learning French in order to pass a translation test which was part of the requirements
for passing her PhD, concluded that many of her own references had origins in her
competitiveness. The researcher commented that competitiveness could arise either
from wanting to do better or be as good as her peers, or from her ideal image of what
a good language learner should be like. These feelings could lead either to facilitating
anxiety, motivating students to work harder and do better, or debilitating anxiety,
pressuring students to avoid classes or the task.
The Yerkes-Dodson Law has been utilised by SLA researchers to explain how
facilitating anxiety actually functions by describing the relationship between
performance and anxiety. An optimal level of arousal is required to enhance students
quality of performance; however, too much arousal may turn into stress, stress may
23

become anxiety, and anxiety may even result in panic, which will negatively affect
the quality of performance. Figure 1 below shows the variations in anxiety levels with
connection to the quality of performance.

Figure 1. Inverted U-shaped relationship between anxiety and performance (MacIntyre, 1995)

Allwright and Bailey (1991, p. 172) centred too on the relationship between the
quality of performance and the level of anxiety, endorsing the view that success is
partly predicated on the possibility of failure:

Knowing that success is not guaranteed, but that making an effort might make all the
difference between success and failure, we may do better precisely because our
anxiety has spurred us on. If, on the other hand, we would really like to succeed but
feel that no matter how hard we try, we are most likely to fail, then our anxiety is
likely to make it even more difficult for us to produce our best.

Having said this, the debate on whether anxiety is facilitating or debilitating is
still largely tipped in favour of seeing it as a negative, debilitating force. However,
given the above discussion on a number of different anxiety types, such as
trait/state/situation-specific anxiety as well as debilitating/facilitating anxiety, it
24

should be recognised that anxiety is perhaps better seen existing along a continuum as
opposed to discreet either/or categories.

2.5 Speaking anxiety
Most research has shown that LA is linked with oral performance, thus
causing oral achievement in the target language to suffer (Gregersen and Horwitz,
2002; Horwitz, 2000, 2001; Horwitz et al., 1986; Kitano, 2001; Liu, 2006; MacIntyre,
Noels, and Clment, 1997; Woodrow, 2006; Young, 1992). Arguably, speaking is the
skill in which the students language ego is most vulnerable due to a high level of
self-exposure that it imposes on them. Daly (1991) gave five explanations for the
development of speaking anxiety: a) genetic predisposition, that is an individuals
tendency to be sociable and active, b) an individuals history of reinforcements and
punishments when s/he was a child, c) the lack of rewards during communicative
attempts, d) peoples early development of communication skills, and e) lack of
suitable models of communication. In most classrooms, language tutors face the
dilemma of transforming language learning into a pleasant experience or developing
students oral fluency and accuracy (Phillips, 1991). This section will concentrate on
the nature and conceptualisation of speaking anxiety, starting with a discussion about
theoretical concepts associated with it, and then considering empirical evidence on the
construct of speaking anxiety.

2.5.1 Theoretical concepts linked to speaking anxiety
As noted earlier, communication apprehension hinders the production of
language. According to Daly (1991), ambiguity is a characteristic contributing to
communication apprehension. Language learning has the potential for ambiguity, and
25

when speaking, teachers and students do not operate in a vacuum but are often faced
with having to involve in interactions with the premise that they must understand
what is being said. With reference to L2 speaking, and given that students are
expected to communicate orally through the use of unfamiliar sounds or forms, it
seems logical that communication apprehension directly affects the levels of an
individuals willingness to communicate (WTC; MacIntyre and Charos, 1996;
McCroskey, 1970; McCroskey and Richmond, 1987, 1991). Parallel to LA, WTC
correlates with certain personality variables, such as self-confidence, self-efficacy,
and introversion/extroversion (Mitchell, Myles, and Marsden, 2013). Mejias,
Applbaum, Applbaum, and Trotter (1991, p. 88) have stated that the level of
communication apprehension is critical in language learning, for if a student is
apprehensive about communicating in a particular language [] he or she will have
negative affective feelings toward oral communication and will likely avoid it.
The notion of social anxiety in cognitive psychology could also serve as a
means of delineating the complex nature of speaking anxiety. Schlenker and Leary
(1982, p. 645) mentioned that social anxiety arises whenever people are motivated to
make a desired impression on others, but are not certain that they will do so. This
definition suggests a positive correlation between social anxiety on the one hand, and
motivation and level of doubt on the other: as both the desire to be approved by others
and the uncertainty of such an event to occur increase, the amount of social anxiety
increases as well (Kitano, 2001; MacIntyre, 2002).
It could be argued that the theory of social anxiety shares some commonalities
with the terror management theory proposed by Greenberg and his colleagues (1992,
p. 913), who speculated that people are motivated to maintain a positive self-image
because self-esteem protects them from anxiety. Horwitz et al. (1986) claimed that
26

foreign language learning poses a threat to self-esteem because it is axiomatic that
students will make mistakes when communicating by means of a language they have
not yet fully acquired or mastered. These threats to learners self-esteem provoke
anxiety and could be managed by increasing their degree of self-worth.

2.5.2 Empirical evidence on speaking anxiety
Horwitz et al. (1986, p. 127) argued that the foreign language classroom may
represent serious impediments to the development of second language fluency as
well as to performance. This may be due to the severely restricted language code
through which learners are expected to perform in class, that further renders language
classrooms inherently face threatening environments (Drnyei, 2001, p. 91). Given
that learners have to communicate through the medium of a new language, it is highly
likely that they will make mistakes. However, the majority of students fear making
mistakes in classroom oral tasks, and view mistakes as a manifestation of weakness
and incompetence. At the same time, several students believe that speaking is the
most important skill they need to learn in order to master a foreign language (Kitano,
2001; Phillips, 1991). Teachers, too, think of speaking as a vital aspect of the learning
process. Dalys (1991, pp. 6-7) quote is indicative of this point:

From the start of a persons schooling, willingness to communicate plays an
important role in how well one performs and how positively one is perceived. In early
studies, scholars found that teachers have a positive bias toward talkative children in
their classrooms [] This bias is reflected in the policy of many teachers to include
classroom participation in grade calculations [] we live in an educational world
where orality is seen as a necessary, personal positive characteristic.

Thus, students fear of making mistakes when speaking in a foreign language,
doubled by their beliefs about the enormous significance of learning speaking, are
likely to aggravate their feelings of LA.
27

Learners self-perception of their ability is thought to be a distinguishable
aspect of oral performance. Daly (1991, p. 10) associated conspicuousness, that is
the idea of feeling self-conscious and exposed to an uncomfortable degree, with
learning speaking:

Imagine walking into a party and having everyone turn to stare at you. That
experience alone is likely to make you more anxious. People prefer not to be the
focus of attention especially when they feel they are engaging in an activity where
their competence is low.

This scenario gives an idea of what students may have to cope with. Students are very
often the focus of classroom interaction, they are highly visible, and therefore the
option of falling back on being just one in a class of students is not a viable one.
MacIntyre et al. (1997) explored how students L2 actual competence and LA
affect their perceived competence in the L2. The participants in their study were 37
Anglophones enrolled in a first-year philosophy course at a bilingual university, who
had considerable exposure to French. They were administered a LA questionnaire
consisting of items from Gardners French use anxiety and French class anxiety scales
(MacIntyre and Gardner, 1989), and a modified version of the can do test that
assessed their self-perceived competence on 26 French tasks. The researchers reported
a strong link between actual competence, perceived competence, and LA. In addition,
a significant negative correlation (r=.-60) was found between self-rated speaking
proficiency and LA.
Kitano (2001) administered a survey to 211 Japanese students at two major
universities in the USA and concluded that a significant negative correlation exists
between LA and self-perceived speaking ability. Thus, as students perceived of
themselves as less competent than their peers, their level of LA increased. Much in
28

the same vein, Woodrow (2006) collected quantitative data from 275 participants
enrolled in EAP courses in Australia. The researcher developed the Second Language
Speaking Anxiety Scale (SLSAS) for her study and made use of additional interviews.
The results indicated that speaking anxiety both within and outside the language
classroom was associated with L2 self-perceived performance.
Price (1991) conducted interviews with highly anxious students. The
participants believed that their pronunciation was not accurate and that they were not
pronouncing words as native speakers would do. Perhaps one of the most forceful
comments to be found in the LA literature was made by one of the students that Price
interviewed. After doing an end-of-term oral presentation in French the foreign
language -, the student made the observation that Id rather be in a prison camp than
speak a foreign language (ibid., p. 104). MacIntyre (1999, p. 39) suggested that such
remarks are indicative of underlying insecurities in language learning:

Some readers might be tempted to dismiss these excerpts as exaggerations. Even if
they are somewhat melodramatic, the statements express deep-seated feelings, and
the underlying sentiment should not be ignored. Language learning provokes a
traumatic reaction in some individuals.

In yet another study, Bailey (1983) reflected on her own language learning
experiences in a personal diary. The researcher concluded that anxiety can be caused
and/or aggravated by the learners competitiveness when he sees himself as less
proficient than the object of comparison (ibid., p. 27). What Bailey (1983, p. 86)
confirmed, then, is that anxiety is often caused or exacerbated when perceiving
oneself in relation to others, and what the language learner perceives as real may be
more important to that persons language learning experience than any external
reality.
29

Students reticence and anxiety was also investigated by Tsui (1996), who
videotaped or recorded lessons of 38 English-as-a-second-language (ESL) secondary
school teachers in Hong Kong. The teachers were shown the videos or given the
recordings, and were then asked to identify a problem they faced while teaching. This
procedure led to a taxonomic system of strategies that they were asked to use for a
period of four weeks. During this period, the teachers also kept a diary where they
reported on their thoughts and on classroom events. At the end of the four-week
period, they videotaped or recorded one more lesson, evaluating the perceived results
and effectiveness of the strategies, and then wrote a report. Analyzing the data, Tsui
(1996) concluded that students reticence was due to their fear of making mistakes
and the subsequent, possible derision by peers, teachers intolerance of silence,
uneven allocation of turns during which teachers attention shifted to those students
whom they knew were willing to provide an immediate answer, and incomprehensible
input mainly because of the way questions were formed or instructions given.
Foreign language learners have also been found to share feelings of fear of
negative evaluation as part of the speaking classes they attend. Gregersen and Horwitz
(2002) measured reactions to oral performance among four anxious and four non-
anxious second-year English language students at the University of Atacama, Chile.
They used videotaped conversations with the participants in order to obtain a sample
of their speaking ability in English, and then conducted interviews to elicit the
informants beliefs on their feelings of anxiety and perfectionism. The findings
revealed that the highly anxious participants were influenced by others evaluations
and the subsequent possibility of looking foolish, and consistently linked their
mistakes in speaking activities to that possibility. The researchers also found that a
range of perfectionist traits were strongly associated with the four anxious learners,
30

but not with the non-anxious learners. In particular, the perfectionist/anxious students
would not be satisfied with merely communicating in the target language; on the
contrary, they would aim for flawless speech, similar to that of a native speaker, or
otherwise would likely prefer to remain silent until they were certain of how to
express their thoughts. Gregersen and Horwitz (2002, p. 562) concluded that such
impossibly high performance standards create the ideal conditions for the
development of language anxiety. Much in the same vein, the students who
compared their pronunciation with that of native speakers in Prices (1991) study also
feared being looked down on. Additionally, Kitano (2001) concluded that a positive
correlation (r=.316) exists between LA and fear of negative evaluation.
Liu (2006) investigated 547 Chinese undergraduate non-English majors at
three different proficiency levels through the use of an adapted Foreign Language
Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS; Horwitz et al., 1986), as well as observations,
reflective journals, and interviews. The researcher found that the students felt the most
anxious when answering questions set by the teacher or when asked to speak English
in class. Further, Young (1990) found that many Spanish learners would be willing to
take part in oral classroom tasks if they were not afraid of saying the wrong thing.
The emergence of fear of negative evaluation as an important component of
classroom speaking anxiety has also been well documented through factor analytic
studies. In a study of 96 second-year Japanese students at the University of Texas at
Austin, Aida (1994, p. 159) found that speech anxiety and fear of negative evaluation
may not be totally independent concepts, but rather are probably different labels
describing one phenomenon in a language learning situation. Cheng, Horwitz, and
Schallert (1999) investigated the links between second language classroom anxiety
and second language writing anxiety among 433 Taiwanese English majors. The
31

principal components analysis of the FLCAS pointed at low self-confidence in
speaking English as being the most prominent factor of classroom anxiety. Koul et al.
(2009) administered a survey to 1,387 Thai college students to examine their goal
orientations for learning English as well as their anxiety. The researchers concluded
that LA stemmed from fear of failing the class, examination anxiety, fear of negative
evaluation, speaking anxiety, and frustration and apprehension arising from students
inability to comprehend or express oneself in English. Furthermore, Mak (2011)
examined the sources of speaking-in-class anxiety of 313 Chinese English first-year
university students in Hong Kong. Speech anxiety and fear of negative evaluation
again constituted the first factor of the L2 oral anxiety sources taxonomy. In
particular, speaking in front of the class without being prepared in advance, and being
corrected when speaking were the two most frequently mentioned causes of speaking
anxiety.
In a comparative study on anxiety in a reading course and a conversation
course, Kim (2009) administered four sets of questionnaires to 59 students at a
womens University in Korea and divided the research into two phases. In the pretest
phase, the Trait Anxiety Inventory, the Korean version of the FLCAS, the
Achievement Motivation Questionnaire, and a background questionnaire, were used.
In the main test phase, only the FLCAS and the Achievement Motivation
Questionnaire were administered to the participants. The results showed that the
students were more anxious in conversation classes than reading classes (mean score
of 104 as opposed to 98.4 in the reading classes). The researcher also found that
speaking anxiety stemmed from spontaneous speaking, speaking in front of peers, fear
of negative evaluation, and meeting the requirements of the speaking course.

32

2.6 Writing anxiety
Writing could be considered as the least anxiety-provoking of the four skills.
As Leki (1999, p. 65) succinctly put it,

Unlike when listening and reading, when writing one controls the language and the
content of the message. Unlike speaking, writing allows time to think about the
message, to find words and syntactic structures to communicate the message, and to
change the content and the language after the first attempt is written down.

Nonetheless, the writing process is not always linear for foreign language learners.
Research has also shown that writing can lead to difficulties and apprehension even in
ones L1 (Daly and Miller, 1975a, 1975b).
Writing anxiety or, as is more often referred to, writing apprehension
appears when negative feelings about oneself as a writer and about ones abilities to
meet the requirements of a writing task emerge, all of which may disrupt certain
aspects of the writing process (Rankin-Brown, 2006). Writing apprehension causes
difficulties with the task at hand, despite the writer having the mental acuity to cope
with it. Cheng et al. (1999) claimed that second language writing anxiety should best
be understood as language-skill-specific, given that it correlates with and predicts
writing achievement.
Research into L2 writing anxiety has sought to identify its sources with a view
to suggesting approaches to writing instruction that may reduce highly anxious
learners writing anxiety. Hayes (1996) argued that writing anxiety is caused by
students low self-related perceptions of themselves as writers, as well as their fixed
language learning mindsets that successful writing in the L2 is attributable to a natural
talent. Leki (1999) listed a number of writing anxiety sources, including the degree of
preparation learners are normally given to successfully complete a writing task,
33

students beliefs about writing, fear of negative evaluation, and differences between
their native language and the target language with respect to rhetorical approaches to
writing. Leki (1999, p. 65) also made a connection between writing anxiety and
attitudes towards writing, claiming that dislike of writing stems from a variety of
sources, most of which are, sadly, the probable results of educational experiences.
Anxiety about writing may also be rooted in students not knowing what is
expected from them when working on a writing task. Learners are often sent mixed
messages from writing teachers about how a piece of writing will be evaluated. Leki
(1999, p. 67) commented:

It is in the courses devoted to language, such as composition courses and foreign
language courses, where good content typically cannot save students and where
papers are returned covered with red correction marks, little stab wounds marking
every linguistic and print code transgression the writer has committed. To make
matters worse, it is precisely in these no-content language courses that students are
the most confused about what the teacher wants in the first place. [] We tell
students that we are interested in their ideas about a topic, that we want to hear what
they think or have to say. But neither writing teachers nor students seem to really
expect that a piece of student writing in a language class will be judged by the ideas
expressed.

ztrk and een (2007) maintained that writing anxiety often stems from
language-related difficulties learners are faced with in the L2. Thus, despite having
ideas to elaborate on in writing, their occasional lack of appropriate vocabulary, or
difficulties with spelling, morphology, and syntax, may lead to the production of low-
quality output which does not always reflect their intellect. Student writers may
therefore know what to say, but not how to say it, as they cannot always find the right
target language forms for expressing their ideas (Leki, 1999). From this perspective,
writing anxiety could result from classroom practices, in the sense that students who
are anxious about writing are, generally, less skillful writers and simultaneously
34

deprived of opportunities to improve their writing skills via writing instruction
(ztrk and een, 2007).
Madigan, Linton, and Johnson (1996, p. 295) suggested that writing
apprehension could lead to distress associated with writing and a profound distaste
for the process, both of which could subsequently cause avoidance behaviour. The
researchers conducted three experiments for the purposes of examining what they
called the paradox of writing apprehension (ibid.), that is to say, the fact that
apprehensive writers reported frustration throughout the writing process, but did not
produce poor-quality writings. The first experiment involved 58 students from
psychology classes at the University of Alaska, Anchorage, and tested the correlation
between writing apprehension and performance. It was found that the essays of
apprehensive and non-apprehensive writers differed slightly but not significantly in
terms of noun phrase fluency, right-branching clause fluency, holistic quality, and
syntactic complexity. Experiments 2 and 3 examined the negative influence of self-
talk
2
on the writing process. In particular, the second experiment analysed the
compositions of 49 first-semester English composition students and 52 freshmen
psychology students on the basis of a prompt given to them. Results showed that
negative self-talk by and large inflicted writing apprehension: students attention was
directed towards self-deprecating thoughts that caused writing apprehension. The
researchers highlighted that it was students weak self-concepts about writing that
made them anxious, and not their actual competence in writing. Self-concept is a
psychological construct which represents individuals cognitive and affective
evaluative beliefs about themselves (Pajares and Schunk, 2005). Research examining
self-concept has emphasised a number of problems emerging from confusion over

2
Self-talk includes ones conscious thoughts as well as their unconscious assumptions and perceptions
of the situations they find themselves in. Self-talk is often skewed towards the negative, often leading
to inaccurate, self-deprecating remarks.
35

overlapping terms, such as self-efficacy and self-esteem. Therefore, it is important to
differentiate self-concept from these closely related terms. As Bandura (1997) put it,
self-efficacy is an expectancy belief, referring to peoples beliefs about themselves as
language learners and about how well they can do in a language course. In contrast,
self-esteem is the evaluative dimension of the self, encompassing beliefs as well as
emotions, such as pride, discouragement, or shame (Mercer, 2011c).
Going back to Madigan et al.s (1996) study, in the third experiment, students
were invited to write two essays, one in a quiet room and one during a lecture, the
latter being thought of as a highly distracting environment, and then complete a
thought-listing questionnaire (ibid., p. 305), where students were asked to describe
their experiences of the writing process. The participants were the same as in the first
experiment. The findings showed that the apprehensive writers modified their self-
talk during the quiet and the distracting condition similarly, but non-significantly, to
the non-apprehensive ones. The researchers concluded that differences in how
students performed in writing were due to how they experienced writing anxiety, with
highly apprehensive student writers being anxious before, during, and after the actual
process of writing.
Rankin-Brown (2006) administered the English as a Second Language Writing
Apprehension Test (ESLWAT; Gungle and Taylor, 1989) to ten students enrolled in
English language courses in an Intensive English Program at a university in the
western part of the USA. The respondents were also interviewed as a follow-up to the
questionnaire. Writing apprehension arose as a result of frustration students
experienced due to self-evaluation and self-expectations of the appropriate way to
write, fear of evaluation from the teacher and peers, and, interestingly, fear of losing
their identity when attempting to incorporate new rhetorical patterns in their writings.
36

Woodrow (2011) conducted an exploratory study with 738 Chinese college
English students in order to examine the relationship between anxiety, self-efficacy,
and writing performance using structural equation modelling. A Likert-scale
questionnaire to measure anxiety and self-efficacy was devised for the study. Writing
performance was operationalised through a free writing test. To measure self-efficacy,
the researcher used a can-do scale concerning writing activities; to measure anxiety,
the participants were asked to rate how anxious they were when completing micro
activities (i.e., sentence-level writing), macro activities (i.e., paragraph and whole-text
writing, mostly describing a graph or writing an argumentative essay), and translation
activities, which were included because they were part of the College English Test 4
(CET-4) that students had to pass in order to graduate and of the College English Test
6 (CET-6) in order to enter a graduate programme. The results showed that writing
anxiety negatively correlated with self-efficacy (r=-.71), meaning that writing anxiety
predicts low self-efficacy. However, writing anxiety was not correlated with writing
performance. On the contrary, self-efficacy about writing was predictive of writing
performance (r=.43).
To conclude, research into skill-specific anxiety has revealed some of its key
dimensions and main causes, in an attempt to help language educators to create more
comfortable language learning environments. Nonetheless, research into the
relationship between speaking anxiety and writing anxiety is scarce. The present study
also aimed at addressing this gap in the existing LA literature.

2.7 The major stressors
The considerations of this section centre on what potential sources of LA
researchers have managed to identify. Clearly, if teachers and students are aware of
37

possible causes of in-class anxiety, measures of intervention would be easier to
implement successfully.
MacIntyre (1999, p. 30) has commented on the fact that very little empirical
research has been done to establish the origins of LA, and several authors have
identified the potential sources of language anxiety based on their experience,
theoretical sophistication, and discussions with anxious language learners. In an
attempt to generalise about the causes of LA, Young (1994) claimed that it may stem
from learner characteristics, teacher characteristics, and classroom procedures. In an
earlier publication, Young (1991) had categorised the possible sources of students
classroom anxiety into six types: personal and interpersonal anxieties originating from
low self-esteem and competitiveness, learner beliefs about language learning,
instructor beliefs about language teaching, instructor-learner interactions, classroom
procedures, and language testing. Gardner (1991, viii), in his Foreword to Horwitz
and Youngs (1991) groundbreaking volume on LA, reflected on various possibilities
too:

From my own perspective, I kept wondering about the etiology of language anxiety.
Does it derive from more general forms of anxiety in that generally anxious
individuals have a predisposition to also experience language anxiety, or is it
relatively distinct? Does it grow out of experiences directly associated with the
language and the learning context, or is it possible that because the other language is
a representation of another cultural community, there is a predisposition among some
people to experience such anxiety because of their own concerns about ethnicity,
foreignness and the like?

Gardner, therefore, points towards the notion that LA might arise out of the language
learning context, or might be a stable personality trait, or might even be associated
with concerns about ones identity. Such notions are seen as pertinent in exploring the
complex phenomenon that is LA, and will be discussed in the sections that follow
38

along with an array of other anxiety-ensuing factors that interfere with classroom
language learning.

2.7.1 Self-efficacy beliefs
A factor that may be a source of LA is the beliefs that individuals hold about
themselves as language learners and about how well they can do in a language course.
Self-efficacy beliefs were indeed found to influence students LA (Bandura, 1986,
1997; Mills, Pajares, and Herron, 2007). Informed by Banduras (1986) social
cognitive theory, self-efficacy is defined as the perception of abilities to perform
actions at a particular level. For example, a student may believe that s/he will get a
high score at an end-of-term test. Self-efficacy influences the choices and actions a
person may take. Thus, a person may attempt a task that s/he is confident about.
Beliefs of personal efficacy do not depend on ones abilities, but rather on what one
believes might be accomplished with ones set of skills. Self-efficacy beliefs are,
therefore, often thought of as better predictors of academic success than are actual
abilities, skills, and knowledge (Bandura, 1997).
Self-efficacy beliefs are interconnected with self-confidence, as well as self-
perceptions of competence and performance. Specifically, if a student is self-
confident and has a high sense of self-efficacy, their anxiety levels will remain low
(Cheng et al., 1999; Clment, Drnyei, and Noels, 1994; MacIntyre et al., 1997). In
fact, within research into the directionality among these constructs, self-confidence
was defined as self-perceptions of communicative competence and concomitant low
levels of anxiety in using the second language (Noels, Pon, and Clment, 1996, p.
248). Thus, self-confidence and LA are positively correlated, as opposed to self-
perceived competence found to be negatively associated with LA but positively
39

associated with language learners WTC (Baker and MacIntyre, 2000; MacIntyre,
Clment, Drnyei, and Noels, 1998). Mills et al. (2007, p. 423) explained that highly
efficacious language learners are even able to transform negative affect into positive
affect in class:

In social cognitive theory, ones perceived sense of efficacy to exercise control over
potentially problematic situations plays a key role in the arousal of student anxiety.
Those with a stronger sense of efficacy are more apt to take on the deleterious
happenings that breed stress with positive expectations and are often more
successful in transforming them into positive events.

Bandura (1997) also posited that self-efficacy beliefs are informed by previous
experiences which can be positive or negative. These beliefs may be based on
previous mastery experiences, for example previous success when doing a similar
task, or previous experiences of failure, for instance in formative or summative
evaluative situations. Self-efficacy beliefs can also be influenced by persuasion of
significant others, for example, a teacher or peer persuading an individual of their
competence, or by self-judgments, either accurate or inaccurate, for example anxiety
can lead to lower self-efficacy due to thoughts of possible failure (Bandura, 1986,
1997). One of the most significant aspects of this is the view that self-efficacy is not
fixed but is informed by the antecedents mentioned above and, most importantly, that
it can be manipulated in the classroom (Schunk, Pintrich, and Meece, 2008). Bandura
(1995) also posited that individuals with a high sense of efficacy create success
scenarios, whereas those doubting their efficacy resort to failure scenarios,
considering their negative experiences only. MacIntyre et al. (1997) also distinguished
between the self-enhancement bias and the self-derogation bias, both influenced by an
individuals strength of their self-efficacy. Specifically, the former emanates from a
40

desire to strengthen ones feelings of personal satisfaction and self-worth, whilst the
latter appears in individuals who tend to underestimate their capacities.
Insights from empirical research into LA and self-efficacy could help towards
a greater understanding of the conceptual links between them. MacIntyre et al. (1997)
conducted a study with 37 Anglophone students in English-language sections of a
compulsory first-year philosophy class at a bilingual university in Canada, whose
competence in French varied widely. The participants completed a questionnaire in
English, consisting of a LA scale and a self-rated L2 proficiency scale evaluating their
self-perceptions on 25 different tasks which they then attempted to complete. The
results indicated a significant negative correlation between actual competence,
perceived competence, and LA. In particular, the anxious students were found to
underestimate their abilities, as opposed to their non-anxious counterparts who tended
to overestimate their competence in the L2. Therefore, as their level of anxiety
increased, their subjective competence decreased. Additionally, in the case of
speaking, writing, and comprehension tasks, the mean residual score (i.e., statistically
speaking, it indicates that the participant has made an accurate prediction of their
actual score) for the anxious students was negative, whereas the mean residual score
for the relaxed students was positive.
Onwuegbuzie, Bailey, and Daley (1999) investigated 210 university students
enrolled in French, German, Spanish, and Japanese courses, in order to examine the
factors connected with LA. Using setwise multiple regression analysis, the researchers
found that the students expected final foreign language course grades had the highest
significant correlation (r=-.45) with LA. The results also revealed that highly anxious
students had low expectations of their overall score, and low self-perceptions of their
proficiency in the L2.
41

2.7.2 Identity or the self
LA research has acknowledged issues related to identity. The central tenet is
that foreign language learning is a unique academic discipline impacting on our
identities in powerful and subtle ways. This is because the language being learned is
the object of study and, at the same time, the vehicle through which students are
expected to express themselves and communicate. Such uniqueness and the way the
learner of a foreign language can be confronted with a self that bears no relation to
their true self have led Horwitz et al. (1986, p. 128) to conclude that probably no
other field of study implicates self-concept and self-expression to the degree that
language study does.
Stroud and Wee (2006) acknowledged that anxiety in the language classroom
is generally competence-based, because students experience anxiety due to an
overriding concern with their language ability, which is further aggravated by a fear
of evaluation by the teacher and/or the peers. However, Stroud and Wee (2006, p.
300) also argued for identity-based anxiety, defined as a students concern with
maintaining his or her relationship with particular groups than with his or her
language abilities, accompanied by the desire to be accepted by ones peers or a
desire to avoid ridicule from them. Identity as a source of anxiety is further
commented on:

One, it is possible for the desire for peer acceptance to detrimentally affect language
learning. Two, because such peer groupings or cliques are relatively stable, most
students find it difficult to break away and so identity-based anxiety can continue to
affect a student not just occasionally, but it can in fact become a significantly
pervasive aspect of their experience of classroom culture (Stroud and Wee, 2006, p.
302).

Allwright and Bailey (1991) and Tsui (1996) also observed that some highly anxious
language learners make deliberate mistakes in order to avoid standing out from their
42

less able classmates. In this case, identity-based anxiety comes to the fore, too.
Identity issues and anxiety, therefore, are closely related, with the fear of being
different, of being characterised in an undesirable way, or of being excluded some of
the key aspects to be considered. As Newcombe (2007, p. 64) argued, identity is
closely linked with notions of inclusion and exclusion, thus being an area of
considerable importance for learner success.
However, in her work on immigrant women in Canada, Norton (2000)
conceived of anxiety as epiphenomenal, that is to say a secondary phenomenon that
results from and accompanies identity, whilst putting the latter at the core of language
learning. The researcher concluded that anxiety depended on whom her participants
were talking to and why, theorising that the way people position themselves or what
identity they negotiate for themselves in interaction, may constitute a manifestation of
anxiety. If people are positioned in ways that are favourable to their sense of self, then
anxiety can be a facilitating force. If, on the contrary, they are positioned in
unfavourable ways, then anxiety can be debilitating. Norton (2000) also put forward
the notion that anxiety and other affective factors are not stable; thus, portraying them
in terms of binary opposites (e.g., motivated and unmotivated, anxious and non-
anxious), as is often the case in the SLA literature, is unlikely to work. These
variables should rather be viewed as fluctuating and fluid over periods of time, shaped
by power differentials in relationships.
Language learners can indeed be negatively affected by both competence- and
identity-based anxiety, and, from this perspective, Stroud and Wees (2006) and
Nortons (2000) comments are particularly pertinent: learners want recognition and
praise for their work and effort, they want to feel that they are part of or are able to
43

integrate in a new, target language community, and, given that they are often
evaluated, they want to feel secure in the language classroom.

2.7.3 The L1
Sparks and Ganschow (1991) suggested that students abilities in their native
language may impact on their performance in the foreign language, thus igniting
anxiety, which in such instances is epiphenomenal. The researchers generated the
Linguistic Coding Deficit/Differences Hypothesis (LCDH), which assumed that
students difficulties in mastering the phonological, syntactic, and semantic
components of their native linguistic code could result in the arousal of anxiety in the
L2.
Ganschow and Sparks (1996) conducted a study of 154 high school women in
order to examine the conceptual links between LA and L1 deficits as described
through the LCDH. The students were divided into three groups, namely low anxious,
highly anxious, and average anxious, based on their total anxiety score on the FLCAS.
The findings showed that the low-anxious students outperformed their highly anxious
and average-anxious counterparts on most native language skills, implying that the
former were equipped with certain mechanisms in their first language which
rendered the whole process of L2 learning easier and less anxiety-provoking.
However, L1 deficiencies as a source of LA have been criticised by
researchers in the field. Zheng (2008) argued that the main drawback of the LCDH
lay on the fact that differences between first and second language development were
not taken into consideration. MacIntyre (1995, p. 90) posited that the LCDH relegated
LA to the status of an unfortunate side effect. MacIntyre (1995) and Horwitz (2000)
claimed that certain students would still experience LA, regardless of any L1 deficits.
44

2.7.4 Yan and Horwitzs grounded theory model of anxiety
Yan and Horwitz (2008) applied the FLCAS to 532 business students in all
four years of the course in a University in Shanghai, Peoples Republic of China. On
the basis of the FLCAS results, the researchers classified participants in three clusters,
namely high-, moderate-, and low-anxiety clusters. Six students were randomly
selected from each of the four years of the course. From the six in each year, two
students (one male and one female) were chosen from each category of anxiety. Only
three students from level four (one from each of the anxiety level groups) participated
in the study due to their heavy schedules. Therefore, 21 students took part in a semi-
structured interview that lasted for approximately 30-40 minutes each, and was
carried out in their mother tongue.
After conducting the interviews, the researchers used grounded theory analysis
to develop a model of the sources and effects of LA. The variables that were
generated from the interviews were divided into four categories. The variables within
the first category, that is, regional differences, test types, gender, teacher
characteristics, class arrangement, and parental influence, were thought of as primary
drivers (Yan and Horwitz, 2008, p. 168), because they influenced, either directly or
indirectly, all the other variables. The second category included language aptitude,
comparison with peers, and learning strategies, which were influenced by the first
category, but in turn were influencing the variables in the third group. Here, the
authors identified LA, and interest and motivation, which are more likely to be
influenced rather than to be influencing (ibid., p. 169). Thus, it could be deduced
that affective factors exhibited a passive function, in comparison with the other
variables that described action. The final category, achievement, was influenced by all
the other variables of the model. Despite the fact that early research on LA had
45

revealed that the relationship between anxiety and achievement is bidirectional, in this
study the researchers found that the learners perceived these two variables influence
as unidirectional, given that they only commented on how anxiety kept them from
achieving and did not mention lack of achievement as contributing to their anxiety
(ibid., p. 173).
Interestingly, the only two variables that were found to exert a bidirectional
influence on each other in this study were LA and interest and motivation. High
anxiety led to low motivation, whilst greater interest and motivation decreased
anxiety. Previous research has not examined the extent to which LA and motivation
are interrelated, and, in fact, the authors here also addressed the scarcity of research
into the possibility of causality among them:

[] although motivation is generally conceived of as a positive trait with respect to
language learning, it would also seem to play a role in affecting anxiety. It is difficult
to imagine an anxious learner who had no desire or need to learn the language (ibid.,
p. 176).

In other words, the researchers pointed that the conceptual links between anxiety and
motivations are not as clear as is generally assumed.
Yan and Horwitz (2008, p. 153) also touched upon some methodological
issues about LA research, the most important being the prominent use of
questionnaires to group students into different anxiety levels. It is worth noting their
viewpoint here:

Although the findings of previous studies point to several sources and consequences
of language anxiety, their reliance on questionnaires do not allow for an examination
of how anxiety interacts with other learner or situational factors to influence language
learning. Studies that encourage learner reflection through interviews or diary entries
would seem to have the potential to yield a richer understanding of learners
perceptions of how anxiety functions in their language learning, which, in turn, might
46

lead to a clearer understanding of the general role of anxiety in language learning.


This is of particular interest, as it shows that the author of the FLCAS suggests that
LA research may greatly benefit from new approaches and should move beyond self-
reports. The authors also commented on the fact that most LA research has been
conducted in the USA and Canada, and acknowledged that it should look to other
contexts too. The present study, therefore, responds to Yan and Horwitzs (2008) call
for attempts to situate LA within broader sociocultural settings outside North
America. These considerations will be discussed further in the methodology chapter.

2.8 Anxiety management and reduction techniques
The golden rule for helping highly anxious students is, above all, to make
them aware of the possibility of LA. Language educators can play a significant role in
this process, by first identifying those learners prone to becoming anxious (Gregersen,
2007). Following on from this, teachers should be able to decide whether students
anxiety is a global trait or the result of a particular situation happening in class
(Brown, 1994). Jones (2004) added that teachers should also be aware of the
dimensions of anxiety as a social and cultural phenomenon and be in a position to
realise the degree to which face affects people.
Selecting appropriate teaching practices could be another step towards helping
students to alleviate their stress in the language classroom. Tsui (1996) suggested that
teachers lengthen the wait time after questions for which they would not receive any
answer, reformulate questions, occasionally allow students to write down their
answers before sharing them with their classmates, clarify that for some questions
there is no definite response, encourage team work among peers in class, focus on
content rather than on form depending on the aims of the lesson, and aim at
47

establishing a good rapport with the students. Williams and Burden (1997) referred to
the theory of behaviourism, which by and large posits that learning is the result of
environmental rather than genetic factors, and could be explained through operant
conditioning. Therefore, the way teachers plan on their lessons and teach the class
may fundamentally affect students anxiety levels. The authors suggested that the
goals of each lesson should be clearly stated, tasks should be broken down into
manageable sets, students should be allowed to work at their own pace, and should
also be given positive reinforcement. Onwuegbuzie et al. (1999) took this a step
further by considering macro-level factors, and proposing that the goals of the whole
course should be made clear well in advance. According to Vygotskys sociocultural
theory, the initial motive for engaging in an activity is what determines its outcome
(Gillette, 1994, p. 212).
Another important step would be to enhance students metacognitive
awareness and self-regulatory processes. The field of foreign language education has
shifted its focus from language learning strategies to self-regulation and the degree to
which individuals are active participants in their own learning (Drnyei, 2005).
Drnyei (1994) argued that self-regulated learning allows teachers and researchers to
evaluate broader, more multidimensional constructs, including cognitive,
metacognitive, motivational, behavioural, and environmental processes that learners
might use to enhance achievement. Pajares (2002) suggested that, through small-
scale, practitioner research, teachers should also identify and assess students self-
beliefs about their own self-regulatory strategies and develop appropriate
interventions to challenge them and help them to alter their perceptions accordingly.
Through the use of such surveys, instructors might become aware of the strategies
their students use to complete language assignments and include appropriate lessons
48

to teach students the necessary strategies to become more successful language
learners.
Additionally, teachers should nurture students self-efficacy beliefs, as these
self-perceptions are related to academic success. This could be achieved by fostering
the sources of self-efficacy, such as personal successful learning experiences, the
successes of peers, and positive feedback when merited (Bandura, 1986, 1997).
Teachers could, in fact, adopt a teacher-as-a-researcher approach to teaching; before
implementing any strategies for allaying students LA, they should do some research
on their attitudes, learning styles, and personality types, in order to get to know them
better and be able to choose suitable intervention techniques.
Instilling confidence in students by helping them set clear and realistic targets
and clarifying that making mistakes is only natural is another aspect language
educators could take into account (Onwuegbuzie et al., 1999). In a study of 252
students in nine first-semester English classes at a university in Japan, Matsuda and
Gobel (2004) administered the FLCAS and the Foreign Language Reading Anxiety
Scale (FLRAS; Saito, Horwitz, and Garza, 1999), and found that self-confidence in
speaking English was a crucial predictor of performance. Boosting students self-
esteem for the purposes of buffering their anxiety is a helpful strategy too. According
to the terror management theory of social behaviour, individuals are characterized by
an inherent predisposition to maintain a positive image about oneself and to sustain
high levels of self-esteem. This feeling is aroused when one is considered an object of
salience in the community (Greenberg et al., 1992). Therefore, teachers could enhance
students positive psychology in class, by reducing evaluation and making comments
that do not accentuate poor performance or low marks.
49

Huang, Eslami, and Hu (2010) examined the relationship between teacher
support and LA. They administered the FLCAS, the Classroom Life Measure, and a
background questionnaire to 158 Taiwanese college students, who were learning
English for an average of 8.1 years and were enrolled as freshmen in the following
programmes: business administration, chemistry, and industrial/electrical/civil
engineering. The findings yielded a statistically significant positive correlation
between teacher support and comfort with learning English (r=.27) and a negative
correlation between teacher support and students fear of failing the class (r=-.18), an
indication that the participating students were more confident and competent learners
when they were academically supported by their teachers.
Teachers could also encourage risk-taking among students (Dewaele, 2012;
MacIntyre et al., 1997). If a student fears failure, anxiety emerges. Anxious students
tend to deprive themselves of communication opportunities, and are therefore unable
to assess their level of knowledge and quality of performance in the target language.
A vicious circle then commences, as anxiety remains stable and students do not take
any risks to improve their proficiency. According to Brown (1994), successful
language learners are at the same time successful risk-takers, as they attempt to
produce language despite the possibility of inaccurate output.
With reference to student errors, teachers are advised to select appropriate
error correction techniques based on instructional philosophy and on reducing
defensive reactions within the students (Horwitz et al., 1986). Overt or offensive
error correction may embarrass students who are likely to resort to non-participation
or avoidance behaviour (Aida, 1994). Brown (1994) also recommends the use of
recasts, a form of error correction where teachers reformulate the students erroneous
utterance as soon as this is spoken. Sheen (2008) conducted an empirical study to
50

investigate whether LA influences students ability and the extent to which students
modify their output when provided with corrective feedback in the form of recasts.
Students were initially administered a questionnaire measuring their LA, and were
then divided into four groups on the basis of their total LA score: 13 highly anxious
learners who received recasts, 11 low anxious learners who received recasts, 11
highly anxious learners who received no recasts, and 10 low anxious learners who
received no recasts. The two recast groups attended two treatment sessions, which
were audio-taped, transcribed, and coded for the frequency of recasts. A pretest and
immediate and delayed posttests on speeded dictation and writing were used with all
groups. The results showed that the low anxious recast students outperformed the
highly anxious recast students. In addition, the low anxious learners who benefitted
from recasts produced higher levels of modified output, implying that recasts were
most effective with low anxious learners.
Horwitz (1990, p. 23) introduced the idea of behavioural contracting, that is
a form of contract signed by the students and the teacher stating that the teachers
expectations from the students could be kept low until the students anxiety is
controlled. Young (1991) suggested that anxious students keep a journal, as well as
participate in student support groups or language clubs organised by the language
institutions on a regular basis.
Kondo and Ying-Ling (2004) investigated the anxiety coping strategies of 209
students enrolled in English language courses at two universities in central Japan. The
researchers adopted a three-phase approach to collecting and analysing data. In the
first phase, they measured students LA levels and asked them about the strategies
they used in order to reduce their anxiety. The second phase aimed at grouping the
strategies in terms of any commonalities between them. In the third phase, the
51

researchers examined the correlations between students LA score and the types of
strategies used. The results revealed the five following strategy types: a) preparation
(the most frequently-cited strategy) referring to the development of study techniques
in order to fully master English and diminish anxiety, b) relaxation including
strategies for overcoming a range of somatic symptoms, such as palpitations,
sweating, fidgeting etc., c) positive thinking where students attempted to shift their
attention to pleasant situations and away from negative self-related cognition, d) peer
seeking by looking for classmates who shared the same feelings of negative affect in
class, and e) resignation in which case students refused to take any steps at all to allay
their anxiety. The researchers made a further classification of the above strategies,
suggesting that preparation could be conceived of as a behavioural strategy, relaxation
as an affective strategy, and positive thinking and peer seeking as cognitive strategies.
Finding ways to minimise speaking anxiety can be a daunting task for
teachers. Phillips (1999, p. 125) argued:

Based on consistent results showing that the speaking skill is the most frequently
cited source of anxiety among language students, one might posit that todays
emphasis on the development of communicative competence will exacerbate
students anxiety about speaking. If teachers are unwilling to renounce the goals of
the oral proficiency movement, they must seek a resolution to the apparent conflict
between those goals and the negative affective reactions engendered by oral practice.

Most students indeed find speaking or simply appearing in front of the class as the
most anxiety-provoking aspect of the lessons. For that reason, group work and pair
work could be used as frequently as possible in language classes. Their function and
utility in the classroom with reference to the reduction of anxiety has been
commented on by many LA researchers:
a) They contribute to an atmosphere of community in the classroom (Kitano,
2001; von Worde, 2003).
52

b) They decrease learners exposure to the whole class and the competitiveness
among students.
c) Group practice gives time for more practice (Phillips, 1992). Thus, extra
practice can increase students confidence and sense of efficacy.
d) They allow students to take initiatives while working with a partner in class,
and take a proactive role in handling oral activities. In this way, fluency can
also be enhanced, and students confidence can be given a real boost.
e) They promote even student participation, reducing self-consciousness, as
students feel that they are singled out from the rest (Berg, 1993).
As regards strategies for coping with writing anxiety, Leki (1999) suggested
the implementation of heuristics, that is, brainstorming, freewriting, looping which
includes three attempts to write the intended text, each time minimising the length of
the previous text by trying to find the texts centre of gravity, branching and
clustering, outlining, and cubing by answering a set of possible questions about the
topic. Drafting constitutes another helpful approach to process writing, which helps
towards minimising the number of mistakes students are likely to make and towards
reducing their anxiety. Sequenced writing assignments could be another option. Here,
each assignment is based on the previous one, and the students acquire information on
a single topic as well as on the structures necessary to elaborate on that topic. In
addition, Rankin-Brown (2006) lay emphasis on the process approach to writing, and
on the fact that teachers should help students to understand that it is essential to
devote time to writing a draft or multiple drafts, rather than aiming to achieve
perfection from the very beginning.
ztrk and een (2007) administered the Second Language Writing Anxiety
Inventory (SLWAI; Cheng, 2004) and a background questionnaire to 15 university
53

students in a preparatory English class in Turkey. They also conducted two additional
reflective sessions in order to explore students thoughts on the use of portfolio
keeping as a means of developing writing skills and combating writing anxiety. The
findings revealed that portfolio keeping increased learner autonomy, and helped
participants to expand their vocabulary range and improve in their critical thinking.
Students writing anxiety was also reduced, because the portfolios were not grammar-
oriented, students did not have to be fixated on accuracy, and felt more confident
about what they could produce in the target language.
However, one should not jump prematurely to the conclusion that the
strategies discussed in this section always create consistent results for all language
learners (Oxford, 1992, p. 30). As already mentioned, LA may interact in a complex
way with other individual learner differences, such as self-esteem, motivation, and
willingness to communicate, and, thus, strategies for minimising anxiety may produce
different effects in language learning and within certain learners. In addition, the
strategies suggested above should not be thought of as distinct, independent ways of
intervention, but rather as a challenge for teachers to make a wise decision about ways
of combining them to cater for the needs of individual students. Finally, it should be
noted that excessive use of or insistence on specific strategies only is likely to lead to
undesired results. As Dewaele (2012, p. 48) argues with reference to risk-taking for
example, reckless risk-taking is unlikely to have any beneficial effects in foreign
language learning, but moderate and intelligent risk-taking is likely to lead to greater
success.



54

2.9 Language anxiety and grade level
It can be tacitly assumed that anxiety emerges during the earlier stages of
language learning, when students are still trying to acquire a range of aspects related
to the target language, and is gradually being reduced as soon as learners become
more proficient and fluent. Liu (2006) investigated the levels of anxiety of 547 first-
year undergraduate non-English majors enrolled in an English listening and speaking
course at three different proficiency levels in a university in Beijing, China. The
students were administered an adapted version of the FLCAS and a background
questionnaire, and were also asked to write reflective journals once a week for six
weeks. In addition, two highly anxious, three average anxious, and two low anxious
students and their teachers were interviewed. The teachers were additionally asked to
keep a weekly record of their anxious and relaxed students behaviour for the whole
term. The researcher observed and video-recorded some of the classes in order to
cross-check and compare the students and teachers answers. The results indicated
that the least proficient students had the highest mean score (103.14) on the FLCAS
compared to their most proficient counterparts who had the lowest mean score of
98.65.
Pappamihiel (2002) examined the LA of 178 Mexican immigrant students
attending ESL and mainstream classes in a school in the USA. The participants were
asked to fill in the English Language Anxiety Scale. It was found that the students
who were gradually becoming high achievers in their ESL classes exhibited lower
levels of anxiety than their less proficient counterparts, thus indicating that their
increasing self-confidence helped them to control or minimise their anxiety.
Nevertheless, empirical research has also revealed that very competent
language learners are likely to experience high levels of LA. Gardner and MacIntyre
55

(1993) noted that, at the initial stages of learning, anxiety is not a crucial parameter,
because learners have not yet had any negative affective experiences. Marcos-Llins
and Garau (2009) conducted a comparative study of 134 college students enrolled in
11 courses of Spanish as a foreign language at various levels. The researchers
administered the FLCAS and a background questionnaire twice in a term in order to
test the stability of LA over time. The ANOVA results showed that the advanced
learners had the highest scores on the FLCAS (M = 113.05). The researchers
attributed this difference to the nature of Spanish as a foreign language and to the fact
that advanced learners are intrinsically motivated to learn the language and do not
think of language learning as a mere requirement to graduate.
Still, learners may experience similar levels of LA irrespective of their level of
proficiency in the L2. Pichette (2009) conducted a questionnaire-based study with 186
French-speaking learners of English or Spanish as a second language in universities in
Quebec, Canada. The questionnaire consisted of items from the FLCAS, the FLRAS,
and the Writing Apprehension Test (WAT; Daly and Miller, 1975a). The results of
the t-tests did not yield any significant differences between first-semester students and
more proficient students. Pichette (2009) argued that the obligatory status of L2
courses in Canadian schools could account for the lack of any difference in LA among
students at different proficiency levels.

2.10 Research needed
While reviewing the literature on LA, considerable attention was given to
Horwitz et al.s (1986) seminal research into anxiety and their widely used FLCAS, as
well as to speaking anxiety. Other areas frequently discussed in the literature were
56

techniques that language teachers could use in order to help their students alleviate
their stress.
However, several lacunae become apparent in research into LA, therefore
advancing this research and extending it to any of the following areas is warranted:
a) Skill-specificity and LA. Perhaps arguably the most under-represented area in
research into LA is how it relates to language skills other than speaking.
Speaking is clearly the most self-effacing and ego-involving of all four skills,
yet this does not imply that anxiety about listening, reading, and writing is
non-existent. As Mercer et al. (2012, p. 242) commented,

In other words, anxiety for foreign language learning is different from anxiety for
maths; and anxiety for speaking differs from that for writing. This suggests that
research is also needed that examines the possible effects of specific parameters such
as the unique character of particular languages or differences across different skill
domains within a language.

How, then, could we conceptualise LA about the remaining three skills, and
how could we help students cope with writing anxiety, listening anxiety, or
reading anxiety? This study aims for a greater understanding of skill-specific
anxiety, and, in particular, speaking anxiety and writing anxiety.
b) Coping strategies for use by students. As we have seen, empirical research into
what strategies language learners use to cope with their LA has only been
investigated in a limited number of publications (Kondo and Ying-Ling,
2004). The traditional LA models have concentrated on types of pedagogical
intervention that are needed in order to reduce anxiety and advance learning.
However, a problem with this approach concerns the absence of any indication
of how the learners the actual bearers of anxiety confront anxiety. As
Ushioda (2011, p. 13) claimed with relation to motivation,
57


Translated into classroom practice, such models thus promote a view of motivation as
essentially controlled by the teacher through various techniques and strategies, rather
than as actively shaped by through personal meaning-making, intentionality and
reflexivity. Moreover, such models focus teachers attention on generalised types of
learner behaviour and attitude and how to deal with them, rather than on how to
engage with the complex and uniquely individual people in their classrooms: people
who bring particular identities, histories, goals and motives; people for whom
learning a language is just one small part of their lives; people who are not just
language learners and who perhaps do not see themselves in these terms.

Thus, it is intuitive that by urging highly anxious students to voice their
thoughts and suggest ways to minimise their LA would be worth investigating
and would hopefully help fellow students faced with similar negative affect
and high levels of anxiety in their language classrooms.
c) Viewing learners holistically. The insights provided by researchers into
understanding language learners as people (Lantolf and Pavlenko, 2001) have
yet to resonate in LA research. Ushiodas (2009, p. 218) call for a person-in-
context view of the learner that is more than a theoretical abstraction is yet to
be addressed, primarily through the design and implementation of more
qualitative, contextualised studies. MacIntyre and Gregersen (2012) have
indeed underlined that affective variables interact in context-dependent, non-
linear ways, recognising the need to reject simple cause-and-effect models that
help to understand and explain affect and LA. Drnyei and Ushioda (2011, p.
248) also highlighted that research paradigms should extend beyond focusing
on the relationship between psychological variables and L2 achievement so
that we gain insights into the role of the context and the environment:

This prominent emphasis is in accordance with the growing social concern in
virtually all of contemporary SLA research and the challenge is to adopt a dynamic
perspective that allows us to consider simultaneously the ongoing multiple influences
between environmental and learner factors in all their componential complexity, as
58

well as the emerging changes in both the learner and the environment as a result of
this development.

These calls are suggestive of the direction that the field of LA as a whole should be
moving to, that is to say, empirical studies that take into account the whole
environment of the learner in order to interpret anxiety episodes.

2.11 Summary
The principal aim of this chapter was to offer an extensive, critical theoretical
discussion about the nature of LA and how it could function as a constraining factor
on learners behaviour in the language classroom. We have seen how LA has been
defined, conceptualised, and related to other disciplines, as well as to what extent it
can be positive and promote classroom language learning. Specifically, LA
researchers have concluded that it is situation-specific because it is often due to
conditions arising during the process of learning a language. LA has also been widely
associated with fear of negative evaluation, communication apprehension, and test
anxiety.
The literature on anxiety about speaking and writing in a foreign language was
also reviewed. Previous research has shown that speaking anxiety is connected with
fear of negative evaluation, fear of making mistakes, and self-perceptions of ability in
a foreign language. Writing anxiety was best conceptualised as being language-skill-
specific given its correlation with writing achievement. Self-perceived competence
and self-concepts were also found to affect writing anxiety levels. Strategies for
coping with general classroom LA and skill-specific LA were detailed next.
Quantitative data regarding the relationship between LA and different proficiency
levels were presented in the last section of this chapter. In fact, it can be argued that
59

the existence of and research into anxiety have been responsible for the large number
of teachers and researchers who contemplate a shift of attention to the affective
domain and the need for awareness of techniques for reducing this negative emotion.
Before describing and discussing my research methodology, a short chapter
detailing important aspects of English language learning and teaching in Greece has
been included, as this was believed to facilitate understanding of the research results
and insights emerging from the study.




















60

CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH CONTEXT: TEACHING AND LEARNING ENGLISH
AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE IN GREECE

3.1 Introduction
Ushioda (2013) suggested that by context we do not just refer to geographical
setting but to curricular context too. For a better understanding of the present research
project, this section will offer a brief description of the Greek foreign language
education system, with an emphasis on the teaching of EFL in private language
schools, a facet that will be discussed in relation to the countrys current educational
and socioeconomic profile. Knowing the context of language learning and teaching
certainly helps towards understanding and evaluating learning outcomes.

3.2 English education in primary school
Foreign language instruction in Greece is provided in both state schools and
private foreign language institutes. With respect to state education, English is the first
foreign language young learners are taught at the third grade of primary education, at
approximately the age of 8. A pilot programme to examine the feasibility and
effectiveness of teaching EFL to the first and second grades of primary education
entitled New foreign language education policies in schools: Learning English in
early childhood (implemented within the National Strategic Reference Framework
2007-2013) was put into practice in 2010, and 800 state primary schools participated
in it (Lakasas, 2010; Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs, 2010). Such an
educational measure is indicative of an attempt to take advantage of young learners
well-documented ability to acquire foreign languages more rapidly than older
61

learners. According to the critical period hypothesis, the optimum time to acquire
language if presented with adequate stimuli is the years before puberty; after that,
some aspects of language can be learnt but full mastery cannot be achieved
(Lenneberg, 1967). However, it has been clearly shown that, in instructed language
learning settings, older learners have a superior learning rate mainly due to their
greater cognitive maturity than that of younger learners (Muoz, 2006).
Young learners at Greek state primary schools are expected to cover a series
of three coursebooks (Sepirgioti et al., 1998; Sepirgioti et al., 1999; Sepirgioti et al.,
2006) over the last three grades of their primary education, that is, grades 4, 5, and 6
respectively. For the third grade of English language instruction, a new coursebook,
written on the basis of principled eclecticism, has been introduced in September 2012
(Alexiou and Mattheoudakis, 2011). The book combines elements of various teaching
approaches including the lexical approach, total physical response, task- and content-
based language teaching. Before the introduction of the new coursebook, teachers
could choose a beginners book for young learners from a stateapproved list of
commercially available coursebooks. Such materials and the syllabus aim to take
learners up to the elementary level.

3.3 English education in secondary school
In junior high schools (the first three years of secondary education), English is
compulsory. However, in senior high school (the last three years of secondary
education), when emphasis is placed on the national curriculum relating to university
entrance examinations, English is not compulsory and Greek learners have to choose
among English, French, or German. In the secondary sector, English language
teachers are provided with a long list of stateapproved coursebooks by both
62

international and local publishers and are required to choose a coursebook according
to the linguistic and cognitive needs of their students.
Although English holds a high status within the broader context of the Greek
education system, Alexiou and Mattheoudakis (2013, p. 101) take issue with the way
the transition between primary and secondary education of EFL is achieved:

As English was initially introduced in Greece as a foreign language at secondary
schools, consequent decisions had to be made with respect to the expansion and
continuity of the syllabus, the coursebooks and other teaching materials to be used in
the two educational sectors, and foreign language teachers training in the respective
sectors. It would be reasonable to assume that the syllabus and resources would be
modified following this change in policy; in fact, both have remained unchanged
since 1997. As a result, the issue of liaison between primary and secondary sector in
foreign language learning needs to be addressed in order to ensure a smooth transition
between the two educational sectors.

The authors emphatically stated that, sadly, the benefits gained from the newly-
introduced early instruction scheme in primary education are likely to be lost when
students move on to secondary education.

3.4 English language learning and teaching in tertiary education
Tertiary education in Greece is provided in universities and technological
educational institutes, and entrance is based on exams. English instruction in higher
education institutions often takes the form of teaching ESP, with a strong focus being
put on jargon, whilst little if at all emphasis is placed on learning EAP, or at least
English for Specific Academic Purposes (ESAP). Modules on English language at
university require students to have some knowledge of English, usually addressing
A2+ levels of proficiency, according to the Common European Framework of
Reference for Languages (CEFR; Council of Europe, 2001). Teachers are expected to
63

produce their own materials for use in class, using materials of their own choice,
seldom prepared in collaboration with the subject specialists.

3.5 The private sector
The instruction of English in Greece is also provided by a thriving private
sector of language schools. Mattheoudakis and Alexiou (2009, p. 232) quote that the
number of private language schools in Greece more than tripled between the years
1985 and 2000 (2,000 private language institutes in 1985 and 7,000 in 2000), and has
continued to increase as private language tuition seems to have become the norm
rather than the exception. About 80% of Greek school children attend foreign
language institutes and Greek families spend on average about 880 million euros on
tuition fees and course books (Mattheoudakis and Alexiou, 2009; Angouri,
Mattheoudakis, and Zigrika, 2010). These private institutes provide intensive foreign
language tuition to students of around 7 years old and above. The courses they offer
are not compulsory and cater both for general EFL learning and exam-oriented
learning, targeting the English language exams from acclaimed standardised
examination boards (e.g., Cambridge English Language Assessment, the University of
Michigan), or national standardised English testing centres (i.e., Research Centre for
Language Teaching, Testing, and Assessment, National and Kapodistrian University
of Athens). By contrast, English language instruction provided in state schools and at
the tertiary level is not entirely exam-centred, and internal exams usually take place.
Certified knowledge of English, as well as of other foreign languages, is inextricably
linked to future career development. In fact, a quick glance at job vacancies in a
Greek newspaper will reveal that the vast majority of such announcements require a
64

certified knowledge of English, a need that fortifies the huge success of private
language centres.
The above figures mirror the great importance Greek students attach to the
EFL instruction they can receive via the private sector. This is partly due to their
belief that foreign language tuition in state schools cannot equip them with the tools
necessary to learn English. Large groups of students, lack of standardisation in
services provided, variability in students levels of achievement, uninteresting lessons,
unmotivated teachers, and provision of tuition that is not focused on language
certificates, constitute the main reasons why Greek EFL learners favour private
language schools and why the state sector is rather devalued (Angouri,
Mattheoudakis, and Zigrika, 2010; Mattheoudakis and Nicolaidis, 2005; Sifakis,
2009). Private language institutes, therefore, seem to have become an official part of
the educational system (Angouri, Mattheoudakis, and Zigrika, 2010, p. 191).
According to Diamantopoulou (2002, 2006), while 91% of Greeks believe in the
usefulness of learning a foreign language, only 28% (the smallest percentage amongst
European Union member states) claim that they have learned a foreign language via
instruction provided in state schools. The latest Eurobarometer survey (2012, p. 102)
also elucidated this point by arguing that Greece [] stands out from the rest of the
EU in terms of learning through group language lessons with a teacher outside school,
with almost half of respondents in Greece (48%) [] saying they have learnt in this
way. Greeks poor perception of the usefulness of language lessons at school is again
emphasised in the aforementioned survey: Greece stands out as the country with a
particularly poor perception of the usefulness of language lessons at school with 13%
of respondents saying this is the most effective method they have used (ibid., p. 107).
Sifakis (2009) and Sifakis and Sougari (2003) have even claimed that state school
65

EFL teaching has the status of TENOR (Teaching English for No Obvious Reason).
Attention is now increasingly being focused on the quality of teaching in Greek state
schools and on the issue of the evaluation of the teachers. The poor standards in the
Greek foreign language education system in the public sector have led the present
government to reexamine the quality of the countrys education system and formulate
a new policy to bring about necessary changes. Education reform will, thus, require
teachers to rethink classroom practice and focus on continuous professional
development. In addition, there is a growing consensus that traditional forms of
teacher development are inadequate for addressing teachers issues and for
confronting the challenges teachers face in their everyday practice (Lignos, 2006;
Papastamatis et al., 2009).
The keen interest in learning EFL in private language institutes also reflects
the high status of English within the Greek socioeconomic environment. 74% of
Greeks believe that English is the most useful language for their personal
development, and 92% think that English is the most useful language for children to
learn for their future (Eurobarometer, 2012). As Greek is one of the least widely
spoken languages outside of Greece, Greek students recognise the necessity to learn a
foreign language that will allow them to communicate with speakers of other
languages abroad. English, with its worldwide influence and current label as an
International Language (EIL; Crystal, 1997) or Lingua Franca (ELF; Jenkins, 2007),
is expected to provide its learners with unique educational and professional
opportunities, hence being the first foreign language Greeks opt for. English could
also be said to be used as a lingua franca within Greece, for instance in interaction
situations with tourists.
66

The European Union is another factor regulating English language learning
and use in its member states (Truchot, 2003). As Sifakis (2009, p. 232) puts it,
English has no official status [in Greece] but is considered a key prerequisite for
surviving in todays globalised world. We might therefore describe Greek students
motivation to learn English as representing a generalised international orientation
similar to what Yashima (2009, p. 145) has termed international posture in relation
to Japanese learners of English, that is a tendency to relate oneself to the
international community rather than any specific L2 group. Additionally,
intranationally speaking, the competitiveness engendered by an unstable and insecure
domestic market where unemployment rates increase dramatically further incentivises
English language learning, explaining students vocational orientations to learn
English in an attempt to improve their career prospects.

3.6 English language teachers qualifications
In the public sector, at the primary, secondary, and tertiary levels, English
language teachers are typically native Greeks, whereas a number of native English-
speaking teachers are likely to work in private language schools. Teachers working in
the public sector are all graduates of a university department of English language and
literature. This may not always be the case in the private sector, where holders of a C2
level certificate in English (e.g., Cambridge Proficiency in English; CPE) are likely to
teach EFL. (This, however, was not the case with the EFL teachers participating in
this study.) This case has recently come to court in an attempt to minimise the number
of English teachers who are insufficiently qualified. Native English teachers working
in private institutions are qualified teachers, without necessarily being holders of a
67

degree in English language, but having the advantage of being native speakers of the
language taught.
Unlike other countries, a practical qualification in teaching EFL (e.g.,
Certificate in English Language Teaching to Adults; CELTA) is not mandatory for
English language teachers in Greece. In theory, university courses in methodology
would aim at providing students with practical insights into teaching. Nevertheless,
emphasis is placed on raising students awareness of a range of approaches to
language teaching, and prospective English teachers are not required to participate in
pre-service training in an actual school/university, guided by supervising teachers.
Given this lack of explicit training in ELT pedagogy, the need for making teaching
practice modules mandatory at university is becoming more and more prominent.
Recent research (Giotis, 2010) has shown that, in the absence of teacher training, EFL
teachers mostly rely on the teachers guide or implement the methodology that their
own successful teachers were using in class. Teachers could, however, participate in
continuous professional development workshops organised by associations regulated
by the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs, such as TESOL Greece or
TESOL Macedonia-Thrace, or by independent schools or colleges.

3.7 Summary
This chapter focused on a description of the English language education
system in Greece, distinguishing between the three main grade levels, namely
primary, secondary, and tertiary education, as well as between state schools and the
private sector. Delineating the research context will help towards a greater
understanding of aspects of the whole environment of the learners that will be shown
to influence their levels and manifestation of LA in the classroom.
68

The next chapter discusses all the methodological aspects taken into
consideration when designing and conducting the present study, and when analysing
the data collected, following suggestions from the relevant literature.






















69

CHAPTER 4
METHODOLOGY

4.1 Introduction
This chapter delineates the theoretical background of all the methodological
decisions I made with reference to the research design, data collection, and data
analysis and interpretation. The chapter begins with the aims and research questions
of the study. The remainder of the chapter consists of the following sections: research
approach, participants, instruments, data collection procedures, data analysis, validity
and reliability, and ethics.

4.2 Purpose of the study
As stated in the Introduction, the purpose of this study was to respond to the
scarcity of research on the classroom LA of Greek EFL learners, with particular
emphasis on its relationship to language skill specificity, as well as on the causes of
both classroom and skill-specific LA and the strategies deployed to minimise them.
These aims were divided into five research questions:
1. Which factors contribute to the speaking anxiety of Greek EFL learners?
2. Which factors influence Greek EFL learners writing anxiety?
3. What is the difference in LA among students at different proficiency levels?
4. What aspects are perceived as the main causes of classroom LA?
5. What strategies do Greek EFL students deploy to minimise their LA and how
do their teachers choose to intervene?
All five research questions were both confirmatory and exploratory in nature,
as they aimed to verify or perhaps disconfirm theory and at the same time explore
70

unanticipated avenues. This dual nature of my research questions was what largely
governed the entire research design, as recommended by the literature (e.g., Teddlie
and Tashakkori, 2009). The quantitative strand was followed by a qualitative
component, expanded by and supplemented with interviews and a diary study in order
to address researchers constant call for qualitative projects to investigate individual
learner differences. The next section provides an overview of current methodological
discussions about existing individual differences research with a view to justifying the
need for change in paradigmatic choices.

4.3 Researching individual differences
Research on individual differences in SLA has gained ground over the last 30
years, and the affective dimensions of language learning in particular have interested
scholars in the field. As the term suggests, individual differences should take for
granted that each learner is different, and thereby research into this field ought to
adjust its epistemology and methods to the key assumptions underlying such a notion.
Nonetheless, traditional research on individual differences has mostly been
quantitative in nature, and with a view to examining learner idiosyncracies, and
labeling students according to similarities between them.
In light of the social turn
3
in SLA (Block, 2003), the need for more
interdisciplinary and socially informed approaches to SLA research has been
emphasised. Previous research has relied on group averages and statistics, which tell
us something about individual difference characteristics, but as Ushioda (2009, p.
216) succinctly puts it, they do so in an abstract collective sense, thereby

3
Benson and Cooker (2013, p. 4) have very recently taken a strong view of the social turn in SLA,
raising the following question: Does the social turn in Applied Linguistics simply imply a widening of
the investigative lens, such that individual language learners are always studied within a social context
of some kind, or does it imply a radical reconceptualisation of the individual as subject of research and
practice?
71

depersonalising learners (Ushioda, 2011, p. 12). New insights into SLA research
need to look less into categorising individuals, and more toward the individual and
the social and environmental factors that help the individual create his or her image as
a learner and as a person (Pellegrino Aveni, 2005, p. 145). Learners are agents,
whose learning and affect in class is largely contextualised, and it is this context that
is relevant and necessary to gain a fuller, more ecological understanding of the
individuals abilities, traits, behaviours, and knowledge (Duff, 2008, p. 38). This
echoes Drnyeis (2005, p. 218) claims about the importance of context in recent
research into individual differences:

The most striking aspect of nearly all the recent ID [i.e., individual difference]
literature is the emerging theme of context: It appears that cutting-edge research in all
these diverse areas has been addressing the same issue, that is, the situated nature of
the ID factors in question. Scholars have come to reject the notion that the various
traits are context-independent and absolute, and are now increasingly proposing new
dynamic conceptualisations in which ID factors enter into some interaction with the
situational parameters rather than cutting across tasks and environments.

From this sociocultural perspective therefore, individual differences research
should focus on a person-in-context view of the learner (Ushioda, 2009, p. 218),
which reveals complex and dynamic patterns among individuals, their contexts, and
their personal histories (Benson, 2005; Block, 2003; Lantolf and Pavlenko, 2001;
Larsen-Freeman, 2001; Mercer, 2011a, 2011b; Mercer et al., 2012; Skehan, 1991;
Ushioda, 2009; Williams and Burden, 1997). The practice of investigating LA
qualitatively should therefore start to gain momentum as a promising research
framework in explaining affect in SLA (Ewald, 2007; MacIntyre and Gregersen,
2012; Ushioda, 2012; Yan and Horwitz, 2008). Mitchell et al. (2013, p. 24) have
stressed the need for more integrated models of learner development that will help
to depict individual differences, such as LA and WTC. Skehan (1989, p. 118) indeed
72

called for extended methodologies, settings and goals with anxiety research that
might enable us to step outside the rather restrictive framework within which such
studies are presently conducted.
Taking into account the shift of focus on qualitative research and my research
questions, a strong qualitative element that would give learners voice was
incorporated. At the same time, and in order to avoid anecdotalism, I had to focus on
those participants that were highly anxious - and not on any students learning EFL
in order to gain fuller insights into their affect in the classroom. Thus, I could not
entirely rely on the open-ended nature of qualitative research, realising that a
quantitative instrument was indispensable. These methodological decisions are
detailed below.

4.4 Problems in language anxiety research
Problems inherent to LA research bear similarities to problems with
researching individual differences discussed in the above section. However, a
fundamental problem of research into LA concerns difficulties in directly observing it.
Anxiety is internally mediated, and, therefore, an individuals levels of anxiety could
mainly be inferred from a range of physiological symptoms, such as sweating, or self-
report written or oral accounts. A second problem concerns the fact that LA is not a
monolithic variable but rather constitutes a multifaceted construct which consists of a
range of dimensions that cannot be measured only through quantitative instruments.
Qualitative research could help towards probing into aspects of LA that would
otherwise remain hidden if only questionnaires were administered.
These considerations were taken into account when designing the study.
Questionnaires were administered to help select the most highly anxious cohort of
73

students. To disclose internal and mental processes that were anxiety-induced and on
which students could not directly comment in the questionnaires, learner diaries were
collected and analysed. Interviews were conducted to elucidate both questionnaire and
diary results. Thus, a mixed methods approach combining quantitative and qualitative
research was adopted in order to account for a holistic picture of how, when, and why
anxiety is likely to emerge. The research design and the rationale behind it are
explicated in the following sections.

4.5 Research paradigm: Pragmatism
The 1980s was the era of a fierce paradigm war between the two major
research camps of constructivism (i.e. qualitative research) and postpositivism (i.e.
quantitative research) in terms of the epistemology and logic each one was embracing.
The former generally caters for a bottom-up approach where participants' life histories
and worldviews shape the meaning of phenomena and give rise to theories, as
opposed to the latter confirming or disconfirming theories and hypotheses and
involving measurements of and relations between variables. Mixed methods research
has risen as a result of the rejection of a forced choice use of either quantitative or
qualitative inquiry in the social sciences, and was seen as adhering to the principles of
pragmatism, which by and large rejected the either/or of the incompatibility thesis
4

(Teddlie and Tashakkori, 2009, p. 21), and favoured both points of view (Drnyei,
2007; Greene and Caracelli, 2003; Howe, 1988; Larsen-Freeman and Long, 1990;
Rossman and Wilson, 1984). As Brewer and Hunter (2006, p. 55) stated, rather than
being wedded to a particular theoretical style [] and its most compatible method,

4
The incompatibility thesis is associated with the supposed link between paradigms and
research methods. According to this thesis, research paradigms are associated with research
methods in a kind of one-to-one correspondence. Therefore, if the underlying premises of
different paradigms conflict with one another, the methods associated with those paradigms
cannot be combined (Teddlie and Tashakkori, 2009, p. 15).
74

one might instead combine methods that would encourage or even require integration
of different theoretical perspectives to interpret the data. Drnyei (2007, p. 277) also
observed that maintaining an open and flexible frame of mind and remaining as free
as possible of paradigmatic dogmas is becoming a prerequisite for good research. As
Howe (1988, pp. 13-14) explicitly stated,

Rather than divorcing paradigms from the conduct of research (but nonetheless
having them dictate what is to count as legitimate knowledge), the compatibilist can
insist on a mutual adjustment between the two such that practice is neither static and
unreflective nor subject to the one-way dictates of a wholly abstract paradigm. []
Unfortunately, all that incompatibilism seems to have to offer is a forced choice
between two exclusive paradigms and the spin-off of a fragmented research
community with one group championing the view that their method is the only truly
scientific one [], and the other group embracing multiple realities so that
researchers are free to speak their own languages, investigate their own questions,
and come up with their own standards of truth.

More than simply using what works in order to attain ones research objectives,
pragmatism is a choice based on the belief that objectivity and subjectivity are not
always in strict contrast, but rather cater for an inductive-deductive research cycle
(Teddlie and Tashakkori, 2009, p. 87) that facilitates data interpretation.
Consequently, researchers employ quantitative and qualitative research methods to
elicit both quantitative and qualitative data, which are ultimately integrated into an
organic view of the phenomenon under scrutiny. In other words, one approach is used
to help explain and build on the results from the other approach (Creswell, 2009).
Mixed methods research also contributes to the triangulation of data and analysis.

4.6 Research approach: Mixed methods
A number of different terms have been used to refer to a mixed methods
research approach, such as integrating, synthesis, multimethod, and mixed
methodology. However, recent writings use the term mixed methods (Creswell,
75

2009), which will also be used throughout this thesis. Johnson, Onwuegbuzie, and
Turner (2007) advocated for a contingency theory encompassing all three research
paradigms (i.e., quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods) and understanding their
strengths and weaknesses. They argued that, rather than presenting a dichotomy
between research methods, it is more insightful to view mixed methods research as
situated somewhere between a bottom-up and a top-down approach: in the case of the
former, the research questions determine the research approach, whilst in the case of
the latter the approach is not driven by the research questions. Their paper presents a
comprehensive definition of mixed methods research which is the one I relied on:

Mixed methods research is the type of research in which a researcher or team of
researchers combines elements of qualitative and quantitative research approaches
(e.g., use of qualitative and quantitative viewpoints, data collection, analysis,
inference techniques) for the broad purposes of breadth and depth of understanding
and corroboration (Johnson et al., 2007, p. 123).

In educational contexts specifically, where the exploration focuses on cognitive as
well as affective aspects of the learning experience as my research did, mixing
methods seems particularly helpful (McDonough and McDonough, 1997).
Additionally, with reference to research into language learning psychology, Mercer et
al. (2012, p. 244) highlighted the necessity of using a mixed methods framework,
arguing that in order to meet the challenges posed by increasingly complex
perspectives on psychology, researchers will need to be creative in developing a range
of methodologies.




76

4.6.1 Combining quantitative and qualitative research
Drnyei and Ushioda (2011, p. 202) argued that the main issue to be
considered by researchers when deciding which approach (i.e., quantitative or
qualitative) to use concerns the following:

Is our research topic/question such that it is meaningful to aggregate findings from
many participants, or would producing such a composite score lead to the loss of the
subtle, individual trajectories that are at the heart of the phenomenon we are after?

However, this does not mean that quantitative and qualitative research cannot be
combined within a single study, given that most topics can be examined
meaningfully following both qualitative and quantitative approaches (ibid., p. 201).
As mentioned in the previous section, offsetting the limitations of one method
by the strengths of the other method was the basic rationale behind mixed methods
research. Gillham (2000, p. 5) argued that in research we have to balance the gains
and losses in anything we choose to do. On the one hand, when examining many
individuals quantitatively, the purpose is to gather information and generalise these
results to the wider population. Therefore, the possibility of understanding the
particular is low.
On the other hand, qualitative studies aim to explore the uniqueness of a small
number of participants, and, therefore, cannot explain the characteristics of bigger
groups (Croker, 2009). Richards (2003, p. 9) stressed that a qualitative approach is
above all else a person-centred enterprise and therefore particularly appropriate to our
work in the field of language teaching. Miles and Huberman (1994) also argued that
one of the major strengths of qualitative research is its focus on what real life is
like. Qualitative research assesses causality among variables in order to explain how
the different aspects in the worlds of participants affect each other. Creswell (2009, p.
77

4) also stated that qualitative research is a means for exploring and understanding the
meaning individuals or groups ascribe to a social or human problem. Qualitative
research therefore gives researchers the opportunity to focus on individual meaning
and understand individuals in all their complexity.
Quantitative and qualitative research should not be treated as mutually
exclusive. Miles and Huberman (1994) maintained that qualitative data can be used
when one wants to supplement, validate, or illuminate quantitative data gathered from
the same research context. Counting goes hand in hand with qualitative data analysis,
because when we identify a theme or a pattern, were isolating something that (a)
happens a number of times and (b) consistently happens in a specific way. [] When
we say something is important or significant or recurrent, we have come to that
estimate, in part, by making counts, comparisons, and weights (ibid., p. 253).
Ivankova and Creswell (2009, p. 145) added that mixed methods research is also an
intuitive way of conducting inquiry: many individuals look to both numbers and
stories to make sense of everyday events.
In the current study, the quantitative data and analysis helped to get an overall
picture of the anxiety level distributions of the participants. Then, significant
quantitative results were explored through a longitudinal diary study and qualitative
interviews to gain greater insights into the conceptualisation of LA by highly anxious
students. Both components addressed questions of directionality, identifying possible
elements that might relate to each other and to the focal variable under study.

4.6.2 Choosing methods: The sequential explanatory design
The present study implemented a fixed mixed methods design. The mixing
occurred during the data collection stage where the results obtained from the first
78

quantitative phase informed the collection of data in the second qualitative phase by
selecting participants and developing research instruments. The data were first
connected when selecting participants for the diary study and the interviews, as well
as when thinking of interview questions grounded on the diaries and survey results,
and then when interpreting and discussing the findings from the two stages. The table
below explicates the explanatory design procedures guiding the current project.

Table 1. Explanatory design procedures guiding the study (adapted from Ivankova and
Creswell, 2009)

Quan
5
Quan Connect
6
Qual
7
Qual Interpret
8

Survey of
students
(N = 128)
Descriptive
statistical
analysis
Selecting
participants
for
qualitative
follow-up
Diary study
(N = 7)
Follow up
interviews
(N = 13)
Thematic
analysis/Coding
Interpretation
based on
quantitative
and
qualitative
results

Creswell and Plano Clark (2011) claimed that the sequential explanatory
design is well suited when qualitative research is needed to help explain the results of
previously conducted quantitative research, specifically as far as significant or
nonsignificant results as well as outlier or surprising cases are concerned. This design
is therefore suitable for researchers who wish to follow up quantitative results by
forming groups for use in subsequent qualitative research. The sequential explanatory
design, like all mixed methods designs, also aims at triangulating data. However, it
differs from triangulation designs, as the purpose in collecting data through different
instruments is not to compare and contrast the different findings, but rather to help
inform one stage through the other.

5
Quantitative.
6
Mixing occurred at this stage.
7
Qualitative.
8
Mixing occurred at this stage.
79

One of the main strengths of this approach is its emergent nature that provides
the researcher with a straightforward framework for implementation, as the data
collection is carried out in two separate stages and one type of data is collected at a
time (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2011). Table 2 visually displays the sequential
explanatory design procedures guiding this study. The procedure will be explained in
detail in the sections to follow.

Table 2. Visual diagram of explanatory design procedures (adapted from Ivankova and
Creswell, 2009)

Phase Procedure Product
Quan data N = 128
FLCAS and ESLWAT
Background questionnaire
Numeric data
Quan analysis Descriptive statistics
Factor analysis
Correlations
SPSS software
Means, SDs
Factor loadings
Correlation coefficients
Connecting quan and qual
phases
Purposefully selecting
participants
N = 7 diarists
N = 13 interviewees
(the diarists were also
interviewed; all highly
anxious students)
Qual data Learner diaries
Individual interviews
Text data (diary entries and
interview transcripts)
Qual analysis Thematic analysis
Coding form
Codes and categories

Mixing of the quan and qual
results
Explanation of the quan
results based on qual findings
Conclusion

Reporting the results of a study conducted on the premises of this design is
also a straightforward task owing to the sequential nature of this design (Ivankova and
Creswell, 2009). Drnyei (2010) also claimed that it enriches the final findings
considerably. Much in the same vein, Gillham (2000, p. 101) stated that the interview
findings can illustrate the questionnaire results and bring your research study into
life.
80

However, one of the greatest challenges of using a sequential explanatory
design is the lengthy amount of time required for undertaking the research as the data
collection involves two separate phases (Creswell, 2009). The researcher usually
reaches a decision as to which quantitative results need to be further explained and
how the participants will be selected for the second phase after collecting and
analysing the initial data (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2011). Hence, participants should
be informed in advance of the possibility that they may be contacted again.

4.7 Participants
4.7.1 Rationale of choice of sample
In the sequential explanatory design, sampling occurs at two points: in the
quantitative stage and in the qualitative stage. These two sampling stages inform one
another and are not independent. The quantitative research was conducted on the basis
of probabilistic or random sampling, which Tashakkori and Teddlie (2003, p. 713)
defined as the selection of a relatively large number of units from a population, or
from specific subgroups (strata) of a population, in a random manner where the
probability of inclusion for every member of the population is determinable. In the
current study, the sampling units were clusters of students that occurred naturally in
EFL classrooms. Hence, with probability sampling, each member of the population
under study has an equal chance of being selected (Cohen, Manion, and Morrison,
2007; Creswell, 2009).
In the second, qualitative strand of this study the participants were selected on
the basis of purposeful sampling. As the name suggests, the sample has been chosen
for a specific purpose. According to Creswell and Plano Clark (2011, p. 173),
purposeful sampling in qualitative research means that researchers intentionally
81

select (or recruit) participants who have experienced the central phenomenon or the
key concept being explored in the study. The key assumption behind purposive
sampling procedures is the selection of information-rich cases (Patton, 2002, p.
230) that can provide an in-depth understanding of the research phenomenon by
studying individual cases. The follow up is conducted with a few participants in order
to obtain their specific language and voices about the topic (Creswell, 2009, p. 19).
Miles and Huberman (1994, p. 27) also confirmed that qualitative researchers
usually work with small samples of people, nested in their context and studied in-
depth.
Mixed methods researchers generally advise that, for the follow-up,
participants that are representative of different groups, or who scored outside the
norm, should be chosen, in order to understand how groups differ and why certain
informants scored as they did. As Miles and Huberman (1994, p. 28) put it, searching
deliberately for confirming and disconfirming cases, extreme or deviant cases, and
typical cases serves to increase confidence in conclusions. Patton (2002, p. 234) also
commented:

In statistical terms, extreme case sampling focuses on outliers (the endpoints of the
bell-shaped curve normal distribution) that are often ignored in aggregate data
reporting. [] extreme cases may be information-rich cases precisely because, by
being unusual, they can illuminate both the unusual and the typical.

The highly anxious EFL learners of the present study were taken as extreme cases.
The mean score was calculated, and therefore participants whose total anxiety score
was higher than the mean score were classified as having high levels of anxiety as
opposed to students who scored lower than the mean score and were thus classified as
82

low anxious. The specific characteristics that the highly anxious shared were isolated
and studied in depth.

4.7.2 Participants in the quantitative component
My target population was Greek students enrolled in private language schools
learning EFL. Two institutes where English is studied as a foreign language were
selected from Thessaloniki, the second biggest city in the country situated in northern
Greece. The directors of studies in both schools were ex-colleagues of mine.
Permission to gain access to both schools and conduct my research there was granted
through sending an invitation to the directors to take part in my project.
The selection of the participants in the quantitative component was based on
their age and level of proficiency in EFL. It was believed that adult students would be
better able to offer insightful accounts of their emotions in class given their life
experience and linguistic maturity. It happened that in both institutes adults were of a
B1 level of proficiency and above. I therefore decided to randomly recruit those
students, as they were expected to have a clearer view of what studying EFL entails,
hence being in a position to share their personal episodes of affect in the EFL
classroom.
Based on the above considerations, I targeted a sample of around 200
participants, of which certain students were expected to exhibit low levels of LA and
would thus be excluded from the project. I used cluster sampling, a probability
sampling strategy used for large and diverse populations where the researcher selects
a specific number of clusters (in my case, two language schools) and tests a particular
number of cases from those clusters (in my case, 19 EFL classes) (Cohen et al., 2007;
Drnyei, 2007, 2010; Teddlie and Tashakkori, 2009). When combined with random
83

sampling as my strategy for this component was cluster sampling is believed to
maximise the validity of survey research. It was anticipated that the differing ages and
proficiency levels of the participating students would provide me with interesting
comparisons and insights into their levels of LA.
Of the initial population of 197 respondents, 128 were classified as highly
anxious thus being qualified for this study. Those students total anxiety score was
above the mean score for the questionnaire. As explained above, all informants were
adults; the average age was 24.12. There were 44 male and 84 female students. The
minimum length of exposure to English was two years with a maximum length of
eight years. The participating students proficiency level ranged from B1 to C2 (in
CEFR standards, from lower intermediate to upper advanced). 86 of the respondents
were studying in higher education institutions in Thessaloniki, as opposed to the
remaining 42 who declared themselves as professionals. In addition, their foreign
language learning experience varied significantly, with the majority of students
having studied French and Spanish, and five students indicating that they have been
enrolled to Arabic and Turkish classes.

4.7.3 Participants in the qualitative component
Interview student participants and diarists were selected from the same
schools. First, a number of completed questionnaires were chosen through criterion
sampling (Miles and Huberman, 1994), my conceptual criterion being to ensure high
levels of LA that would lead to insightful and thick descriptions (Denzin, 2001) of the
construct by different informants. These questionnaires were ranked according to the
respondents total LA score. Thus, the students with the highest rankings were invited
84

to keep a learner diary and attend the follow-up interview. If unwilling to participate,
the second or third questionnaire in rank was selected.
Patton (2002, p. 244) emphatically stated that there are no rules for sample
size in qualitative inquiry; rather the size depends on what you want to know and
what will have credibility. I initially invited twenty students to participate in the
interview, and fourteen students to write a learner diary for me. These numbers
accounted for a 10-20% of the total number of participants from the quantitative
component. Drnyei (2010, p. 63) in fact advised researchers to leave a decent
margin to provide for unforeseen or unplanned circumstances, as some participants
are likely to drop out, or some questionnaires may have to be disqualified. The
interview schedule was arranged on the basis of the participants availability. Quite
often participants did not show up, or would ask me to put off the interview until a
later date. The final number of student interviewees was thirteen. As for the diaries,
the level of attrition (Duff, 2008) was quite high (i.e., 50%). At the end of the diary
study, I received a total of 61 entries from eight diarists over a period of two months.
However, I decided to exclude one diarist who provided only five entries, as I
considered that diary incomplete and inefficient. Therefore, the data that were used
for analysis and interpretation were 56 diary entries from seven diarists.
The eleven EFL teachers who were working in both schools were also
interviewed individually. Table 3 below summarises the biodata of the teacher
interviewees (the teachers names in the table are pseudonyms).




85

Table 3. Teacher interviewees biodata

Teacher School Levels currently
teaching
Age ELT
experience
(in years)
Qualifications
Argyris 1 Upper-intermediate
Advanced
(A few classes per
year with all levels as
he is the head teacher
in the school.)
42 19 BA English Language
& Literature
MA Theoretical
Linguistics
Linda 1 Intermediate 53 23 BA English Language
MA Linguistics
PhD American
Literature
CELTA
Elisa 1 Lower-intermediate
Intermediate
30 8 BA English Language
& Literature
Antonis 1 Intermediate
Upper-intermediate
Advanced
35 12 BA English Language
& Literature
Bonnie 1 Lower-intermediate
Intermediate
26 4 BA English Language
& Literature
CELTA
Akrivi 1 Advanced 54 25 BA English Language
& Literature
Kiki 1 Intermediate
Advanced
31 7 BA English Language
& Literature
Alexandra 2 Lower-intermediate
Intermediate
39 11 BA English Language
& Literature
Teacher Training
Course, University of
Stockholm
Mary 2 Lower-intermediate
Intermediate
46 17 BA English Language
& Literature
Joanna 2 Upper-intermediate
Advanced
44 13 BA English Language
& Literature
DELTA
Maria 2 Upper-intermediate 32 8 BA English Language
& Literature

4.8 Instruments
Given that LA is usually hard to define and measure, a combination of
different instruments was opted for in order to help explain the results, triangulate
different kinds of data, and relate them in as meaningful a way as possible to capture
the complexity and dynamism of the construct under examination. All instruments are
described below.
86

4.8.1 Quantitative component
4.8.1.1 The use of questionnaires in ELT research
The main strength of questionnaires is that they are efficient in terms of
researcher time, researcher effort, and cost (Drnyei, 2010). In contrast to interviews,
administering a questionnaire requires personal investment from the part of the
researcher to a lesser extent. Data processing is also a clear and straightforward task
to accomplish. Drnyei (2010, p. 6) stressed that questionnaires are versatile because
they can be used successfully with a variety of people in a variety of situations
targeting a variety of topics. Further, a well-constructed questionnaire can produce
consistent and reliable results and is likely to reduce the bias of interviewer effects
(Drnyei , 2010). Such biases will be discussed in the section on the use of interviews
in ELT research below.
However, according to Gillham (2000, p. 1), in research methodology no
single method has been so much abused as questionnaires. Drnyei (2010) argued
that questionnaires often result in superficial data as their nature does not allow for
probing deeply into an issue; this may occasionally be augmented by the fact that
respondents are often unreliable and unmotivated, and they tend to leave out or
misread questions. Problems of data quality may indeed arise due to the fact that
questionnaires may be completed hastily and carelessly (Gillham, 2000).
The social desirability bias is another weakness inherent to applied linguistics
research using questionnaires. Participants may not always report on what they truly
feel or believe. As Drnyei (2010, p. 8) simply put it, questionnaire items are often
transparent, that is, respondents can have a fairly good guess about what the
desirable/acceptable/expected answer is, and some of them will provide this response
even if it is not true.
87

Drnyei (2010) also listed the acquiescence bias, the halo effect, and the
fatigue effect among the most common weaknesses of questionnaire research. The
acquiescence bias concerns the human tendency to agree with statements which they
are unsure about, or to be unwilling to look at the negative aspect of as topic. The halo
effect refers to the tendency for people to overgeneralise; for instance, if their
impression of something or someone is negative, they will not be inclined to say
anything positive about that person or situation. Finally, the fatigue effect is the result
of feeling tired or bored to provide responses towards the end of the questionnaire.

4.8.1.2 Developing the questionnaire

The quantitative data collection instrument used in this study consisted of two
parts, the first one focusing on background, demographic information about the
student participants, and the second covering various aspects of LA (see Appendix A).
I included a cover page with the title of the project and with general instructions
explaining what the study is about and why I am undertaking it, how those specific
participants and their experiences would help me to draw some useful insights
regarding the topic under investigation, informing them about the possibility that
some of them will be contacted soon and will be invited to take part in an interview
and/or a diary study, promising confidentiality and anonymity, and thanking them.

Part I: Biodata and background information
This section of the instrument collected details about the number of years
participants had been studying English for, their gender, age, occupation, other
foreign languages known and level of proficiency in them, as well as orientation and
motivation types for learning EFL. Drnyei (2010) highlighted the importance of the
88

biodata and background information sections of research questionnaires,
recommending that researchers trade carefully in order to promise confidentiality and
convey the usefulness of those sections for the purpose of each study.

Part II: Language anxiety
As explained in the Introduction, this project aimed at investigating language-
skill-specific anxiety, and specifically speaking and writing anxiety, in EFL
classrooms in Greece. Two questionnaires the FLCAS (Horwitz et al., 1986) and
the ESLWAT (Gungle and Taylor, 1989) were thus piloted and refined for the
purposes of the study. Before analysing the process of developing the final
questionnaire, I will describe both quantitative data collection instruments, with
special focus on the items they include and on reliability issues emerging from
previous studies using them.
The most well-established and widely used instrument for the identification
and measurement of LA is the FLCAS, which consists of 33 self-report items
assessing the level of students anxiety and focusing on self-expectations of poor
performance, comparisons with significant others involved in the language learning
process, psychophysiological symptoms, and avoidance behaviour (Horwitz et al.,
1986). The instrument was originally designed for and administered to approximately
300 students at the University of Texas at Austin. Scores on the scale may range from
33 to 165. Horwitz (1986) reported that the instrument yielded a high internal
consistency of .93, and its test-retest reliability over eight weeks was .83.
The reliability and validity of the FLCAS were also tested by Aida (1994) in a
study of 96 students of second-year Japanese at the University of Texas at Austin. All
participants were asked to complete the FLCAS bearing in mind their experience of
89

learning Japanese as a foreign language in their first year. The results revealed an
internal consistency of .94, similar to that obtained by Horwitz (1986). The test-retest
reliability over the fall and spring semester was .80, showing that the FLCAS can
assess ones LA levels accurately at different times. In addition, the high test-retest
reliability of the instrument was indicative of the fact that, apart from situation-
specific LA, the FLCAS can also trace ones trait anxiety (Aida, 1994). Prez-
Paredes and Martnez-Snchez (2000) examined the validity and reliability of the
FLCAS too. They administered it to 198 Spanish post-beginner students of English at
a Spanish Official School of Languages. The results yielded a reliability of .89 as
well as a high test-retest reliability of .90 over three weeks.
Even though the FLCAS is not in its entirety related to speaking anxiety,
previous research has shown that, given its association with second language
speaking achievement, it measures anxiety primarily related to speaking situations
(Aida, 1994, p. 163). Using the FLCAS in their study of the speaking and writing
components of classroom LA, Cheng et al. (1999) also concluded that FLCAS
concentrates particularly on aspects of speaking anxiety. Rodrguez and Abreu (2003)
contended that the FLCAS indeed measures speaking anxiety, thus being insufficient
to identify anxiety caused by the remaining three skills. Pichette (2009) buttressed
this point of view, arguing that twenty out of the 33 items of the FLCAS focus on
speaking, while the remaining thirteen items measure general classroom anxiety with
no concern over anxiety about writing or reading. Mak (2011) factor analysed the
FLCAS and found that the majority of items loaded on the first factor which clearly
addressed speaking anxiety and its subsequent fear of negative evaluation. Taking
into account insights from previous research, the FLCAS was deemed the most
appropriate quantitative data collection instrument for speaking anxiety.
90

As explained in the literature review, research into writing anxiety developed out of
studies of anxiety that native English writers would experience (Daly and Miller,
1975a, 1975b). Daly and Miller adapted their WAT originally designed for native
English writers for use with second language writers. However, as Woodrow (2011,
p. 511) put it,

There is some concern regarding the appropriateness of this instrument initially
developed for use with native language writers. The questionnaire items do not seem
to capture issues faced by second language writers, such as finding a composition class
a very frightening experience, or feeling good when handing in a composition. This
may be why there are few studies in second language learning using this
instrumentation.

Cheng (2004) developed a writing anxiety instrument, which, despite having good
reliability, concentrated mostly on anxiety about generic writing tasks, a focus that
would not coincide with what I had planned on investigating. The main reason why I
opted to use the ESLWAT was that the statements included in it captured my research
purposes with reference to writing anxiety, namely how anxious students were about
writing in English, and where their anxiety would stem from.
I assembled the final version of the questionnaire from the components of
both instruments. The resulting LA questionnaire consisted of 56 items that were
jumbled up when given to the students. Brown (2001) warned that answers
respondents give to one question may affect answers on subsequent questions. Hence,
randomisation was thought of as a means of controlling problems of ordering effects
and of increasing reliability.
The following modifications were made to the questionnaires:
a) Items related to interaction with native speakers were eliminated, because they
referred to hypothetical situations that did not occur in the English language
classrooms under investigation.
91

b) The term foreign language was replaced by English language. For example,
the original FLCAS item I feel confident when I speak in my foreign language
class was modified to I feel confident when I speak in my English language
class.
c) The double-barreled item I have no fear of my writing being evaluated by my
teacher and/or my peers was further split into two statements, namely I have no
fear of my writing being evaluated by my teacher and I have no fear of my
writing being evaluated by my peers.
The variables were measured through a Likert scale. As recommended in the
literature, an odd number of choices (five) was used in order to allow participants to
sit on the fence and take the neutral non-opinion option given to them (Brown,
2001; Cohen et al., 2007; Drnyei, 2010). According to Brown (2001, pp. 41-42),
naturally, there are times when a fence-sitting option may be desirable. Cohen et al.
(2007, p. 326) also stated that the categories on a Likert-type questionnaire should
exhaust the range of possible responses which respondents may wish to give. If I
felt that the undecided category has been overused or noticed that it has been
interestingly used with specific items, I thought I could follow this up in the
interviews.
Second language researchers have commented positively on the use of Likert
scales in research questionnaires. Skehan (1989, p. 11) argued that no individual
item carries an excessive load, and an inconsistent response to one item would cause
limited damage. Additionally, such scales better address the target content domain
than single items, as the former usually include more than one item to capture the
content area; the target is the same but slightly different aspects of it are mentioned in
the questionnaire (Drnyei, 2010). By way of example, an LA questionnaire using a
92

Likert scale may consist of statements on speaking anxiety addressing different
responses to it which are also phrased differently, such as I tremble/feel my heart
pounding/am nervous when I speak in my English language class. Moreover, coding
Likert scales is a straightforward task, hence leaving no room for rater subjectivity
(Drnyei, 2010, p. 26). The answers are assigned a number and are then entered into
a computer database. Therefore, uniformity across questions in terms of the types of
questions and of the nature of data gathered is provided. Brown (2001) added to this
that usually closed-response questions are easier to answer and less likely to be
skipped by participants.
On the other hand, Brown (2001) claimed that closed-response questions
provide a limited range of answers and are less exploratory in nature than open-ended
questions. He concluded that survey designers may be more likely to find what they
are looking for in closed-ended questions, rather than finding unexpected responses
as they might in open-response questions (p. 38). However, this shortcoming of
closed-ended questions, and consequently of Likert scales, could be balanced by
incorporating a qualitative phase in the research project, as the present study
implemented.
After the questionnaire was compiled, both sections were translated into the
student participants L1 (i.e., Greek) by the researcher. In order to ensure the
equivalence of the English and the Greek version, I consulted two external reviewers,
both working as English language teachers in Greece and holding an MA in
translation from the University of Surrey.



93

4.8.1.3 The pilot study
Field-testing or piloting the questionnaire is a vital step towards constructing a
good instrument, and any attempt to shortcut the piloting stage will seriously
jeopardise the psychometric quality of the questionnaire (Drnyei, 2010, p. 54). The
pilot study can indicate questions with ambiguous wording, too difficult questions,
questions that do not yield any unique data, or questions that are difficult to code, as
well as problems regarding the administration and layout of the questionnaire
(Drnyei, 2010). Gass and Mackey (2007, p. 3) warned that the piloting stage can
reveal subtle flaws in the design or implementation of the study flaws that may not
be readily apparent in the plan itself, but that could otherwise prove costly and time-
consuming, perhaps even leading to the loss of valuable and irreplaceable data.
The questionnaire was therefore piloted with a very similar sample from one
of the two private language schools (N = 20). After the consent of the director of
studies was gained, I administered the questionnaire to students of two different
classes (i.e., ten B1 students and ten C2 students). The students that took part in the
pilot study were not involved in the main study. The data collected through piloting
the questionnaire were analysed for reliability. The scale proved to be highly reliable
( = .92). The scale was also tested for internal consistency. As Brace et al. (2006, p.
331) advised, if items within a scale are intended to measure aspects of the same
construct, then they should all be fairly strongly correlated with each other.
Correlations among items (i.e., part-whole or item-total correlations) were computed
in order to check for unsatisfactory internal consistency coefficients. The value of
Cronbachs alpha for the scale if a particular item is deleted was also assessed. The
questionnaire items indeed correlated strongly with each other. Some moderate
correlations among items were also found. Thus, both scales appeared to be reliable,
94

and, in addition, the moderate and strong correlations between items could give a
preliminary idea on groupings of variables that were likely to emerge in the main
study. The inter-item correlations and the item-total correlations for the questionnaire
can be found in Appendices B and C respectively.

4.8 Qualitative component
4.8.2.1 The use of diaries in ELT research
A diary study is defined as "a first-person account of a language learning or
teaching experience, documented through regular, candid entries in a personal journal
and then analysed for recurring patterns or salient events" (Bailey, 1990, p. 215).
Catering for both introspection and retrospection on the part of the learners, it gives
researchers the opportunity to unobtrusively study each learner's views on affective
factors and generally on those facets of the language learning experience which are
normally hidden or largely inaccessible to an external observer (Bailey and Oschner,
1983, p. 189). Drnyei (2007) argued that qualitative research in general involves the
study of individuals with as little obtrusion as possible, and diary studies help
towards this requirement to a large extent.
Generally speaking, a diary study demonstrates its utility in highlighting the
development of participants' emotional experiences over a long period of time and on
many different occasions. In fact, Mercer (2006, p. 66) argued that "the temporally
organised longitudinal nature of a diary study is one of its greatest assets". Bailey
(1983, p. 98) also pointed out that "diary studies allow us to see the classroom
experience as a dynamic and complex process through the eyes of the language
learner". Hence, focusing on learners voices and complexity on a longitudinal basis
95

aids language teachers and researchers to better understand classroom language
learning.
However, one limitation of diaries inherent in research on emotions and
anxiety is that participants cannot always have access to unconscious learning
processes or strategies they use to alleviate their stress in the classroom (Gkonou,
2013). Damasio (2000, p. 36) claimed that there is no evidence that we are
conscious of all our feelings, and much to suggest that we are not. Learners are not
always aware of the connections among events that take place in class, or the reasons
why they exhibit certain behaviours or adopt specific strategies, and are therefore
unable to report on them. Additionally, some participants may not be good at
describing their thoughts and feelings. Instead, it is the researcher who content-
analyses data, and creates coding schemes and relational models for an in-depth
explanation of emotional and behavioural factors. This lack of evidence of the
unconscious may result in incomplete entries, because events that may be of
particular interest from the researcher's perspective may be omitted by the participant.
Nevertheless, I believe that this could mostly be the case with younger or less
experienced language learners who do not yet possess an inventory of skills and
awareness of the process of second or foreign language learning. In contrast, the
current study was conducted with adult EFL learners who, according to the
demographic information initially obtained, had often already attempted to learn
other foreign languages, ranging from modern foreign languages such as French,
Italian, or Spanish, to less commonly taught and studied languages such as Arabic
and Turkish. I was therefore lucky that my participants had long and varied foreign
language learning experience. Additionally, given that my study was focusing on the
LA of highly anxious EFL learners, the students who took part in it were mostly
96

aware of the nature of their anxiety as they often encountered it in class. Thus,
contextual level factors need to be considered when designing a diary study, as these
could help increase the quality and narrow the scope of the data collected.

4.8.2.2 The present diary study
The diary study for the current project spanned two months. First, a training
session was conducted prior to the commencement of diary keeping to ensure that
participants have understood the purpose of the study and the way they could best
complete their entries. Despite sounding like a daunting task, my main aim was to
help participants see the importance of what they were doing. Apart from benefitting
the researcher, learners should also feel that the project they take part in is beneficial
to them (Allwright, 2003). I tried to highlight this aspect when training the students.
They were all presented with a sheet of guidelines on how to complete their diaries
along with a sample diary entry that I created, both preceded by an introductory
paragraph clearly stating the benefits of the process to them (see Appendix D):

The diary is a very important and helpful tool, which will enable you to think more
deeply about the English lessons that you follow and your needs as a language learner,
whilst at the same time providing you with a clear record of the work you do. In
addition, it constitutes a means of giving you insightful and valuable writing practice.

I hoped that, through my providing a heuristic framework for increasing learners'
awareness of themselves as language learners and by using the diaries as a medium of
regular writing practice in English, informants would be encouraged to submit
successful and complete entries. Having the chance to go through their mistakes with
me was another possibility offered to them as a compensation for their participation.
97

Most of them were keen on arranging post hoc sessions to discuss ways of improving
their writing.
Nonetheless, as is the case with the majority of diary studies, a major pitfall
was the level of attrition (Duff, 2008). Having initially contacted fourteen EFL
learners who gave their consent to participating and attended my training session, I
only received seven complete diaries adhering to the research principles set out at the
beginning. Half of the informants could not achieve the levels of commitment and
dedication required by the study and felt that it interfered with their own schedules.
On the other hand, when interviewed, the diary study participants who returned
complete entries to me commented that their positive attitudes towards writing in
English were motivating enough to allow for their contribution to my project.
Finally, the pilot stage of the diary study was put into practice in September
2010 in order to confirm the effectiveness of diaries as research instruments for the
needs of the current project. The purpose of my pilot diary study was twofold: a) to
ensure the efficiency and clarity of the instructions given to the diarists, and b) to find
out whether the frequency of diary entries (i.e., after each English lesson, twice a
week) was manageable for them. The data showed that I would be able to gather the
information which was relevant to my research topic in the main study. However,
with reference to the second purpose of the pilot stage, I observed that the
participants had failed to produce an entry for every response time scheduled for
them. Consequently, I decided to reduce the scheduled response frequency to just
once per week, which sounded achievable to the students even though from my
researcher perspective it could occasionally have been at the expense of the richness
of data.

98

4.8.2.3 The use of interviews in ELT research
Richards (2009, p. 187) stressed that only interviews can probe the beliefs
and experiences that might explain their [the participants] responses. In a profession
like teaching, such understanding can be invaluable. In fact, the purpose of
qualitative interviewing is to capture how the interviewees view their world, as well
as the complexities of their individual perceptions and experiences. [] The
fundamental principle of qualitative interviewing is to provide a framework within
which respondents can express their own understandings in their own terms (Patton,
2002, p. 348).
Having to ask and answer questions is also a natural and common way to
collect information about everyday life topics one might be interested in (Drnyei,
2007). As Kvale (1996, p. 5) argued, qualitative interviews are a means of
professional conversation between people that has a structure and a purpose to
serve research and elucidate aspects of the life world of the interviewees. The
emergent and exploratory nature of interviews, the consideration of the research
setting which can be of paramount importance when doing research in education, the
deep understanding and delineation of the levels of complexity that aspects of
language learning usually involve, and the flexibility when things go wrong that
interviews are characterised by, make them an indispensable and valuable research
instrument. Thus, interviews can enable us to produce exciting results and probe into
findings that would have remained unexplored or even been neglected if
questionnaires were the sole method of research.



99

4.8.2.4 The interview protocol
All interviews were conducted using a semi-structured guide from which I
selected questions during the interview, depending on the direction of the discussion.
In this interview type, researchers have clear questions they want answered, but ask
them in a way that invites an open response. Interviewers are thus allowed the
freedom to digress. Specifically, they should allow flexibility to probe some aspects
in depth, to follow up with further questions interesting points made by the
interviewee, and, where necessary, to let the interviewee lead the discussion (Berg,
2007; Richards, 2009). While the interview protocol provided a relatively systematic
coverage of all themes, the interviewees, being considered co-constructors of
meaning, were free to suggest related topics, and I often devised questions in an
attempt to follow up any interesting points they made. The interview topics were
selected so as to test the theoretical assumptions prevalent in the existing literature, to
probe for participants interesting answers in the questionnaires, and to give
participants opportunities for subjective spontaneous contributions.
The semi-structured interview has been criticised by researchers in the field
(Drnyei, 2007; Richards, 2009), who considered it as a compromise because it
draws to some extent on both of the other types [i.e., structured and unstructured]
(Richards, 2009, p. 185). This is in fact true: a researcher knows that certain key areas
will need to be identified in order to compare the students experiences of these. An
element of structure is therefore important. On the other hand, a general picture is
unlikely to reveal the undercurrents of feelings, expectations, opinions, and so on that
will help investigators understand the reasons for what they see happening. For this,
more open questions will be needed to allow students the freedom to bring to the
surface aspects of their experience that would otherwise remain hidden. Thus, the
100

advantage of semi-structured interviews and the interview guide they are based on is
that they give the interviewer/evaluator the reassurance that s/he has carefully
decided how best to use the limited time available in an interview situation. The
guide helps make interviewing a number of different people more systematic and
comprehensive by delimiting in advance the issues to be explored (Patton, 2002).
In the pilot phase of the project, the interview guides were used with two
student and two teacher interviewees who were respectively studying and working in
one of the two language schools. Their answers and reactions to my questions were
taken into account when adjusting and refining the format, order, and wording of the
questions. No changes were made to the interview protocol for the teacher interviews.
As far as field testing the student interviews was concerned, I noticed that the
interview guide brought a certain level of structure and could be used unchanged with
all student interviewees. However, the pilot interviews further showed that I had to
slightly adjust the student interview guides to cater for the individual responses of
each participant to questionnaire items, paying particular attention to cover intriguing
and unexpected answers given to the questionnaires and, in the case of specific
students only, in the diaries. Please see Appendices E and F for the full student and
teacher interview protocols.

4.9 Data collection procedure
4.9.1 Questionnaires
The questionnaires were administered in December 2010. The researcher was
present during the administration of the instrument in order to deal with participants
queries. I first gave them some information about my research, that is, the institution I
am conducting it with, its purpose and potential usefulness, and the reasons why I
101

selected the particular participants. Confidentiality and anonymity were also orally
re-emphasised. I then invited the participants to read the instructions and ask me any
questions they had. I also encouraged them to raise their hands if they had any
questions while completing the questionnaire, and address them to me.

4.9.2 Diaries
The diary study began in January 2011 and spanned two months. As explained
in section 4.8.2.2, a training session was arranged with the respondents who were
willing to keep a diary. The diarists were asked to send their diaries to me
electronically at the end of each teaching week. The diary study was also monitored
by the participants tutors.

4.9.3 Interviews
4.9.3.1 Teacher interviews
The interviews with the EFL tutors were conducted in December 2010 and
January 2011. The interviews were arranged for a day and time that would suit the
interviewees, normally before or after one of their classes, and took place in rooms
that were available in each language school. All interviews were conducted in
English, and were audio-recorded and transcribed by myself.

4.9.3.2 Student interviews
The interviews with the EFL students were conducted in April 2011, after the
end of the diary study and the preliminary analysis of the diary data. All interviews
took place in the language schools. The language used in the student interviews was
102

Greek. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed by myself. The student
interviews were translated selectively, for citation purposes.

4.10 Data analysis
The quantitative data were submitted to descriptive and inferential statistical
procedures, while the qualitative data were analysed thematically. The results of the
two sequential processes were integrated into meta-inferences presented in the
Discussion chapter. The two data analysis processes are described in more detail
below.

4.10.1 Quantitative data
Quantitative data analysis was performed using the Statistical Package for
Social Sciences (SPSS) version 16.0. First, descriptive statistics were used to present
and describe data in terms of summary frequencies, means, and standard deviations.
Then, inferential statistics helped to make inferences and predictions on the basis of
the data gathered. These included correlations and difference testing, that is one-way
analysis of variance and factor analysis.
Each of the 128 questionnaires received an individual code which allowed it
to be identified very quickly when needed. The first step of data processing here
involved quantifying the data by converting answers to numbers. The questionnaire
was answered on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5
(strongly agree). The coding frame was therefore straightforward. However,
positively worded items, such as It wouldnt bother me at all to take more English
language classes and I feel confident when I speak in my English language class,
were reversed and recoded. By way of example, if a student selected option 4 (i.e.,
103

agree) for the item I tremble when I know I am going to be called on in my English
language class, then s/he would receive four LA points. On the other hand, selecting
4 for the statement It wouldnt bother me at all to take more English language
classes would be assigned 2 LA points. The total classroom anxiety score was
derived by summing the students responses to respective items.

4.10.2 Qualitative data
4.10.2.1 Preparation of the data
After conducting the interviews, I manually transcribed them verbatim and
stored them in separate files for each participant along with their questionnaire
responses, and where applicable, their diary entries. The student interviews were
translated selectively, for citation purposes. First, I read through the transcripts and
the diary entries once to get an overall idea of the participants viewpoints on the
topic in question, writing thoughts on the margin. As Richards (2003, p. 273)
suggested, while it is possible to approach the task by coding paragraphs or even
larger sections of data, the most productive approach is probably to work on a line-
by-line basis, leaving any winnowing and sorting until later.
Scanning the written texts was the second step towards developing a coding
scheme. I used natural breaks in the material, such as cutting off points, which
usually denoted a change in topic. This was largely determined by the sequence of the
questions asked in the interviews. With relation to the interview transcripts, I soon
realised that the texts were structured in a way that the focal points sparsely appeared
throughout them. Even though the interviews followed a question protocol, which
meant that questions and answers would be likely to appear in a linear order across all
transcripts, answers to the same question were found in various pages throughout the
104

texts as participants tended to repeat some of their responses, or felt that they had
something else to add to their previous thoughts and had to go back to a point that
they had made earlier. Thus, I thought that a more holistic approach to reading the
transcripts would be beneficial for grasping the content of the informants opinions.
Doing this, I wrote summaries for each participant on Microsoft Word, collating both
the quantitative and the qualitative data I had collected. The summaries listed the
participants pseudonyms, their age, gender, other foreign languages known,
occupation, and orientations for learning EFL, as well as their responses to key
questions (e.g., skill-specific anxiety, LA associated with internal and external
factors, etc.). Whenever I noticed a mismatch between responses to questions through
the three research instruments, I made a quick note of the informants reasoning as
this would guide the data interpretation at a later stage. Contributing to viewing each
participant holistically, these summaries helped me to write the participant profiles
presented in the Qualitative Findings chapter, useful in understanding their
contributions later.

4.10.2.2 Developing a coding scheme
Qualitative data analysis was an iterative process involving going back and
forth between the data. As Teddlie and Tashakkori (2009, p. 252) also speculated,
qualitative data analysis is eclectic. It is difficult to prescribe a single, particular
data analysis scheme for a particular qualitative database. Typically, each researcher
analysing qualitative data employs an eclectic mix of the available analytical tools
that best fit the data set under consideration. Creswell (2009, p. 176) added that
qualitative research gives a holistic account of the topic in question as qualitative
researchers view it through a complexity lens, which involves reporting multiple
105

perspectives, identifying the many factors involved in a situation, and generally
sketching the larger picture that emerges.
The interview and diary data were coded using first- and second-level, or
pattern, coding. First, the codes were created and defined. Inductive analysis was
used at this stage, which involved discovering patterns, themes, and categories in the
data. This was accompanied by deductive analysis, where the data were analysed
according to existing frameworks from the literature (Strauss and Corbin, 1998).
Ideas from reading informed this process. Before starting off with coding the
interview data, I had developed a list of codes from the existing literature for the
purposes of having an idea of possible themes that may emerge through the analysis
of my data. Some examples of codes from the existing literature included fear of
negative evaluation, concern over errors, self-concepts, relaxation, and team work.
An example of the codes I gave to three teacher interviews can be found in Appendix
G.
Second, pattern codes were used as a form of meta-code. According to Miles
and Huberman (1994, p. 69), pattern coding is a way of grouping those summaries
[i.e., the first-level codes] into a smaller number of sets, themes, or constructs. For
qualitative researchers, its an analogue to the cluster-analytic and factor-analytic
devices used in statistical analysis. Pattern coding is a means of constructing a
cognitive map (Miles and Huberman, 1994, p. 69) that helps researchers understand
the interaction among people and incidents. Additionally, for multi-case studies,
pattern coding allows for cross-case analysis and for the identification of common
themes and directionality (Miles and Huberman, 1994). Thus, different categories
emerged, which were integrated into core categories. Similar topics were clustered
together in order to reduce my total list of categories. The principle of convergence
106

(Guba and Lincoln, 1994; Patton, 2002) was employed here: I had to figure out what
things fit together by looking for recurring regularities in the data. The process was
concluded when the sets of categories were saturated so that new sources led to
redundancy, and when the analysis began to overextend beyond the boundaries of
the issues and concerns guiding the analysis (Patton, 2002). Data were also checked
for divergence in order to see where participants voices differed and to facilitate
understanding of the nature of complex and multifaceted variables.
The final schemes (Appendices I, J, and K) consisted of both predetermined
and emerging codes. The qualitative data were also quantified. I counted the number
of times each code occurred in the texts in order to be better able to draw a
conclusion as to which codes were the most frequently mentioned ones for the
participants in my study.
After deciding on my codes, I had them cross-checked by a departmental
colleague to establish inter-coder agreement. According to Creswell (2009, p. 191),
such an agreement might be based on whether two or more coders agree on codes
used for the same passages in the text. In order to assess the credibility of qualitative
findings, I also used member checking by taking the interview scripts with the
relevant themes back to two student and two teacher participants in order to
determine whether participants felt that my codes were accurate. With reference to
the utility of member checking or member validation, Richards (2003, p. 264)
claimed that it would be worthwhile to involve participants in the research process in
ways other than just inviting them to take part in an interview or write up a diary on
any aspect of TESOL; as participants in the research process, they have a wider call
on our attention and it may be worthwhile to involve them in other ways.

107

4.11 Data quality
As mentioned above, mixed methods research combines quantitative and
qualitative research instruments in a single study. Therefore, the quality of a mixed-
methods research project is assessed separately for its quantitative and qualitative
components, as they both contribute to the overall data (Cohen et al., 2007; Drnyei,
2007; Tashakkori and Teddlie, 2003). Quality criteria will now be discussed in terms
of quantitative and qualitative research respectively.

4.11.1 Quality in quantitative research
In a nutshell, validity is best defined as representing the extent to which an
instrument measures what it is supposed to measure. Cohen et al. (2007), however,
mentioned that, recently, validity has taken many different forms. Three main types
of validity are particularly important here: criterion validity, content validity, and
construct validity (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2011; Drnyei, 2007).
Criterion validity measures whether the scores on the particular instrument
relate to some external standard, such as scores on a similar instrument (Creswell and
Plano Clark, 2011). Researchers often distinguish between predictive and concurrent
validity; the former aims at establishing if the scores predict a criterion measure, as
opposed to the latter which examines if the present results correlate with other results
found by using another instrument (Cohen et al., 2007; Creswell, 2009). As this was a
cross-sectional research project, predictive validity could not be tested at this time,
although it will be possible to do this in future, follow-up projects. As for concurrent
validity, three different data collection instruments were deployed in this study in
order to explain and triangulate data, and in most cases the results as to LA and its
confounding variables converged.
108

Content validity means that the items included in a quantitative instrument are
representative of all aspects of the phenomenon being investigated (Cohen et al.,
2007; Creswell and Plano Clark, 2011). Although it would be difficult to judge
whether a quantitative instrument measures all aspects of classroom anxiety, as well
as speaking anxiety and writing anxiety, the theoretical framework and the final
questionnaire aimed to offer a comprehensive depiction of LA, incorporating facets
that had not been researched together before.
Construct validity refers to the extent to which a test is measuring the
construct it claims to be measuring. This can be achieved by rooting the researchers
construction of the target variable in a deep literature search that will elucidate all its
aspects (Cohen et al., 2007). Construct validity can also be ensured through different
research techniques that lead to similar results. My findings, obtained through a
sequential explanatory design and triangulation, corroborated most of the results in
existing publications. However, comparison cannot be total, as new
conceptualisations of LA were offered in this study, specifically with relation to
learner agency and ecosystems.
The literature also distinguishes between internal and external validity, the
former representing the extent to which the researcher can conclude that there is a
cause-and-effect relationship among variables in the study and whether this
relationship can be said to be true, as opposed to the latter which refers to the
generalisability of the findings to a larger population (Creswell and Plano Clark,
2011; Teddlie and Tashakkori, 2009). Of the six most salient threats to internal and
external validity that Drnyei (2007) listed, only two might apply to this project: the
Hawthorne effect and the social desirability bias. The Hawthorne effect is
documented when participants behave differently when they know they are being
109

studied. As for the social desirability bias, participants in a study may begin to exhibit
performance that they believe is expected of them. As my investigation tapped into
participants self-reported perceptions on the nature of their classroom LA, great care
was taken to minimise both effects in the presentation of the project to the students, in
answering their questions during the administration process, and in highlighting the
importance of giving as honest an answer as possible to each statement of the
questionnaire.
As far as reliability is concerned, this means that scores received from
participants should be consistent and stable over time (Creswell and Plano Clark,
2011). One frequent measure of reliability in quantitative research is the internal
consistency coefficient of a scale, or Cronbachs . Creswell (2009, p. 150) stated
that when one modifies an instrument or combines instruments in a study [as was the
case with this project], the original validity and reliability may not hold for the new
instrument, and it becomes important to re-establish validity and reliability during
data analysis. As seen earlier in the description of my quantitative instrument, the
final questionnaire rendered an internal consistency coefficient of .92, an value that
means that it is very highly reliable (Cohen et al., 2007; Drnyei, 2007). High internal
consistency reliability means that the questionnaire consists of homogeneous items
that measure the same target area. In psychometric terms this means that each item
on a scale should correlate with the other items and with the total scale score
(Drnyei, 2010, p. 94).

4.11.2 Quality in qualitative research
In qualitative research, validity is renamed into trustworthiness conceptualised
as the degree to which a study is valuable in terms of credibility, transferability,
110

dependability, and confirmability (Lincoln and Guba, 1985; also expounded in Cohen
et al., 2007; Drnyei, 2007; Tashakkori and Teddlie, 2003; Teddlie and Tashakkori,
2009). Each of these has an equivalent in quantitative research.
The credibility of qualitative findings (equivalent to internal validity in
quantitative research) refers to the extent to which the findings are credible from the
perspective of participants. Credibility can be enhanced by the researchers long-term
exposure to the context under investigation a process that I followed throughout the
data gathering stage , and the adequacy of the collected data through the use of
different methods of data collection (Lincoln and Guba, 1985), which has also been
achieved as explicated earlier in the Instruments section. Another way to assess
credibility is through the use of member checking or respondent validation, in which
case the researcher provides summaries of the findings to the participants and asks for
confirmation. As discussed in an earlier section (Developing a coding scheme),
summaries of two teacher interviews were written and sent to both language schools.
Additionally, summaries (in Greek) of two interviews were sent to the student
participants.
Transferability (equivalent to external validity in quantitative research)
estimates to what extent the findings can be transferred to other contexts. Given that
qualitative research is very often context-bound, there may be cases where
transferability is difficult to achieve. However, Lincoln and Guba (1985) suggested
that transferability can be increased by providing thick description of the research site
in order to allow readers and other researchers to determine whether the findings are
transferable. Following this advice, I offered enough description of my research
context in the Research Context and in the Participants section above so as to make
the project as transparent as possible. The research findings presented in the next
111

chapter will offer the conditions for comparison and contrast between my context and
other settings. In addition, Miles and Huberman (1994) suggested incorporating
cross-case analyses in research reports to enhance transferability and strengthen the
theory a researcher attempts to build. The Findings chapter that follows will examine
similarities and differences among participants in detail.
Dependability, being equivalent to reliability in quantitative research, assesses
the possibility that the same results would be obtained again. According to Lincoln
and Guba (1985), dependability can be assessed and increased by keeping an audit
trail of accurate records of the documentation of research design, data, analysis,
reflection, synthesis, and so on, so that the researchers decisions are open to others.
Dependability could also be established by relying on multiple coders to reach
agreement for passages in a text (i.e., inter-coder reliability; Creswell, 2009; Creswell
and Plano Clark, 2011). For this purpose, I asked a research student in the department
who is familiar with the Greek ELT context to assign codes to two of my interview
transcripts. The level of inter-coder agreement was satisfactory in the sense that we
agreed on the majority of codes except for the ones that described self-related
constructs. This was mainly attributed to the fact that there are only subtle differences
between self-concepts and, as was also explained in the literature review, the
terminology relating to the self is overlapping. Therefore, what I had for example
coded as self-confidence was coded as self-esteem by my colleague.
Confirmability, approximating objectivity in quantitative research, is the
assumption that one investigators interpretations would also be corroborated by other
researchers. As was the case with dependability above, confirmability of the
qualitative findings is increased through satisfactory levels of inter-coder agreement.

112

4.12 Ethics
Ethical issues in educational and social research often stem from what Cohen
et al. (2007, p. 51) termed the costs/benefits ratio, a dilemma which requires
researchers to strike a balance between the demands placed on them as professional
scientists in pursuit of truth, and their subjects rights and values potentially
threatened by the research. This observation guided my ethical considerations
throughout this project. An application for ethical approval was submitted to the
Department of Language and Linguistics in July 2010. The application described the
procedure of data collection and confirmed that the participants of the study would all
be adults. The consent form that I would get the participants to sign was also attached
to the application. My application was approved in August 2010 and I was therefore
able to proceed to the data collection stage of the pilot study and, later on, the main
study.
The following ethical principles were taken into account in the instrument
design, data gathering, and data processing stages:
a) Informed consent (Appendix L). The directors of studies verbal and written
consent was obtained one month before the start of my research, after detailing the
aims and nature of the project to them orally and on the consent form they were
asked to sign. The class teachers who were interviewed were given information
about the project first by the directors of studies and then from me before the start
of each interview, when they were also asked to sign the form. As far as the
students were concerned, they were provided with the necessary information about
the project (including details of voluntariness, anonymity, confidentiality, and
beneficence) on the cover letter accompanying the questionnaire. In addition,
before the administration of the quantitative instrument, I took several minutes to
113

explain everything orally to them, specifying that their consent would be
formalised upon completion of the consent form. I also explained the conditions
for conducting the diary study and the interview, as some of them would be invited
to participate in them at a later stage. The interviewees oral consent for recording
the conversation digitally was also obtained before each interview. During the
diary writing training session, I once again stressed the issues of anonymity and
non-traceability, and explained orally how each diarists name and data would be
handled.
b) Voluntary participation. None of the participants was forced or directly
encouraged to participate in the investigation. Quantitative data were collected in
classroom groups, and all students were happy to get involved. The head teachers
of both schools had already informed the potential student participants that they
would be invited to participate in a research project conducted at the University of
Essex, and this was believed to have augmented students desire to please and to
conform. As for the interviews, students were free to decline when invited to
attend one, and three of them did. During the interviews, they were free to skip
any question they wanted, and were not pushed for answers at any time.
c) Anonymity, confidentiality, and non-traceability. These were vital conditions for
my project, and I knew that lack of anonymity would have reduced my
participants number as well as the sincerity and dependability of their responses.
Everyone was promised absolute confidentiality and anonymity, and were told that
their biodata and background information would only be used in ways that would
be beneficial to the research findings and pedagogic implications of the project. In
order to maximise non-traceability, I did my best to make sure that the
participants pseudonyms were used accurately throughout the reporting stage of
114

the results, and that the direct quotations from the interviews and diaries were not
credited through demographic information. In addition, research findings were
reported in an aggregated manner for both schools, in order to avoid any
unpleasant consequence that school identification could have led to. In addition,
the informants were told that their names, any demographic information relating to
them, and their answers to all questions would be treated with strict confidence.
This was also a point made on the consent form they had to sign before completing
the questionnaire. I explained to the participants that although I asked them for
their name and email address on the cover page, I did so only because some of
them would be further invited to take part in a follow-up interview or a diary
study, and I had to be able to contact them again.
d) Beneficence. Cohen et al. (2007) claimed that potential informants could be
persuaded to participate in research if they could see that this would bring
personal, educational and social benefits. Thus, apart from contributing to the
literature of a lesser documented affective factor through my project, it was my
objective to help students speculate on their stressful reactions to EFL learning and
read their emotions when in class. Through the dissemination of my findings in
Greece and elsewhere, my research was hoped to have the potential to raise
questions that could ultimately lead to the creation of anxiety-free atmospheres in
language schools. This was emphasised to all the participants before the
administration of the questionnaire and the data collection through interviews, and
later again during the diary keeping training session. With reference to the latter,
and as was also explained in the section on the present diary study (4.8.2.2) earlier,
I highlighted that diary writing could provide students with invaluable writing
115

practice. What is more, I gave them the opportunity (and most of them seized it) to
arrange individual tutorial-like sessions with them and discuss their writings.

4.13 Conclusion
This chapter offered an in-depth discussion of the methodological decisions I
made with reference to the research design of the present project. A critical overview
of theories of mixed methods research, and of the research paradigm and approach
governing this study were presented first in order to explicate what type of research
was conducted and why. Detailed information about the participants, the instruments,
and the techniques of data collection and analysis, was provided for the quantitative
and qualitative components of the study. The main aspects of quality in quantitative
and qualitative research, as well as ethical issues, were discussed next. In Chapters 5
and 6 that follow, I present the quantitative results and qualitative findings of this
project.












116

CHAPTER 5
QUANTITATIVE RESULTS

5.1 Introduction
As justified in the Methodology chapter, the study implemented a sequential
mixed methods design, using quantitative and qualitative data to address the research
questions. This chapter reports on the quantitative results of this project, whereas the
next chapter will present the qualitative findings. Although the two strands are
presented in two separate sections, they are complementary and will be integrated in
the Discussion chapter.
This chapter is organised into two main parts: descriptive statistics and
inferential statistics. In the first section, the distribution and frequencies of each
questionnaire item are presented. The second section concentrates on group effects
through correlations and analysis of variance, as well as on multivariate statistics, and
in particular factor analysis.

5.2 Descriptive statistics
In this section, measures of central tendency, that is the means (M) and
standard deviations (SD), as well as the frequencies, of speaking anxiety and writing
anxiety variables will be presented. The section aims at providing a rough idea of the
participants conceptualisations of classroom speaking and writing anxiety.
Before moving on to describe the statistics for the LA questionnaire, I present
the results of the normality tests I performed in order to check that the data were
normally distributed. Table 4 shows the results of the Kolgomorov-Smirnov test and
117

the Shapiro-Wilk test. The Shapiro-Wilk test is appropriate for sample sizes as large
as 2000, therefore it is used here as the numerical means for assessing normality.

Table 4. Tests of normality for the LA questionnaire
Tests of Normality

Kolmogorov-Smirnov
a
Shapiro-Wilk
Stati
stic Df Sig.
Stati
stic df Sig.
Total Anxiety
Score
.059 128 .200
*

.983 128 .513
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.


The Sig. value of the test is .513, that is, greater than .05, which allowed me to
conclude that the data came from a normal distribution. The normality of the data is
also represented graphically in Figure 2.





















118

Figure 2. The normal Q-Q plot for the LA questionnaire



5.2.1 Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS)
The main descriptive statistics for the data collected through the adapted
FLCAS are summarised in Table 5. As can be seen in the means column of the table,
item 10 (I worry about the consequences of failing my English language class) had
the highest mean value (M = 3.34) with 74 out of a total of 128 students either
agreeing or strongly agreeing with the statement. One of the findings of the study
therefore is that students anxiety stemmed from their fear of failing the course. Items
2 (I dont worry about making mistakes in my English language class) and 22 (I
dont feel pressure to prepare very well for my English language class) also had
considerably higher mean values than others (i.e., 2.86 and 2.85 respectively). Thus,
119

most students rated their concern over errors and their anxiety over being well
prepared for the lesson very highly, demonstrating that these two variables also
influenced their levels of anxiety in the EFL classroom.
Looking at the frequencies section in Table 5, an overwhelming majority of
the participating students either strongly disagreed or disagreed with items 17 (I
often feel like not going to my English language class; N =117) and 26 (I feel more
tense and nervous in my English language class than in my other classes; N = 101).
In other words, most of these students did not exhibit avoidance behaviour in the
form of skipping class, nor did they feel more anxious in their EFL class than in any
of their other classes. Although a vast majority of students claimed not to avoid the
lessons, just over half of the respondents (N = 68) marked their unwillingness to take
more EFL classes (item 5), and 86 of them reported being worried about the classes
even before entering them (item 28).
120

Table 5. Means, standard deviations, and frequencies for the items of the FLCAS questionnaire


No. Variable M SD
Frequencies
SD
9

D N A S
A
1. I never feel quite sure of myself when I am speaking in my English language class. 2.72 1.115 14 52 26 28 8
2. I dont worry about making mistakes in my English language class. 2.86 1.135 13 45 25 37 8
3. I tremble when I know that I am going to be called on in my English language class. 2.01 .968 41 51 22 12 0
4. It frightens me when I dont understand what the teacher is saying in the English language. 2.44 1.135 29 43 25 28 2
5. It wouldnt bother me at all to take more English language classes. 2.66 1.187 16 52 29 17 13
6. During my English language class, I find myself thinking about things that have nothing to do with
the course.
2.64 1.078 17 48 33 24 6
7. I keep thinking that the other students are better at English than I am. 2.49 1.122 26 45 31 20 6
9. I start to panic when I have to speak without preparation in my English language class. 2.17 1.066 41 45 22 19 1
10. I worry about the consequences of failing my English language class. 3.34 1.179 15 15 24 60 14
11. I dont understand why some people get so upset over English language classes. 2.62 1.130 17 45 35 22 7
12. In my English language class, I can get so nervous I forget things I know. 2.27 1.167 34 54 14 19 6
13. It embarrasses me to volunteer answers in my English language class. 2.14 1.048 41 46 26 12 3
15. I get upset when I dont understand what the English teacher is correcting. 2.68 1.150 21 44 22 37 4
16. Even if I am well prepared for my English class, I feel anxious about it. 2.58 1.320 32 40 19 24 13
17. I often feel like not going to my English language class. 1.48 .896 86 31 1 7 2
18. I feel confident when I speak in my English language class. 2.34 1.090 23 49 32 17 3
19. I am afraid that my English teacher is ready to correct every mistake I make. 2.14 .876 31 57 32 7 1
20. I can feel my heart pounding when Im going to be called on in my English language class. 2.18 1.111 39 43 24 18 2
22. I dont feel pressure to prepare very well for my English language class. 2.85 1.137 11 50 24 33 10
23. I always feel that the other students speak the English language better than I do. 2.40 1.104 28 42 30 25 1
24. I feel very self-conscious about speaking the English language in front of other students. 2.55 1.170 5 5 14 50 52


9
SD = Strongly Disagree; D = Disagree; N = Neither Agree Nor Disagree; A = Agree; SA = Strongly Agree
121

25. My English language class moves so quickly I worry about getting left behind. 1.98 1.068 50 46 16 12 3
26. I feel more tense and nervous in my English language class than in my other classes. 1.81 .962 58 43 18 6 2
27. I get nervous and confused when I am speaking in my English language class. 2.20 1.045 33 53 24 14 3
28. When Im on my way to my English language class, I feel very sure and relaxed. 2.31 .994 24 62 23 16 3
29. I get nervous when I dont understand every word the English teacher says. 2.41 1.160 29 48 22 23 5
30. I feel overwhelmed by the number of rules you have to learn to speak the English language. 2.61 1.117 16 48 32 24 6
31. I am afraid that the other students will laugh at me when I speak the English language. 2.99 .992 2 8 5 51 51
33. I get nervous when the English teacher asks questions which I havent prepared in advance. 2.49 1.012 19 54 31 21 3





















122

Participants disagreement with items depicting purely negative
psychosomatic and behavioural reactions to classroom speaking anxiety was also
evident. Specifically, 92 students disagreed with item 3 (I tremble when I know I am
going to be called on in my English language class), 88 with item 12 (In my
English language class, I can get so nervous I forget things I know), 87 with item 13
(It embarrasses me to volunteer answers in my English language class), 86 with
item 9 (I start to panic when I have to speak without preparation in my English
language class), 86 with item 27 (I get nervous and confused when I am speaking
in my English language class), and 82 students with item 20 (I can feel my heart
pounding when I am going to be called on in my English language class). This is a
clear indication that classroom speaking anxiety has more of a psychological and
cognitive rather than physical impact on the participating students.
Another important implication emerging from Table 5 is students low sense
of self-confidence and self-efficacy. In particular, 36 participants agreed with item 1
(I never feel quite sure of myself when I am speaking in my English language
class), and 72 disagreed with item 18 (I feel confident when I speak in my English
language class). The interviews and diary entries will provide more details about the
close and complex connection between self-concepts and LA.
Among other revealing findings, Table 5 also shows that the respondents were
preoccupied with negative evaluations by their peers. Specifically, a vast majority of
students (N = 102) either strongly agreed or agreed with statements 24 (I feel very
self-conscious about speaking the English language in front of other students) and
31 (I am afraid that the other students will laugh at me when I speak the English
language), with the latter item reaching the highest mean score (M = 2.99) out of all
the items in the questionnaire. Despite fearing evaluation by classmates, students
123

maintained a strong sense of self, neither believing that the other students are better at
English than them nor thinking that their peers speak the language better than them.
On the other hand, students disagreed with items 19 (I am afraid that my English
teacher is ready to correct every mistake I make) and 33 (I get nervous when the
English teacher asks questions which I havent prepared in advance). This study
therefore suggests that students mostly feared evaluation by their classmates rather
than their teacher.

5.2.2 English as a Second Language Writing Apprehension Test (ESLWAT)
The main descriptive statistics for the data collected through the adapted
ESLWAT are summarised in Table 6. One immediate evident result is that, as was
the case with the FLCAS too, a very large majority of the participating students (N =
102) claimed that they did not avoid writing in English (item 1), nor did they think
that the EFL writing classes were a frightening experience for them (item 5). Students
did not endorse statements describing negative psychosomatic reactions to writing
anxiety either. In particular, 92 students strongly disagreed or disagreed with item 7
(My mind seems to go blank when I start to work on a composition in English), and
86 with item 13 (Im nervous about writing in English).
A brief look at the table also reveals that many statements concentrate on
students attitudes towards the writing skill and towards the English writing class. As
seen in the frequencies columns, it is rather telling that approximately half of the
respondents were not particularly keen to work on writing in English. Only 18
students either agreed or strongly agreed with item 3 (I look forward to writing
down my ideas in English), 13 with item 6 (Handing in a composition written in
English makes me feel good), 18 with item 10 (I like to write my ideas down in
124

English), 13 with item 15 (I enjoy writing in English), 20 with item 17 (Writing
in English is a lot of fun), and 8 with item 19 (I like seeing my thoughts on paper in
English). More detailed analyses of the students interviews will provide further
insights into these statistics later, and will examine whether negative attitudes to
writing influence and/or are influenced by writing anxiety.
Other noteworthy descriptive statistics related to the ESLWAT include those
questionnaire items depicting students self-concepts again (i.e., items 11, 21, 22, 23,
24). Most participants reported feelings of low self-confidence in expressing their
ideas clearly in writing, and weak self-efficacy as far as writing good compositions is
concerned. However, they believed they could efficiently manage the time to be
devoted to a writing task, submit a well-written final product, and, interestingly, write
in English equally well with, or even better than, other people. One therefore wonders
if writing anxiety could be associated with different stages of a writing lesson,
namely process and product writing. As we will see below, the qualitative findings
will provide more details about such relationships. Finally, looking back at the table
again, it is interesting to note that most students would fear more if their written work
was evaluated by their peers rather than by their tutor.








125

Table 6. Means, standard deviations, and frequencies for the items of the ESLWAT questionnaire

No. Variable M SD
Frequencies
SD D N A SA
1. I avoid writing in English. 1.87 1.007 57 45 15 8 3
2a. I have no fear of my English writing being evaluated by my teacher. 2.70 1.154 17 49 28 24 10
2b. I have no fear of my English writing being evaluated by my peers. 2.28 .988 25 64 19 18 2
3. I look forward to writing down my ideas in English. 2.55 .912 15 47 48 16 2
5. Taking an English composition course is a very frightening experience. 1.90 .954 48 54 15 8 2
6. Handing in a composition in English makes me feel good. 2.50 .823 12 54 49 12 1
7. My mind seems to go blank when I start to work on a composition in English. 2.14 1.010 36 56 21 12 3
10. I like to write my ideas down in English. 2.50 1.019 19 46 44 13 5
11. I feel confident in my ability to express my ideas clearly when writing in English. 2.24 .876 23 59 34 11 0
13. Im nervous about writing in English. 2.23 1.021 30 56 23 16 2
15. I enjoy writing in English. 2.29 .915 24 53 37 13 0
17. Writing in English is a lot of fun. 2.67 1.005 13 40 54 13 7
19. I like seeing my thoughts on paper in English. 2.29 .843 20 61 39 6 2
21. I have a terrible time organising my ideas in an English composition course. 2.12 .953 34 55 26 11 1
22. When I hand in an English composition, I know Im going to do poorly. 2.02 .803 32 70 18 8 0
23. Its easy for me to write good compositions in English. 2.57 .919 9 57 41 17 3
24. I dont think I write as well in English as most people. 2.34 .959 20 60 30 15 2





126

5.3 Inferential statistics
The procedures conducted for inferential purposes are presented in this
section. Although more tests were initially conducted, only those tests with
statistically significant results appear here as these are generalisable.

5.3.1 One-way ANOVA: Level of proficiency in English and language anxiety
ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) is used with quantitative research involving
more than two conditions, testing whether these different conditions have resulted in
significantly different scores. In statistical terms, ANOVA will tell us whether the
change in the independent variable has affected the scores of the dependent variable
(Brace, Kemp, and Snelgar, 2006; Drnyei, 2007). One-way ANOVA was selected
since the distribution of the data was normal in this case too. Table 7 below shows the
results of the normality test.

Table 7. Normality test for the four groups of four independent variables
Tests of Normality

Level of student
proficiency in
English
Kolmogorov-Smirnov
a
Shapiro-Wilk

Statisti
c df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Total Anxiety
Score
Lower
Intermediate
.128 24 .200
*
.956 24 .370
Upper
Intermediate
.084 32 .200
*
.984 32 .898
Lower Advanced .106 43 .200
*
.967 43 .252
Upper Advanced .082 29 .200
*
.966 29 .455
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.


127

A one-way between-subjects ANOVA was used to test for differences in LA
levels among students of different levels of proficiency in EFL. As explained in the
Methodology chapter, the participating students were divided into four proficiency
levels on the basis of CEFR, namely B1 (i.e., lower intermediate), B2 (i.e., upper
intermediate), C1 (i.e., lower advanced), and C2 (i.e., upper advanced). LA levels
differed significantly across the four groups, F (3,124) = 5.446, p = .001. Tables 8
and 9 present the sample ANOVA statistics for the present study, including
descriptive statistics for the subsamples compared.
Given that a major limitation of the results from a one-way ANOVA is that it
is unclear how the means differ, a post-hoc Tukey test was conducted to test all
possible pair-wise comparisons (i.e., B1 and B2, B1 and C1, B1 and C2, B2 and C1,
B2 and C2, C1 and C2). Tukey post-hoc comparisons of the four groups indicated
that the lower intermediate group (M = 129.12, 95% CI [120.02, 138.22]) gave
significantly higher LA levels than the upper advanced group (M = 105.1, 95% CI
[96.65, 113.54]), p = .001. Comparisons between the upper intermediate group (M =
112.62, 95% CI [104.76, 120.48]) and the other three groups, as well as between the
lower advanced group (M = 112.83, 95% CI [105.99, 119.68]) and the other three
groups, were not statistically significant at p < .05. Table 10 illustrates the results of
the Tukey post-hoc multiple comparisons of the four groups.






128

Table 8. Sample ANOVA statistics for the present study

ANOVA
Total Anxiety Score

Sum of
Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups (Combined) 7903.380 3 2634.460 5.446 .001
Linear Term Unweighted 6978.130 1 6978.130 14.425 .000
Weighted 6404.606 1 6404.606 13.240 .000
Deviation 1498.774 2 749.387 1.549 .217
Within Groups 59984.675 124 483.747
Total 67888.055 127

Table 9. Descriptive statistics for all four subsamples compared

Descriptives
Total Anxiety Score

N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Minimum Maximum
Between-
Component
Variance Lower Bound Upper Bound
Lower Intermediate 24 129.1250 21.54533 4.39792 120.0272 138.2228 86.00 167.00
Upper Intermediate 32 112.6250 21.80670 3.85492 104.7628 120.4872 72.00 162.00
Lower Advanced 43 112.8372 22.23460 3.39075 105.9944 119.6800 72.00 160.00
Upper Advanced 29 105.1034 22.20255 4.12291 96.6581 113.5488 71.00 151.00
Total 128 114.0859 23.12037 2.04357 110.0421 118.1298 71.00 167.00
Model Fixed Effects 21.99426 1.94404 110.2381 117.9337
Random Effects 4.65401 99.2748 128.8971 68.28788


129

Table 10. Mean differences among the four groups

Multiple Comparisons
Total Anxiety Score
Tukey HSD
(I) Level of student
proficiency in
English
(J) Level of
student
proficiency in
English
Mean
Difference
(I-J)
Std.
Error Sig.
95% Confidence
Interval
Lower
Bound
Upper
Bound
Lower Intermediate Upper
Intermediate
16.50000
*
5.93913 .032 1.0332 31.9668
Lower Advanced 16.28779
*
5.60411 .022 1.6935 30.8821
Upper Advanced 24.02155
*
6.06936 .001 8.2157 39.8274
Upper Intermediate Lower
Intermediate
-16.50000
*
5.93913 .032 -31.9668 -1.0332
Lower Advanced -.21221 5.13489 1.000 -13.5845 13.1601
Upper Advanced 7.52155 5.63898 .543 -7.1635 22.2066
Lower Advanced Lower
Intermediate
-16.28779
*
5.60411 .022 -30.8821 -1.6935
Upper
Intermediate
.21221 5.13489 1.000 -13.1601 13.5845
Upper Advanced 7.73376 5.28497 .463 -6.0294 21.4969
Upper Advanced Lower
Intermediate
-24.02155
*
6.06936 .001 -39.8274 -8.2157
Upper
Intermediate
-7.52155 5.63898 .543 -22.2066 7.1635
Lower Advanced -7.73376 5.28497 .463 -21.4969 6.0294
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.











130

5.3.2 Factor analysis: Intraconstruct relationships
Exploratory factor analysis is a type of multivariate statistics that examines
whether one or more factors underlie a number of variables. The analysis usually
identifies the number of factors as well as which of the variables make up which
factor. Exploratory factor analysis therefore aims at reducing data by extracting
factors from the variables. Drnyei (2010, p. 91) explained:

A well-designed questionnaire contains several items focused on each content area and
therefore the parallel items need to be summed up in multi-item scales for the purpose
of analysis. By so doing, we can create fewer but broader variables that carry almost as
much information as the original variables.

Creswell (2009, p. 218) also stated that, with factor analysis, a researcher qualifies
quantitative data as s/he may create factors or themes that then can be compared
with themes from the qualitative database.
For factor analysis to produce a reliable result, a sampling adequacy should be
guaranteed. This could be detected using the following two tests:
a) The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy, an index used to
examine the appropriateness of factor analysis. Large KMO values (i.e., between
0.5 and 1.0) are good because they show that correlations among pairs of variables
(i.e., potential factors) can be explained by other variables. On the contrary, values
below 0.5 imply that factor analysis may not be appropriate.
b) The Bartletts test of sphericity, used to test the hypothesis that the correlation
matrix is an identity matrix, that is, the variables are uncorrelated in the
population; each variable correlates perfectly with itself (r = 1), but has no
correlation with other variables (r = 0). If the Bartletts test of sphericity is
significant, then factor analysis is feasible.
131

Taking into account the above assumptions, the present study showed that
factor analysis for both the FLCAS and the ESLWAT was appropriate. Tables 11 and
12 present the results of the KMO and Bartletts tests.

Table 11. KMO and Bartletts test for FLCAS

KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling
Adequacy.
.842
Bartlett's Test of
Sphericity
Approx. Chi-Square 1519.760
Df 406
Sig. .000


Table 12. KMO and Bartletts test for ESLWAT

KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling
Adequacy.
.860
Bartlett's Test of
Sphericity
Approx. Chi-Square 744.485
Df 136
Sig. .000


The FLCAS and the ESLWAT were therefore subjected to exploratory
principal components analysis with varimax rotation in order to identify those
components that best define each of the two anxiety measures. What follows are
general guidelines of the analytical approaches adopted to investigate the component
structure of both scales.
Selection of the best rotated solution was based on several considerations.
First, an important guideline for the selection of the number of components to be
extracted was the scree plot. Extraction of components that were one above and one
below the solution suggested by the scree plot was also examined in order to choose
the solution that accounted for as much total variance as possible and which would
help me to retain an interpretable component structure. Second, following the
suggestions made by Cheng et al. (1999), an item could be included in a factor if it
132

had a primary loading of a minimum of .50 and no secondary loadings within .20 of
the primary loading. This second criterion was applied to establish a cutoff point for
inclusion of a variable in a factor for interpretation purposes.
The principal components analysis of each instrument based on the
considerations mentioned above is presented in the following two sub-sections.

5.3.2.1 Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS)
The initial run of the FLCAS produced nine factors with eigenvalue greater
than one. On the basis of the criteria listed in section 5.3.2, a three-component
solution, accounting for 42.5% of the total variance, was selected. Table 13 presents
the loadings of variables on factors and the percentage of the variance for each factor.
The first component (FLCAS1) consisted of ten items accounting for 18.5%
of the total variance. Most of these items seem to share a feeling of speaking anxiety,
low self-beliefs, and fear of negative evaluation by the peers, thereby signifying that
anxiety about speaking in English forms an integral part of LA. A number of self-
related constructs, such as self-confidence and self-efficacy, also emerged as part of
factor one. Specifically, the two items with the highest loadings on this factor (items
20 and 23, loadings = .668 and .664 respectively) address negative anxiety reactions
to speaking English and low self-perceptions of ability when compared with others.
Similar feelings are expressed through items 31, 7, 3, 1, and 13. A positively worded
item (item 18), referring to self-confidence with respect to speaking English, was also
loaded on this factor. The remaining two items (item 26 and 8) are not speaking-skill-
specific, but on the contrary reflect global worry about the English class. The former,
which marks a contrast between English language classes and other subject classes,
was highly loaded on this component, as opposed to the latter that targets testing
133

situations in class and which had the lowest loading out of all variables in factor one.
This first component (FLCAS1) was labeled Speaking anxiety and fear of negative
evaluation.
The second FLCAS component (FLCAS2), explaining 16.6% of the total
variance, included five items that characterise students negative affect with
connection to the English teacher. In particular, items 15, 4, and 29 depict dread of
failing to understand what the teacher is saying or correcting, while items 19 and 33
respectively describe students fear of being corrected by the teacher or being asked
again by the teacher to respond in the English language class. This factor was named
Anxiety towards the English teacher.
Lastly, three items comprised the third FLCAS factor (FLCAS3), accounting
for 7.3% of the total variance. The items included here indicate participants attitudes
towards the English class and the extent to which they are relaxed during the lesson.
This component was called Comfortableness with taking English classes.











134

Table 13. Factor loadings of the FLCAS items and percentage of variance

Label Speaking anxiety
and fear of negative
evaluation
Anxiety towards
the English
teacher
Comfortableness
with taking
English classes
Item Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3
20. I can feel my heart pounding when Im going to be called on in my English language class. .668
23. I always feel that the other students speak English better than I do. .664
31. I am afraid that the other students will laugh at me when I speak in English. .651
26. I feel more tense and nervous in my English language class than in my other classes. .644
7. I keep thinking that the other students are better at English than I am. .639
3. I tremble when I know that Im going to be called on in my English language class. .602
1. I never feel quite sure of myself when I am speaking in my English language class. .599
18. I feel confident when I speak in my English language class. .529
13. It embarrasses me to volunteer answers in my English language class. .524
8. I am usually at ease during tests in my English language class. .501
15. I get upset when I dont understand what the English teacher is correcting. .837
4. It frightens me when I dont understand what the teacher is saying in the English language. .790
29. I get nervous when I dont understand every word the English teacher says. .735
19. I am afraid that my English teacher is ready to correct every mistake I make. .692
33. I get nervous when the English teacher asks questions which I havent prepared in advance. .687
11. I dont understand why some people get so upset over English language classes. .686
28. When Im on my way to my English class, I feel very sure and relaxed. .627
5. It wouldnt bother me at all to take more English language classes. .579
% of variance 18.5 16.6 7.3



135

5.3.2.2 English as a Second Language Writing Apprehension Test (ESLWAT)
In the initial run of the rotated component matrix on the ESLWAT items, four
factors with eigenvalue greater than one emerged. Based on the considerations
outlined in section 5.3.2, a three-component solution was selected for the ESLWAT.
The three selected components accounted for 51.9% of the total variance. Table 14
presents the loadings of variables on factors and the percentage of the variance for
each factor.
Six items were loaded on the first factor (ESLWAT1), accounting for 20.2%
of the total variance. All items included in this factor are worded positively and
indicate students likes and dislikes with respect to writing in English. Compared
with the remaining two items, the first four items that loaded on this factor share
similar loadings. This factor was given the label Attitudes towards writing in English,
to encompass both positive and negative student attitudes to writing.
The second factor (ESLWAT2) included five items and accounted for 18.3%
of the variance. The first four items are negative-toned, and refer to negative self-
perceptions and concern about potential failure in writing classes. In particular, item
22 describes students low self-perceptions of performance in EFL writing, item 7
indicates that writing anxiety is symptomatic of mind block, item 21 measures
students difficulty with the writing process, and finally item 5 implies that a
sentiment of fear is connected with EFL writing classes. On the contrary, the last item
that was loaded on this factor, item 23, addresses students levels of self-efficacy in
relation to English writing. Therefore, this factor presents a Self-derogation
dimension when writing in English.
The last ESLWAT component (ESLWAT3), consisting of two items and
accounting for 13.4% of the total variance, is characterised by a strong evaluation
136

apprehension element either by the teacher or by the peers. This component was
named Fear of negative evaluation.
137

Table 14. Factor loadings of the ESLWAT items and percentage of variance

Label Attitudes
towards writing
in English
Self-derogation
when writing in
English
Fear of negative
evaluation
Item Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3
10. I like to write down my ideas in English. .716
17. Writing in English is a lot of fun. .714
15. I enjoy writing in English. .712
3. I look forward to writing down my ideas in English. .711
19. I like seeing my thoughts on paper in English. .607
6. Handing in a composition written in English makes me feel good. .582
22. When I hand in an English composition, I know I am going to do poorly. .785
7. My mind seems to go blank when I start to work on a composition in English. .761
21. I have a terrible time organizing my ideas in an English composition course. .647
5. Taking an English composition course is a very frightening experience. .574
23. It is easy for me to write good compositions in English. .573
2a. I have no fear of my English writings being evaluated by my teacher. .824
2b. I have no fear of my English writings being evaluated by my peers. .653
% of variance 20.2 18.3 13.4

138

5.3.3 Correlations: Interconstruct relationships
Pearson product-moment correlations were computed between the overall
FLCAS and ESLWAT, as well as their subcomponents. Table 15 presents the
correlation matrix.

Table 15. Correlations among the overall FLCAS, overall ESLWAT, and their
subcomponents

CA
10
CA1 CA2 CA3 WA
11
WA1 WA2 WA3
CA 1.000
CA1 .913* 1.000
CA2 .731* .499* 1.000
CA3 .451* .291* .185* 1.000
WA .543* .477* .340* .362* 1.000
WA1 .393* .356* .175 .342* .823* 1.000
WA2 .553* .437* .425* .336* .815* .493* 1.000
WA3 .304* .300* .161 .154* .605* .327* .375* 1.000
* p < .05

A significant and moderate correlation (r = .54) was found between the
FLCAS and the ESLWAT. In addition, the strongest correlation was between the
overall FLCAS and ESLWAT2 (Self-derogation when writing in English; r = .55)
and between the overall ESLWAT and FLCAS1 (Speaking anxiety and fear of
negative evaluation; r = .47).
The overall FLCAS was highly correlated with FLCAS1 (Speaking anxiety
and fear of negative evaluation; r = .91), less highly correlated with FLCAS2
(Anxiety towards the English teacher; r = .71), and moderately correlated with
FLCAS3 (Comfortableness with taking English classes; r = .45). As far as the writing
anxiety correlations are concerned, there were significant and high correlations
between the overall ESLWAT, ESLWAT1 (Attitudes towards writing in English; r =
.82) and ESLWAT2 (Self-derogation when writing in English; r = .81). Lastly, a

10
FLCAS.
11
ESLWAT.
139

significant and moderate correlation was found between the overall ESLWAT and
ESLWAT3 (Fear of negative evaluation; r = .60).

5.4 Conclusion
The descriptive statistics demonstrated that speaking anxiety is largely
associated with students fear of failing the course and concern over errors. Students
also reported that they did not avoid their speaking and writing classes. A strong link
was found between skill-specific anxieties and weak self-concepts. The one-way
ANOVA showed that the lower-intermediate students gave significantly higher LA
levels than their more advanced counterparts. Finally, the exploratory factor analysis
revealed that speaking anxiety was again related to fear of negative evaluation,
anxiety towards the English teacher, and students less comfortableness with taking
English classes. Factor analysing the writing anxiety questionnaire showed that
writing anxiety stemmed from attitudes towards writing in English, self-derogation
when writing in English, and fear of negative evaluation.
The quantitative results have provided some interesting initial insights into
Greek students LA, and will find solid support in the qualitative findings that are
presented in the next chapter. The interview and diary analyses will also enrich these
results by suggesting additional dimensions to the complexity of the LA of Greek
EFL learners. The quantitative and qualitative results will then be discussed together
in Chapter 7.
140

CHAPTER 6
QUALITATIVE FINDINGS

6.1 Introduction
The role of the interviews and the diary study in this project was to shed light
on the statistics and explore unexpected insights and viewpoints that would have
otherwise been hard or even impossible to obtain through the questionnaire. As such,
the data were analysed combining deductive and inductive approaches. Respectively,
a categorical scheme suggested by the quantitative analysis of the questionnaires and
by the existing literature was applied, whilst at the same time a dialectical stance was
adopted in order to identify additional themes that were meaningful to the
participants. Every individual view expressed in this qualitative strand of the project
was appreciated in itself as a source of subjective meaning contributing to the general
understanding of the topic under investigation.
The presentation of the qualitative findings will primarily be guided by
research questions 4 (What aspects are perceived as the main causes of classroom
LA?) and 5 (What strategies do Greek EFL students deploy to minimise their
classroom and skill-specific LA and how do their teachers choose to intervene?).
However, insights from the learner diaries and student and teacher interviews will
supplement the quantitative results reported in the previous chapter, namely those
relating to speaking anxiety and writing anxiety. Before presenting the results, short
profiles will be included for every participant, which provide a useful background for
the presentation of the qualitative results and aim at extending our understanding of
the participants viewpoints.

141

6.2 Participants profiles
Information about the teacher participants was provided in the Methodology
chapter. Table 16 offers important background information about my thirteen student
participants, which will be very useful in understanding their contributions later. The
table contains their pseudonyms, their gender and age, their total anxiety score, and a
brief summary of their interviews and, for some of them, of their diaries. These
summaries were written by myself after the data analysis stage, and consist of direct
citation, concentrating on the salience of the students references to LA. Miles and
Huberman (1994, p. 86) in fact advised researchers to include individual case
synopses that aim to disclose what is important to each individuals experience.
Mann (2011, p. 6) commented that there is something appealing in qualitative
interviews, but they often tend to be presented bereft of context and methodological
detail. Summarising the participating students thoughts and feelings about
classroom EFL learning was therefore thought of as a means of contextualising both
the interviews and diaries, and of giving the reader a rough idea of how LA is
distributed and manifests within the students. Participants are listed according to their
anxiety score starting with the most anxious interviewee. The reader is advised to
read the remainder of this chapter in conjunction with Table 16.





142

Table 16. Student participants profiles

Participant Gender Age Total LA score
(min. = 56,
max. = 280)
Interviewee Diarist Summary
Natassa F 26 254 Yes No My anxiety stems from my belief that I am not good, that I may fail the
course and also fail to meet others expectations. I become anxious when I
speak in English, I get embarrassed. I get very anxious when I see my
classmates writing; I do not focus on my writing but on what the others are
doing. I am competitive against my classmates; I feel I have to do better
than them. What I know I am good at doesnt make me anxious. When I get
anxious, I sometimes cry because I think I didnt do as well as I could do. I
used to be afraid of English because of a strict teacher I had in the past. I
like being told that I am good at English. Marks especially for skills I am
good at make me anxious. Its the way my mistakes are perceived by my
teacher rather than the mistake Ive made that makes me anxious. I did very
well in two speaking tasks before Christmas it was right before the
holiday, I was in a good mood, and my anxiety was productive and under
control. When I get anxious, my heart beats fast, I may suffer from stomach
disorders, and I feel like my mind stops working. I am concerned over
others opinions. I am not self-confident and I believe that the others are
better than me. When my peers speak in class, I dont focus on what they
say but try to think of what I will say. I often focus on my anxiety rather
than on any weaknesses I may have in English; its like a reluctance to face
whats difficult.
Kalliopi F 27 242 Yes No I become anxious when I am not well prepared for the class. Exams may
also make me nervous. In class, I become anxious because I have to be
fluent. When I was younger, I used to become very anxious at the presence
of my teacher and peers; now, things are different. I am not as anxious as I
used to be because I have better English now. I sometimes become anxious
when I dont have time to do all my homework. I never skip classes. When I
become anxious, I dont cry or anything, but I avoid eye contact with the
teacher and I feel bad about it. If I fail, I will worry a lot because I will feel
that I havent studied enough. I like English and the lesson is always
143

pleasant. I avoid comparing myself with my classmates. I believe that ones
anxiety depends on ones personality. Anxious teachers, or teachers with a
judgmental attitude, can make students anxious too. Being anxious may also
mean that you want to do well.
Sophia F 19 239 Yes No Writing in English is my concern. I feel self-conscious when I speak in
English at the presence of my peers. I am filled with remorse when I havent
studied much, and this is what I believe part of my anxiety about English
stems from. However, when I am not well prepared, it means I havent
expended much effort so I expect I will not do well. If I have studied hard, I
get anxious because I dont want to fail. Peers can either be very anxious
themselves, or snobbish about others; in either cases, they can make you
anxious. I really like working with the two teachers I have now, and
comparing them with some other English language teachers that I had in the
past, I drew the conclusion that teachers can make a real difference to the
learning process and to how anxious students feel about English. Lessons
should take place in a friendly classroom atmosphere, otherwise students are
not really keen to attend. In the language school, they announce the results
of our tests, and hang them on the wall; I dont like this practice, I dont
want other students to know what mark I got. Whatever you are good at
doesnt make you anxious. If English language learning is your own
conscious decision, then I believe you have positive attitudes towards
English and this reduces your stress.
Nikos M 29 226 Yes No I am anxious about English because I feel I am not good enough to succeed.
I once failed the Michigan proficiency preliminary exam; I got 21 instead of
23. I am self-confident when speaking in English, because I know I can lead
the discussion the way I want. Writing makes me anxious, because I know
that its either you know the topic and have ideas about it, or you dont.
When I am anxious, I get fidgety, I sweat, and I stutter. Anxiety is a
personality thing. There are no specific strategies to use to minimise my
anxiety about English. What I try to do is get well-prepared for the class and
study more. I am a perfectionist and I believe this increases my anxiety. I
dont want to fail. I worry when I see Ive made many mistakes in my
writing, but at the same time this encourages me to study more. I may avoid
something if I realise that its not worth it. I will not get anxious about
144

something that I feel will not offer me much. The reason why I am learning
English is because I need it for my job. This makes me anxious because if I
fail it means I am not well-qualified to get that post at work. In writing, I
have to think of ideas and then use the correct English to express them.
Zoe F 27 225 Yes No In the classroom, I am anxious about essay writing, or making grammar
mistakes when I speak, because I am used to speaking in Greek. I think that
my classmates are doing better than me, or they will make fun of me if I
make a mistake. If I am not well prepared for the lesson, or if I dont do
things the way my teacher wants, I become anxious. I often freeze in class
and feel like I cant speak. I want to see the classroom as a community
where I can get help from my classmates, and where they can explain to me
things I may have not understood. I become anxious when my teacher is
correcting me, because the number of the mistakes that I will make is an
indication of my level. Teachers do not actually mark our speaking, which is
something that makes speaking more stressful than the other three skills.
Language anxiety is also a matter of experience. Teacher attitude does play
a crucial role in how students perceive of themselves, and in how anxious
they get during the lessons. When I am anxious, I get fidgety in class and
cant concentrate. It helps me to feel that I can rely on my classmates when I
am anxious, when I have a question about the lessons, or when I cant come
up with ideas in writing.
Elisa F 19 214 Yes Yes When I am anxious, I get a stomach ache. Anxiety affects my performance,
and I suddenly feel that I cannot achieve my full potential in class. When I
get anxious, I try to think positively, to think that everything is OK. Writing
in English makes me anxious, because I am never sure whether I will have
the time to write down everything that I want. Vocabulary makes me
anxious; there are different English words with very similar meanings and
with only one equivalent in Greek, so its not always easy to choose the one
you need in English as there are only subtle differences between them.
Thinking in terms of my first language does not really help much. In the
past, I had a teacher who was so anxious that I was hoping for the lesson to
finish as soon as possible. English makes me anxious because its not my
mother tongue.
Maria F 23 211 Yes Yes I become anxious when I know I am not well-prepared for the class and the
145

teacher asks me questions. When I get anxious, I avoid eye contact with the
teacher. Anxiety is a fear of failure. If I fail the English course, I will feel
that the effort I expended was worthless. I sometimes compare myself to
other students. My mind often stops working when I become anxious.
Anxiety depends on our personality. Anxiety can signify some positive
things, for example that a student cares about his/her performance in
English. Since we have easy access to English nowadays, we can practise
the language, improve our English, and reduce our anxiety over it.
Kiki F 35 207 Yes Yes To me, anxiety equals fear of failure. When I get anxious, I forget things I
know; when I leave the classroom though, I remember everything and I am
able to spot my mistakes, and this is so irritating. I become anxious when I
speak in English, because of the limited time I have at my disposal to think
and say something; even if I were given more time, I believe that it wouldnt
be enough. I have to do well and get the certificate, for professional
development purposes. I like being corrected as this helps me to improve. I
get anxious when I speak in English and my teacher cant understand what I
am saying. I am the oldest student in the class, and I feel I have to do well. I
always try to encourage myself. I am concerned over others opinions about
me. When something makes me anxious, I dont usually avoid it but I try to
do it. I always do my homework. If I fail, I will need to pay extra money,
and this also makes me anxious. I sometimes feel there are so many things
to learn, especially when it comes to vocabulary and words that mean many
different things.
Anna F 18 203 Yes Yes If I am well-prepared for the class, I am not anxious. When I get anxious, I
talk to my teachers and I also try to think positively. I like writing in English
and thats the main reason why I was keen to keep a diary for you. I think I
sometimes push myself, because I dont want to be perceived as a weak
student in the eyes of my peers. I dont like being laughed at. I get anxious
when I dont understand what the teacher is saying. I feel nice when I get a
high mark. A low mark I may get may stem from my anxiety. When I am
anxious, my mind stops working and I cant understand what I am being
told or what I am reading. I become anxious when something is difficult, or
when I am not given enough time to do it. In writing in English, I get
anxious because we are given a word limit. When I get anxious, I get
146

fidgety, I sweat, I may get a terrible stomach ache, and I feel bad and tense.
If I am anxious over something, I dont usually avoid it; it really depends on
how important that thing is.
Danae F 18 200 Yes Yes I am anxious about speaking in English because I am afraid that I will make
mistakes. I get anxious when I am not sure whether Ive used the correct
verb tense or the right word. I fear being laughed at. I am more anxious in
my English class than in my other classes, because I have to use a foreign
language. I am anxious when I know I am not well-prepared for the class,
and particularly when I havent studied the vocabulary. Some English words
have more than one meaning, or may not have a Greek equivalent, and this
makes me anxious. When I am anxious, my memory suffers and my heart
beats fast.
Fanis M 18 197 Yes Yes Anxiety is a kind of fear. When I get anxious, I get a stomach ache. When I
get anxious, I try to encourage myself. I am afraid that I will make mistakes
and this usually increases my anxiety. Different words that mean pretty
much the same thing may make me anxious. Whenever I become anxious, I
think positively, and I try to shift my focus from my anxiety to the task at
hand.
Ioanna F 18 192 Yes Yes I become very anxious when I know that I dont have enough time for the
writing task, and when I am told in advance that something is difficult.
Writing in class is the most anxiety-provoking activity for me. Sometimes I
am about to cry when I know that the time I have at my disposal is so
limited. When I am anxious, I usually complain in class. I try to shift my
attention to the English task, and forget about my anxiety. I get anxious
when for example I get 59 and the pass mark is 60. Aspects of the lesson
that I like dont make me anxious.
Katerina F 19 187 Yes No When I am anxious, I freeze. I can get very anxious when I realise that I am
not being understood by my interlocutor(s). I become anxious because I
want to be perfect. Working in pairs or groups in class also makes me
anxious, because I feel that the onus is on me to ensure that the task will be
completed on time and successfully. Peers can make you anxious when you
realise that they are doing much better than you; thats why placing students
in the right class according to their level really does matter. Making
mistakes is seen as something natural by our teacher; in fact, we are
147

encouraged to learn the language through trial and error in order to avoid
making mistakes later on, in an exam and when we are actually using the
language for communication purposes. When I have studied hard, I become
anxious because I dont want to fail. If I dont do well despite having
studied, I feel even worse. Positive thinking helps me a lot. Ones
motivation to learn English may determine ones anxiety levels.








148

6.3 Skill-specific anxieties
6.3.1 Speaking anxiety
Speaking anxiety concerned most students and emerged as a multifaceted
variable comprising a range of subjective aspects and effects. The key concepts
associated with it can be seen in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Key concepts associated with speaking anxiety



As evidenced in Figure 3, students speaking anxiety stemmed from concerns
over language use, classroom dynamics, the schools policy on language education,
and psychological factors connected with EFL learning. First, a recurrent justification
that both students and teachers gave for anxiety over speaking in EFL was that, when
using English to communicate, learners needed to make sure that their pronunciation,
grammar, and lexical choice and use remained accurate. Second, learners themselves
were aware of the fact that they were expected to speak spontaneously with limited or
even no preparation time before their actual speaking took place. Marias account
was quite self-explanatory:

Speaking
anxiety
Language use:
Accuracy
Speaking
spontaneously
Pauses
Classroom
dynamics
Psychology:
Self-concepts
Fear of negative
evaluation
School policy
149

I am anxious in class when the teacher asks questions and I have to think on my feet.
Sometimes I may not remember the English word. Or, I will need to choose the correct
verb tense or the correct preposition. The last two are a nightmare! And also speaking
should be spontaneous and you dont have enough time to think like in writing.

Similar frustrations were generated by Kiki and Elisa in their diaries
12
:

Yesterday we were talking about theatre in class and when it was my turn to speak, I
really couldnt do it. I have a problem in saying something, I feel that I should have
plenty of time to think and to organise my thoughts, to choose the correct words, and
to express my opinion in the end. How much better things would be without the
speaking.

Especially when it comes to the speaking part, I get really nervous and confused. The
short time I have is not always enough for me to think and speak right.

In her interview too, Kiki emphasised the spontaneity required when speaking,
drawing an interesting comparison between speaking in EFL and driving:

While speaking, my interlocutor is waiting for my reply. If I had time to think about
my answer, that would be fine. But this is impossible. Time flies and I need to say
something. I am like this when I am driving. I am thinking that if someone comes and
stops right behind me, I am bothering him/her and I have to go. I have to be quick.

Teachers too emphasised the effect of the nature of speaking as a skill on their
students speaking anxiety. Bonnie claimed that, with spoken English, students were
experiencing long, negative pauses trying to collect their thoughts and their speech,
and Alexandra explained students high degree of speaking anxiety through the fact
that in speaking, whatever youve said, you cant take it back.
Many students went on to discuss the critical role that mainly peers and
occasionally tutors played on their levels of speaking anxiety in class, proving that
classroom dynamics could influence the amount, quality, and type of spoken
interactions produced by them. These distinctive dynamics interplayed with the third,

12
Diary entries are kept in the original.
150

psychological dimension of the speaking anxiety model. Peer pressure weakened
students self-concepts, and their sense of self-efficacy and self-confidence, whilst at
the same time increasing their fear of negative evaluation. Although capable of
producing an accurate sentence, Natassa recollected the following classroom event:

We were chatting in class, and my classmate asked me something and I answered
Because I am foolish. Then she asked me what this word meant. And the others were
laughing. So this situation influenced me negatively and then I was wondering if I had
made a mistake, or said something wrong. And above all it made me feel embarrassed
about speaking in English. I just doubt myself and my capacities and I believe that the
other students are better than me.

Natassa also offered a noteworthy glimpse into the influence of peer pressure on her
decision to speak in class, confessing that she even postponed speech production until
she was absolutely certain that what she had to say was accurate:

I get nervous when my peers make fun of me. However, the thing is that I never speak
in class unless I am 100% sure that I have the answer. I think there is an element of
anxiety there too. And also I dont want them to judge me, or to think less of me,
because this will make me worry about my performance and I wont be able to do well
in the next lesson.

Of the participants who referred to their English teachers as assessors of their
performance in class, most agreed that their comments were much appreciated and
well-received, and indeed maintained that giving feedback formed an integral part of
a teachers job. However, Kalliopis point of view appeared to be at odds with the
general picture. In an attempt to avoid becoming weak in the eyes of her teacher,
Kalliopi summarised the precaution expressively:

K: I really fear making mistakes, not because Ive made a mistake and that means that
I havent studied enough, but rather because I tremble from my teachers and my
peers reaction to it. I know that my teacher calls on us in a predictable order and I
know when it is my turn to speak. So I read my question again and again to make sure
151

that I can give as accurate an answer as possible, but I ignore everything else that goes
on in the classroom at that time.
I: From your experience, what could your teachers reaction be like?
K: I dont know. I think that my teacher will have a condescending attitude and will
tell me that I am not well prepared. And that my classmates will laugh at my mistake.
I: Does this happen in the end?
K: Well, I think that in a class there will possibly be one or two students that you dont
like or they dont like you. Thats why I am expecting them to laugh at my mistake. As
for the teacher, I think I want to show him that I am doing my best. But now that I
come to think about it, maybe its just a situation Ive created in my mind. It may be
something like a phobia.

Whether it was a real or an imaginary situation, Kalliopis fear of being negatively
evaluated by her teacher ignited speaking anxiety in class. Kalliopi also felt that the
EFL classroom was as hierarchically structured an entity as a company, with the
teacher holding a high status in class much in the same way as a boss is leading a
company:

I see my teacher as my boss. When I know I am seeing someone who is superior to me
and I know that I will be judged by the way Ill answer his/her questions, I get nervous.
I am not self-confident and I feel that my level of English is low.

Zoe also thought that the interactional context generates feelings of speaking anxiety:

In speaking, I first need to check what the communication with my interlocutor is like,
if s/he is friendly and easy-going, or if s/he is strict. The latter is definitely stressful
and makes me not want to speak much or even not at all.

Difficult interactional situations in class, where students notice that they cannot get
their message across, were also referred to in the interviews. Katerina said:

I become anxious when the others do not understand what I am saying. Then I try to
use other words to explain it.

Kiki shared a similar feeling:

152

I am anxious when I realise that Joanna [i.e., her teacher] cannot understand what I am
talking about, which means that I cannot get my message across.

Several teacher interviewees attributed new students speaking anxiety to the
language schools policy on conducting the lessons through the medium of the L2
only. It was rather interesting to see that EFL teachers believed that external factors,
such as curricular decisions about the language of the lessons, could influence
learners speaking anxiety in the immediate language class. Bonnie said:

Because in most English language schools, I dont know how many classes there are
and teachers speak in English. Many times Ive come across students, new students
who told me We never speak in the classroom. We just write and the teacher speaks.
So they are not accustomed to talking in English. But they have to. They find that it is
something the teacher should do so I think that they find it more difficult, speaking in
English. So speaking anxiety, its a combination of anxiety and that many of them are
not used to speaking in English.

Teachers alleged insistence that the L1 should be avoided in the EFL classroom
translated into lessons that many of the students found demotivating, pointless, and
stressful. Argyris recounted the following:

But when a student comes from another school, an adult, at the age of twenty, twenty-
two, and they start working with our method, speaking only in English, this makes
them very stressed, because they are saying Come on, are we going to talk in English
all the time?, or Am I supposed to stand up and talk in front of an audience?, or Am
I supposed to debate with other students?. So they, it depends on when they come to
the school, and how they are trained.

Alexandra gave a similar answer:

They are not used to speaking in English. And thats why what we try to do here at this
school anyway is that we try to speak as much English as possible from the younger
ages as well. Even though they wont understand everything, and maybe thats a
source of anxiety for them, when they start and they come to school and everyone
speaks English. They have that reaction a lot of times and I say everything in English
in the beginning and they sort of, you see the look on their faces, when theyre like Oh
my God, what is she saying?
153


However, Zoe had very strong views about the way oral practice of English was used
in class, explaining that it did not lead to extensive speaking practice (which would in
consequence increase students self-confidence and lower their speaking anxiety) due
to its reliance on formulaic exchanges between the teachers and the students:

Most of the times when we have an English lesson there is not much focus on
conversing in English. I mean that you go to the school and you work on exercises, or
the teacher tells you how to write an essay. Lessons usually focus on the writing
component rather than on speaking. Even when we enter the classroom and we speak
English with the teacher, its just the basics we say, such as hi, how are you, did you
do your homework. This is in every lesson. And even though teachers stress the
importance of speaking in English in class, I dont think this is done in a way that will
help me to learn more, increase my confidence in my speaking abilities, and reduce my
anxiety about speaking.

6.3.2 Writing anxiety
Teacher and student interviewees attributed writing anxiety to a range of
factors that occasionally overlapped, as summarised in Table 17. The figures in
brackets refer to the number of mentions of each factor by the teacher and student
participants.

Table 17. Teachers and students perspectives on the causes of writing anxiety

Teachers Students
L1 writing deficiencies (6) Lack of ideas (7)
Lack of ideas (2) Limited time to work on an activity (5)
Less experience with foreign language
writing strategies (2)
Writing in class (2)
Concern over errors (red pen) (1) Concern over errors (teachers reaction) (1)
Limited time to work on an activity (1) L1 writing deficiencies (1)


From a teacher perspective, L1 writing deficiencies along with difficulties in
generating ideas constituted the two most widely-mentioned causes of EFL writing
in-class anxiety. A justification that teachers gave for L1 writing deficiencies
154

concerned the structure of the schooling system which does not teach students how to
advance their critical thinking skills and be able to write their thoughts down. In order
to succeed in L1 writing, students usually have to memorise the taught input, and then
insert it into their work, without being explicitly taught argument, paragraph, and
essay structure. Teachers maintained that if students had developed their L1 writing
skills, they would have then been able to transfer them to the L2. Mary gave an
excellent example of her own experience and teaching practice:

One very good example of that was this years first certificate classes. They had a topic
on, describe technology, the meaning of technology in your daily life. What can we
say about that? We dont have any ideas. And they start to panic, its obvious how
anxious they are about such tasks. I just said What are you talking about? Give me all
your mobile phones, switch them off, and Ill put them in a little box, and Ill lock this
box and Ill give it to you tomorrow. And then think and tell me about technology in
daily life. And they said, What? I cant live without my mobile. And I wanted to
show them OK, think about that, think about leaving your mobile phones here for 24
hours and then think about how you become like dependent. So try to develop ideas.
And they are not taught to develop their own ideas, because of the system of just copy
and paste.

Joanna also described L1 writing deficiencies as follows:

They say theyve never seen a paragraph before, the topic sentence. And we spend a
lot of time, especially in proficiency classes.

Similarly, but from a student perspective, Kalliopi also explained how writing anxiety
in EFL was heavily dependent on lack of L1 writing strategies:

I find writing difficult and I dont do as well as I would want to. I am afraid of writing
in English because I also think that I was not taught how to write well even in Greek. I
feel that it took me many years to be able to write good essays, so writing was always
what would make me anxious in my English classes too, and I think that I completely
dislike it.

155

By contrast, most students referred to lack of ideas as the major cause of
writing anxiety, and linked this lack to language-skill specificity. Although a fluent
and self-confident English speaker, Nikos explicated how his difficulty in
brainstorming ideas with relation to writing in a foreign language aroused feelings of
writing anxiety:

I cant come up with ideas in writing. So when I sit down and write, lets say a story, I
cant come up with the appropriate ideas about what I want to write, and also I want to
adjust my ideas to the English I have. I wouldnt like to address a topic that I am not
well aware of, but rather a topic I know something about. And this combination is
quite difficult. To think of a story and to adjust your English to that story.

Ioanna had very strong views about her writing anxiety which mainly stemmed from
writing tasks set unexpectedly in class, strict time limits within which tasks should be
completed, and again lack of ideas. When interviewed, she said:

I like writing, but when the teacher asks us to write in class without being told that we
would do so, I become anxious, because I think I will not have enough time to
complete the task. How will I organise my thoughts? What will I write?

In her diary, Ioanna also wrote:

Today, though the lesson started with a very interesting talk, it ended very
stressfully The big surprise came when we were told that we were going to do
writing in class. No one was happy about that and everyone started complaining. I got
very angry and anxious because we only had half an hour to finish it. I actually got so
angry that I didnt know what to write and wrote about half a page, maybe a little
more. I wasnt the only one that didnt have time since the others ran out of time as
well. Really after that, the lesson was not pleasant at all. I wish we hadnt done that
writing task or our teacher could have at least warned us about it.

Writing activities, however, should be timed in order to fit in with the total duration
of lessons, and to familiarise students with the format of future exams, the teachers
said.
156

As far as mistakes in writing were concerned, the teacher perspective was in
stark contrast to the equivalent student one. Specifically, one teacher mentioned that,
for many students, the red pen in particular had negative connotations and was
associated with judgment and discouraging correction, thereby increasing writing
anxiety levels. On the other hand, from the point of view of students, concern over
mistakes in writing was associated with fear of negative evaluation by the teacher,
and with the notion that teachers are more tolerant with mistakes in speaking than in
writing. Kalliopis quote was illustrative of that point:

I feel that if I make a mistake in speaking my teacher knows that in an attempt to
express what I have in mind I got confused and chose the wrong preposition or the
wrong word. On the contrary, in writing, I very often fear that when my teacher will
read what I wrote, she will think like Why did she make so many mistakes? She had
time at her disposal, she could use a dictionary or her notes, and still she made
mistakes.

Comparing and contrasting student and teacher perspectives to writing anxiety
has led to interesting insights into it, revealing the complex nature of writing anxiety.
The following sections focus on factors associated with general classroom anxiety,
which are either internal or external to the language learners, and which affect their
LA in differing degrees.

6.4 Internal anxiety-inducing factors
Internal anxiety-inducing factors were defined as being any factors which are
centred primarily within an individual, such as learner personality, self-concepts, and
learner agency.



157

6.4.1 Personality
Highly anxious student participants reported on aspects of their personality
that determined the level of their classroom LA. Perfectionism was conceived of by
certain students as one of the personality-related facets of LA that led them to set
themselves higher personal performance standards and react badly to failures. Nikos
explained:

I am a strict judge of myself, and of others. I always evaluate my level of English, and
I become anxious because I dont want to fail. You dont want to fail and you want to
be perfect. Like James Bond, for instance.

Sophia exemplified two different types of individuals and their subsequent degree of
anxiety:

I believe that anxiety is clearly a personality trait. You are a perfectionist and due to
your personality you are prone to worry and anxiety. Or, you are at the other end of the
continuum, you dont care, thats your philosophy of life, and you think that life is too
short to spend time on unimportant issues and become anxious. Obviously I belong to
the first category, and I get anxious about English just because I want to do well.

Perfectionism was also illustrated by only one of the teacher interviewees. Argyris
drew an interesting generalisation about top students in his English language classes:

They want to be successful, the stressors are that, they are the students and they want
to show that they have some knowledge between them. The very very good students,
what we say the fyta, the geeks, these are stressed because they are who they are, and
they are sometimes stressed because they want to release this etiquette.

Differing degrees of conscientiousness, which constituted the second
dimension linked to personality-stemming LA, were also found to influence learners
affect in the classroom. Some participants maintained that their self-awareness of not
being diligent sometimes, either due to commitments other than the language classes,
158

or owing to their laxity and negligence, dramatically increased their levels of in-class
LA. Danae said:

I quite often feel anxious before entering the classroom, especially when I havent
studied the vocabulary. And very often I think that the teacher will ask the meaning of
a word and I will have no answer to give. Of course this happens when I am busy with
university commitments or stuff like that.

Having a job which is based on a hectic schedule, Nikos also felt that he could not
study as much as he would want to:

I work very long hours, almost every day, and I become anxious because sometimes I
wish I could have studied more, and I must say that sometimes I am not at all happy
with how hard I managed to study at home.

Interestingly however, Sophia described the exact opposite:

When I havent studied, I am no nervous at all. I get extremely anxious when I am well
prepared. Because youve expended some effort, and you dont want to fail. If you
dont do well despite having studied, you feel even worse.

It is therefore interesting to see the complications that might arise when students
realise that they have not studied much, often due to conditions that were beyond
their control. These complications impact on personality dimensions, which
concomitantly interact with their LA about the English classes, often in a negative
manner.

6.4.2 Self-concepts
A recurrent motif throughout the qualitative data was the student participants
frequent mentions of a range of self-concepts, such as self-confidence, self-efficacy,
and self-perceptions of ability in EFL. It is important to note, however, that self-
159

concepts exerted both a negative and a positive influence on students classroom LA
levels, functioning as a cause of LA and as a means of allaying stress respectively.
Only a few students were found to make self-deprecating remarks and to have
a low sense of the self-concepts mentioned above. Elisa felt that, owing to the
inevitability of making mistakes in English as this was not her mother tongue, her
self-confidence weakened hence igniting sentiments of LA and worry. Confronted
with similar, negative self-beliefs, Natassa summarised her low self-efficacy and
subsequent high LA expressively:

I usually check what other people are doing in class instead of focusing on my own
work. If they are writing and I am not, I become very anxious. At that point, I may
even forget everything I know and do very bad.

Natassa interestingly added that she constantly wanted to be told by her teacher that
she was a good student. This praise was hence construed as a boost to her self-esteem
and as a means of allaying her LA. Sophia also made a noteworthy remark with
connection to her low self-perceived competence and its influence on her classroom
LA levels.

Being a perfect student is not what I am aiming for. I have never been the best student
in the class and I am not expecting to be the best either, but I think that my anxiety
stems from the fact that I am filled with remorse for not being good enough. It happens
unconsciously I think.

Nevertheless, most of the student participants tended to strengthen their self-
concepts, and hence exhibit lower levels of LA, in respect to those skills or activities
for which their self-perceived competence was high. They commented:

I: Speaking never makes me anxious.
C: Why not?
160

I: Because I believe I am fluent. I can use the language very competently. (Ioanna,
interview)

I know I am good. The comments I get from my teacher are always good. There is no
chance of me not doing my homework. I am a hard-working student. There are other
reasons that make me anxious. (Kiki, interview)

I like writing. Thats why I started keeping a diary for you, because I like writing both
in English and in Greek. Thats why I am comfortable when writing essays, because I
know I am good at it. (Anna, interview)


Additionally, Nikos attributed his self-confidence when speaking English to his
inherent ability to manage discussions skillfully both in Greek and in a foreign
language.

I am self-confident when I am speaking in English, because in general I can lead
conversations away from topics I am not familiar with. This is a skill I have cultivated
throughout my work experience too.

From a teacher perspective, Antonis spoke about his students low self-perceptions
of ability and low self-efficacy, both having a profound impact on their level of
classroom LA.

I have a group this year, all adults group, and I think that their level of anxiety is
mostly elevated by the fact that they cant understand grammar. And even though I am
trying to make them talk generally about everyday stuff, they keep concentrating on
Oh, we make mistakes when we talk so we have to learn the grammar. But they cant
learn the grammar, so thats a vicious circle of stress. They are stressed because adults
that come to learn English are people who, in their teenage years, found it very
difficult to learn English so they sort of know that they are not good at it.

6.4.3 Learner agency
Learner agency, that is to say, an individuals will and capacity to act, was
found to play a critical role on the development and maintenance of LA. Students
161

mentioned that, as independent adults, they needed to balance their agentic resources
skillfully in order to achieve their goal to master the target language. Concerns over
time management, work-life balance, responsibility to cover their English language
lesson tuition fees, and studying English to become proficient, were daunting tasks
which increased the learners fear of failure and LA. Nikos commented:

When you are an adult, you work, you may not have much time to study and you
would wish to be able to study more, you have to pay your bills, your tuition fees, the
books you are using in class. You have to be a conscious individual who cares about
the English classes and wants to succeed. You have to learn English because at this age
you dont want to waste your time and also you dont want to pay all over again in
case you fail. So my anxiety results from all this effort I am expending, both in
financial and ethical terms.

Nikos explained that his anxiety would stem from his fear that he would fail the
course, which in turn would stem from the realisation that having to balance work,
life, and studying is difficult and may lead to failure. An interesting connection
emerges here between attributions that learners make for their possible failures and
the way these attributions mediate the effect of possible failures on LA.
Another way that learner agency was found to exert influence upon LA
concerned students realisation that English language learning is mandatory. Kiki
explained this with saddening pragmatism:

S: Years have passed by. I am 35 years old and I am still learning English. I should
have attempted it when I was younger, but I was lazy.
C: Why do you say so?
S: Because I have no time to waste. I must learn English. I am not young. Younger
learners, children, are still young and are therefore not constrained by time, but I am.

She went on to argue that her aim was to learn the language, and that she felt the need
to prove herself in what she was doing, something she was finding very stressful at
her age.
162

Kikis awareness of the importance of knowing English emanated from the
structure of the Greek foreign language education system, which actually imposes a
set of success-oriented beliefs on students. One of the requirements for admission to
various posts in the public sector concerns certified knowledge of English, and this
broadly dictates that failure is not an option for the students. Danae emphatically
stated the following:

When I was younger, I was lazy and I wasnt studying English. I can now understand
how important having certified knowledge of English is. I mustnt fail. I need the
points to have more chances to get a job in a state school.

The fact that certified knowledge of English is a prerequisite for getting a good job in
the public sector seemed to motivate Danae to work towards completing her goal.
However, the requirement of an English language certificate for jobs increased her
fear of failure and rose her anxiety about failing the course.
Self-perceptions of ability in the target language were another principal
component contributing to learners sense and exercise of agency. Certain students
appeared to hold weak self-concepts that made them avoid studying harder. Thus, in
this case, they exercised their sense of agency through non-participation and non-
action, which led to mounting levels of anxiety. The extract below illustrates this
point.

Being a perfect student is not what I am aiming for. I have never been the best student
in the class and I am not expecting to be the best either, but I think that my anxiety
stems from the fact that I am filled with remorse for not being good enough. It happens
unconsciously I think.

It should be noted, however, that students self-perceived abilities do not always
reflect their actual abilities. Given that the study did not include any objective
163

measures of the participants actual performance and achievement in EFL other than
information about their CEFR scores, the reliability of their comments on their self-
perceived performance could not be tested.
Another insightful comment that the majority of students made concerned the
complex interplay between learner agency, age, and LA. Students argued that older
learners (i.e., adults) are active agents in their own learning and, in most cases, have
developed a sense of need for achievement and internal attributions, which, in the
case of the highly anxious EFL learners in this study, ignited feelings of LA. This
was illustrated by Sophia and Zoe in the following excerpts:

When you are young, you dont really understand why you are learning English. Its
almost always your parents decision to attend lessons in the language school. But as
you grow up, you realise that it is something useful and that you have to expend effort
on it if you want to achieve something. Not only are you learning English out of your
own volition, but its also the realisation that you have to do well in it, and this may
increase your anxiety about English in class. Its also the fact that things are more
difficult, the input is getting harder and you need to study more. And this makes me
anxious.

The younger we are, the more nave we also are, and therefore the less anxious. While
growing up, we have to be responsible individuals and manage language learning
satisfactorily. Now, I feel I have to do well. When I was younger, I think I didnt care.

Notably, the findings reveal that age could impact on differential levels of LA, as
well as on how learners shape their sense and exercise of agency.

6.5 External anxiety-inducing factors
External anxiety-inducing factors were defined as those factors that largely
stem from outside the individual, such as experiences with significant others and
linguistic input. It should be noted that the distinction between internal and external
factors cannot always be sustained, as they may not be truly independent categories.
164

For example, as it will also be seen below, an external anxiety-ensuing factor, such as
prior EFL learning experiences, can have a serious impact on an internal anxiety-
ensuing factor, such as self-concept, thus indicating that the two are inseparable.
However, I felt that this distinction can serve to make the dynamic causes of LA more
comprehensible.

6.5.1 Significant others
In the classroom context, the presence of the teacher and/or the peers was an
important factor affecting students levels of LA. With connection to evaluation by
the English teacher, an interesting link emerged here between students fear of losing
face and a sense of a need to impress the teacher. This was apparently supported by
students unwillingness to query when they have not understood. As Akrivi
described,

What causes anxiety in the classroom would be the fact that they do not understand
what I am talking about, and they feel they are missing out, and Ive explained the
grammar point on the board, and they havent a clue of what I am talking about. They
are too embarrassed to ask me to repeat it, or they are too embarrassed to show that
they dont understand.

A few student interviewees also highlighted their fear of losing face at the
presence of the teacher, as well as their desire to impress the teacher. Natassa
explained that the lack of praise by her teacher led to high LA and also made her
think that her teacher was not satisfied with her performance. Kalliopi stressed that
she did not want her teacher to think less of her. Maria felt that her teachers
corrections and evaluation were an indication of her level of proficiency in EFL; thus,
if the comments and corrections on her work were many, she would think that her
teacher might believe that she is not a capable student. On closer examination of the
165

data therefore, it seems not to be the teacher per se who increases students LA levels,
but rather the importance students attach to their teachers impression of them.
Another recurrent justification that teacher interviewees gave for explaining
the significance of teachers as significant others during the process of language
learning concerned students need to match the teachers expectations. Kiki
questioned whether teacher expectations were made clear to the students, explaining
that teachers should first decide what to expect from each student on the basis of
his/her capabilities. Expressing similar concerns, Linda argued that not knowing
what it is that the teacher wants [] really scares them [i.e., the students].
Apart from the teachers, other significant others in the classroom are the
peers. Accounts that surfaced in the interviews concerned students dislike of being
negatively evaluated by their peers rather than their teacher. Sophia had very strong
views about her classmates, thinking that their behaviour was the main source of her
LA.

Classmates can make me anxious in two different ways. First, they are anxious too,
they are getting hysterical, and they make me anxious, and this is something very
common. I mean you are on your way to the lesson and you are relaxed, but as soon as
you enter the school you realise how anxious they are, so you become anxious too.
Second, they can be a bit of a snob and you know that they are stronger students than
you actually are. So, you try to be like them, but by the time you realise that thats not
possible, your feelings of anxiety overwhelm you.

As illustrated by Sophia, peer pressure may lead to competitiveness and tenseness.
Confronted with a similar problem, Zoe believed that her classmates could do better
than her, and feared facing derision if she said something wrong. Katerina, in turn,
considered that the discrepancy between the level of proficiency of students of the
same class seemed to generate most competitiveness-stemming problems. Anna
166

spoke about how she invoked her own anxiety in order to avoid her peers severe
criticism:

I sometimes feel that I put pressure on myself, because I dont want to show to my
peers that I am not good at English or that I cant do it. And I dont like being laughed
at, so I try to study hard to avoid making mistakes.

Another emotionally laden account of the effects of peer pressure was offered by
Natassa:

I usually check what other people are doing in class instead of focusing on my own
work. If they are writing and I am not, I become very anxious. At that point, I may
even forget everything I know, and I will perform badly.

By contrast, Nikos explained why his classmates did not ignite feelings of LA, a
statement which resonates with Katerinas opinion reported above:

My peers dont make me anxious. First, one of them is my sister so I am aware of her
reactions. The other students are of the same level of proficiency as me, perhaps even
of a lower level, so neither anxiety nor competitiveness can affect me.

When given the hypothetical situation of perceiving himself as less capable than his
classmates, he said that this would definitely be hurtful and influence his LA in class.
Fanis offered important insights into this aspect, adding that negative evaluation and
criticisms were most often initiated by the weakest members of the group she
belonged in. Expressing similar concerns, one of the teachers, Linda, recollected the
following sad classroom event:

In this class, there are eight students and there is one person who makes remarks a lot
of times about the pronunciation. I mean it is funny because that student makes
mistakes too but I dont know if she does it because she feels bad about herself. But
Ive spoken to her two or three times privately as nicely as I could. Ive been saying
something like You are really trying to help, but. In fact she wasnt trying to help,
167

she was making fun of somebody but I didnt want to say that. And I think that stresses
the other students. It calls attention to what they can do. We try to call attention to
what they can do, of course this is what we do as teachers. But now that you are asking
me about peer pressure, yes, there is one person in this particular group who creates a
kind of bad atmosphere sometimes.

The comments included in this section are first indicative of the importance
that students attach to the impression that their teachers and peers get of them, and
second of the effect on LA of thinking that this impression might be negative.

6.5.2 The input
From the student perspective, input-stemming classroom LA was governed by
difficulties with lexical items. Students diary entries were overloaded with mentions
of vocabulary-related problems, and with their subsequent experiences of LA in the
classroom. Specific problems with lexis included learning the meaning of
polysemous words and words belonging to the same lexical group, lacking topic-
related vocabulary needed to perform certain tasks, and having to deal with unknown
words. Some examples are listed below:

Im afraid of the vocabulary and its true that English language is very complicated!
One word can mean many things! For example minutes means the minutes of the hour
but also the records of a meeting! Couldnt English people find another word? (Kiki)

Bite-sip-chew-gulp-lick-swallow! Six words to describe more or less the same thing.
(Fanis)

I felt a little bit nervous this moment because I like sports and I cant select whats my
best. I dont know some words and I cant explain the rules of some sports and that
makes me nervous. (Danae)

My score on reading was good although I had so many unknown words and I got very
anxious. (Maria)

168

When interviewed, Fanis stressed that different vocabulary items in English that are
translated with the same word in Greek seem to generate LA.

Vocabulary makes me anxious very often, because even though there are many words
with one meaning, each word is usually used in different occasions. I mean that we
cant use two words that are translated the same in Greek in the same sentence. Each
word should be used in a different context.

Similar frustrations were generated by Elisa in her interview.

I think that vocabulary is what makes me very anxious. Although certain words may
look like synonyms, they cant be used in the same sentence. If you write a sentence
and you replace a word with what seems to be a synonym given also the translation in
Greek, the resulting sentence is likely to be wrong. The language is also rich in terms
of words. We are using a book, the Words you need, and the words in there are so
many. I wonder if I will ever be able to memorise them all. If I have a look at the book
now, I am sure I will not remember most of them despite having studied a lot.

Diarists also expressed concerns about, and a kind of fear of, the complicated nature
of the target input and how it could interfere with learning and with producing
accurate output:

I hope that Ill manage to remember all the details when Ill have to speak or to write.
(Kiki)

Phrasal verbs are another complicated chapter of English. How easy is it to keep so
many things in mind? To speak English with so many rules and exceptions in mind?
(Fanis)

Its just that sometimes I get very anxious and Im worried that Im not going to
remember all the new vocabulary Im learning. I always seem to forget some words.
(Elisa)

Reading the teacher interviews, only Linda referred to target input as a source
of classroom LA, admitting that, whilst input could be one degree harder than
learners current level of proficiency, a wrong choice of too difficult materials was
169

one of the origins of her students LA. Being very forthcoming, she kept on
explaining with saddening pragmatism why her decision of what to teach apparently
translated into a stressful classroom atmosphere:

The book was our fault, because the book was really too hard for them, but I can see
that they were anxious about it and you know if I had chosen a different book, it
wouldnt have been a stressful situation. [] the book that weve read, Fahrenheit 451.
I didnt know the students so once we were reading the book and I can see that it was
too hard, I can see that it was making them nervous, because it made them feel that
they didnt know very much. [] I think that was a big source of stress. They were
asked to do something which was beyond, they did it but it was beyond what they
could do comfortably. So, if what is taught, its not matched nicely with their level. I
mean you dont want to be right at their level, you want to be a little harder. But this
was may be instead of one degree too hard which would have been good, it was
probably three degrees too hard which was stressful.

Lindas comments are indications that evaluating language teaching materials prior to
their use and analysing students needs at the beginning of a course do not always
constitute standardised practices in language teaching situations. As the interview
was developing, she repeated her previous point, this time somehow contradicting
herself:

These students, Ive been pushing with this book that is too hard, they kind of resist
but on the one hand I know I made a mistake, the book is too hard, but on the other
hand I know as a language learner and as a language teacher that if you always give
people what theyre comfortable with, they dont learn. You have to give them
something thats a little bit too hard and provide a safe little environment, so thats,
thats the way it works when you teach.

The excerpts also demonstrate that, on the one hand, Linda intended to incentivise
language learning by challenging her students with input that was slightly harder than
their current level of proficiency in EFL, whilst, on the other hand, the incongruity
between input level and proficiency level had unforeseen results on the students
academic performance and on their LA.

170

6.6 Prior foreign language learning experiences
Interestingly, LA appeared as a manifestation of events occurring outside
class which exerted significant influence on students affective behaviour in class.
Events taking place outside class concerned learners past foreign language learning
experiences, and local norms and beliefs about successful language learning.
Learners prior foreign language learning experiences were found to be linked
with their current levels of classroom LA. In particular, the participants commented
on negative past occurrences that clearly control their anxiety over EFL learning.
First, it is notable that English language tutors attitude has made quite an impact on
the students present LA. Former EFL teachers who were very anxious themselves, or
who had a condescending manner, were mentioned as a major source of learners
anxiety in class. The extracts below by Elisa and Maria further illustrate this point.

I think that teachers transfer their stress to their students. I had an English teacher a
few years ago who was so anxious in class that I always hoped for the lesson to finish
in order to calm myself down. She was flicking through the book nervously, telling us
what we will do now, in one month, in three months, when we will write our tests. And
I also believe that this is bad for a teachers image too.

The teacher I had was very tough and demanding, and had a judgmental attitude
towards students. You were afraid of him just by looking at him. He was always asking
us to do the difficult exercises in the book, because he was saying that the easier ones
are only for idiots. I believe he was a qualified teacher, but he should really work on
his manner.

Past teacher-related negative foreign language learning experiences could also
be due to teachers putting pressure on students to succeed. Natassa describes such an
experience.

I used to hate English, but the teacher was to blame for that. She was weird. [] She
was demoralising me, and I was avoiding classes, I wasnt doing my homework. []
That school was in my hometown, you know, its a small town in a remote area, and
171

she wanted us to pass the exam to prove that her institute is good. All this was putting
pressure on me. Then I failed the exam, and stopped studying English. I registered
again for English lessons when I came here to go to university. Now I like English, but
I still feel I have a kind of fear of it.

Locality and its emergent beliefs about foreign language learning success shape ones
experiences and influence ones levels of LA in present and future encounters with
the language in instructional settings. Natassas experience suggests the existence of
an occasional, informal macrosystem (Bronfenbrenner, 1979): local, success-oriented
beliefs about language learning have subtle effects on affective behaviour in class,
and these overarching social and educational norms governing small institutions in
remote, provincial areas again influence the microsystem, that is the current EFL
classroom.
The second aspect of prior language learning experiences concerns instances
of failure in formal examinations in the past, or having scored marks on tests that
were approaching the borderline. Both were shown to induce feelings of fear of
upcoming failure among learners and consequently increase their LA. Nikos
recollected the following account:

S: Anxiety is part of my life that I cant get rid of. It follows me in almost everything I
do. With relation to English, I am anxious because I believe that I am not good enough
to succeed.
I: Why not?
S: Because I once failed the Michigan preliminary exams, I got 21 instead of 23 which
was the pass mark.

This extract demonstrates that LA is a dynamic variable, resulting from a linear
process of interaction between different conditions. Global anxiety pre-exists within
the learner and is a stable personality trait, presumably manifesting under stressful
circumstances, including language learning among others. This leads to a situation-
specific form of anxiety, i.e., classroom LA, which dramatically increases due to an
172

inherent fear of failure stemming from an unlucky past examination event. In
addition, the fact that a student may receive a mark only two points below the pass
mark adds extra feelings of despair to ones affective state.
Learner self-concepts and the way they are shaped also appear interrelated
with past learning experiences. With reference to EFL speaking in particular, students
reported feelings of self-consciousness and low self-confidence, which stemmed from
interpersonal interactions and engendered speaking-specific classroom LA, as Sophia
and Natassa said.

In my previous language school, I would make a pronunciation mistake and I would be
laughed at for the next couple of weeks. And I really wonder if those students were
considering themselves so expert to criticise the level of English of others. I was so
young back then and couldnt understand how such an event could affect my
willingness to speak now. Now I always think that someone will make fun of me and
my English.

My teacher tells me that I am good at speaking, and that I have a good accent which
sounds American. However, I feel embarrassed whenever I speak because the other
students make fun of me sometimes. For example, I pronounce the word the as //and
not as /i/ and the others make fun of this, because they think it sounds too American.
And it was the teacher who started all this by commenting on my pronunciation in
front of the whole class.

The second student was confronted with the fact that fellow students would perceive
her differently from the way they perceived themselves. Specifically, the student was
perceived by others as being too foreign for their native group, a self-belief that
accentuated the potential of group membership to provoke LA and that further stifled
future oral attempts.




173

6.7 The Greek foreign language education system
Another interesting finding that emerged from the qualitative data analysis
revealed that the Greek foreign language education system exerted influence on
students LA about EFL learning. Anna commented:

Why do we need to get so many certificates? I mean, I may be able to speak English
without holding the proficiency or the first certificate. It would really be interesting to
see if this is the case in other countries too. My friends in France do not even know
what proficiency and first certificate mean. They dont have to have a collection of
foreign language certificates as we do.

Thus, the structure of the system and the certified knowledge of English (and of other
foreign languages too) that it dictates increase students need for achievement, fear of
failure, and LA.
Teachers have also commented on the connection between English language
certificates, fear of failure, and LA. Mary drew an interesting conclusion about the
dynamic nature of LA, arguing that intermediate-level students who have not yet had
any exam classes lead to language certificates are more anxious than their more
experienced counterparts:

The intermediate students are more anxious than the advanced students in this school,
because the former have not yet taken the main, big English exam, the first certificate.
And they know that everybody has to have the first certificate to get a good job.

Therefore, it is clear that students awareness of how the education system and the
job market work affect their levels of LA in the classroom. These links will be
discussed in more detail in the next chapter.



174

6.8 Coping strategies
One goal of this project was to develop a typology of strategies for coping
with classroom LA. As will be discussed below, teachers and students can make their
own unique contributions to a research project. Hence, this section is divided into two
main themes: what students do to alleviate their stress about English language
learning, and what instructors do to help students cope with their LA in instructed
language learning contexts.

6.8.1 What students do
Although affective strategies are directed towards minimising students LA,
the findings indicated that Greek EFL learners mostly opted for an array of
metacognitive strategies instead. Table 18 lists the tactics for coping with LA
organised by six strategy types. The statements contained in the table were mentioned
by the students in their interviews and diaries.











175

Table 18. Tactics for coping with LA organised by six strategy types

Strategy type Tactics
Positive thinking I try to think of something that makes me happy. I think of times when
Ive studied hard. I try to think positively. I think of a success in the
future. I try to think that I will do very well. I think of something else. I
think of both success and failure possibilities, and I choose the one I like.
I try not to think of my anxiety. I tell myself that I will do it. I tell myself
that I am not anxious. I tell myself that theres still time to practise. I tell
myself that there is no reason to be anxious. I tell myself that learning is
more creative than being anxious. I try to convince myself that I will be
able to find a solution.
Preparation I review the material covered in class. I try to do my best. I aim to
improve my grade. I study hard. Overviewing for the vocabulary test is
for my own good. The more vocabulary I study, the easier these exercises
become, and the less my anxiety is. I think carefully of my weaknesses
and I try to work on them. The more I learn about the English language,
the less anxious I am. I prepare myself better. I ask the teacher some
questions. I ask my teacher to rephrase her question. I read the questions
carefully. I try to guess the meaning of an unknown word. I peruse the
material before I am called on by the teacher.

Seeking practice
opportunities

I try to keep in touch with English. I listen to many English songs. I
watch many English films.
Relaxation I close my eyes and I go to a place that calms me down. I try to relax. I
try to calm down. I try to take it easy. I drink water. I take a deep breath.
Peer seeking I ask other students if they understand the class. If possible, I try to
compare my answers with other students answers at the end of the task.
Unless the teacher asks us to work individually, I work together with the
person sitting next to me.
No strategy use I dont really believe that there exists a specific strategy you can use to
reduce your anxiety, because as I said before anxiety is a personality
trait.

The first strategy set, Positive thinking, is characterised by a range of tactics
that divert students attention from the anxiety-provoking situation to pleasant, and in
most cases imaginary, conditions, including scenarios of success in EFL learning
among others. Students reported the following:

I try to think about something that makes me happy, such as a good mark on a test or a
task, or think about times when Ive studied hard. I try to think positively so I feel
more relaxed. (Anna)

When I am anxious, I try to think positively, to think about a success in the future, that
I will do very well. (Fanis)

176

I try to think of why I get anxious. Then I consider all the possibilities, for example if
this happens, it will result in this and that etc. I try to come up with a rational
explanation to any result, and choose the result I like. To feel that I have found a
solution to whatever might happen in the end. And I think I am not anxious this way.
(Kalliopi)

Students who reported use of positive thinking also felt that suppressing stressful
thoughts and focusing on the task at hand would facilitate language learning, and
hence reduce their anxiety associated with the language class. Ioanna, for example,
said:

When I am anxious, I avoid thinking about my anxiety and try to shift my focus on the
task itself. For example, the teacher once asked us to do some writing in class. At that
moment I was feeling that I couldnt write a word. But in the end I did very well. I
tried to forget my anxiety.

Fanis made a similar remark:

I am trying not to focus on my anxiety. I know I want to learn English and I will do it.
I am an optimist and I put effort in what I am doing. I am also trying to find a solution
to overcome my anxiety rather than letting it interfere with my learning and
performance in class.

The second category, Preparation, refers to strategies that aim at improving
study and learning skills, as well as performance (e.g., I study hard, I try to guess the
meaning of unknown words, I prepare myself better). Students resorting to
Preparation strategies highlighted that, while they felt their level of competence in the
target language increased, their anxiety declined in a fairly consistent manner.
Danaes account was quite illustrative of this point:

I worry if I get a low mark. I then review the class lessons to make sure I know what
has been covered. Then I feel like I know everything, I feel more competent. And I aim
for a higher mark next time.

177

The third category, Relaxation, involves strategies addressing psychosomatic
anxiety symptoms, which could be overcome by taking a deep breath for instance, or,
more interestingly, mentally travelling to a place one likes (e.g., I close my eyes and I
go to a place that calms me down), as well as dissuading oneself to take the whole
stressful situation seriously (e.g., I try to take it easy). Katerina summarised this
strategy set expressively.

The best way to reduce your anxiety is to close your eyes for two minutes and think of
something irrelevant, something calm. Just go to a place that calms you down.

Peer Seeking constituted the fourth strategy set, and consisted of tactics that
were indicative of students willingness to boost their self-confidence by looking for
classmates who had difficulty in understanding the class too. Zoe put this very
competently:

If I know that someone else has the same problem as me, I will think that s/he is not
any better than me. Thats a relief, I believe.

Other students mentioned that they sought opportunities to work collaboratively in
the classroom mainly prior to a whole-class oral task. Maria made her point quite
succinctly:

If you panic because you dont have the answer or because you cant understand
something and you may not feel at ease to ask the teacher, you can work with the
person sitting next to you. I believe that this also reduces competitiveness among
classroom members, and you feel relaxed when you go to class.

Strategy categories 5 (i.e., Seeking practice opportunities) and 6 (i.e., No
strategy use) were less commonly suggested by the participants. Maria maintained
that looking for opportunities to practise English is getting easier and easier
178

nowadays, given the status of English as an EIL and the increasingly technological
age we live in. Practising English outside class mostly through the use of authentic
materials was what she was opting for, thinking that increasing her mastery of the
language could reduce her anxiety about English. As far as the sixth strategy set is
concerned, Nikos expressively argued:

I dont really believe that there exists a specific strategy you can use to reduce your
anxiety, because as I said before anxiety is a personality trait. One of my friends
suggested that we scream into a pillow. It helps to release your stress, she said. How
can you do this in class? I did it at home, it doesnt work.

A final note concerns most students claims that they did not necessarily
resort to avoidance behavior in an attempt to minimise their LA. On the contrary,
they felt that risk taking was sometimes indispensable to help them overcome their
stress. Exercising their agency in an attempt to prioritise tasks and needs and evaluate
the importance and usefulness of a task was another strategy certain students adopted.
The extracts below support this point.

If I am very anxious, and what Ive been asked to do is something I really have to do
and cant avoid, I will do it because I will have no other choice. You need to take risks
at some point. I believe that anxiety is a kind of fear and something we have to get
over. If there is no other way out, we will overcome our fears and whatever will be,
will be. (Natassa)

Whether I would avoid an activity, thats a good question. It depends on the activity. If
it is something that will not offer anything to me and there is no point doing it, I will
avoid it, yes. If it is something that I have to expend effort for in order to succeed, I
will not avoid it. I will try to overcome my anxiety instead. (Nikos)

Of the thirteen student interviewees, only Kalliopi admitted that she occasionally put
studying English off and avoided an instructor whose condescending attitude made
her feel uncomfortable. She confided:
179

She has this stern look. [] Sometimes I feel I dont want to attend her lesson. I
usually do the homework she assigns, but if I have other things to do, I will put that
off. To be honest, I partly like the fact that I dont always have time to do my
homework for her class.

For Kalliopi, avoidance is not an anxiety-coping strategy, but rather a means of
revolting against a teacher whom she does not wholeheartedly approve of.

6.8.2 What teachers do
Given the well-documented consequences of classroom LA, teachers were
asked what techniques they deployed in their classes to help their students to
minimise their anxiety.
The majority of the teachers suggested that praising the students with a view
to boosting their self-confidence was their main aim. While the interviewees
acknowledged the importance of being realists when evaluating students
performance, they believed that showing trust in students abilities, highlighting their
strengths, and placing emphasis on those skills they have improved in, could reduce
their LA. Linda, who was teaching American literature to advanced students, said:
What Ive been doing with this book is emphasising that they are good, that I
wouldnt bring this in to just anybody. Antonis expressed this view in unambiguous
terms: We try to point out that we are sure that they are going to make it. He
mentioned later that he was keen to award students successes during lessons, by
focusing on aspects of the language or on skills they are good at. Kiki also stated that
she tried to shift the students focus on their strengths when she realised that some of
them were anxious in class:

When I see that they are stressed, I say Dont worry so much about that, focus on the,
on how much you have improved compared to previous times. Thats what I tell them.
To focus on important things. I tell them Look, thats what you have done right. Good
180

for you, that was one thing that you improved. Even if ten other things were still
wrong, I wont focus on them on that specific day.

Error correction was the second thematic unit mentioned by teachers as a
means of reducing students LA. The first step was to help students adopt the attitude
that mistakes were a crucial part of the language learning process and, therefore, they
would be made by everyone. Teachers said that, in fact, mistakes were a sign that
their students were actually learning and that their interlanguage was developing.
Alexandra explained how she felt making mistakes benefitted her students:

I say that a lot, that if you knew everything, you wouldnt be here. You have to make
mistakes, its normal to make mistakes. I make mistakes. And we are here to learn
from each other, so its good that you made a mistake, because now the others wont
make the same mistake. So I try to sort of make them understand that we are actually
learning from the mistakes and that its not always ideal to be perfect. If they were
perfect, they wouldnt be here.

Similarly, Linda offered a noteworthy glimpse of how she believed making mistakes
was interpreted by her students:

Why have I made all these mistakes? And I say Well, they are tiny mistakes. I mean
a spelling mistake is silly. It doesnt mean that you dont know English. So yes
sometimes they get a little nervous. They feel like they dont know very much when
they see mistakes. We all make mistakes. I make mistakes when I speak English. I
mean just I do, not grammar mistakes but I start talking really fast, you know, its
natural. But they are not experienced enough to know that, so they, they take it as a
sign that they dont know something.

Next, interviewees spoke about ways of approaching error correction with
sensitivity to student feelings. They felt that writing comments that did not accentuate
the errors so much instead of using numerical scales to assess their students
competence was an evaluation strategy that was well-received by the latter. Teachers
commented:

181

I write comments such as: I really like the discussion. You wrote elegant sentences.
This was nice, but it would be nicer if you had more details. You had a few mistakes. I
think that you misunderstood a few things about the book, because the character wasnt
really very nice. So I give them some comments, and I always give some kind of a
comment that softens the way they receive the correction. (Linda)

There are cases where adults are very competitive and get stressed over marks and
grades, and the last few years we are trying to avoid stressing so much the grades, that
100%. (Antonis)

Team work seemed to be the thematic thread running through the interviews
of the teachers who suggested enhancing peer support and fostering a sense of
community amongst learners in the EFL classroom. Participants discussed the
usefulness of pair work and group work in terms of the input students were presented
with, and also in terms of mistakes they were likely to make. At the input level,
teachers commented that team work made input seem less difficult to students eyes:

What makes them like pair work is the fact that they think, and probably its true, that
through team work they can eliminate any difficulties they might have. They think that
the other person is going to help them fill in the gaps of some parts that they dont do
well They find it entertaining. They find that, as I said, it can help them present their
final work better and it will probably be more correct, so this gives them extra motive
to try, and they are more confident in that case. (Antonis)

Much in the same vein, Linda also justified why she used team work in class:

I try to use group work when its a little hard, because it seems like that when you can
work it out with one other person, you are not all on your own. That seems to help.
They like working in pairs and small groups this crowd. They think they get energised.
[] But working with another partner usually helps I think to alleviate stress.

At the feedback level, teachers maintained that students did not feel being
singled out, but rather saw their mistakes as a collective thing. Through team work,
learners thought, as Bonnie said, that we are a group, so it is after the group, not just
me that is getting it wrong, a feeling that, according to Argyris, increased their
182

confidence and self-esteem. Joanna mentioned that she made sure her students first
developed their ideas in pairs or small groups in order to calm each other that way,
before they speak out. Alexandra also explained that her students could identify with
each other when paired up or asked to work in groups:

A lot of people share the same thoughts, or have the same questions, so they have to
feel like OK, I am not different from the others. We are the same, we have the same
questions, were wondering about the same things. [] Students look back at their
mistakes as a group and not individually, because a lot of mistakes that are made are
usually very common in more than one students work and they dont see that.

Despite the positively-toned teacher comments on the usefulness of team work, it is
worth mentioning that some students took issue with it adding that problems with
hierarchy within the group were likely to arise, with some students being overly laid-
back as opposed to some others who would become anxious in order to complete the
task. Katerina offered an important insight into this:

I get very anxious when the teacher asks us to work in a group in class. Because
usually there is a problem with the hierarchy within the group. One of us has to be the
leader and say Well, we will work this way, etc.. Or, not necessarily the leader,
because this is a strong word, but someone who has to push others to take initiatives.
This is very stressful for me, because if none of us takes, if none of us tries to do that, I
will have to do it. And I will have to urge the others to work more to finish the task, or
the exercise, or whatever the teacher has assigned us to do. And if we do not manage to
complete the task, I usually feel guilty and I have to shoulder the responsibility.


Apart from these three unanimously mentioned categories of strategies for
reducing students LA, some teachers suggested a range of teaching practices that
they employed in order to help their learners to alleviate their stress. First, with
reference to correcting speaking, two teachers reported on the use of recasts. They
believed that, by reformulating what the students had said, they corrected a speaking
mistake in an unobtrusive way, ruling out the possibility that students would expose
183

themselves to ridicule in the eyes of peers. In addition, Eliza said that she made sure
that target vocabulary was pre-taught prior to tasks, Kiki highlighted the value of
brainstorming prior to writing activities, and finally Linda and Mary suggested
breaking a big task, such as writing an essay, into smaller, manageable tasks for the
students, for instance, writing one sentence for each of the main essay parts first.
Teachers speculated that applying teaching methods such as the ones outlined above
contributed to teaching EFL in an anxiety-free classroom atmosphere.

6.9 Conclusion
It may be concluded that the diary study and the interviews provided support
for most of the quantitative results reported in Chapter 5, but also revealed some
unexpected insights, such as the link made between learner agency and LA. This
connection has not been addressed to date, and it is hoped that the current project will
contribute to the field of second language studies. Very useful insights were also
offered by students and teachers recounts of stories and events occurring in class, all
contributing towards a better understanding of the complex nature of LA. All these
findings will be essential in refining the theoretical framework presented in Chapter 2
and shaping the future projects that will emerge from the present one.
The quantitative and qualitative strands of my project will now be integrated
in the next chapter, Discussion, and the findings will be contrasted with existing
studies addressing similar concepts.





184

CHAPTER 7
DISCUSSION

7.1 Introduction
This chapter integrates the quantitative results reported in Chapter 5 with the
qualitative findings presented in Chapter 6, offering a holistic interpretation of the
data that neither statistics nor thematic analysis would have facilitated separately. The
quantitative and qualitative data have been linked into meta-inferences, in line with
the principle of sequential mixed method analyses (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2011;
Teddlie and Tashakkori, 2009), which guided the research design of this project.
The first part of the chapter is dedicated to explicating those themes that were
found to be particularly important to the participating Greek EFL learners and their
tutors, as identified in Chapters 5 and 6: skill-specific anxieties, the relation between
LA, different proficiency levels, learner agency, and self-concepts, as well as other
internal and external anxiety-inducing factors, and anxiety-coping strategies.
Unexpected findings will also be discussed extensively in this section. Based on the
complexity of student conceptions, identifiable sources of LA, and reported
behaviours, the chapter ends with a holistic view on LA in English language
education.

7.2 Emerging themes
The main themes that emerged from my quantitative and qualitative results
will be discussed with reference to my Literature review (Chapter 2) and Research
context (Chapter 3), comparing and contrasting my findings with the existing studies
that addressed similar concepts.
185

7.2.1 Skill-specific anxieties
One of the goals of the present study was to examine the nature and relative
independence of EFL speaking anxiety and writing anxiety, as stated in research
questions 1 and 2 respectively. The component structures of the FLCAS and the
ESLWAT emerging in this study indeed argue for treating speaking anxiety and
writing anxiety as two independent, distinguishable variables, each depicting
somehow different aspects of classroom skill-specific anxiety. In particular, some
highly anxious students may suffer from fear of speaking English and being
negatively evaluated, some from flawed performance in the presence of the teacher,
and some from aversion to attending their English language class. By the same token,
when writing in English, highly anxious EFL learners may be afflicted by negative
attitudes towards the task at hand, self-derogatory thoughts, and fear of negative
evaluation.
The qualitative data have also shown that both anxiety types appear to be
language-skill-specific, because the requirements of speaking and writing as language
skills influence students levels of speaking anxiety and writing anxiety respectively.
With reference to speaking anxiety, students were fixated on accuracy and frequently
commented on the spontaneity that speaking involves. A strong link was also found
between making mistakes and facing derision by peers given the relatively high
degree of self-exposure that speaking in a foreign language entails. The participants
precarious level of classroom speaking anxiety, interconnected with the possibility of
being negatively evaluated by their peers, could potentially reduce their levels of
intended effort when speaking in class and ultimately result in poor achievement.
MacIntyre, Clment, Drnyei, and Noels (1998, p. 547) doubted the quality of a
language programme that does not cater for an increase in learners WTC:
186

() the ultimate goal of the learning process should be to engender in language
students the willingness to seek out communication opportunities and the willingness
actually to communicate in them. A programme that fails to produce students who are
willing to use the language is simply a failed programme.

These findings point out that the role of the teacher needs to be reconsidered to a
certain extent. Apart from the traditional teacher roles mentioned in the literature on
language teaching (Harmer, 2007), including those of a prompter, controller,
assessor, resource, and tutor, teachers should also act as moderators of classroom
events that could generate personal feelings of inadequacy within learners.
By contrast, skill-specific writing anxiety was heavily dependent on L1
writing deficits and inability to come up with ideas on suggested writing topics. In the
light of these associations, Cheng et al.s (1999) claims about language-skill-
specificity with regard to second language speaking anxiety and writing anxiety
reinforce my findings. Despite the fact that no correlations have been calculated
between skill-specific anxieties and achievement in respective skill-related activities
in my study, the quantitative and qualitative data detailed the distinctive nature of
speaking anxiety and writing anxiety that may affect students differently.
Factor analysing the ESLWAT, the emergence of attitudes as its first
component echoes Natassas and Sophias leitmotif that, if a student likes a specific
aspect of the language, then s/he will get anxious over it because of a desire to do
well; on the other hand, if it is an aspect one is not very fond of, then ones anxiety
about it will decrease. Positive attitudes have been associated with intrinsic interest in
learning an L2 and a strong L2 self-concept (Csizr and Kormos, 2009). It follows
that student positive attitudes and writing anxiety are also interrelated. As this link
emerged with connection to writing anxiety, it becomes clear that teachers should
implement writing teaching strategies that will grow enjoyment of EFL writing. First
187

of all, it is important to ease students fears about producing written work in the L2
that is below what they could have produced in their native language. Adult learners
are often hesitant to produce language that is sub par their L1 skills. Process writing
could help students incorporate skills at a natural pace and encourage them to
improve their understanding of writing as a task and of the materials covered. Rather
than focusing students on working on perfection in the first draft, various writing
sessions could be set and writing tasks could be broken into smaller manageable
units, a teaching writing technique that was also employed by certain teacher
interviewees. It is important to instill the idea in students that writing is a cyclical and
iterative process, offering opportunities for interaction between stages and sub-
processes. Rankin-Brown (2006, p. 5) also suggested that teachers assign papers that
address topics students are already familiar with. Through theme-centred modules,
students are able to develop critical thinking skills and writing strategies to
implement with topics they already know and are willing to discuss.
One of the most intriguing findings regarding writing anxiety was the serious
complication of L1 writing deficiencies and lack of L1 writing strategies that
appeared when writing in EFL. The literature on L2 writing suggests that it is only
natural that students will attempt to transfer their knowledge of L1 writing to L2
writing. According to Manchn (2009, p. 12), the multilingual nature of foreign
language writing requires this transfer, which is bidirectional, and [] includes
transfer of knowledge, skills and, very importantly, the use of the writers total
linguistic repertoire at product and process levels. Further, the amount of transfer
will clearly depend on the students proficiency level, with low-level learners
transferring L1 textual features to L2 writing as opposed to more advanced students
who are more likely to rely on L2 textual features in the development of L2 writing
188

skills (Rinnert and Kobayashi, 2009). Schoonen, Snellings, Stevenson, and van
Gelderen (2009, p. 81) claimed that in foreign language writing, L1 writing
expertise and metacognitive knowledge can be used for conceptual (prelinguistic)
preparation. The authors concluded saying that the relationship between L1 and
foreign language writing proficiency is without doubt mediated by foreign language
linguistic knowledge, but the issue of how and to what extent these three constructs
interact is still not settled (ibid., p. 82).
In this study, however, the teacher participants explained that students were
not aware of rhetorical and organisational patterns of writing in their L1. Therefore,
such a transfer was unlikely to exist. This may be due to an overwhelming emphasis
on reading over writing in Greek schools, which appears to be related in part to
educational policies stressing historical and cultural heritage through reading classics
(i.e., Ancient Greek) and modern Greek literature. As far as L1 writing training is
concerned, it emphasises a type of text in which a particular position with supporting
evidence is provided. This kind of writing attaches importance to logical
argumentation, which seems to echo the typical characteristics and conventions of
English academic writing, as well as opinion writing included in EFL textbooks.
Thus, L1 writing instruction appears to promote aspects similar to those of English
opinion-writing. The domain of writing in Greek can often be tightly specified by
exam boards, and therefore the instruction promotes the use of specific discourse
types in essays, as could also be the case when studying English for an exam. One
therefore wonders what it is that Greek students lack when it comes to writing both in
their L1 and L2. Comparing the education systems of Greece and the UK on the basis
of my experience as a learner and as a teacher, I feel that the absence of lateral
thinking, the prescribed nature of what to write and how to write it, and the insistence
189

on rote learning and memorisation evident in all levels of the Greek education
system, could explain EFL students disposition to become anxious about writing.
Having said that, one facet common to both speaking anxiety and writing
anxiety was fear of negative evaluation. Specifically, the respondents endorsed items
of both quantitative data collection instruments that were related to evaluation by
peers and disagreed with statements depicting negative reactions to teacher
evaluation. Insights from the interviews showed that this finding is interrelated with
student beliefs about the role of teachers. Many interviewees talked about the duty
teachers had to evaluate students oral and written work, hence evaluation was what
students would expect their tutors to do, provided that this was conducted in a non-
judgmental manner. With reference to writing anxiety in particular, students felt that
feedback from their tutors helped them to clarify what level they had reached and to
set the syllabus for future work. This finding corroborates Harmers (2007) claims
that EFL teachers often act as feedback providers or assessors, evaluating students
performance and informing them about their progress. From a cultural standpoint too,
this finding resonates with Wan, Low, and Lis (2011) conclusion that, for Chinese
EFL learners, teachers are conceived of as providers and evaluators.
On the contrary, evaluation by peers was not part of the learners set of beliefs
about classroom language learning. Students would not expect their peers to evaluate
them, and, whenever evaluation did occur, it had a detrimental effect on LA levels.
Several students even highlighted that, when speaking, they would face derision by
the weakest members in the class, a situation that translated as competitiveness or
envy. These findings confirm a massive body of literature emphasising frequent
instances of peer pressure in class, as well as a stringent need for social approval,
which maximise students levels of in-class speaking anxiety (Aida, 1994; Cheng et
190

al., 1999; Gregersen and Horwitz, 2002; Horwitz et al., 1986; Kitano, 2001; Mak,
2011; Young, 1990). Individuals are formed by socialisation (Benson and Cooker,
2013), thus their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours are often influenced by significant
others reactions to those projected behaviours. Individuals tend to exhibit different
emotional responses to the audiences reactions (Leary, 1995), thus feeling that they
are perceived the intended way may motivate them to believe they are approved by
their significant others (Leary and Kowalski, 1990), and may also subsequently
motivate them to develop positive affective behaviours towards language learning.
The data have also shown that this social dimension of skill-specific anxieties
often led to social comparisons among learners, which might to a certain degree have
been unconscious processes, with students having no control over them, resulting in
feelings of competitiveness that students were not always in a position to
acknowledge. Zoes answer when asked whether she believed she was competitive
was quite revealing:

I am not competitive. Its just that I want all students in the same class to be of the
same level of proficiency. Is it competitiveness? I dont know. I dont want to feel I am
inferior to others.

Leary (1995) explained that, while behaving in a way that is not yet part of their self-
concept, individuals may learn new things about themselves; they may even come to
realise that they actually are the way they presented themselves. According to the
social comparison theory, after people compare and find differences, they are led to
pressures towards uniformity, either by changing self or changing others, in an
attempt to feel they belong to a homogeneous group (Wheeler, 1991). Many student
interviewees in fact stressed the importance of being carefully placed in groups on the
191

basis of their proficiency levels, in order to avoid heterogeneous, mixed-ability
classes, where students may feel either superior or inferior to their classmates.
At the same time, social comparisons may also be consciously directed by a
learner depending on their self-related needs (Mercer, 2011, p. 10). Hence, to satisfy
these needs, students may engage in upward social comparisons, comparing
themselves with peers that they perceive as better than themselves, or downward
social comparisons, with those considered less able (Mercer, 2011). Wheeler (1991,
p. 8), however, questioned the directionality of these downward and upward drives,
saying if one wanted to be better than others, should one compare downward to
assure being better, or should one compare upward to compete for the better
position?. Thus, upward social comparisons are not necessarily negative. As Wood
and Taylor (1991, pp. 26-27) argued,

Indeed, people appear to be interested in obtaining any information they can about the
distribution of others standings on the dimension under evaluation. It seems likely that
knowing ones own score may have little meaning by itself; one may need to know
where others stand on that dimension to have a context for interpreting ones own
score. Thus, individuals are clearly interested in comparing with others who are
different from themselves along the dimension under evaluation, perhaps as an initial
step toward self-evaluation. [] one may learn from others who are more skilled, and
one may be inspired by their example. Indeed, many researchers have interpreted
upward comparisons as reflecting achievement motives.

Applying insights from the social comparison theory to language teaching is not an
easy task, and no teacher would approve of students being competitive. However, the
theory has the potential to suggest a pedagogy that promotes self-evaluation and
urges students to set clear and achievable targets to improve their learning.
Two important insights, of theoretical and methodological nature respectively,
follow from the findings on language-skill specificity and LA:
192

a) The need for a re-evaluation of the crucial role of writing anxiety on EFL learning
should be underlined. Writing too and not just speaking should be conceived of
as involving a challenging amount of self-exposure when practiced in class. The
present study has revealed that writing anxiety may also emanate from students
fear of negative evaluation by their peers, trepidation about being less competent
than their peers, and low self-confidence when writing in English. Therefore,
helping students to develop practical writing skills, including techniques for
generating and expressing ideas, would make them feel psychologically secure in
the EFL classroom. Given that students may see the foreign language classroom as
a place where any correction equals failure, teachers should make the classroom as
non-threatening as possible. Measures like selective error correction by taking into
account the main foci of the writing activity and by accompanying it with
comments that do not immediately accentuate the errors, could be taken by
teachers to help students overcome their writing anxiety. The link between
classroom anxiety and achievement is an important indication that we do need to
care about our students anxiety and psychology if we care about their
achievement.
b) FLCAS could be used for the purposes of operationalising speaking anxiety. Even
though the FLCAS is not in its entirety related to speaking anxiety, it loaded
primarily on items depicting speaking anxiety situations in the classroom, thereby
suggesting, first of all, that anxiety over speaking emanates from the broad English
language classroom context. The statistically significant high correlation (r = .91,
p < .05) between classroom LA and speaking anxiety revealed that the two
variables are directly proportional. In Aidas (1994) and Maks (2011) studies too,
items relating to speaking anxiety loaded on the first factor, which again
193

significantly and strongly correlated with general classroom anxiety. Therefore,
corroborating the existing literature, the findings of the present study also reveal
that the FLCAS is a quantitative classroom anxiety instrument that measures
primarily speaking anxiety, a finding that is consistent with Cheng et al.s (1999)
as well as Aidas (1994, p. 163) conclusion that the FLCAS appears to measure
anxiety primarily related to speaking situations.

7.2.2 Self-concept and language anxiety
The importance of viewing language and self as closely interrelated has often
been emphasised in the research on self (Cohen and Norst, 1989; Mercer, 2011),
identity (Morita, 2004; Norton, 2000; Williams and Burden, 1997), and more recently
through the introduction of the L2 Motivational Self System model of motivation
13

(Drnyei, 2009). Indeed, Cohen and Norst (1989, p. 61) claimed that there is
something fundamentally different about learning a language, compared to learning
another skill or gaining other knowledge, namely, that language and self are so
closely bound, if not identical, that an attack on one is an attack on the other. Csizr
and Kormos (2009, pp. 109-110) explained that their research underlines the
importance of self-concept in affecting motivated behavior and shows that self-
regulated behavior is hardly possible unless students have a positive image of
themselves as users of another language. Williams and Burden (1997, p. 115) also
stressed the strongly social nature of language learning by concluding that language,

13
Drnyei (2009, p. 29) argued that for some language learners the initial motivation to learn a language
does not come from internally or externally generated self images but rather from successful engagement
with the actual language learning process (e.g. because they discover they are good at it). Based on this
conclusion, Drnyei (2009) proposed the L2 Motivational Self System, consisting of the ideal L2 self (i.e.,
the attributes one would ideally like to possess), the ought-to L2 self (i.e., the attributes one believes one
ought to possess, usually foisted on individuals by others), and the L2 learning experience (i.e., aspects of
the immediate learning environment and experience, such as the curriculum, the peers, the teacher).
194

after all, belongs to a persons whole social being; it is a part of ones identity, and is
used to convey this identity to other people.
The study of the relationship between LA and a range of interrelated self-
beliefs, such as self-concept, self-confidence, self-esteem, self-perceived competence,
and self-efficacy, has also demonstrated that negative self-related beliefs caused
anxiety among students (Bailey, 1983; Foss and Reitzel, 1991; Horwitz et al., 1986;
Kitano, 2001; Price, 1991; Young, 1991). Horwitz et al. (1986, p. 128) contended that
probably no other field of study implicates self-concept and self-expression to the
degree that language study does. The findings in this study corroborate previous
research, but also provide further evidence for both an adverse and a beneficial effect
of self-concept upon LA. Whilst negative self-related cognition increased students
LA in the classroom, positive self-concepts reinforced their feelings of self-worth and
functioned as a means of battling against LA. Although the highly anxious EFL
learners that participated in this study were found to often make self-deprecating
remarks and have a low sense of self-efficacy, they tended to strengthen their self-
concept in respect to those skills or activities for which their self-perceived
competence was high. Ioanna believed she was fluent, and therefore speaking would
not make her anxious; Kiki also underlined the fact that she knew she was a strong
and diligent student (see section 6.4.2). One could therefore surmise that EFL
learners had formed their own affective evaluative beliefs about themselves and
seemed to be aware of their skill development. This should not mean, however, that
students self-perceived abilities always reflect their actual abilities (Kitano, 2001). In
general, individuals tend to ascribe their own personal interpretations to images from
others and to construct their self-concepts based on how they believe others perceive
and judge them in a particular context. It is important to note at this point that ones
195

interpretations may be accurate or, quite often, inaccurate, leading to a low sense of
self-worth and, consequently, high levels of LA.
On the other hand, this study also indicated that self-concepts are likely to
function as anxiety-reducing factors too (MacIntyre and Gregersen, 2012; Mruk,
2006). Clearly, both the positive and negative nature of self-concepts will impact on
language development, either promoting or detracting students from it respectively. It
is possible, however, that anxious students may be able to handle anxiety-provoking
situations if they possess high self-esteem. Greenberg and his colleagues (1992, p.
913) proposed a terror management theory, which posited that people are motivated
to maintain a positive self-image because self-esteem protects them from anxiety. As
Horwitz et al. (1986) noted, students with low self-esteem are likely to be more
vulnerable to the threats caused by the uniqueness of the language learning process
and the overall language learning environment, as opposed to individuals with a sure
sense of self-worth, likely to manage those threats more effectively.
With the students participating in this study, the amount of linguistic
knowledge did not always constitute the factor that impeded communication, but it
was their self-esteem that needed to be given a real boost. Natassa the most anxious
student in this study underlined the importance of such a strategy by saying that she
wants to be praised by her teachers and to be told that she is good at English. External
incentives, such as praise, can motivate students to act and increase their confidence
as learners of a foreign language. Although consolidating a stable form of self-esteem
is largely the result of a developmental process which takes time (Mruk, 2006), this
type of positive emotion, as well as praise, interest, and enjoyment, may help students
to build strengths against negative emotions (Gardner, 1985; MacIntyre and
Gregersen, 2012).
196

However, praise should be used carefully, and teachers need to take care not
to inadvertently instill students with unrealistic ideas about language learning and
unrealistic expectations of themselves as language learners. Research has shown that
overusing praise by praising students for easily achieved successes and unsolicited
help can have debilitating effects on self-perceived competence, because students
tend to see this easily gained form of praise as a low-ability cue (Dweck, 2007;
Weiner, 1986). Mercer and Ryan (2010, p. 442) also suggested that feedback and
praise should focus on learners effort, the process of learning, and beliefs about
developing ones ability through hard work.
With reference to writing, analysing the ESLWAT also showed that most
students were not self-confident in expressing their ideas clearly in writing, and
reported low self-efficacy in writing good compositions. However, a vast majority
believed that they could submit a well-written final product. One could therefore
presume that writing anxiety could be associated with different stages of a writing
lesson, namely process and product writing, as the students self-concept appeared to
be weak during the process of writing but strong with relation to the end product.
Students rationalised that process writing creates a certain amount of stress due to
lack of L1 writing strategies and their transferability to the L2. This insight into
differential levels of writing anxiety was also facilitated by the student interviews,
where several students spoke about their anxiety and initial negative reactions to
writing within strict time limits on the one hand, and their well-written final piece on
the other, for which they received very good marks by teachers.
In the previous section, I argued that process writing should be viewed as a
cyclical and non-linear process, where interactions between stages are normal and
should form part of the EFL writing process. Teachers should therefore encourage
197

and train students to plan, draft, re-plan, draft, edit, etc. their written piece before they
produce and submit the final version. Although process writing may be time-
consuming and may meet, at least initially, with some resistance on the part of the
learners, it could contribute to defragmenting EFL writing, and could also help
learners to become better writers in their out-of-class or post-course English studying
routes.

7.2.3 Learner agency and language anxiety
One of the most intriguing themes of the present study, which I was not
aiming at investigating from the outset but which emerged through the qualitative
data analysis phase, was the student interviewees high sense and exercise of agency
leading to differential levels of classroom LA (Gkonou, forthcoming). Within
psychology- and anthropology-based research, agency is viewed as the
socioculturally mediated capacity to act (Ahearn, 2001, p. 112). Within much of
SLA, however, and given the fact that ones capacity to act is likely to be influenced
by their cognitive and motivational affordances, agency refers to an individuals will
and capacity to act (Gao, 2010). More recently, Mercer (2012, p. 42) defined agency
as being composed of two dimensions that cannot be meaningfully separated:

Firstly, there is a learners sense of agency, which concerns how agentic an individual
feels both generally and in respect to particular contexts. Secondly, there is a learners
agentic behaviour in which an individual chooses to exercise their agency through
participation and action, or indeed through deliberate non-participation or non-action.
Agency is therefore not only concerned with what is observable but it also involves
non-visible behaviours, beliefs, thoughts and feelings; all of which must be understood
in relation to the various contexts and affordances from which they cannot be
abstracted.

Thus, learners may feel that they want and are able to act (i.e., sense of agency), and
then proceed to real action and participation (i.e., exercise of agency). At the same
198

time, their denial to act or participate in specific contexts for specific reasons is also
an indication of their sense and exercise of agency.
Agency can therefore have a major impact on learning outcomes, and, as van
Lier (2008) put it, successful language learning depends on the activity and initiative
of the learner (van Lier, 2008). Lantolf and Pavlenko (2001, p. 145) emphasised that
learners are people with human agency who actively engage in constructing the
terms and conditions of their own learning. However, as Mercer (2012, p. 41)
argued, before a learner engages their agentic resources and chooses to exercise their
agency in a particular learning context, they have to hold a personal sense of agency
a belief that their behaviour can make a difference to their learning in that setting.
Much in the same vein, Bown (2009, p. 580) also explained that to effectively
manage learning and regulate emotional responses, learners must be aware of their
own agency and must believe themselves capable of exercising that agency. Hence,
autonomous and self-regulated learning behaviour depends on learners awareness of
themselves as active agents, capable of exerting influence on and shaping their own
language learning experiences.
Agency was found to be largely mediated from a range of settings
surrounding the students, as well as from the temporal and spatial dimensions
associated with those settings. As Carter and Sealey (2000, p. 11) argued,

Too great an emphasis on structures denies actors any power and fails to account for
human beings making a difference. Too great an emphasis on agency overlooks the
(we would claim) very real constraints acting on us in time and space. And reducing
each to merely a manifestation of the other [] necessarily results in a theory which is
unable to capture the complex relations between them.

Thus, contextual and personal factors should not be abstracted, but should rather be
seen as interacting with each other in order to lead to desirable results. Within
199

psychology, Bandura (1989, 1997) also attached importance to the interplay between
environmental and intrapersonal (e.g., cognitive, affective, and motivational) factors,
and posited that individuals should not be merely viewed as agents reactive to their
contexts, but at the same time as proactive agents who are able to change them.
Within SLA too, learner agency along with self-concept, beliefs, motivation, affect,
and self-regulation were found to interact within a system of reciprocal causation
(Mercer, 2011). Investigating how learners exercise their agency in their selection
and use of strategies, Gao (2010) concluded that the interaction of context and agency
can initiate strategy use, and that the concept of learner agency needs to be extended
to include aspects other than a learners metacognition and self-regulation.
Thus, learner agency should not be seen as a monolithic variable, but rather as
a latent construct which is shaped by numerous contextual, sociocultural, and
intrapersonal factors influencing the students. This echoes Lantolf and Pavlenkos
(2001, p. 155) call for a more complex view of second language learners as agents.
Consistent with these views, this study made a link between learner agency and LA, a
connection not addressed to date.
As was the case with self-beliefs too, the findings illustrated that the role of
learner agency on LA was dual, consisting of a range of dimensions which, although
occasionally contributing towards increasing students anxiety, often helped them to
develop internal mechanisms to control it. The findings of the present study therefore
posed questions of directionality between classroom LA and learners sense and
exercise of agency, which could certainly contribute towards stimulating further
research into analysing the components of the agentic system of highly anxious EFL
learners in particular. Since research into the relationship between LA and learner
agency is scarce, this study aimed to reach a better understanding of the subject, with
200

the hope of identifying practices that language educators could put in place to help
students with a strong sense and exercise of agency better deal with their classroom
LA.
The most salient component of the informants agentic system was
metacognitive knowledge gained through self-evaluation and self-perceptions of
ability in EFL. As was mentioned above, the participating students were frequently
constructing their self-evaluative judgments and were aware of their skill
development. Clearly, self-regulation will influence agency as well as students
decisions about how to allocate their agentic resources (Mercer, 2011, p. 433) and,
thus, what they need to focus on. Mercer (2011, p. 431) also stressed that self-
perceived competence will affect decisions about how to exercise agency as well as
the degree to which a learner feels able to direct their agency in ways to enhance their
learning. Metacognitive knowledge therefore leads to healthy reflection and
evaluation of ones thinking which may result in making specific changes in how one
learns through a targeted and well-defined agentic behavior in the classroom
(Anderson, 2012, p. 170). Therefore, metacognition and agency should be considered
complementary to each other in revealing the process and goals of autonomous
learning (Gao and Zhang, 2011).
Although the metacognitive dimension of agency seems to promote learner
self-regulatory processes towards planning for effective learning, increasing self-
confidence and hence reducing LA, it may as well determine an adverse outcome.
Drnyei (2005, 2009) claimed that students will tend to compare their self-perceived
performance with future goals, and, if they notice any gap, they will be motivated to
act. Higgins (1987) suggested his self-discrepancy theory, which postulates that
individuals are motivated to reduce the discrepancy between their actual self and the
201

behavioural standards of their ideal or ought-to selves. The discrepancy between their
actual self and their ideal selves initiates self-regulation and metacognition. However,
any gaps between students perceived competence and the accomplishment of future
goals may also accentuate their potential fear of failure in their studies and maximise
their anxiety over academic achievement, because students are likely to
underestimate their capacities to narrow that gap. On the one hand therefore, students
should be encouraged to set goals and exercise their agency towards achieving them.
On the other hand, highly anxious EFL learners failure or even reluctance to exercise
their agency and exhibit self-regulatory behaviour just because they believe their
competence is below par, is likely to ignite more anxiety.
Another particularly noteworthy dimension of the informants agentic system
concerns their time management skills in an attempt to prioritise tasks and personal
needs. Given that this study was conducted with adult learners who have to balance
their goal to become proficient in the language and their other life goals, such as to go
to work, deal with accommodation-related tasks, and attend other classes, it becomes
clear that learner agency influences classroom LA. As age increases, learners go
through a maturation phase where they feel that they understand the significance
behind learning English, take a proactive role, and continuously build their sense of
agency. Students generally felt that they needed to prioritise concurrent needs and
goals, and as far as EFL learning was concerned, they thought that their goal to
master the language should be attained. As Nikos said, an adult would have to
oversee a number of different tasks on a daily basis, therefore s/he would not want to
waste [their] time in the EFL classroom. Thinking that mastering the language is a
goal to be sought for, an increasing fear of failure accompanied by high LA emerges,
and students feel that mastering the L2 is not well within their means.
202

Students precarious levels of fear of failure and their stringent need for
achievement also appeared to pressure them to exercise their agency in the EFL
classroom. An explanation for this could be their fixed set of success-oriented beliefs,
which could in turn be attributed to the structure of the Greek foreign language
education system. Strong claims, such as I mustnt fail (Kiki, interview), reveal that
failure is not an option for the students. In the absence of a longitudinal,
developmental study, it is unclear whether these success-oriented beliefs were
initially externally formed and imposed, and then gradually internalised by the
students, or whether they formed an integral part of the students beliefs about the
scope of language learning in general. In fact, when certain beliefs are dominant
within ones immediate sociocultural environment, individuals tend to internalise
them unconsciously and spontaneously. This dynamic relationship between what
individuals believe (i.e., their self-concept) and what others impose on them to
believe (i.e., their ideal self, or their ought-to self; Drnyei, 2009) is demonstrated in
the evidence that, in fact, ones ideal or ought-to self can change their self-concept.
As Drnyei and Ushioda (2011, p. 82) commented,

[] it is not always straightforward to decide at times of social pressure whether an
ideal-like self state represents ones genuine dreams or whether it has been
compromised by the desire for role conformity. Indeed, group norms, as their name
suggests, impose a normative function on group members and because humans are
social beings, most of us adhere to some extent to these norms. This means that there is
a pressure to internalise our ought selves to some extent, resulting in various degrees of
integration.

Thus, the internalisation of social values and identities conditions ones personal
values and preferences. The process of internalisation helps to explain how specific
external orientations can be assimilated into ones self-concepts. Different people and
different contexts can play a significant role in students internalisation of beliefs
203

about success in language learning. Therefore, aspects of context shape the learners
experience, and, reciprocally, [] the learner shapes the context to meet her needs
and aspirations (Noels, 2009, p. 299).
Internalisation could, on the one hand, lead to devastating negative
consequences in academic environments, given that students are often externally
imposed to consider English simply as an academic subject that one has to study in
order to succeed, or graduate, or be given a promotion, before moving on to more
personally relevant pursuits. Thus, students may not view the English class as an
opportunity to become proficient speakers of the language and acquire and develop a
skill for life, but rather as a place that will guarantee them success in English for job.
This could further endanger their intrinsic interest in the language, if there is one, or
prevent them from gradually developing one. On the other hand, internalisation can
as well serve educational purposes in two ways: a) students could be encouraged by
their teachers to appropriate learning goals that they see as personally relevant, and b)
doing something that one does not necessarily believe in may open up learning
possibilities, which a student of little experience might never try otherwise, thus
being very educational in itself.
Another component contributing to students sense of agency and mounting
LA is their beliefs about language learning. Mercer and Ryan (2010) talked about
mindset beliefs and distinguished between a fixed mindset, referring to students
believing that language learning abilities largely depend on an innate, fixed talent,
and a growth mindset, in which case ones ability to learn a language is attributable to
effort and studying. They explained that the type of mindset will influence a students
sense of agency. The findings of the present study demonstrated that the majority of
students possessed a growth mindset, and were continuously referring to vocabulary
204

as something they needed to work hard on. Participants also stressed that they were
looking for ways of how best to learn vocabulary. These mindset beliefs had a
considerable impact on learners LA levels, and could indicate whether language
learning development was within their control: students acknowledged the relative
difficulty of lexical input, and the subsequent difficulty in acquiring it, and, therefore,
tried to find appropriate ways of acting and of exercising their agency in order to
study new vocabulary.
Three important insights follow from these findings:
a) Developments in research on agency can inform, and even transform, theoretical
and methodological conceptualisations of LA. Although agency has been widely
associated with language learner identity and autonomy (Benson and Cooker,
2013; Bown, 2009; Toohey and Norton, 2003; Ushioda, 2007), the study of the
agentic system of highly anxious EFL learners can indeed provide insights into the
complexity of the constructs of both agency and LA. This leads to a call for more
studies on the interconnection between LA and learner agency.
b) Enhancing learners self-regulation and metacognitive knowledge could not only
lead to effective language learning in the long run, but could also give students the
opportunity to speculate on and analyse the way they think in an attempt to
identify ways to diminish the anxiety they are faced with in the classroom. This
aspect will be discussed in more detail in the section on coping strategies below.
c) Language learners should be viewed and understood as people who are
necessarily located in particular cultural and historical contexts (Ushioda, 2009,
p. 216), who have a variety of social roles, and who are proactive agents and
moderators of their own learning. The contexts surrounding the students, ranging
from sociocultural, out-of-class settings, to formalised learning contexts such as
205

the language classroom, shape and determine their behaviour and emotions in
class. Language educators should therefore urge learners to develop and improve
self-monitoring and self-regulatory skills, and build strong motivational
attributions. Having control over ones own learning brings more self-confidence
to students, and, hopefully, less anxiety.

7.2.4 An ecological approach to language anxiety
The findings of the current study relate well to Bronfenbrenners (1979, 1993)
nested ecosystems model, according to which human behavior is structured over four
layers: micro-, meso-, exo-, and macrosystem, ranging from the immediate setting to
the overarching social and cultural context. The microsystem, which is the innermost
layer, operationalised through the EFL classrooms, has been extensively discussed in
the previous sections and will also be discussed in the sections that follow. The
second level, the mesosystem, reflects the interrelatedness between the classroom and
other settings containing the students. Students past language learning experiences
having occurred outside the current classroom but exerting an influence on LA in the
current classroom are grouped under this level.
The mesosystemic level in this study was found to comprise aspects such as
prior self-concepts, prior achievement, direct feedback from and reflected appraisals
of others, and past teachers attitude in the form of judgmental manner towards
students, all influencing students present degree of LA in the classroom. Within
psychology, the effect of ones prior achievement on current behavior and affective
state was seen in the Reciprocal Effects Model (REM; Marsh, 2006). According to
the REM model, prior self-concept affects subsequent achievement, and also prior
achievement affects self-concept development. This could perhaps be extended to
206

LA-related literature and, notably, to the present study, the findings of which revealed
that prior LA influences future achievement and prior achievement affects LA
development. Daly (1991, p. 10) claimed that people who previously have had
positive experiences learning languages are, in all likelihood, less anxious about
conquering another one than are those who recollect nothing but fear, anxiety and
failure from prior attempts.
In the context of the present study, and in particular in Natassas and Nikoss
case (see section 6.6), their negative past experiences with failure and with strict
teachers influenced their subsequent language learning experience to the point that
they were anxious about failing the course or about being taught by a tutor with a
similar attitude to teaching. Therefore, acknowledging prior experience as an
influence on how LA develops is a perspective that should be taken into account
when attempting to conceptualise anxiety. LA and achievement were often found to
have a bidirectional relationship (Horwitz, 2001; Kitano, 2001; Marcos-Llins and
Garau, 2009; Onwuegbuzie et al., 1999; Pappamihiel, 2002; Phillips, 1992;
Woodrow, 2006), and in fact measures of achievement were extensively used in
correlational studies investigating the relationship between these two variables. The
findings of the present study, therefore, support existing research, with the exception
of Yan and Horwitzs (2008) study, whose model did not indicate any influence of
achievement on the anxiety of Chinese EFL learners, and vice versa. According to the
authors (ibid., p. 173), they [i.e., the learners] only commented on how anxiety kept
them from achieving and did not mention lack of achievement as contributing to their
anxiety.
From this ecological approach to LA though, the most interesting finding
concerns the existence of a third systemic level that could be conceived of as falling
207

somewhere between an exosystem and a macrosystem. Bronfenbrenner (1979, 1993)
claims that the exosystem refers to the interconnection between two or more settings,
at least one of which does not contain the individual but influences his/her behaviour
in the classroom. As for the macrosystem, it entails the overarching socioeducational
norms, including the indigenous learning culture as well. At this level therefore, the
exosystem and macrosystem encapsulate two important dimensions: Natassas the
most anxious students concerns over local, success-oriented beliefs about language
learning having a subtle effect on student affective behaviour in class; and, the nature
and structure of the Greek foreign language education system which influences
students LA levels. These two aspects will be discussed next.
Natassa argued that her teacher owned a language school in a rural area in
Greece; students success at learning English would be a means of advertising the
quality of teaching offered by the school. Overall, a students success at foreign
language learning mirrors a schools high quality of education programmes. As such,
teachers and school owners anxiety and their expectations from their students are
likely to engender anxiety within the latter. Concomitantly, a countrys foreign
language education system extends to educational policies implemented by each
language school. It is therefore important not to lose sight of the big picture when
assessing teaching and learning practices and their detrimental effect on students LA.
Just like students feel controlled by the teacher and have their autonomy stifled and
their anxiety augmented, so too teachers feel controlled by higher order factors and
administrative bodies. Exosystemic and macrosystemic factors thereby influence not
only student LA, but also teacher behaviour that often impacts on student affective
behaviour within the microsystem.
208

As explained in the Research Context chapter, foreign language learning in
Greece is urgently needed for international communication, as Greek is one of the
least widely spoken languages outside of Greece. However, additional instrumental
reasons, stemming from higher education norms and the indigenous culture of
learning, put much pressure on learners too. The education system in general revolves
around formal examinations. Foreign language learning too targets exams from
international acclaimed examination boards, or national standardised English testing
centres. The public sector, where an overwhelming majority of citizens aspire to work
in, is monitored by the Supreme Council for Civil Personnel Selection (ASEP) and is
structured on the basis of a point factor system, where many points go to English and
other foreign language certification as a prerequisite for securing the top jobs there.
Within the context of the present study therefore, the Greek foreign language
education system, sharing both exosystemic and macrosystemic features, increases
EFL students LA in the microsystem, the immediate EFL classroom.
Noteworthy among the findings on viewing LA ecologically was the insight
that not only did the exosystem and macrosystem ignite feelings of LA in the
classroom, but might have also endangered students intrinsic interest in the
language. As generalised a practice as it is on an international scale, it is known that
upcoming exams, like any other form of contingent reward, undermine students
intrinsic motivation to learn the foreign language. When individuals know that they
will be rewarded for performing a task, the extrinsic incentive becomes more salient
than the intrinsic one (Deci and Ryan, 1985). As Noels (2009, p. 297) put it, the
cause of the action is removed from the persons own wishes, and is experienced as a
form of control. As long as that contingency is present, a student would engage in
language learning; once removed, that engagement would desist. This study revealed
209

that Greek students feared failure and attached great importance to succeeding in the
course and in future exams. From a cultural point of view, this finding confirms
Ryans (2009, p. 125) analysis of English language teaching in Japanese secondary
schools, which he found has a clearly defined instrumental function, stripped of any
communicative function, where English is seen as content for a series of
examinations that have profound consequences for future academic or career
prospects.
At a teaching and learning practice level, however, several students expressed
their discontent with less interactive and occasionally exam-centred forms of
teaching, and did not universally reject communicative activities, but rather stressed
their usefulness in the acquisition of English as a communication tool. Zoe explained:

In our English lessons there is not much focus on conversing in English. I mean that
you go to the school and you work on exercises, or the teacher tells you how to write
an essay. Lessons usually focus on the writing component rather than on the oral one.
Even when we enter the classroom and we speak in English with the teacher, its just
the basics we talk about, such as hi, how are you, did you do your homework. This is
in every lesson.

Rejection of communicatively-oriented activities occurred only when certain tasks
were perceived as offering limited learning attainment potential. The Greek culture of
learning should therefore be dynamically understood.
These findings set a new research agenda that could contribute towards
making LA research more ecological. As Williams and Burden (1997, p. 190) pointed
out, what is of particular significance to us here is that ecological or systems
approaches emphasise the importance of taking into account the total environment of
the learner if we are to explain adequately how and why people learn. Raising
awareness of the existence of the four systems could thereby benefit language
teachers, urging them to scrutinise their students ecosystemic behaviour in an
210

attempt to alleviate their stress in the classroom. Whilst teacher intervention could be
achieved by bottom-up innovation in the microsystem, a top-down approach to the
remaining ecosystems is also required to help allay students in-class LA (Peng,
2012). Teachers could become aware of the realities of the different contexts that
surround their students, and engage in pedagogical decision-making aimed at
enhancing their learners options and learning potential.

7.2.5 Level of proficiency and language anxiety
One of the aims of the present study was to investigate the difference in
language anxiety among students at different proficiency levels, as mentioned in the
third research question. The quantitative data collection instruments indicated that the
B1 students experienced the most anxiety and the C2 students the least, with B2 and
C1 students falling between the other two, thereby corroborating MacIntyre and
Gardners (1991a, p. 111) conclusion that as experience and proficiency increase,
anxiety declines in a fairly consistent manner. Lius (2006) and Pappamihiels
(2002) claims that higher level students were less anxious than their lower-level
counterparts in their studies also resonate well with my participants viewpoints.
The strong link between lower proficiency levels and LA could first be
attributed to learners relatively limited exposure to the L2 by the time they reach B1.
It is clear that lower-level students will possess a smaller amount of knowledge of the
target language, and will have fewer opportunities for English use than their more
advanced counterparts. What is more, adult learners often feel ashamed and
embarrassed when they realise that they cannot get their intended meaning across in
the foreign language. Their self-consciousness is also aggravated by fears about
211

producing work in the L2 that is not up to par with what they could have produced in
their native language.
Another difference between the advanced levels and the lower intermediate
levels concerns the different foci of both learning and teaching. Aspects such as how
much is taught, the complexity of the rules given, the type of practice activities used,
and the way in which meaningful contexts to bring target language to life are created,
may increase students LA over the target linguistic input. In lower-level EFL classes,
explicit teaching of grammar rules and new structures, as well as of new lexical
items, is still ongoing, thereby restricting learners to acquiring rules and occasionally
minimising teachers flexibility on what to teach. Students main focus of learning is
getting things right by trying to incorporate the rules in their oral and written output.
Accuracy is therefore emphasised at the expense of fluency. We have seen that
Antoniss students still seemed fixated on accuracy despite his efforts to get them
talking as much as possible.

I have a group this year, all adults group, and I think that their level of anxiety is
mostly elevated by the fact that they cant understand grammar. And even though I am
trying to make them talk generally about everyday stuff, they keep concentrating on
Oh, we make mistakes when we talk so we have to learn the grammar.

The importance that students attach to the need to work on accuracy can maximise
their self-consciousness and pose a threat to their self-esteem. Even if teachers
establish that they are delighted for students to speak anything at all, it is entirely up
to each individual students personality how mistakes and correction are perceived.
Less experience with EFL learning and strategies could also be a hindrance in
the case of B1 students. As Mary, one of the tutors, commented, B1 students have not
yet taken any formal English examination, which is what the vast majority of foreign
212

language learners intend to do in Greece. Dendrinos and Zouganeli (2012) explained
that reaching B2-level proficiency in English is the goal for most Greek students. On
the contrary, advanced students are experienced exam takers and thus accustomed to
techniques and types of tasks EFL learning entails. I have mentioned elsewhere that,
as students amass experience and autonomy, they are better able to find their own
ways to minimise LA and also anxiety in trait, global terms. In consequence, it
appears that experience and proficiency levels go hand in hand, influencing students
amount of LA accordingly.
The qualitative findings, however, contradicted the quantitative results to a
certain extent, offering implications for a complex interplay between L2 input,
proficiency levels, and LA. Specifically, several students spoke about the difficulty
and overwhelming amount of lexical input, and commented that, although they were
now proficient in the language, they had to cope with advanced linguistic input and
demanding tasks, therefore not perceiving their advanced level of competence as a
facilitating factor towards alleviating their LA.
Such accounts, which surfaced in the interviews, could indeed be associated
with the curricular standards set for advanced classes. EFL students in those classes
know that they are expected to produce more authentic-like language and not restrict
themselves to the production of formulaic sentences and structures. I have argued
above that lower-level EFL students lack linguistic knowledge, and are therefore
likely to become anxious when they realise that they cannot express themselves.
Having acquired more linguistic input, however, does not always account for a
decrease in anxiety levels, because advanced students, just because they are advanced
and know a lot, have more chances of noticing their own errors. As Kitano (2001, p.
558) claimed, when they make errors in relatively easy expressions that they learned
213

in earlier stages of language study, some students are ashamed and embarrassed.
Another possibility is that teachers reactions to mistakes at these levels of EFL
learning may also be stronger. It is likely that some teachers might not be as tolerant
against mistakes as teachers at the lowest levels, but on the contrary set higher
expectations for their students as the levels progress. These factors could explain the
rise in advanced students LA levels since they are aware of the increase in the
difficulty of instruction and in the performance standards set for them.
Given the relative mismatch between the quantitative and qualitative data, the
findings regarding the connection between proficiency levels and LA should be
treated with caution. Above all, one could conclude that students of any level of
proficiency are influenced by LA in differing degrees.

7.2.6 Coping strategies
The fifth research question aimed at exploring strategy use as a means to cope
with LA. The findings indicated that the majority of students opted for Positive
Thinking and Preparation. This finding partially supports Kondo and Ying-Lings
(2004) study on Japanese students anxiety-reducing strategies, where Preparation
was reported to be used more frequently than any other strategy, as opposed to
Positive Thinking ranking third in order of students strategy preference. Drnyeis
(2009, p. 35) discussion about strengthening students vision of their ideal L2 self
through the use of the positive imagery approach reinforces my findings that
positive thinking could be effectively used as a means of counteracting LA.
According to this approach, which is mostly used in psychotherapy, students could
resort to highly pleasurable, relaxing images to counteract anxiety (ibid.), a strategy
that a large majority of the participating students indeed have adopted.
214

It is interesting to note that, even though highly anxious students are generally
found to resort to task-irrelevant thoughts and avoidance-oriented behaviour in an
attempt to reduce their LA, the findings of the present project seem to indicate the
exact opposite. Preparation in particular, which obviously caters for on-task
classroom behavior, provides students with opportunities for active coping with their
stress (Zeidner, 1998), requiring them to focus on the actual problem. As Kondo and
Ying-Ling (2004, p. 263) succinctly put it, congruence between active coping and
Preparation is obvious; both provide a sense of mastery over the source of the stress,
divert attention from the problem, and discharge energy following exposure to
threat. It thus follows that for the students of the present study too, focusing on the
task at hand or on longer-term tasks (e.g., advancing proficiency in EFL) contributed
to suppressing their self-deprecating thoughts and minimising their levels of LA.
Of particular interest too was students denial that they tended to avoid their
English classes or classroom tasks that could increase their LA, a finding that seems
to contradict those in much of the existing research (Bailey, 1983; Bown, 2006;
Horwitz et al., 1986; Oxford, 1999). Instead, student interviewees reported conscious
use and exercise of their sense of agency when encountering an extremely difficult
and hence potentially anxiety-provoking task. Their decision to act or not to act, that
is, to do or to avoid the task, largely depended on where their priorities lay and on the
significance of that particular task to them. If not doing the task would lead to
undesired results, the students would proceed with completing it. On the other hand,
if avoiding it would not make any difference, they would avoid it. I have mentioned
elsewhere that research into the complex interrelationship between anxiety and
agency is still in its infancy in the field of SLA, with no empirical evidence to verify
it. However, further investigation of this issue could extend our understanding of the
215

newly-introduced construct of learner agency, and inform, or even transform, our
conceptualisations of LA as a whole.
Another insight emerging from the data is Greek EFL students highly
developed metacognition and self-regulation. Most students seemed self-determined
and, on the basis of the background information gathered from them regarding their
learning of foreign languages, their self-regulation was doubled by an apparent gift
for foreign languages. Nevertheless, this potential is largely overlooked in the English
class. It emerged that many students used this potential outside the classroom,
increasing their exposure to English through popular songs and videos, literature, and
other pursuits, therefore showing academically fruitful intrinsic motivation. The
English classes appear to help students acquire the necessary language skills, but
potentially deprive them of cultivating their intrinsic interest in the language. Having
said this, maintaining and protecting students motivation as well as increasing their
exercise of agency could make language learning more personally relevant and
effective (Little, Ridley, and Ushioda, 2002; Ushioda, 1996, 2009), and less stressful.
The significance of fostering self-regulation should thus be underscored. According
to Bandura (2001), self-regulation could in fact be the medium through which
students can exercise their agency. Ushioda (1996) stressed the need for teachers to
support students in developing their capacity to become self-regulated agents. Bown
(2006) claimed that the focus should be shifted on the process of developing self-
regulation. To achieve this objective, teachers should guide students through self-
assessment of their strengths and weaknesses related to EFL learning as well as of
their learning goals, by urging them to keep a language learning diary, providing
constructive feedback, and designing individual study plans in collaboration with
each student. As Bown (2006, p. 580) suggested, the task of the instructor in a self-
216

instructional context is not only to transmit the material or to correct errors but also to
help learners to reect on and evaluate their own achievements and learning
experience. Instructors will need to act as counselors.
From the perspective of the teachers, reducing student anxiety levels could be
achieved by focusing either on individual characteristics that increase students LA,
or on classroom and instructional factors that maximise ones anxiety (Horwitz et al.,
1986, 2010). By identifying which individual traits or classroom practices make
students anxious, teachers would be better able to take drastic measures to reduce
anxiety. My findings resonate well with this: the teacher interviewees reported on
employing praise and team work, helping students to recognise that mistakes are a
natural part of the learning process, approaching error correction with sensitivity to
student feelings, and deploying a range of teaching practices including recasts, pre-
teaching vocabulary, brainstorming prior to writing, and breaking a task into smaller
parts. The strategies used by the English teachers of this study did not directly target
distinct student personality traits, but rather took into consideration the overall
ecologies of learning, the classroom dynamics, and those teaching techniques that
could reduce negative affective and emotional responses to learning English.
Focusing on individual student characteristics was not a strategy that students would
expect their teachers to adopt either. Two of the students, Elisa and Nikos, had strong
views about the role of the EFL teacher:

The teachers role is not to console the students. He is not a psychologist. (Elisa)

I think that the teacher should focus on the essence of the lesson and on whether we are
learning and progressing. I dont think theres enough time to focus on how students
will cope with their anxiety. (Nikos)

217

In this light, it is clear that teachers and students treat LA differently, choose different
methods of intervention, and view their own roles as well as each others roles from
different angles. Teachers and students can influence the learning experience
differently, and therefore trying to see how and why their opinions differ is a fruitful
research trajectory (Williams, personal communication).

7.3 Viewing language anxiety holistically
The findings discussed in this chapter provide further evidence for the
multidimensional nature of LA and pave the way for a potentially fruitful re-
conceptualisation of this construct. Existing work has shown that LA could best be
conceived of as situation-specific, without however looking into the dynamic
processes of development and maintenance of LA within highly anxious EFL
learners. Rather, LA was generally thought of as the result of having to perform
satisfactorily by relying on limited linguistic resources. In addition, it should be
acknowledged that, although anxiety appeared to hinder the performance of the
participating students, it is not necessarily always debilitating, given the fact that
some highly anxious students in this study were also high performers, as is evidenced
by their interviews and their teachers interviews. This could indicate that LA is and
indeed should be viewed as a complex construct consisting of a range of dimensions.
The present study also suggested that, in the case of highly anxious EFL
students, LA could indeed be conceived of both as a personality trait and as a state,
dynamic condition. Students appraisals of their experiences indicated that a sense of
pre-existing global anxiety, which was robust and did not fluctuate over time, was
accompanying their classroom language learning trajectories since the very
beginning; and in fact their high levels of LA when interviewed were the result of a
218

transition from low to high anxiety throughout the period of English studies. Hence,
research into LA should not be viewed as a question of either/or, but rather as a
combination of both trait/stable and situation-specific/dynamic dichotomies of LA in
EFL classrooms. As a multifaceted construct, it is likely to be composed of both
dimensions in differing degrees depending on a variety of personal and contextual
factors, all being discussed in detail above.
The findings have also shown how LA cannot meaningfully be understood as
a single monolithic variable but is perhaps best conceived of as a complex, dynamic
system composed of a multitude of interrelated components. Early research has not
made any connections between LA and other learner and contextual variables.
Nevertheless, recent empirical investigations into LA have started to move towards
this new direction, currently dominating the field of SLA research. Yan and Horwitz
(2008, p. 152) emphatically stated that it is [] clear that anxiety does not work in
isolation. As Peng (2012, p. 9) also argued with reference to Chinese EFL learners
WTC, L2 WTC in the innermost system the classroom seems to be nurtured by,
and thus fluctuate because of the interaction between the factors internal and external
to individual learners, and inside and beyond the classroom walls. Gardner,
Tremblay, and Masgoret (1997, p. 356) also suggested that, by considering variables
collectively rather than investigating them separately, we can more easily determine
the processes by which individual difference variables influence how well people
acquire a L2.

7.4 New directions: Using complexity theory in language anxiety research
Throughout this thesis, I have often described LA as a complex and dynamic
variable which influences and is influenced by a range of other variables, all
219

operating within the learners experience of learning EFL. For the participating
students, apart from constituting a stable personality trait, the experience of LA was
also largely context-dependent. A myriad of other factors, which were controlled by
the learners, but were also often extraneous to them, seemed to account for a variation
in anxiety levels from time to time and across situations.
Larsen-Freeman (1997, p. 157) characterised language learning as a non-
linear process, and explained that we will never be able to identify, let alone
measure, all the factors accurately. And even if we could, we would still be unable to
predict the outcome of their combination. Thus, rather than trying to extricate
constructs inherent in language learning, it is important to acknowledge that they are
dynamically interconnected.
One of the most recent developments in applied linguistics research is the use
of complexity theory to interpret phenomena through the use of organic, holistic
models that have replaced linear, cause-and-effect approaches to understanding
learner behaviour in class. The contribution that complexity theory could make to
research into language learning psychology by looking at interconnections, context,
dynamics, and complexity among variables, has recently been stressed by Mercer et
al. (2012), and could indeed constitute a promising research framework. Larsen-
Freeman (2012, pp. 206-207) defined complexity theory as follows:

CT/DST [i.e., Complexity Theory/Dynamic Systems Theory] aims to account for how
the interacting parts of a complex system give rise to the systems collective behaviour
and how such a system simultaneously interacts with its environment. [] complex
does not merely mean complicated. Although the components of a CT are usually
numerous, diverse, and dynamic, a defining characteristic of CT is that its behaviour
emerges from the interactions of its components. [] The traditional scientific
method, which is based on analysis, isolation, and the gathering of COMPLETE
information about a phenomenon, is incapable of dealing with such complex
interdependencies.

220

Larsen-Freeman and Cameron (2008) stated that complex systems are in a constant
state of flux. This can lead to changes in the system as a whole and in the ways in
which the components of the system interact. As Drnyei and Ushioda (2011, p. 37)
explained, because of the multiple interactions of the system constituents which
also involve environmental factors the system is constantly in flux, but the direction
of change cannot be ascribed to any single variable in isolation as it is a function of
the overall state of the system. Therefore, there is one single cause of change, but
multi-directional relations among variables within a larger system, which can
interact in unpredictable ways and can vary in their relative significance (Mercer,
2012, p. 44).
It is important to note, however, that not every system is a complex system,
because, in theory, a complex system should be composed of at least two elements.
On the basis of the findings of the present study though, LA could be understood as a
complex dynamic system, and the findings here could be re-examined in light of
complexity theory advancements in the future. Currently, LA research is still in its
infancy regarding complexity approaches. However, the potential of a complexity
perspective in respect to LA should not be disregarded, as this could lead to a more
comprehensive understanding of anxiety about language learning. As Drnyei and
Ushioda (2011) claimed, complex systems may indeed offer the closest
approximation of reality.

7.5 Conclusion
It can be concluded that the interviews and the learner diaries provided
support for most of the quantitative results reported in Chapter 6, and also revealed
some additional, emerging themes, such as the interrelationship between LA, learner
221

agency, and ecologies of learning. What is more, the qualitative findings showed that
anxiety could not and should not be isolated from other learner variables,
including level of proficiency in English, age, degrees of self-regulation, and self-
concepts, neither from the broad language learning context.
Taken together, the findings of the present study call for a need for qualitative,
situated studies of LA that focus on individual learners in all their complexity and
take into account the wide range of environments in which people function.




















222

CHAPTER 8
CONCLUSION

8.1 Introduction
This thesis investigated the factors that induce skill-specific anxiety and
general classroom LA to Greek EFL learners, as well as the strategies that both
teachers and students deploy in an attempt to minimise the anxiety levels of the latter.
Specifically, the aim of the research project was to gain insights into the LA of Greek
learners of EFL and its implications for classroom involvement and behaviour, in
order to address the scarcity of research into the nature and possible repercussions of
this construct for English language learning and teaching in Greece. The project also
aimed at contributing to the field of English language teaching as a whole, by testing
and suggesting new ways of viewing LA.
This chapter draws conclusions on the basis of the quantitative and qualitative
findings presented in Chapters 5 and 6, and the emergent themes extensively
discussed in Chapter 7. The conclusions are summarised by revisiting the research
questions of the study. Implications for teaching are discussed next, followed by the
limitations of the present study and suggestions for future research.

8.2 Aims achieved
My literature review ends with some reasons why I consider that more
research is needed in the field of LA. I argue for a need for examining LA that is
specific to skills other than speaking, conducting empirical research into anxiety
coping strategies used by learners themselves, and implementing more in-depth,
qualitative research designs to LA research.
223

This project has addressed the above aims. In particular, writing anxiety has
been meticulously investigated through a survey and qualitative instruments, and
compared and contrasted with speaking anxiety. Researching anxiety about listening
and reading would be the focus of a whole new project, and, therefore, selecting for
investigation a language skill (i.e., writing) that was believed to extend the existing
literature in the field was thought of as a promising route.
Examining strategies that learners often use to cope with their LA was another
innovative aspect of the present study. As explained in the review of the literature,
research into this is necessary but scarce. Hardly any attention has been given to or
empirical research done to establish strategic learning of highly anxious EFL learners,
although there are solid findings to confirm that an array of strategies could prove to
be useful for teachers of highly anxious students. There is a need for comprehensive
models aiming to describe not only the possible, but also the actual strategies that
could help towards alleviating anxiety. Knowing what anxious language learners do
to allay their stress in the classroom can certainly help individuals suffering from
similar negative psychological conditions. The present study addressed this gap by
offering a comprehensive typology of strategies deployed by Greek EFL learners,
which could also be useful for students learning EFL in similar contexts.
Finally, recent calls by SLA researchers for situated studies that attach great
importance to the whole environment surrounding language learners were not ignored
in this project. A qualitative research framework combining interviews and learner
diaries was established, revealing that LA is manifested within the language
classroom, but is in fact controlled by a variety of settings containing the students,
most of which expand beyond the typical language class.

224

8.3 Revisiting research questions
8.3.1 Research Question 1: Which factors contribute to the speaking anxiety of
Greek EFL learners?
This research question aimed at investigating the factors that are associated
with L2 speaking anxiety. In the quantitative data collection phase, speaking anxiety
was operationalised through the FLCAS. Factor analysing the instrument revealed
that fear of negative evaluation, anxiety towards the English teacher, and
comfortableness with taking English classes were the main components of speaking
anxiety. The qualitative findings elucidated the quantitative results, and indicated that
speaking anxiety may emanate from concerns over language use, classroom
dynamics, self-concepts, and exosystemic factors. Combining insights from
quantitative and qualitative data produced a coherent picture of speaking anxiety, and
in fact neither quantitative nor qualitative data could have revealed much separately,
but in consonance they have facilitated a glimpse into a widely recognised
phenomenon consisting of a number of different aspects inside and outside of the
learner.

8.3.2 Research Question 2: Which factors influence Greek EFL learners writing
anxiety?
The second research question focused on a componential analysis of writing
anxiety. Factor analysing the ESLWAT showed that attitudes towards writing in
English, self-derogation when writing in English, and fear of negative evaluation,
were conceptually linked with EFL writing anxiety. The qualitative data highlighted
some more antecedents to writing anxiety in EFL classrooms in Greece, including L1
writing deficiencies, lack of ideas, and limited time allotted to writing tasks in class.
225

These findings represent a step forward towards a better understanding of EFL
writing anxiety, given that the majority of research into it has been conducted in L1
settings. Taking into account the prominent status of writing in the Greek education
system, investigating the factors that interplay with writing anxiety could help
teachers to start their own bottom-up reform to teaching writing in a foreign
language.

8.3.3 Research Question 3: What is the difference in language anxiety among
students at different proficiency levels?
In order to address this research question, a one-way analysis of variance of
the total LA scores of students at four different proficiency levels was calculated. The
results showed that the lower intermediate group (i.e., the lowest-level group taking
part in this project) gave significantly higher LA levels than the upper advanced
group (i.e., the highest-level group participating in the study). This result resonates
well with the literature to date. The qualitative data have further shown that, at least
within the Greek EFL learning context, it is not just the students high or low level of
proficiency in English that may determine their anxiety, but that their competence
may well interact with their age, language learning experience, course expectations,
and personal standards of successful performance. The interrelatedness of these
factors should not be ignored.

8.3.4 Research Question 4: What aspects are perceived as the main causes of
classroom language anxiety?
This research question has probably yielded the most interesting results of this
project, as aspects such as learner agency, ecologies of learning, weak self-concepts,
226

fear of failure, and a mark-centred mentality, were found to influence the students
LA levels dramatically. Research to date has mostly focused on how errors, a
condescending teacher attitude, and fear of negative evaluation, ignite LA. However,
the current study has revealed that LA is not a static variable, but is multidimensional
and largely determined by a vast array of contextual and personal factors.

8.3.5 Research Question 5: What strategies do Greek EFL students deploy to
minimise their language anxiety and how do their teachers choose to intervene?
The final research question aimed at investigating strategies of potential help
to highly anxious students by looking at the issue from the perspective of the
educators, as well as actual strategies that EFL learners deploy in order to minimise
their LA. Students reported on using metacognitive strategies, such as positive
thinking, preparation, opportunities for practice, and peer seeking. Relaxation was the
only affective strategy that was sometimes mentioned by the students. Teachers, on
the other hand, referred to lenient error correction, team work, praise, and certain
teaching practices perceived of as anxiety-buffering. It is important to note here that,
despite the differences between the student and the teacher perspective, seeing their
thoughts in combination could in fact open up new paths to confronting the negative
effects of anxiety in language classrooms.

8.4 Implications for the classroom
Most implications for classroom practice have already been stated indirectly
or directly, but I would like to emphasise here what I believe are the crucial ones. It is
important to acknowledge at this stage though that it is not possible to extrapolate
from a study of a subgroup of highly anxious students to a whole classroom.
227

The most salient point extensively discussed throughout this chapter concerns
the importance of understanding EFL learners as holistic beings nested within the
bigger systems of their personal histories and the entirety of their lives and multiple
contexts. Clearly, different learners will have different language learning and life
experiences, all influencing their affect and performance in the classroom to varying
degrees. The strong links between LA, learner agency, and the ecology of learning
provide further empirical support for regarding students as individuals whose learning
is contingent upon different contexts. Language educators should therefore be aware
of the wide range of external factors that may mediate in-class anxiety. Language
learning is a socioculturally mediated process, and learners are likely to be affected
by other settings containing them.
Secondly, given the pervasive influence of peer pressure on students anxiety
in class, language educators should be able to find ways to confront episodes of
competitiveness and social comparisons among students. The latter should be made
aware of the fact that all students attend lessons for the same purpose, and inevitably
face similar difficulties. Teachers must also be careful not to show favouritism
towards any one of their students, as each student in the room needs to feel valued. If
felt that a student is stronger than their fellows, teachers should grasp the opportunity
to indirectly involve strong students in the teaching process. Encouraging students to
work together and creating a friendly, non-self-effacing classroom atmosphere would
also benefit both students and the teacher. It is important for students to feel that they
know each other well and can seek for peer support whenever needed.
Thirdly, the significance of analysing students needs prior to the
commencement of a language course, as well as for the duration of the course, can
cater for more successful teaching. Students need to be able to express themselves, to
228

talk about what worries and what thrills them, as well as what helps them engage
more and learn better. When such communication between teacher and students
occurs, the teacher gains crucial insights into the learners own concerns, anxiety
causes, and motivational processes, which will help towards designing as tailor-made
courses as possible to cater for students needs.

8.5 Limitations and future research
In the absence of a longitudinal or ethnographic investigation of LA about
EFL learning, fluctuations in anxiety levels could not be measured, neither could the
reasons why certain fluctuations might occur be identified. Therefore, interpretive-
qualitative case studies of learners and teachers, learner autobiographies, and life
histories could be suitable future options. Additionally, changes in LA levels over
time, as well as the significance of such changes, could also be examined through a
complex dynamic systems lens.
The present study provided insights into how LA interacts with learner
agency, and moved towards establishing an ecological understanding of LA in EFL
classrooms in Greece. Given that these conceptual links unexpectedly emerged from
the qualitative data analysis but indeed contributed to a preliminary attempt to create
a new theoretical framework for LA, more studies aiming to connect LA, agency, and
the ecologies of learning could supplement the above findings.
Particularly salient dimensions of speaking anxiety and writing anxiety also
emerged from this project. However, only anxiety over the productive skills was
assessed. Future projects could also look at skill-specific anxiety with reference to the
receptive skills of reading and listening, as well as LA about sub-skills, such as
pronunciation, vocabulary, and grammar.
229

A final note concerns the use of direct observations of learners in the language
classroom. The participants responses in the interviews along with their diary entries
were taken as faithful representations of their classroom affective behaviour. As
Ohata (2005, p. 140) pointed out with reference to the difficulties of researching
anxiety, interviews are useful to access things that cannot be directly observed, such
as feelings, thoughts, intentions, or beliefs. However, observing the actual lessons
would possibly provide valuable insights into affective reactions to classroom
language learning, such as peer pressure, or fear of making a mistake, that interviews
cannot, by nature, reveal.


















230

REFERENCES

Ahearn, L. M. (2001). Language and agency. Annual Review of Anthropology, 30,
109-137.
Aida, Y. (1994). Examination of Horwitz, Horwitz, and Copes construct of foreign
language anxiety: The case of students of Japanese. The Modern Language
Journal, 78(2), 155-168.
Alexiou, T., & Mattheoudakis, M. (2011). Bridging the gap: Issues of transition and
continuity from primary to secondary schools in Greece. In E. Kitis, N.
Lavidas, N. Topintzi, & T. Tsangalidis (Eds.), Selected Papers from the 19
th

International Symposium on Theoretical and Applied Linguistics. Thessaloniki:
Monochromia.
Alexiou, T., & Mattheoudakis, M. (2012). Magic Book: A1 level Students Book for
the third grade. Athens: Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs.
Alexiou, T., & Mattheoudakis, M. (2013). Introducing a foreign language at primary
level: Benefits or lost opportunities? Research Papers in Language Teaching
and Learning, 4(1), 99-119.
Allwright, D. (2003). Exploratory practice: Rethinking practitioner research in
language teaching. Language Teaching Research, 7(2), 113-141.
Allwright, D., & Bailey, K. M. (1991). Focus on the language classroom: An
introduction to classroom research for language teachers. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Anderson, N. J. (2012). Metacognition: Awareness of language learning. In S.
Mercer, S. Ryan, & M. Williams (Eds.), Psychology for language learning:
231

Insights from research, theory and practice (pp. 169-187). Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Angouri, J., Mattheoudakis, M., & Zigrika, M. (2010). Then how will they get the
much-wanted paper? A multifaceted study of English as a foreign language in
Greece. In A. Psaltou-Joycey & M. Mattheoudakis (Eds.), Advances in
research on language acquisition and teaching (pp. 179-194). Thessaloniki:
Greek Applied Linguistics Association.
Arnold, J., & Brown, H. D. (1999). A map of the terrain. In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in
language learning (pp. 1-24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bailey, K. M. (1983). Competitiveness and anxiety in adult second language learning:
Looking at and through the diary studies. In H. W. Seliger & M. H. Long
(Eds.), Classroom-oriented research in second language acquisition (pp. 67-
103). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Bailey, K. M. (1990). The use of diary studies in teacher education programmes. In J.
C. Richards & D. Nunan (Eds.), Second language teacher education (pp. 215-
226). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bailey, K. M., & Oschner, R. (1983). A methodological review of the diary studies:
Windmill tilting or social science? In K. M. Bailey, M. H. Long, & S. Peck
(Eds.), Second language acquisition studies (pp. 188-198). Rowley, MA:
Newbury House.
Bailey, P., Daley, C. E., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (1999). Foreign language anxiety and
learning style. Foreign Language Annals, 32(1), 63-76.
Bailey, P., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Daley, C. E. (2000). Correlates of anxiety at three
stages of the foreign language learning process. Journal of Language and
Social Psychology, 19(4), 474-490.
232

Baker, S. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2000). The role of gender and immersion in
communication and second language orientations. Language Learning, 50(2),
311-341.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive
theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American
Psychologist, 44(9), 1175-1184.
Bandura, A. (1995). Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H.
Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review
of Psychology, 52, 1-26.
Barlow, D. H. (2002). Anxiety and its disorders: The nature and treatment of anxiety
and panic (2
nd
ed.). New York, NY: Guildford Press.
Benson, P. (2005). (Auto)biography and learner diversity. In P. Benson & D. Nunan
(Eds.), Learners stories: Difference and diversity in language learning (pp. 4-
21). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Benson, P., & Cooker, L. (2013). The social and the individual in applied linguistics
research. In P. Benson & L. Cooker (Eds.), The applied linguistic individual:
Sociocultural approaches to identity, agency and autonomy (pp. 1-16).
Sheffield: Equinox Publishing.
Berg, B. L. (2007). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (6
th
ed.).
Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
233

Berg, V. C. K. (1993). Managing learner anxiety in literature courses. The French
Review, 67(1), 27-36.
Block, D. (2003). The social turn in second language acquisition. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press.
Bown, J. (2009). Self-regulatory strategies and agency in self-instructed language
learning: A situated view. The Modern Language Journal, 93(4), 570-583.
Brace, N., Kemp, R. & Snelgar, R. (2006). SPSS for psychologists: A guide to data
analysis using SPSS for Windows (versions 12 and 13) (3
rd
ed.). Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Brewer, J., & Hunter, A. (2006). Foundations of multimethod research: Synthesising
styles. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by
nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1993). Ecological models of human development. In M.
Gauvain & M. Cole (Eds.), Readings on the development of children (pp. 37-
43). New York: Freeman.
Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Brown, J. D. (2001). Using surveys in language programs. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Carroll, J., & Sapon, S. (1959). The Modern Languages Aptitude Test. San Antonio,
TX: The Psychological Corporation.
Carter, B., & Sealey, A. (2000). Language, structure and agency: What can realist
social theory offer to sociolinguistics? Journal of Sociolinguistics, 4(1), 3-20.
234

Chastain, K. (1975). Affective and ability factors in second language acquisition.
Language Learning, 25(1), 153-161.
Cheng, Y. S. (2004). A measure of second language writing anxiety: Scale
development and preliminary validation. Journal of Second Language Writing,
13(4), 313-335.
Cheng, Y. S., Horwitz, E. K., & Schallert, D. L. (1999). Language anxiety:
Differentiating writing and speaking components. Language Learning, 49(3),
417-446.
Clark, D. A., & Beck, A. T. (2010). Cognitive therapy of anxiety disorders: Science
and practice. New York: Guildford Press.
Clment, R., Drnyei, Z., & Noels, K. A. (1994). Motivation, self-confidence, and
group cohesion in the foreign language classroom. Language Learning, 44(3),
417-448.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6
th

ed.). London: Routledge.
Cohen, Y., & Norst, M. J. (1989). Fear, dependence and loss of self-esteem: affective
barriers in second language learning among adults. RELC Journal, 20(2), 61
77.
Council of Europe (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages:
Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed
methods research (2
nd
ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
235

Croker, R. A. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research. In J. Heigham & R. A.
Croker (Eds.), Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical
introduction (pp. 3-24). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Croznier, W. R. (1997). Individual learners: Personality differences in education.
London: Routledge.
Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Csizr, K., & Kormos, J. (2009). Learning experiences, selves and motivated learning
behaviour: A comparative analysis of structural models for Hungarian
secondary and university learners of English. In Z. Drnyei & E. Ushioda
(Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 98-119). Bristol:
Multilingual Matters.
Daly, J. A. (1991). Understanding communication apprehension: An introduction for
language educators. In E. K. Horwitz & D. J. Young (Eds.), Language anxiety:
From theory and research to classroom implications (pp. 3-15). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Daly, J. A., & Miller, M. D. (1975a). The empirical development of an instrument to
measure writing apprehension. Research in the Teaching of English, 9(3), 242-
249.
Daly, J. A., & Miller, M. D. (1975b). Further studies on writing apprehension: SAT
scores, success expectations, willingness to take advanced courses and sex
differences. Research in the Teaching of English, 9(3), 250-256.
Damasio, A. (2000). The feeling of what happens: Body, emotion and the making of
consciousness. London: Vintage Books.
236

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in
human behaviour. New York: Plenum.
Deffenbacher, J. L. (1980). Worry and emotionality in test anxiety. In I. G. Sarason
(Ed.), Test anxiety: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 111-124). Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dendrinos, B., & Zouganeli, K. (2012). European survey on language competences:
The Greek participation. Interim National Report. Research Centre for
Language Teaching, Testing, and Assessment: National and Kapodistrian
University of Athens.
Denzin, N. K. (2001). Interpretive interactionism (2
nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Dewaele, J.-M. (2012). Personality: Personality traits as independent and dependent
variables. In S. Mercer, S. Ryan, & M. Williams (Eds.), Psychology for
language learning: Insights from research, theory and practice (pp. 42-57).
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Diamantopoulou, A. (2002, March 24). Do you speak English? On languages and...
ideologies. To Vima tis Kiriakis. Retrieved from
http://www.tovima.gr/print_article.php/?e=B&f=13522&m=B56&aa=1
Diamantopoulou, A. (2006). Intelligent Greece: In a changing Europe, in a changed
world. Athens: A. A. Livanis Publications.
Drnyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom.
The Modern Language Journal, 78(3), 273-284.
Drnyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
237

Drnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in
second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Drnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative,
qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Drnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Drnyei & E. Ushioda
(Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 9-42). Bristol:
Multilingual Matters.
Drnyei, Z. (2010). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction,
administration, and processing (2
nd
ed.). London: Routledge.
Duff, P. (2008). Case study research in applied linguistics. New York, NY:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dweck, C. S. (2007). The perils and promises of praise. Educational Leadership,
65(2), 34-39.
Elkhafaifi, H. (2005). Listening comprehension and anxiety in the Arabic language
classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 89(2), 206-220.
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Erhman, M. E. (1996). Understanding second language learning difficulties.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Eurobarometer Survey (2012). Europeans and their languages. European
Commission.
Ewald, J. D. (2007). Foreign language learning anxiety in upper-level classes:
Involving students as researchers. Foreign Language Annals, 40(1), 122-142.
Foss, K. A., & Reitzel, A. C. (1988). A relational model for managing second
language anxiety. TESOL Quarterly, 22(3), 437-454.
238

Ganschow, L., & Sparks, R. L. (1996). Anxiety about foreign language learning
among high school women. The Modern Language Journal, 80(2), 199-212.
Gao, X. (2010). Strategic language learning: The roles of agency and context.
Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Gao, X., & Zhang, L. J. (2011). Joining forces for synergy: Agency and
metacognition as interrelated theoretical perspectives on learner autonomy. In
G. Murray, X. Gao, & T. Lamb (Eds.), Identity, motivation and autonomy in
language learning (pp. 25-41). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of
attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R. C. (1991). Foreword. In E. K. Horwitz & D. J. Young (Eds.), Language
anxiety: From theory and research to classroom implications (pp. vii-viii).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second
language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.
Gardner, R. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (1993). On the measurement of affective
variables in second language learning. Language Learning, 43(2), 157-194.
Gardner, R. C., Tremblay, P., & Masgoret, A.-M. (1997). Towards a full model of
second language learning: An empirical investigation. The Modern Language
Journal, 81(3), 344-362.
Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2007). Data elicitation for second and foreign language
research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gillette, B. (1994). The role of learner goals in L2 success: Sociocultural theory and
children with special needs. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian
approaches to second language research (pp. 195-210). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
239

Gillham, B. (2000). Developing a questionnaire. London: Continuum.
Giotis, G. (2010). EFL teachers first year of teaching. Research Papers in Language
Teaching and Learning, 1(1), 117-134.
Gkonou, C. (2013). Some methodological issues in using learner diaries to
investigate classroom anxiety. ELT Research, 28, 4-6.
Gkonou, C. (forthcoming, 2014). Agency, anxiety, and activity: Understanding the
classroom behaviour of EFL learners. In P. Deters, X. A. Gao, E. R. Miller, &
V. Vitanova (Eds.), Interdisciplinary Approaches to Theorising and Analysing
Agency and Second Language Learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., Pyszczynski, T., Rosenblatt, A., Burling, J., Lyon, D.,
Simon, L., & Pinel, E. (1992). Why do people need self-esteem? Converging
evidence that self-esteem serves an anxiety-buffering function. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 63(6), 913-922.
Greene, J. C., & Caracelli, V. J. (2003). Making paradigmatic sense of mixed
methods practice. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed
methods in social and behavioural research (pp. 91-110). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Gregersen, T. S. (2007). Breaking the code of silence: A study of teachers nonverbal
decoding accuracy of foreign language anxiety. Language Teaching Research,
11(2), 209-221.
Gregersen, T. S., & Horwitz, E. K. (2002). Language learning and perfectionism:
Anxious and non-anxious language learners reactions to their own oral
performance. The Modern Language Journal, 86(3), 562-570.
240

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research.
In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp.
105-117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Guiora, A. Z., & Acton, W. R. (1979). Personality and language behaviour: A
restatement. Language Learning, 29(1), 193-204.
Gungle, B. W., & Taylor, V. (1989). Writing apprehension and second language
writers. In D. M. Johnson & D. H. Roen (Eds.), Richness in writing:
Empowering ESL students (pp. 235-248). New York: Longman.
Harmer, J. (2007). How to teach English. Harlow: Pearson Longman.
Hayes, J. R. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in
writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The signs of writing (pp. 1-27).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Horwitz, E. K. (1986). Preliminary evidence for the reliability and validity of a
foreign language anxiety scale. TESOL Quarterly, 20(3), 559-562.
Horwitz, E. K. (1990). Attending to the affective domain in the foreign language
classroom. In S. S. Magnam (Ed.), Shifting the instructional focus to the
learner (pp. 15-33). Middlebury, VT: Northeast Conference on the Teaching of
Foreign Languages.
Horwitz, E. K. (2000). It aint over till its over: On foreign language anxiety, first
language deficits, and the confounding of variables. The Modern Language
Journal, 84(2), 256-259.
Horwitz, E. K. (2001). Language anxiety and achievement. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 21, 112-126.
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom
anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70, 125-132.
241

Horwitz, E. K., Tallon, M., & Luo, H. (2010). Foreign language anxiety. In J. C.
Cassady (Ed.), Anxiety in schools: The causes, consequences, and solutions for
academic anxieties (pp. 95-115). New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.
Horwitz, E. K., & Young, D. J. (1991). Language anxiety: From theory and research
to classroom implications. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Howe, K. R. (1988). Against the quantitative-qualitative incompatibility thesis or
dogmas die hard. Educational Researcher, 17(8), 10-16.
Huang, S., Eslami, Z., & Hu, R. S. (2010). The relationship between teacher and peer
support and English language learners anxiety. English Language Teaching,
3(1), 32-40.
Ivankova, N. V., & Creswell, J. W. (2009). Mixed methods. In J. Heigham & R. A.
Croker (Eds.), Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical
introduction (pp. 135-161). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Jenkins, J. (2007). English as a Lingua Franca: Attitude and identity. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Johnson, R., Onwuegbuzie, A., & Turner, L. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed
methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112-133.
Jones, J. F. (2004). A cultural context for language anxiety. English Australia, 21(2),
30-39.
Karras, I. D. (2012). Foreign language anxiety and the use of affective language
learning strategies among Greek university students in an ESP/EAP context.
(Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from the National Archive of PhD Theses.
(http://www.didaktorika.gr/eadd/handle/10442/27011?locale=en)
242

Kim, S. Y. (2009). Questioning the stability of foreign language classroom anxiety
and motivation across different classroom contexts. Foreign Language Annals,
42(1), 138-157.
Kitano, K. (2001). Anxiety in the college Japanese language classroom. The Modern
Language Journal, 85(4), 549-566.
Kleinmann, H. H. (1977). Avoidance behaviour in adult second language acquisition.
Language Learning, 27(1), 93-107.
Kondo, D. S., & Ying-Ling, Y. (2004). Strategies for coping with language anxiety:
The case of students of English in Japan. ELT Journal, 58(3), 258-265.
Koul, R., Roy, L., Kaewkuekool, S., & Ploisawaschai, S. (2009). Multiple goal
orientations and foreign language anxiety. System, 37(4), 676-688.
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning.
Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Lakasas, A. (2010, September 9). English language learning in the first and second
grade of primary school. Kathimerini. Retrieved from
http://news.kathimerini.gr/4dcgi/_w_articles_ell_100011_09/09/2010_414324
Lantolf, J., & Pavlenko, A. (2001). (S)econd (L)anguage (A)ctivity theory:
Understanding second language learners as people. In M. Breen (Ed.), Learner
contributions to language learning: New directions in research (pp. 141-158).
London: Longman.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2001). Individual cognitive/affective learner contributions and
differential success in second language acquisition. In M. P. Breen (Ed.),
243

Learner contributions to language learning (pp. 12-24). Harlow, Essex:
Pearson Longman.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2012). Complex, dynamic systems: A new transdisciplinary
theme for applied linguistics? Language Teaching, 45(2), 202-214.
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied
linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. H. (1990). An introduction to second language
acquisition research. London: Longman.
Leary, M. R. (1995). Self-presentation: Impression management and interpersonal
behaviour. Madison, WI: Brown & Benchmark.
Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature
review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin, 107(1), 34-47.
Leki, I. (1999). Techniques for reducing second language writing anxiety. In D. J.
Young (Ed.), Affect in foreign language and second language learning: A
practical guide to creating a low-anxiety classroom atmosphere (pp. 64-88).
Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Lenneberg, E. H. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley.
Lignos, D. (2006).
[Thoughts and findings concerning teachers education]. Virtual School, The
Sciences of Education [Online]. Retrieved from
http://www.auth.gr/virtualschool/3.3/Praxis/LignosTrainingEducators.html
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Little, D., Ridley, J., Ushioda, E. (2002) (Eds.). Learner autonomy in the foreign
language classroom: Teacher, learner, curriculum, and assessment. Dublin:
Authentik.
244

Liu, M. (2006). Anxiety in Chinese EFL students at different proficiency levels.
System, 34(3), 301-316.
MacIntyre, P. D. (1999). Language anxiety: A review of the research for language
teachers. In D. J. Young (Ed.), Affect in foreign language and second language
learning: A practical guide to creating a low-anxiety classroom atmosphere
(pp. 24-45). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
MacIntyre, P. D. (2002). Motivation, anxiety and emotion in second language
acquisition. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual Differences and Instructed
Language Learning (pp. 45-68). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Charos, C. (1996). Personality, attitudes, and affect as predictors
of second language communication. Journal of Language and Social
Psychology, 15(1), 3-26.
MacIntyre, P. D., Clment, R., Drnyei, Z., & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualising
willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and
affiliation. The Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 545-562.
MacIntyre, P.D., & Gardner, R.C. (1989). Anxiety and second language learning:
Toward a theoretical clarification. Language Learning, 39(2), 251-275.
MacIntyre, P.D., & Gardner, R.C. (1991a). Methods and results in the study of
anxiety and language learning: A review of the literature. Language Learning,
41(1), 85-117.
MacIntyre, P.D., & Gardner, R.C. (1991b). Language anxiety: Its relation to other
anxieties and to processing in native and second languages. Language
Learning, 41(4), 513-554.
245

MacIntyre, P.D., & Gardner, R.C. (1994a). The subtle effects of language anxiety on
cognitive processing in the second language. Language Learning, 44(2), 283-
305.
MacIntyre, P.D., & Gardner, R.C. (1994b). The effects of induced anxiety on
cognitive processing in computerised vocabulary learning. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 16(1), 1-17.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gregersen, T. (2012). Affect: The role of language anxiety and
other emotions in language learning. In S. Mercer, S. Ryan, & M. Williams
(Eds.), Psychology for language learning: Insights from research, theory and
practice (pp. 103-118). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
MacIntyre, P. D., Noels, K. A., & Clment, R. (1997). Biases in self-ratings of
second language proficiency: The role of language anxiety. Language
Learning, 47(2), 265-287.
Madigan, R. J., Linton, P. W., & Johnson, S. (1996). The paradox of writing
apprehension. In C. M. Levy & S. E. Randsell (Eds.), The science of writing:
Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 295-308).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mak, B. (2011). An exploration of speaking-in-class anxiety with Chinese ESL
learners. System, 39(2), 202-214.
Manchn, R. M. (2009). Introduction: Broadening the perspective of L2 writing
scholarship: The contribution of research on foreign language writing. In R. M.
Manchn (Ed.), Writing in foreign language contexts: Learning, teaching, and
research (pp. 1-22). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Mann, S. (2011). A critical review of qualitative interviews in applied linguistics.
Applied Linguistics, 32(1), 6-24.
246

Matsuda, S., & Gobel, P. (2004). Anxiety and predictors of performance in the
foreign language classroom. System, 32(1), 21-36.
Marcos-Llins, M., & Garau, M. J. (2009). Effects of language anxiety on three
proficiency-level courses of Spanish as a foreign language. Foreign Language
Annals, 42(1), 94-111.
Marsh, H. W. (2006). Self-concept theory, measurement and research into practice:
The role of self-concept in educational psychology. 26
th
Vernon-Wall Lecture.
British Psychological Association.
Mattheoudakis, M. & Alexiou, T. (2009). Early foreign language instruction in
Greece. In M. Nikolov (Ed.), The age factor and early language learning.
Berlin, NY: Mouton de Gruyter.
Mattheoudakis, M., & Nikolaidis, K. (2005). Stirring the waters: INSET in Greece.
European Journal of Teacher Education, 28(1), 49-66.
McCroskey, J. C. (1970). Measures of communication-bound anxiety. Speech
Monographs, 37(4), 269-277.
McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1987). Willingness to communicate and
interpersonal communication. In J. C. McCroskey & J. A. Daly (Eds.),
Personality and interpersonal communication (pp. 129-156). Beverly Hills,
CA: Sage.
McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1991). Willingness to communicate: A
cognitive view. In M. Both-Butterfield (Ed.), Communication, cognition and
anxiety (pp. 19-44). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
McDonough, J., & McDonough, S. (1997). Research methods for English language
teachers. London: Arnold.
247

Mejias, H., Applbaum, R. L., Applbaum, S. J., & Trotter, R. T. (1991). Oral
communication apprehension and Hispanics: An exploration of oral
communication apprehension among Mexican American students in Texas. In
E. K. Horwitz & D. J. Young (Eds.), Language anxiety: From theory and
research to classroom implications (pp. 87-97). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Mercer, S. (2006). Using journals to investigate the learners emotional experience of
the language classroom. Estudios de Lingstica Inglesa Applicada, 6, 63-91.
Mercer, S. (2011a). Language learner self-concept: Complexity, continuity and
change. System, 39(3), 335-346.
Mercer, S. (2011b). Understanding learner agency as a complex dynamic system.
System, 39(4), 427-436.
Mercer, S. (2011c). Frames of reference used by language learners in forming their
self-concepts. ForumSprache, 6, 6-22.
Mercer, S. (2012). The complexity of learner agency. Apples Journal of Applied
Language Studies, 6(2), 41-59.
Mercer, S., & Ryan, S. (2010). A mindset for EFL: Learners beliefs about the role of
natural talent. ELT Journal, 64(4), 436-444.
Mercer, S., Ryan, S., & Williams, M. (Eds.). (2012). Psychology for language
learning: Insights from research, theory and practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
248

Mills, N., Pajares, F., & Herron, C. (2007). Self-efficacy of college intermediate
French students: Relation to achievement and motivation. Language Learning,
57(3), 417-442.
Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs (2010). New foreign language education
policies in schools: Learning English in early childhood. Retrieved from
http://rcel.enl.uoa.gr/peap/
Mitchell, R., Myles, F., & Marsden, E. (2013). Second language learning theories.
Abingdon: Routledge.
Morita, N. (2004). Negotiating participation and identity in second language
academic communities. TESOL Quarterly, 38(4), 573-603.
Mruk, C. J. (2006). Self-esteem research, theory, and practice. New York: Springer.
Muoz, C. (2006). The effects of age on foreign language learning: The BAF Project.
In C. Muoz (Ed.), Age and the rate of foreign language learning. Clevedon,
UK: Multilingual Matters.
Newcombe, L. P. (2007). Social context and fluency in L2 learners: The case of
Wales. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Noels, K. A. (2009). The internalisation of language learning into the self and social
identity. In Z. Drnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and
the L2 self (pp. 295-313). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Noels, K. A., Pon, G., & Clment, R. (1996). Language, identity, and adjustment:
The role of linguistic self-confidence in the acculturation process. Journal of
language and social psychology, 15(3), 246-264.
Norton, B. (2000). Identity and language learning: Gender, ethnicity and educational
change. Harlow: Pearson Longman.
249

Nunan, D., & Lamb, C. (1996). The self-directed teacher: Managing the learning
process. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should
know. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Oxford, R. L. (1992). Who are our students?: A synthesis of foreign and second
language research on individual differences with implications for instructional
practice. TESL Canada Journal, 9(2), 30-49.
Oxford, R. L. (1999). Style wars as a source of anxiety in language classrooms. In
D. J. Young (Ed.), Affect in foreign language and second language learning: A
practical guide to creating a low-anxiety classroom atmosphere (pp. 216-237).
Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Bailey, P., & Daley, C. E. (1999). Factors associated with
foreign language anxiety. Applied Psycholinguistics, 20(2), 217-239.
ztrk, H., & een, S. (2007). The effects of portfolio keeping on writing anxiety of
EFL students. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 3(2), 218-236.
Pajares, M. F. (2002). Overview of social cognitive theory and self-efficacy.
http://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Pajares/eff.html [Accessed 16.06.2013]
Papastamatis, A., Panitsidou, E., Giavrimis, P., & Papanis, E. (2009). Facilitating
teachers and educators effective professional development. Review of
European Studies, 1(2), 83-90.
Pappamihiel, N. E. (2002). English as a second language students and English
language anxiety. Research in the Teaching of English, 36(3), 327-355.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3
rd
ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
250

Pellegrino Aveni, V. A. (2005). Study abroad and second language use: Constructing
the self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Peng, J.-E. (2012). Towards an ecological understanding of willingness to
communicate in EFL classrooms in China. System, 40(2), 203-213.
Prez-Paredes, P. F., & Martnez-Sanchz, F. (2000). A Spanish version of the
foreign language classroom anxiety scale: Revisiting Aidas factor analysis.
RESLA, 14, 337-352.
Phillips, E. M. (1991). Anxiety and oral competence: A classroom dilemma. The
French Review, 65(1), 1-14.
Phillips, E. M. (1992). The effects of language anxiety on students oral test
performance and attitudes. The Modern Language Journal, 76(1), 14-26.
Phillips, E. M. (1999). Decreasing language anxiety: Practical techniques for oral
activities. In D. J. Young (Ed.), Affect in foreign language and second language
learning: A practical guide to creating a low-anxiety classroom atmosphere
(pp. 124-143). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Pichette, F. (2009). Second language anxiety and distance language learning. Foreign
Language Annals, 42(1), 77-93.
Price, M. L. (1991). The subjective experience of foreign language anxiety:
Interviews with highly anxious students. In E. K. Horwitz & D. J. Young
(Eds.), Language anxiety: From theory and research to classroom implications
(pp. 101-108). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Ranchman, S. (1998). Anxiety. Hove: Psychology Press.
Rankin-Brown, M. S. (2006). Addressing writing apprehension in adult English
language learners. Proceedings of the CATESOL State Conference.
251

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language
teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, K. (2003). Qualitative inquiry in TESOL. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Richards, K. (2009). Interviews. In J. Heigham & R. A. Croker (Eds.), Qualitative
research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction (pp. 182-199).
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Rinnert, C., & Kobayashi, H. (2009). Situated writing practices in foreign language
settings: The role of previous experience and instruction. In R. M. Manchn
(Ed.), Writing in foreign language contexts: Learning, teaching, and research
(pp. 23-48). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Rodrguez, M., & Abreu, O. (2003). The stability of foreign language classroom
anxiety across English and French. The Modern Language Journal, 87(3), 365-
374.
Rossman, G. B., & Wilson, B. L. (1984). Numbers and words: Combining
quantitative and qualitative methods in a single large-scale evaluation study.
Evaluation Review, 9(5), 627-643.
Ryan, S. (2009). Self and identity in L2 motivation in Japan: The ideal L2 self and
Japanese learners of English. In Z. Drnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation,
language identity and the L2 self (pp. 120-143). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Saito, Y., Horwitz, E. K., & Garza, T. J. (1999). Foreign language reading anxiety.
The Modern Language Journal, 83(2), 202-218.
Schlenker, B. R., & Leary, M. R. (1982). Social anxiety and self-presentation: A
conceptualisation model. Psychological Bulletin, 92(3), 641-669.
252

Schoonen, R., Snellings, P., Stevenson, M., & van Gelderen, A. (2009). Towards a
blueprint of the foreign language writer: The linguistic and cognitive demands
of foreign language writing. In R. M. Manchn (Ed.), Writing in foreign
language contexts: Learning, teaching, and research (pp. 77-101). Bristol:
Multilingual Matters.
Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in education:
Theory, research and applications (3
rd
ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Scovel, T. (1978). The effect of affect on foreign language learning: A review of the
anxiety research. Language Learning, 28(1), 129-142.
Scovel, T. (2001). Learning new languages: A guide to second language acquisition.
Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.
Sepirgioti, M., Karidi, M., & Kosovitsa, C. (2006). Fun Way English 1: Students
book (11
th
ed.). Athens: Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs.
Sepirgioti, M., Papapetrou, M., Karidi, M., & Kosovitsa, C. (1998). Fun Way English
3: Students book (2
nd
ed.). Athens: Ministry of Education and Religious
Affairs.
Sepirgioti, M., Papapetrou, M., Karidi, M., Kosovitsa, C., & Kortesi, Z. (1999). Fun
Way English 2: Students book (5
th
ed.). Athens: Ministry of Education and
Religious Affairs.
Sheen, Y. (2008). Recasts, language anxiety, modified output and L2 learning.
Language Learning, 58(4), 835-874.
Sifakis, N. C. (2009). Challenges in teaching ELF in the periphery: The Greek
context. ELT Journal, 63(3), 230-237.
Sifakis, N. C., & Sougari, A. M. (2003). Facing the globalisation challenge in the
realm of English language teaching. Language and Education, 17(1), 59-71.
253

Skehan, P. (1989). Individual differences in second language learning. London, NY:
Edward Arnold.
Skehan, P. (1991). Individual differences in second language learning. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, 13(2), 275-298.
Sparks, R. L., & Ganschow, L. (1991). Foreign language learning differences:
Affective or native language aptitude. The Modern Language Journal, 75(1), 3-
16.
Spielberger, C. D. (1983). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Palo
Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Spielmann, G., & Radnofsky, M. L. (2001). Language learning under tension: New
directions from a qualitative study. The Modern Language Journal, 85(2), 259-
278.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and
procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stroud, C., & Wee, L. (2006). Anxiety and identity in the language classroom. RELC
Journal, 37(3), 299-307.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and
behavioural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research:
Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and
behavioural sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Toohey, K., & Norton, B. (2003). Learner autonomy as agency in sociocultural
settings. In D. Palfreyman & R. C. Smith (Eds.), Learner autonomy across
cultures (pp. 58-72). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
254

Truchot, C. (2003). Languages and supranationality in Europe: The linguistic
influence of the European Union. In J. Maurais & M. A. Morris (Eds.),
Languages in a globalising world (pp. 99-110). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Tsui, A. B. M. (1996). Reticence and anxiety in second language learning. In K. M.
Bailey & D. Nunan (Eds.), Voices from the language classroom (pp. 145-167).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tudor, I. (2001). The dynamics of the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Ushioda, E. (1996). Learner autonomy 5: The role of motivation. Dublin: Authentik.
Ushioda, E. (2007). Motivation, autonomy and sociocultural theory. In P. Benson
(Ed.), Learner autonomy 8: Teacher and learner perspectives (pp. 5-24).
Dublin: Authentik.
Ushioda, E. (2009). A person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self
and identity. In Z. Drnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity
and the L2 self (pp. 215-228). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Ushioda, E. (2011). Motivating learners to speak as themselves. In G. Murray, X.
Gao, & T. Lamb (Eds.), Identity, motivation and autonomy in language
learning (pp. 11-24). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Ushioda, E. (2012). Motivation: L2 learning as a special case? In S. Mercer, S. Ryan,
& M. Williams (Eds.), Psychology for language learning: Insights from
research, theory and practice (pp. 58-73). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ushioda, E. (2013). Motivation and ELT: Global issues and local concerns. In E.
Ushioda (Ed.), International perspectives on motivation (pp. 1-17).
Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
255

van Lier, L. (2008). Agency in the classroom. In J. P. Lantolf & M. E. Poehner
(Eds.), Sociocultural theory and the teaching of second languages (pp. 163-
186). London: Equinox.
von Wrde, R. (2003). Students perspectives on foreign language anxiety. Inquiry,
8(1), 1-15.
Wan, W., Low, G. D., & Li, M. (2011). From students and teachers perspectives:
Metaphor analysis of beliefs about EFL teachers roles. System, 39(3), 403-415.
Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York:
Springer-Verlag.
Wheeler, L. (1991). A brief history of social comparison theory. In J. Suls & T. A.
Wills (Eds.), Social comparison: Contemporary theory and research (pp. 3-22).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Williams, M., & Burden, R. L. (1997). Psychology for language teachers: A social
constructivist approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wood, J. V., & Taylor, K. L. (1991). Serving self-relevant goals through social
comparison. In J. Suls & T. A. Wills (Eds.), Social comparison: Contemporary
theory and research (pp. 23-49). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Woodrow, L. (2006). Anxiety and speaking English as a second language. RELC
Journal, 37(3), 308-328.
Woodrow, L. (2011). College English writing affect: Self-efficacy and anxiety.
System, 39(4), 510-522.
Yan, J. X., & Horwitz, E. K. (2008). Learners perceptions of how anxiety interacts
with personal and instructional factors to influence their achievement in
English: A qualitative analysis of EFL learners in China. Language Learning,
58(1), 151-183.
256

Yashima, T. (2009). International posture and the ideal L2 self in the Japanese EFL
context. In Z. Drnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and
the L2 self (pp. 144-163). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Young, D. J. (1990). An investigation of students perspectives on anxiety and
speaking. Foreign Language Annals, 23(6), 539-553.
Young, D. J. (1991). Creating a low-anxiety classroom environment: What does the
anxiety research suggest? The Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 426-439.
Young, D. J. (1992). Language anxiety from the foreign language specialists
perspective: Interviews with Krashen, Omaggio Hadley, Terrell, and Rardin.
Foreign Language Annals, 25(2), 157-172.
Young, D. J. (1994). New directions in language anxiety research. In C. A. Klee
(Ed.), Faces in a crowd: The individual learner in multisection courses (pp. 3-
46). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Young, D. J. (1999). Affect in foreign language and second language learning: A
practical guide to creating a low-anxiety classroom atmosphere. In D. J. Young
(Ed.), Affect in foreign language and second language learning: A practical
guide to creating a low-anxiety classroom atmosphere (pp. 3-9). Boston:
McGraw Hill.
Zeidner, M. (1998). Test anxiety: The state of the art. New York: Plenum Press.
Zeidner, M. (2007). Test anxiety: Conceptions, findings, conclusions. In P. Schutz &
R. Pekrun (Eds.), Emotion in education (pp. 165-184). San Diego, CA:
Academic Press.
Zheng, Y. (2008). Anxiety and second/foreign language learning revisited. Canadian
Journal for New Scholars in Education, 1(1), 1-12.

257











APPENDIX A: THE
QUESTIONNAIRE





258

A MIXED METHODS APPROACH TO RESEARCHING LANGUAGE ANXIETY
IN GREEK EFL LEARNERS


Dear Student,

I am conducting a piece of research as part of my PhD thesis, which has the
following title: A mixed methods approach to researching language anxiety in Greek
EFL learners. The thesis will cover issues of English language anxiety in the classroom,
focusing on anxiety specific to speaking and writing in English, the causes of anxiety, and
suggested intervention methods.

Given your experience as a Greek learner of English, I am asking you to be
involved in the investigation and I invite you to spend a short time in the completion of
the enclosed questionnaire.

Please note that, on the basis of the questionnaire results, a certain number of you
may be invited to take part in a diary study and/or a follow-up interview either
individually or in groups. Your name and e-mail address will be kept confidential and will
only be used by the researcher in order to contact you for the purposes of the
diary/interview study if necessary.

May I thank you in advance for your valuable cooperation.

Christina


Christina Gkonou
PhD Researcher
University of Essex
Department of Language and Linguistics
Wivenhoe Park
CO4 3SQ
Colchester
United Kingdom
E-mail: cgkono@essex.ac.uk














259

SECTION A: BACKGROUND INFORMATION


1. Age:


2. Gender:

A. Male B. Female


3. Length of studying English:


4. Foreign languages known (please also indicate level):

A. _______________
B. _______________
C. _______________
D. _______________


5. Occupation:

A. Student B. Employed


6. Reasons for studying English (you can circle more than one answers):

A. Professional development
B. Obligatory status of English in the Greek educational system
C. Personal preference for learning foreign languages
D. Other (please state): ___________________________________












260

SECTION B: QUESTIONNAIRE
Please provide your answer to the following statements by circling the most
appropriate number (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = uncertain, 4 = agree, 5
= strongly agree). Circle ONE number only.


S
t
r
o
n
g
l
y

D
i
s
a
g
r
e
e

D
i
s
a
g
r
e
e

U
n
c
e
r
t
a
i
n

A
g
r
e
e

S
t
r
o
n
g
l
y

A
g
r
e
e

1. It wouldnt bother me at all to take more English language
classes.
2. During my English language class, I find myself thinking
about things that have nothing to do with the course.
3. Im nervous about writing in English.
4. I tremble when I know that Im going to be called on in my
English language class.
5. I worry about the consequences of failing my English
language class.
6. Taking an English composition course is a very frightening
experience.
7. I dont understand why some people get so upset over
English language classes.
8. I look forward to writing down my ideas in English.
9. I get nervous when I dont understand every word the
English teacher says.
10. In my English language class, I can get so nervous I forget
things I know.
11. I feel confident in my ability to express my ideas clearly
when writing in English.
12. Even if I am well prepared for my English language class,
I feel anxious about it.
13. I dont feel pressure to prepare very well for my English
language class.
14. I never feel quite sure of myself when I am speaking in
my English language class.
1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

261

15. My English class moves so quickly I worry about getting
left behind.
16. I have no fear of my English writings being evaluated by
my teacher.
17. I feel very self-conscious about speaking English in front
of other students.
18. I feel more tense and nervous in my English language
class than in my other classes.
19. My mind seems to go blank when I start to work on a
composition in English.
20. When Im on my way to my English class, I feel very sure
and relaxed.
21. I feel overwhelmed by the number of rules you have to
learn to master the English language.
22. I like to speak in English.
23. I feel anxious when I work in groups in my English
language class.
24. I often feel like not going to my English language class.
25. I dont worry about making mistakes in my English
language class.
26. I get nervous and confused when I am speaking in my
English language class.
27. I keep thinking that the other students are better at English
than I am.
28. I feel anxious when I work in pairs in my English
language class.
29. I can feel my heart pounding when Im going to be called
on in my English language class.
30. I dont think I write as well in English as most people.
31. Speaking in English is a lot of fun.
32. It embarrasses me to volunteer answers in my English
language class.
33. I like seeing my thoughts on paper in English.
1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5
262

34. I always feel that the other students speak English better
than I do.
35. I enjoy speaking in English.
36. When I hand in an English composition, I know Im going
to do poorly.
37. I am afraid that the other students will laugh at me when I
speak in English.
38. It frightens me when I dont understand what the teacher
is saying in the English language.
39. I start to panic when I have to speak without preparation
in my English language class.
40. I enjoy writing in English.
41. I feel confident when I speak in my English language
class.
42. I get upset when I dont understand what the English
teacher is correcting.
43. I avoid writing in English.
44. Handing in a composition written in English makes me
feel good.
45. I am afraid that my English teacher is ready to correct
every mistake I make.
46. I have no fear of my English writings being evaluated by
my peers.
47. I look forward to speaking in English.
48. I have a terrible time organizing my ideas in an English
composition course.
49. It is easy for me to write good compositions in English.
50. Writing in English is a lot of fun.
51. I get nervous when the English teacher asks questions
which I havent prepared in advance.
52. I like to write down my ideas in English.
1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5



263

SECTION C: Anything else?

Please refer to anything else you would like to add regarding your English lessons
and any feelings of anxiety about them:

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_________________________














264





APPENDIX B: INTER-ITEM
CORRELATIONS FOR THE
QUESTIONNAIRE (pilot study)







265


Anxiety1 Anxiety2 Anxiety3 Anxiety4 Anxiety5 Anxiety6 Anxiety7 Anxiety8 Anxiety9 Anxiety10 Anxiety11 Anxiety12 Anxiety13
Anxiety1 1,000 ,221 -,167 ,069 ,082 ,285 ,439 -,347 -,063 -,221 ,673 ,285 -,225
Anxiety2 ,221 1,000 ,351 ,311 -,190 -,369 -,003 ,358 -,134 -,377 ,421 ,249 ,203
Anxiety3 -,167 ,351 1,000 ,386 ,303 -,138 -,182 ,281 -,033 -,009 -,259 ,249 ,617
Anxiety4 ,069 ,311 ,386 1,000 ,297 ,013 -,172 ,217 -,106 -,173 ,399 ,247 ,292
Anxiety5 ,082 -,190 ,303 ,297 1,000 ,594 ,174 ,280 ,151 ,203 ,073 ,074 ,256
Anxiety6 ,285 -,369 -,138 ,013 ,594 1,000 ,140 ,031 -,115 ,071 ,345 ,074 -,381
Anxiety7 ,439 -,003 -,182 -,172 ,174 ,140 1,000 ,075 ,711 ,337 ,294 -,223 ,105
Anxiety8 -,347 ,358 ,281 ,217 ,280 ,031 ,075 1,000 ,300 ,189 ,107 ,353 ,323
Anxiety9 -,063 -,134 -,033 -,106 ,151 -,115 ,711 ,300 1,000 ,819 ,035 -,192 ,429
Anxiety10 -,221 -,377 -,009 -,173 ,203 ,071 ,337 ,189 ,819 1,000 -,092 -,146 ,414
Anxiety11 ,673 ,421 -,259 ,399 ,073 ,345 ,294 ,107 ,035 -,092 1,000 ,242 -,204
Anxiety12 ,285 ,249 ,249 ,247 ,074 ,074 -,223 ,353 -,192 -,146 ,242 1,000 ,196
Anxiety13 -,225 ,203 ,617 ,292 ,256 -,381 ,105 ,323 ,429 ,414 -,204 ,196 1,000
Anxiety14 ,247 -,284 -,259 -,490 ,008 -,085 ,627 -,221 ,598 ,499 -,010 -,249 ,259
Anxiety15 ,104 -,024 -,214 -,239 ,090 ,028 ,370 ,180 ,352 ,335 ,242 -,218 ,184
Anxiety16 -,172 ,303 -,321 -,209 -,372 -,581 -,363 ,055 -,252 -,289 -,122 ,017 -,120
Anxiety17 -,051 ,241 ,145 -,043 -,009 -,397 ,410 ,412 ,779 ,646 ,092 ,146 ,643
Anxiety18 ,207 ,540 ,299 -,209 -,233 -,232 -,025 ,055 -,005 -,020 ,031 ,386 ,163
Anxiety19 ,124 ,523 ,422 ,165 -,085 -,027 -,159 ,252 -,055 -,090 ,240 ,511 ,097
Anxiety20 -,132 ,046 ,011 -,507 -,092 ,116 -,279 ,194 -,289 -,222 -,294 ,341 -,354
Anxiety21 -,303 ,312 ,446 -,283 -,042 -,107 -,132 ,169 ,110 ,210 -,267 -,020 ,238
Anxiety22 ,391 ,145 -,212 -,042 -,239 ,143 ,268 -,267 -,114 -,320 ,460 -,122 -,231
Anxiety23 ,156 ,325 ,260 ,275 ,310 -,234 ,493 ,246 ,482 ,262 ,156 ,060 ,757
Anxiety24 ,015 -,195 ,309 -,101 ,549 ,125 ,547 ,189 ,762 ,756 -,120 -,104 ,590
Anxiety25 -,031 ,211 ,498 -,061 ,128 -,230 ,323 ,073 ,450 ,412 -,092 -,335 ,540
Anxiety26 ,360 -,043 ,365 ,420 ,215 ,116 ,308 -,149 ,305 ,245 ,244 ,148 ,333
Anxiety27 ,148 -,175 ,264 -,068 ,462 ,380 ,313 -,094 ,255 ,464 -,068 -,082 ,422
266

Anxiety28
-,081 ,066 ,381 ,530 ,248 ,107 ,124 ,088 ,077 ,099 ,107 -,196 ,449
Anxiety29
-,507 ,164 ,335 -,068 ,139 -,111 ,237 ,513 ,497 ,369 -,175 -,164 ,543
Anxiety30
,006 ,429 ,624 ,051 ,390 -,126 ,270 ,352 ,265 ,092 -,053 -,019 ,558
Anxiety31
,368 ,550 ,153 ,081 -,390 -,506 ,183 ,032 ,142 -,155 ,184 ,353 ,074
Anxiety32
,227 ,439 ,095 -,013 -,260 -,384 ,230 ,195 ,528 ,462 ,327 ,327 ,392
Anxiety33
,227 ,439 ,095 -,013 -,260 -,384 ,230 ,195 ,528 ,462 ,327 ,327 ,392
Anxiety34
,077 -,215 ,324 ,334 ,317 ,310 -,115 -,116 -,254 -,135 -,163 ,201 ,072
Anxiety35
,368 ,358 -,102 -,257 -,207 -,123 ,291 ,194 ,300 ,103 ,414 ,353 ,012
Anxiety36
,047 ,029 ,367 -,093 ,187 ,215 ,046 ,095 ,134 ,163 -,010 ,211 ,138
Anxiety37
,339 ,245 -,070 ,195 -,246 -,242 -,004 ,216 ,233 ,218 ,467 ,625 ,136
Anxiety38
,323 ,236 -,281 -,101 -,316 -,419 ,567 ,103 ,650 ,360 ,397 ,042 ,216
Anxiety39
,625 ,332 ,024 ,075 ,373 ,384 ,620 ,254 ,205 -,064 ,526 ,164 -,104
Anxiety40
,203 -,070 -,018 -,195 ,267 ,137 ,650 ,365 ,768 ,695 ,137 ,081 ,225
Anxiety41
-,106 ,142 ,012 -,401 -,232 -,318 ,361 ,326 ,658 ,567 -,096 ,241 ,425
Anxiety42
,334 ,172 ,098 ,000 ,117 -,147 ,767 ,186 ,789 ,561 ,206 ,090 ,525
Anxiety43
,114 ,142 ,142 ,075 ,271 ,000 ,000 ,090 ,176 ,287 ,085 ,458 ,553
Anxiety44
,348 ,119 ,212 -,028 ,365 ,333 ,680 ,183 ,359 ,053 ,254 ,000 ,167
Anxiety45
,313 ,160 -,378 -,354 -,055 ,244 ,233 ,073 ,323 ,429 ,505 ,067 -,183
Anxiety46
,512 ,231 ,036 -,075 ,220 ,149 ,781 ,382 ,528 ,143 ,363 ,327 ,104
Anxiety47
,317 ,320 -,178 ,142 -,120 -,286 ,055 ,031 ,235 ,125 ,515 ,261 ,169
Anxiety48
,385 ,532 -,202 -,148 -,363 -,172 ,075 ,162 ,077 ,021 ,596 ,286 -,060
Anxiety49
,405 ,211 -,011 ,235 ,092 ,089 ,135 ,129 ,289 ,222 ,601 ,446 ,105
Anxiety50
,503 ,346 ,134 ,093 ,111 -,065 ,377 ,142 ,407 ,258 ,385 ,537 ,348
Anxiety51
,076 ,351 ,189 -,150 -,180 -,259 ,331 ,153 ,467 ,399 ,105 ,155 ,518
Anxiety52
,395 ,346 ,202 ,223 ,184 ,005 ,392 ,365 ,417 ,135 ,399 ,524 ,183

267


Anxiety14 Anxiety15 Anxiety16 Anxiety17 Anxiety18 Anxiety19 Anxiety20 Anxiety21 Anxiety22 Anxiety23 Anxiety24 Anxiety25 Anxiety26
Anxiety1
,247 ,104 -,172 -,051 ,207 ,124 -,132 -,303 ,391 ,156 ,015 -,031 ,360
Anxiety2
-,284 -,024 ,303 ,241 ,540 ,523 ,046 ,312 ,145 ,325 -,195 ,211 -,043
Anxiety3
-,259 -,214 -,321 ,145 ,299 ,422 ,011 ,446 -,212 ,260 ,309 ,498 ,365
Anxiety4
-,490 -,239 -,209 -,043 -,209 ,165 -,507 -,283 -,042 ,275 -,101 -,061 ,420
Anxiety5
,008 ,090 -,372 -,009 -,233 -,085 -,092 -,042 -,239 ,310 ,549 ,128 ,215
Anxiety6
-,085 ,028 -,581 -,397 -,232 -,027 ,116 -,107 ,143 -,234 ,125 -,230 ,116
Anxiety7
,627 ,370 -,363 ,410 -,025 -,159 -,279 -,132 ,268 ,493 ,547 ,323 ,308
Anxiety8
-,221 ,180 ,055 ,412 ,055 ,252 ,194 ,169 -,267 ,246 ,189 ,073 -,149
Anxiety9
,598 ,352 -,252 ,779 -,005 -,055 -,289 ,110 -,114 ,482 ,762 ,450 ,305
Anxiety10
,499 ,335 -,289 ,646 -,020 -,090 -,222 ,210 -,320 ,262 ,756 ,412 ,245
Anxiety11
-,010 ,242 -,122 ,092 ,031 ,240 -,294 -,267 ,460 ,156 -,120 -,092 ,244
Anxiety12
-,249 -,218 ,017 ,146 ,386 ,511 ,341 -,020 -,122 ,060 -,104 -,335 ,148
Anxiety13
,259 ,184 -,120 ,643 ,163 ,097 -,354 ,238 -,231 ,757 ,590 ,540 ,333
Anxiety14
1,000 ,674 -,063 ,426 -,153 -,426 -,204 -,138 ,196 ,321 ,527 ,379 ,027
Anxiety15
,674 1,000 ,051 ,303 -,397 -,482 -,320 -,313 ,294 ,304 ,335 ,471 -,138
Anxiety16
-,063 ,051 1,000 ,069 ,134 -,108 ,271 -,024 -,314 -,140 -,461 -,269 -,660
Anxiety17
,426 ,303 ,069 1,000 ,387 ,314 -,237 ,329 -,124 ,611 ,616 ,515 ,332
Anxiety18
-,153 -,397 ,134 ,387 1,000 ,792 ,394 ,746 -,100 ,140 ,078 ,145 ,151
Anxiety19
-,426 -,482 -,108 ,314 ,792 1,000 ,300 ,660 ,087 ,000 -,015 ,063 ,365
Anxiety20
-,204 -,320 ,271 -,237 ,394 ,300 1,000 ,414 -,268 -,548 -,260 -,420 -,579
Anxiety21
-,138 -,313 -,024 ,329 ,746 ,660 ,414 1,000 -,174 ,000 ,240 ,329 ,000
Anxiety22
,196 ,294 -,314 -,124 -,100 ,087 -,268 -,174 1,000 ,085 -,142 ,150 ,252
Anxiety23
,321 ,304 -,140 ,611 ,140 ,000 -,548 ,000 ,085 1,000 ,611 ,516 ,413
Anxiety24
,527 ,335 -,461 ,616 ,078 -,015 -,260 ,240 -,142 ,611 1,000 ,669 ,461
Anxiety25
,379 ,471 -,269 ,515 ,145 ,063 -,420 ,329 ,150 ,516 ,669 1,000 ,426

268

Anxiety26
,027 -,138 -,660 ,332 ,151 ,365 -,579 ,000 ,252 ,413 ,461 ,426 1,000
Anxiety27
,295 ,163 -,546 ,110 ,108 -,152 -,222 ,188 -,126 ,480 ,656 ,404 ,294
Anxiety28
,019 ,286 -,520 -,099 -,436 -,332 -,616 -,256 ,182 ,448 ,230 ,374 ,271
Anxiety29
,207 ,225 -,239 ,493 ,088 ,199 -,012 ,517 ,153 ,411 ,464 ,445 ,011
Anxiety30
,160 ,327 -,205 ,397 ,232 ,227 -,116 ,347 ,174 ,623 ,609 ,781 ,270
Anxiety31
-,063 -,195 ,124 ,326 ,538 ,463 ,086 ,084 ,150 ,246 ,017 ,145 ,257
Anxiety32
,352 ,181 ,141 ,733 ,525 ,416 ,020 ,313 -,062 ,304 ,303 ,269 ,138
Anxiety33
,352 ,181 ,141 ,733 ,525 ,416 ,020 ,313 -,062 ,304 ,303 ,269 ,138
Anxiety34
-,287 -,262 -,530 -,483 -,222 -,187 -,052 -,289 -,069 ,084 ,100 -,099 ,223
Anxiety35
,332 ,329 ,055 ,498 ,400 ,463 ,194 ,169 ,484 ,164 ,189 ,218 ,122
Anxiety36
,149 ,088 -,469 ,006 ,117 ,261 ,324 ,275 ,278 ,000 ,359 ,237 ,093
Anxiety37
,119 ,200 ,180 ,489 ,203 ,317 -,052 -,202 ,017 ,084 ,012 -,025 ,223
Anxiety38
,583 ,494 ,152 ,738 ,127 ,060 -,337 -,150 ,302 ,437 ,299 ,335 ,245
Anxiety39
,088 ,236 -,333 ,064 ,115 ,104 -,020 -,157 ,294 ,380 ,335 ,202 ,239
Anxiety40
,395 ,339 -,274 ,630 ,175 ,043 -,096 ,058 -,189 ,421 ,753 ,422 ,334
Anxiety41
,407 ,087 ,043 ,799 ,575 ,375 ,223 ,508 -,108 ,356 ,464 ,227 ,059
Anxiety42
,516 ,259 -,292 ,726 ,292 ,081 -,331 ,065 ,000 ,756 ,726 ,474 ,468
Anxiety43
,088 -,167 ,000 ,478 ,538 ,390 ,000 ,376 -,186 ,548 ,383 ,000 ,226
Anxiety44
,376 ,325 -,614 ,124 -,043 ,058 -,067 ,000 ,552 ,424 ,497 ,375 ,308
Anxiety45
,305 ,323 ,047 ,351 ,361 ,255 ,196 ,288 ,152 ,000 ,234 ,082 -,108
Anxiety46
,352 ,146 -,211 ,454 ,269 ,254 ,120 ,000 ,093 ,342 ,383 ,101 ,264
Anxiety47
,340 ,384 ,293 ,446 ,074 ,173 -,157 -,134 ,301 ,234 ,071 ,092 ,051
Anxiety48
,235 ,491 ,298 ,370 ,319 ,307 ,072 ,051 ,410 ,075 -,083 ,176 -,099
Anxiety49
,099 ,120 -,178 ,467 ,252 ,544 -,135 ,038 ,379 ,219 ,260 ,129 ,489
Anxiety50
,160 -,161 -,072 ,667 ,694 ,632 -,007 ,303 -,033 ,482 ,398 ,118 ,504
Anxiety51
,367 ,024 ,007 ,690 ,627 ,422 ,011 ,580 -,079 ,390 ,309 ,268 ,150
Anxiety52
-,038 -,200 -,180 ,571 ,506 ,692 ,052 ,202 ,069 ,337 ,341 ,099 ,543


269


Anxiety27 Anxiety28 Anxiety29 Anxiety30 Anxiety31 Anxiety32 Anxiety33 Anxiety34 Anxiety35 Anxiety36 Anxiety37 Anxiety38 Anxiety39
Anxiety1
,148 -,081 -,507 ,006 ,368 ,227 ,227 ,077 ,368 ,047 ,339 ,323 ,625
Anxiety2
-,175 ,066 ,164 ,429 ,550 ,439 ,439 -,215 ,358 ,029 ,245 ,236 ,332
Anxiety3
,264 ,381 ,335 ,624 ,153 ,095 ,095 ,324 -,102 ,367 -,070 -,281 ,024
Anxiety4
-,068 ,530 -,068 ,051 ,081 -,013 -,013 ,334 -,257 -,093 ,195 -,101 ,075
Anxiety5
,462 ,248 ,139 ,390 -,390 -,260 -,260 ,317 -,207 ,187 -,246 -,316 ,373
Anxiety6
,380 ,107 -,111 -,126 -,506 -,384 -,384 ,310 -,123 ,215 -,242 -,419 ,384
Anxiety7
,313 ,124 ,237 ,270 ,183 ,230 ,230 -,115 ,291 ,046 -,004 ,567 ,620
Anxiety8
-,094 ,088 ,513 ,352 ,032 ,195 ,195 -,116 ,194 ,095 ,216 ,103 ,254
Anxiety9
,255 ,077 ,497 ,265 ,142 ,528 ,528 -,254 ,300 ,134 ,233 ,650 ,205
Anxiety10
,464 ,099 ,369 ,092 -,155 ,462 ,462 -,135 ,103 ,163 ,218 ,360 -,064
Anxiety11
-,068 ,107 -,175 -,053 ,184 ,327 ,327 -,163 ,414 -,010 ,467 ,397 ,526
Anxiety12
-,082 -,196 -,164 -,019 ,353 ,327 ,327 ,201 ,353 ,211 ,625 ,042 ,164
Anxiety13
,422 ,449 ,543 ,558 ,074 ,392 ,392 ,072 ,012 ,138 ,136 ,216 -,104
Anxiety14
,295 ,019 ,207 ,160 -,063 ,352 ,352 -,287 ,332 ,149 ,119 ,583 ,088
Anxiety15
,163 ,286 ,225 ,327 -,195 ,181 ,181 -,262 ,329 ,088 ,200 ,494 ,236
Anxiety16
-,546 -,520 -,239 -,205 ,124 ,141 ,141 -,530 ,055 -,469 ,180 ,152 -,333
Anxiety17
,110 -,099 ,493 ,397 ,326 ,733 ,733 -,483 ,498 ,006 ,489 ,738 ,064
Anxiety18
,108 -,436 ,088 ,232 ,538 ,525 ,525 -,222 ,400 ,117 ,203 ,127 ,115
Anxiety19
-,152 -,332 ,199 ,227 ,463 ,416 ,416 -,187 ,463 ,261 ,317 ,060 ,104
Anxiety20
-,222 -,616 -,012 -,116 ,086 ,020 ,020 -,052 ,194 ,324 -,052 -,337 -,020
Anxiety21
,188 -,256 ,517 ,347 ,084 ,313 ,313 -,289 ,169 ,275 -,202 -,150 -,157
Anxiety22
-,126 ,182 ,153 ,174 ,150 -,062 -,062 -,069 ,484 ,278 ,017 ,302 ,294
Anxiety23
,480 ,448 ,411 ,623 ,246 ,304 ,304 ,084 ,164 ,000 ,084 ,437 ,380
Anxiety24
,656 ,230 ,464 ,609 ,017 ,303 ,303 ,100 ,189 ,359 ,012 ,299 ,335
Anxiety25
,404 ,374 ,445 ,781 ,145 ,269 ,269 -,099 ,218 ,237 -,025 ,335 ,202

270

Anxiety26
,294 ,271 ,011 ,270 ,257 ,138 ,138 ,223 ,122 ,093 ,223 ,245 ,239
Anxiety27
1,000 ,500 ,173 ,325 -,229 ,025 ,025 ,467 -,229 ,229 -,296 -,182 ,288
Anxiety28
,500 1,000 ,274 ,312 -,206 -,150 -,150 ,539 -,353 ,163 -,217 -,136 ,150
Anxiety29
,173 ,274 1,000 ,560 -,094 ,213 ,213 -,203 ,243 ,405 -,203 ,153 -,025
Anxiety30
,325 ,312 ,560 1,000 ,276 ,171 ,171 ,084 ,352 ,460 -,074 ,174 ,469
Anxiety31
-,229 -,206 -,094 ,276 1,000 ,569 ,569 ,050 ,597 ,253 ,547 ,532 ,404
Anxiety32
,025 -,150 ,213 ,171 ,569 1,000 1,000 -,354 ,644 ,278 ,723 ,701 ,111
Anxiety33
,025 -,150 ,213 ,171 ,569 1,000 1,000 -,354 ,644 ,278 ,723 ,701 ,111
Anxiety34
,467 ,539 -,203 ,084 ,050 -,354 -,354 1,000 -,365 ,363 -,193 -,489 ,277
Anxiety35
-,229 -,353 ,243 ,352 ,597 ,644 ,644 -,365 1,000 ,490 ,630 ,704 ,404
Anxiety36
,229 ,163 ,405 ,460 ,253 ,278 ,278 ,363 ,490 1,000 ,119 -,006 ,308
Anxiety37
-,296 -,217 -,203 -,074 ,547 ,723 ,723 -,193 ,630 ,119 1,000 ,659 ,123
Anxiety38
-,182 -,136 ,153 ,174 ,532 ,701 ,701 -,489 ,704 -,006 ,659 1,000 ,255
Anxiety39
,288 ,150 -,025 ,469 ,404 ,111 ,111 ,277 ,404 ,308 ,123 ,255 1,000
Anxiety40
,411 -,035 ,157 ,336 ,282 ,431 ,431 -,006 ,365 ,152 ,335 ,518 ,569
Anxiety41
,149 -,294 ,523 ,207 ,385 ,725 ,725 -,356 ,560 ,236 ,364 ,567 ,032
Anxiety42
,492 ,198 ,285 ,412 ,465 ,604 ,604 ,032 ,372 ,152 ,319 ,660 ,518
Anxiety43
,451 -,082 ,225 ,171 ,090 ,417 ,417 ,000 ,180 ,088 ,185 ,096 ,000
Anxiety44
,335 ,350 ,474 ,618 ,183 ,062 ,062 ,240 ,434 ,620 -,103 ,231 ,712
Anxiety45
,169 -,301 ,092 ,017 ,165 ,612 ,612 -,358 ,623 ,305 ,396 ,429 ,323
Anxiety46
,056 -,184 ,150 ,277 ,382 ,375 ,375 -,162 ,494 ,132 ,300 ,502 ,667
Anxiety47
-,303 -,149 ,060 ,141 ,414 ,683 ,683 -,373 ,720 ,265 ,730 ,696 ,100
Anxiety48
-,238 -,205 ,029 ,172 ,456 ,668 ,668 -,443 ,823 ,235 ,690 ,647 ,286
Anxiety49
-,138 -,170 ,102 ,219 ,453 ,580 ,580 -,170 ,777 ,415 ,717 ,567 ,320
Anxiety50
,167 -,307 ,057 ,215 ,537 ,674 ,674 -,200 ,537 ,082 ,530 ,510 ,352
Anxiety51
,264 -,085 ,442 ,138 ,153 ,688 ,688 -,464 ,281 -,008 ,193 ,399 -,095
Anxiety52
-,120 -,312 ,134 ,310 ,613 ,508 ,508 -,148 ,613 ,206 ,534 ,489 ,492


271


Anxiety40 Anxiety41 Anxiety42 Anxiety43 Anxiety44 Anxiety45 Anxiety46 Anxiety47 Anxiety48 Anxiety49 Anxiety50 Anxiety51 Anxiety52
Anxiety1
,203 -,106 ,334 ,114 ,348 ,313 ,512 ,317 ,385 ,405 ,503 ,076 ,395
Anxiety2
-,070 ,142 ,172 ,142 ,119 ,160 ,231 ,320 ,532 ,211 ,346 ,351 ,346
Anxiety3
-,018 ,012 ,098 ,142 ,212 -,378 ,036 -,178 -,202 -,011 ,134 ,189 ,202
Anxiety4
-,195 -,401 ,000 ,075 -,028 -,354 -,075 ,142 -,148 ,235 ,093 -,150 ,223
Anxiety5
,267 -,232 ,117 ,271 ,365 -,055 ,220 -,120 -,363 ,092 ,111 -,180 ,184
Anxiety6
,137 -,318 -,147 ,000 ,333 ,244 ,149 -,286 -,172 ,089 -,065 -,259 ,005
Anxiety7
,650 ,361 ,767 ,000 ,680 ,233 ,781 ,055 ,075 ,135 ,377 ,331 ,392
Anxiety8
,365 ,326 ,186 ,090 ,183 ,073 ,382 ,031 ,162 ,129 ,142 ,153 ,365
Anxiety9
,768 ,658 ,789 ,176 ,359 ,323 ,528 ,235 ,077 ,289 ,407 ,467 ,417
Anxiety10
,695 ,567 ,561 ,287 ,053 ,429 ,143 ,125 ,021 ,222 ,258 ,399 ,135
Anxiety11
,137 -,096 ,206 ,085 ,254 ,505 ,363 ,515 ,596 ,601 ,385 ,105 ,399
Anxiety12
,081 ,241 ,090 ,458 ,000 ,067 ,327 ,261 ,286 ,446 ,537 ,155 ,524
Anxiety13
,225 ,425 ,525 ,553 ,167 -,183 ,104 ,169 -,060 ,105 ,348 ,518 ,183
Anxiety14
,395 ,407 ,516 ,088 ,376 ,305 ,352 ,340 ,235 ,099 ,160 ,367 -,038
Anxiety15
,339 ,087 ,259 -,167 ,325 ,323 ,146 ,384 ,491 ,120 -,161 ,024 -,200
Anxiety16
-,274 ,043 -,292 ,000 -,614 ,047 -,211 ,293 ,298 -,178 -,072 ,007 -,180
Anxiety17
,630 ,799 ,726 ,478 ,124 ,351 ,454 ,446 ,370 ,467 ,667 ,690 ,571
Anxiety18
,175 ,575 ,292 ,538 -,043 ,361 ,269 ,074 ,319 ,252 ,694 ,627 ,506
Anxiety19
,043 ,375 ,081 ,390 ,058 ,255 ,254 ,173 ,307 ,544 ,632 ,422 ,692
Anxiety20
-,096 ,223 -,331 ,000 -,067 ,196 ,120 -,157 ,072 -,135 -,007 ,011 ,052
Anxiety21
,058 ,508 ,065 ,376 ,000 ,288 ,000 -,134 ,051 ,038 ,303 ,580 ,202
Anxiety22
-,189 -,108 ,000 -,186 ,552 ,152 ,093 ,301 ,410 ,379 -,033 -,079 ,069
Anxiety23
,421 ,356 ,756 ,548 ,424 ,000 ,342 ,234 ,075 ,219 ,482 ,390 ,337
Anxiety24
,753 ,464 ,726 ,383 ,497 ,234 ,383 ,071 -,083 ,260 ,398 ,309 ,341
Anxiety25
,422 ,227 ,474 ,000 ,375 ,082 ,101 ,092 ,176 ,129 ,118 ,268 ,099

272

Anxiety26
,334 ,059 ,468 ,226 ,308 -,108 ,264 ,051 -,099 ,489 ,504 ,150 ,543
Anxiety27
,411 ,149 ,492 ,451 ,335 ,169 ,056 -,303 -,238 -,138 ,167 ,264 -,120
Anxiety28
-,035 -,294 ,198 -,082 ,350 -,301 -,184 -,149 -,205 -,170 -,307 -,085 -,312
Anxiety29
,157 ,523 ,285 ,225 ,474 ,092 ,150 ,060 ,029 ,102 ,057 ,442 ,134
Anxiety30
,336 ,207 ,412 ,171 ,618 ,017 ,277 ,141 ,172 ,219 ,215 ,138 ,310
Anxiety31
,282 ,385 ,465 ,090 ,183 ,165 ,382 ,414 ,456 ,453 ,537 ,153 ,613
Anxiety32
,431 ,725 ,604 ,417 ,062 ,612 ,375 ,683 ,668 ,580 ,674 ,688 ,508
Anxiety33
,431 ,725 ,604 ,417 ,062 ,612 ,375 ,683 ,668 ,580 ,674 ,688 ,508
Anxiety34
-,006 -,356 ,032 ,000 ,240 -,358 -,162 -,373 -,443 -,170 -,200 -,464 -,148
Anxiety35
,365 ,560 ,372 ,180 ,434 ,623 ,494 ,720 ,823 ,777 ,537 ,281 ,613
Anxiety36
,152 ,236 ,152 ,088 ,620 ,305 ,132 ,265 ,235 ,415 ,082 -,008 ,206
Anxiety37
,335 ,364 ,319 ,185 -,103 ,396 ,300 ,730 ,690 ,717 ,530 ,193 ,534
Anxiety38
,518 ,567 ,660 ,096 ,231 ,429 ,502 ,696 ,647 ,567 ,510 ,399 ,489
Anxiety39
,569 ,032 ,518 ,000 ,712 ,323 ,667 ,100 ,286 ,320 ,352 -,095 ,492
Anxiety40
1,000 ,555 ,796 ,185 ,360 ,452 ,623 ,084 ,191 ,318 ,498 ,245 ,517
Anxiety41
,555 1,000 ,649 ,519 ,169 ,477 ,454 ,273 ,343 ,322 ,620 ,752 ,475
Anxiety42
,796 ,649 1,000 ,414 ,481 ,317 ,647 ,236 ,198 ,331 ,667 ,540 ,542
Anxiety43
,185 ,519 ,414 1,000 ,000 ,306 ,125 ,256 ,082 ,360 ,703 ,569 ,369
Anxiety44
,360 ,169 ,481 ,000 1,000 ,133 ,604 ,095 ,122 ,290 ,196 ,079 ,360
Anxiety45
,452 ,477 ,317 ,306 ,133 1,000 ,230 ,505 ,702 ,539 ,413 ,349 ,264
Anxiety46
,623 ,454 ,647 ,125 ,604 ,230 1,000 ,149 ,225 ,330 ,638 ,392 ,739
Anxiety47
,084 ,273 ,236 ,256 ,095 ,505 ,149 1,000 ,759 ,772 ,410 ,186 ,373
Anxiety48
,191 ,343 ,198 ,082 ,122 ,702 ,225 ,759 1,000 ,616 ,341 ,264 ,292
Anxiety49
,318 ,322 ,331 ,360 ,290 ,539 ,330 ,772 ,616 1,000 ,641 ,160 ,724
Anxiety50
,498 ,620 ,667 ,703 ,196 ,413 ,638 ,410 ,341 ,641 1,000 ,634 ,850
Anxiety51
,245 ,752 ,540 ,569 ,079 ,349 ,392 ,186 ,264 ,160 ,634 1,000 ,333
Anxiety52
,517 ,475 ,542 ,369 ,360 ,264 ,739 ,373 ,292 ,724 ,850 ,333 1,000

273





APPENDIX C: ITEM-TOTAL
CORRELATIONS FOR THE
QUESTIONNAIRE (pilot study)





274


Item-Total Statistics

Scale
Mean if
Item
Deleted
Scale
Variance
if Item
Deleted
Corrected
Item-Total
Correlation
Squared
Multiple
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha if
Item
Deleted
Anxiety1
135.9333 597.495 .314 . .925
Anxiety2
135.8000 600.600 .353 . .924
Anxiety3
134.9333 615.210 .236 . .925
Anxiety4
136.2667 618.781 .045 . .927
Anxiety5
136.1333 609.410 .188 . .926
Anxiety6
136.2000 622.886 -.027 . .927
Anxiety7
136.2000 584.457 .530 . .923
Anxiety8
135.8667 604.981 .360 . .924
Anxiety9
136.7333 591.924 .635 . .922
Anxiety10
136.9333 601.924 .457 . .924
Anxiety11
136.2000 601.600 .410 . .924
Anxiety12
136.0000 602.571 .289 . .925
Anxiety13
135.6000 592.400 .481 . .923
Anxiety14
135.9333 605.638 .337 . .924
Anxiety15
135.8667 608.695 .256 . .925
Anxiety16
135.4000 640.114 -.338 . .930
Anxiety17
136.4000 589.114 .761 . .922
Anxiety18
135.7333 599.067 .413 . .924
Anxiety19
135.4667 598.981 .422 . .924
Anxiety20
136.4000 628.400 -.181 . .927
Anxiety21
136.3333 610.381 .255 . .925
Anxiety22
136.0667 616.210 .121 . .926
Anxiety23
135.6667 593.095 .634 . .922
Anxiety24
136.6000 593.543 .655 . .922
Anxiety25
136.3333 597.810 .462 . .923
Anxiety26
136.0667 597.210 .439 . .924
Anxiety27
135.8000 604.314 .306 . .925
Anxiety28
135.6000 618.971 .048 . .927
Anxiety29
136.1333 598.981 .404 . .924
Anxiety30
136.1333 595.124 .547 . .923
Anxiety31
136.8667 601.981 .426 . .924
Anxiety32
136.4667 586.267 .717 . .921
Anxiety33
136.4667 586.267 .717 . .921

275













Anxiety34 135.8000 629.457 -.169 . .928
Anxiety35 136.8667 591.838 .651 . .922
Anxiety36 135.9333 603.924 .374 . .924
Anxiety37 136.8000 600.886 .463 . .924
Anxiety38 136.9333 595.352 .612 . .923
Anxiety39 135.8667 595.410 .527 . .923
Anxiety40 136.2000 591.743 .672 . .922
Anxiety41 136.1333 581.124 .633 . .922
Anxiety42 136.0000 589.714 .811 . .921
Anxiety43 136.6667 601.238 .496 . .923
Anxiety44 135.2667 597.495 .544 . .923
Anxiety45 137.0667 601.067 .512 . .923
Anxiety46 135.8667 600.267 .658 . .923
Anxiety47 136.5333 599.124 .462 . .923
Anxiety48 136.6000 597.971 .465 . .923
Anxiety49 135.9333 599.067 .667 . .923
Anxiety50 136.4000 585.543 .775 . .921
Anxiety51 136.9333 605.210 .581 . .923
Anxiety52 136.5333 589.552 .723 . .922
276






APPENDIX D:
GUIDELINES FOR DIARISTS







277

LEARNER DIARY


Dear Student,

The diary is a very important and helpful tool which will enable you to think in
more detail about the English lessons that you are now taking and your needs as a
language learner, whilst at the same time providing you with a clear record of the work
you do. In addition, it constitutes a means of giving you insightful and valuable writing
practice.

For the next two months (8 weeks) I would like you to write about the English
lessons that you are taking, every time you have a class. There is no word limit to your
texts, but you are advised to spend approximately 20 minutes on each diary entry. As soon
as you finish each entry, I would appreciate it if you sent your texts electronically to the
email address below. You can also email me in case you have any questions about your
diary or about the project. Your English teacher will monitor the whole process, and,
therefore, you could address some of your questions to him/her. Your diaries will not be
corrected, but any mistakes can be pointed out to you if desired/requested. Your diary
entries will be used for research purposes only, and all information supplied, including
any names, will be treated confidentially. Anonymity is guaranteed.

It would be useful if your diary could include some of the following points:

Date of the particular lesson.
Your own impression of your performance in class.
What you found the most/least anxiety-provoking.
What you really enjoyed.
What you would like to have been done differently.
How (if at all) anxious you felt when speaking in class.
How (if at all) anxious you felt when working on writing in class.
In what way(s) you believe your anxiety manifests in class.
How you think you might overcome your anxiety about English classes.
In what way(s) your teacher could help you to overcome your anxiety.
What you think/feel about your teacher.
What you think/feel about your peers.

Many thanks for your time and effort.

Christina

Christina Gkonou
PhD Researcher
University of Essex
Department of Language and Linguistics
Wivenhoe Park
CO4 3SQ
Colchester
United Kingdom
278

E-mail: cgkono@essex.ac.uk



Below is a sample diary entry:

09/06/2010


Today the English lesson was quite interesting, because we had a discussion about
wildlife and how to protect it. This is one of my favourite topics. However, I dont think I
did that great today, because when the teacher asked me to describe a picture showing
some animals in danger I could not remember some of the words I needed. I mean, I knew
them but I do not know what happened at that moment. Actually I wasnt expecting my
teacher to ask ME, and I became anxious. My classmates made me nervous as well,
because they were raising their hands and I couldnt concentrate. But I should not get
worried. As my teacher said, practice makes perfect and I know that this is just the
beginning of the year!

I liked the fact that the teacher gave us lots of new vocabulary on that topic. I think
that new vocabulary is always useful for speaking, and for writing, listening, and reading.
In fact, when the teacher asked us to write a short essay in class on action we could take in
order to protect wildlife, I think I made good use of the vocabulary taught. Also, the topic
was motivating enough to help me develop my ideas. I handed in the essay, so I now have
to wait till the next lesson to see what mark Ill get To be honest, I feel Im better at
writing than speaking!!













279





APPENDIX E: INTERVIEW
PROTOCOL FOR STUDENT
INTERVIEWS





280

STUDENT INTERVIEWS QUESTIONS


1) How would you define anxiety?
2) Which aspect of English language learning do you think makes you the most / the
least anxious? Why?
3) Are you anxious about speaking? Why / Why not?
4) Are you anxious about writing? Why / Why not?
5) What do you like / dislike about English?
6) How do you perceive mistakes?
7) Are you a perfectionist?
8) Do you avoid things that make you anxious? If yes, how often? If no, why not?
9) Do you think that you are a good student?
10) How do you think that you show your anxiety?
11) Do you think that your peers affect your level of anxiety in the English classroom?
If yes, how?
12) In what ways do you think that your teacher helps you to overcome your anxiety?
13) Are there any strategies that you use to reduce your anxiety?






281





APPENDIX F: INTERVIEW
PROTOCOL FOR TEACHER
INTERVIEWS





282

TEACHER INTERVIEWS QUESTIONS


1) What do you think about the role of English language anxiety? Can it be positive,
negative?

2) Which groups of students are more anxious in your EFL classrooms? The
intermediate or the advanced ones?

3) What do you think about English language anxiety in relation to speaking and
writing?

4) Which factors account for a potential difference in the amount of anxiety in the
above two skills?

5) What major stressors have you noticed during your experience of teaching English
to Greek students?

6) How does your role as an EFL teacher relate to students English language
anxiety?

7) What types of classroom activities or classroom situations are more anxiety-
provoking for your students?

8) How does anxiety manifest in your learners?

9) What strategies do you use to successfully cope with your students language
anxiety?

10) What do you think about the role of the peers?


283






APPENDIX G: EXAMPLE OF
CODING INTERVIEW DATA





284

EXAMPLE OF CODING INTERVIEW DATA

Interview transcript #1
I: Hello and thank you for attending
my interview.
L: Youre welcome.
I: My first question is whether you
think that anxiety is positive or
negative or both.
L: I think anxiety meaning stress, I
think a little bit might be positive for
some people to push them, but in
general a lot of anxiety is
debilitating. I think it, it blocks
people, it, it makes them feel so bad
that their mental state stops them
from continuing. Thats my opinion.
I: And which students do you think
are more anxious? The advanced
ones or the intermediate ones?
L: The ones Ive met here, Ive only
been here a short while, but in this
frontistirio I would say the
intermediate ones are, have been the
most anxious and I guess may be the
more advanced ones are more
confident because they know they
have strong abilities, but in this
group, this group here is lower than
the one I had before and there is
more anxiety in this group than in
the previous which was all very
strong language learners.
I: So you think this is because of the
language.
L: Im guessing it could be. I dont,
there are probably other factors, but
that could be one, one of the reasons.
I: So what do you teach? Are you
teaching literature?
L: Yes, Ill tell you about that later.
I: No, its OK. I dont mind.
L: The book we are doing, I chose
the book with Argiris, and the book
we are doing is a great book, its
called Fahrenheit 451. Weve read
that book with more advanced
students and they got it immediately.
Its symbolic and they loved it. And
this group, you know, were a little




















ANX AND GRADE
LEVEL































SOME ANX =
FACILITATING

GENERALLY =
DEBILITATING

MENTAL STATE
STOPS






INTERMEDIATE
SS MORE ANX
ADVANCED SS:
MORE
CONFIDENT,
STRONG
ABILITIES/LEARN
ERS



















285

stressed about it, because they, they
couldnt get it, they, they, they
didnt quite understand the story.
The book was our fault, because the
book was really too hard for them,
but I can see that they were anxious
about it and you know if I had
chosen a different book, it wouldnt
have been a stressful situation.
I: I see. Do you think that your
students are more anxious during
speaking or writing in class?
L: In class? Let me think which one.
They seem to do both fairly well.
They really, they are really
exuberant, they like talking, even
when we are talking about a story, a
book, and they write pretty well so
they, they dont look stressed really
with either one. May be they are,
they hide it, when they write they
seem to enjoy it or they, they least
they do what I tell them to and the
quality looks fairly good, so to me
neither one really.
I: OK, thats fair enough. What are
the factors that make Greek students
anxious?
L: I think not knowing whats
expected, so I think that when
somebody gets an assignment or
they are given a reading passage or
they are asked to do a writing
assignment and they dont
understand what it is that the teacher
wants, that really scares them so
usually if you make the directions
really clear or take a big task and
break it into smaller tasks for them
instead of saying Write an essay for
homework, you can say Write
three sentences that tell me about
your idea and write three sentences
about, you know, the main parts of
your essay, beginning, the middle,
and the end. And then the next
week bring that to class and then,
you know, if you break it into
something smaller, it somehow
makes them feel less stressed I think.





ANX CAUSE






















ANX CAUSE









ANX REDUCING
STRATEGY















TOO DIFFICULT
MATERIALS












ANX RELATED
WITH WHAT ONE
CAN DO WELL (?)






WHAT THE T
EXPECTS/WANTS








TEACHING
PRACTICE: CLEAR
INSTRUCTIONS,
BREAKING TASK






(STH SS CAN
MANAGE EASILY)
286

Something that they can manage
easily.
I: Any other sources that you can
think of?
L: Of stress? I think their parents a
lot of times are source of stress. I
dont want to say bad things but, you
know, it looks really strange to me,
because you know we spend a lot of
time learning how students minds
work especially out of lessons, and
then we see the parents you know
pushing them to get their
Proficiencies when they are thirteen
or pushing them to take swimming
lessons and music lessons and
French lessons, I mean too much. I
saw that a lot with my own daughter,
I saw some of her friends, their
parents were, they, they wanted the
best for their children, they wanted
their children to have careers and
things that they didnt have
themselves, but I think they are
going about it in the wrong way.
They give the children too many
things to do and this is bad as just
not giving them enough. So thats
another source of stress I think that,
not to be saying anything negative,
but I think thats where some of the
stress comes from, the parents.
I: Yes, I agree with you actually. Do
you think that there are any
particular activities that you do in
class and make the students feel
anxious?
L: I think whenever we do
something, we do an activity,
reading or writing thats too hard for
them so, like the book that weve
read Fahrenheit 451, I real, I
didnt know the students so once we
were you know reading the book and
I can see that it was too hard, I can
see that it was making them nervous,
because it made them feel that they
didnt know very much. They know
a lot actually but the book was just
too hard for them. If I would have an





ANX CAUSE

































ANX CAUSE















SIGNIFICANT
OTHERS:
PARENTS (BUT
WITH YOUNGER
SS)





























INPUT
DIFFICULTY
(activities that are too
hard for the Ss)







287

easier book I think it would, they
would have felt better about it.
I: OK, so it was above their level of
proficiency.
L: Yes, it was above their level. I
didnt know them and I brought the
wrong book so they have already
bought it and we were already
starting it so we couldnt change
really but I think that was a big
source of stress, they were asked to
do something which was beyond,
they did it but it was beyond what
they could do comfortably.
I: So the materials can sometimes
make them feel a bit more anxious.
L: Yes, if its not matched nicely
with their level, I mean you dont
want to be right at their level, you
want to be a little harder, but this
was may be instead of one degree
too hard which would have been
good, it was probably three degrees
too hard which was stressful.
I: What about their peers? Do you
think students are influenced by
them?
L: Well, in this class, they are eight
students and there is one person who
makes remarks a lot of times about
the pronunciation or, I mean it is
funny because that student makes
mistakes too but I dont know if she
does it because she feels bad about
herself but Ive spoken to her two or
three times privately as nicely as I
could, you know Ive been saying
something like You are really
trying to help, but. In fact she
wasnt trying to help, she was
making fun of somebody but I didnt
want to say that and I think that
stresses people. It calls attention to
what they can do. We try to call
attention to what they can do, of
course this is what we do as
teachers, so yes there is one person
in this particular group who creates a
kind of bad atmosphere sometimes.
I: Is that person a strong student or a








ANX CAUSE
































ANX CAUSE
















WRONG CHOICE
OF MATERIALS
(too difficult,
mismatch between
what T chose and
what Ss could do
comfortably)





i + 1
ONE DEGREE TOO
HARD: GOOD,
THREE DEGRESS
TOO HARD:
STRESSFUL















PEERS: MAKING
FUN OF EACH
OTHER, IT CALLS
ATTENTION TO
WHAT THEY CAN
DO



288

weaker student? Because students
themselves admit that the, those
people in class who usually make
fun of the rest are usually you know
the weaker students.
L: She is, she is not the strongest
student but she is not the weakest
student in class either. Id say
average, but may be she just has you
know some other kind of insecurity.
I: Yes, what youve said before.
When your students are anxious, if
they are, do they show it in any
specific way? Can you understand
it?
L: Yes, behaviour. They get fidgety,
and you know they giggle, its hard
to keep them focused. If they are not
stressed and you have the materials
that are perfectly suited to their
level, its smooth and they just flow
in the activities, but when its too
hard and they are getting stressed,
you get this fidgeting and its, you
understand that youve brought
something that its too hard and that
they are reacting.
I: Do you use any strategies to help
them overcome this anxiety?
L: Well, what Ive been doing with
this book is emphasising that theyre
good, that I wouldnt bring this in to
just anybody. I spend a lot of time
helping them understand the book.
Before we read I give them
sometimes a little like outline, if say
Im gonna give them, next week we
are going to read twenty pages, the
week before I give them a summary
of the main points so when they are
reading they know where they are
headed, or I give them, I always give
them a list of the characters and you
know if they are good, they are bad,
you know something, some
characteristics about the character.
Sometimes I give them some
questions to guide them to the story,
I try to give them something so that
they are not just reading on their






























ANX COPING
STRATEGY
















































PRAISE















TEACHING
PRACTICE:
SCAFFOLDED
TASKS (giving Ss
289

own, that they have some kind of
scaffolder or some, something to
assist them. So I do that before they
start reading for a homework. In
class, I spend a lot of time defining
vocabulary or helping them extract
the main meaning of a passage,
sometimes I put them in groups and
I have them work on an activity you
know together, so that they can kind
of share information and then we
have a whole class discussion with
the teams reporting. So I guess I try
to use group work when its a little
hard, because it seems like that when
you can work it out with one other
person, you are not all on your own.
That seems to help, they, they like
working in pairs and small groups
this crowd, you know they think
they get energised and, you know,
they speak into Greek sometimes but
as long as they are talking about the
lesson, I mean I push them to use
English but they are Greeks, you
know they are all Greek speakers, so
its a little unnatural. So if they use
Greek but they are talking about the
problem, the work, I dont mind that
much. I might you know remind
them. But working with another
partner usually helps I think to
alleviate stress.
I: That was my next question
actually, I mean to what degree you
use pair work or group work.
L: A lot, a lot. In fact when I was
first starting to work here, it was
really funny. Its just the way I was
trained to be a teacher so I had the
students in pairs and they were all
talking, and they were talking
loudly, because they were eight kids
and there were three groups and they
were excited about their work, and
Argiris came in because he thought
Oh the new teacher! The students
are misbehaving, you know. He
was worried about me that they
werent being respectful, so he came














ANX COPING
STRATEGY


































outline, list of
characters, questions)












GROUP WORK
(when you can work
it out with one other
person, you are not
all on your own)































290

in and he said Whats going on?. I
said Oh nothing, you know, we are
just doing group work (laughs). So
you know its noisy and some people
dont like that noise, but you know
to me if its noisy, it means they are
doing something. Unless its writing
or reading, if I am telling them to
read quietly, I dont want talking.
But if it is a group activity and they
are having a conversation to figure
out the questions, Im excited, I
mean I like that. So yes I use it,
every class period I have some kind
of a group activity.
I: Yes, they learn and they also, you
know, they are on task.
L: Yes, just keeping them on task,
but if, you know, you go round and
remind people, I think they stay on
task.
I: OK, good. What about mistakes?
How do you think the students feel?
L: You mean in writing or speaking?
I: In either.
L: In speaking, when were in class
talking, I, I never correct a mistake
ever. I just think that we put people
off. I mean I know me when I am
speaking Greek and I have a teenage
daughter. She wants to help me but
when we are at a gathering with our
friends, I speak English to her but
were at a dinner party and every
time I say something, she is
interrupting me and correcting me. I
mean it puts you off. And she is my
daughter, we are close, but if your
teacher does that to you, it must be
far worse, because you know the
teacher is an authority, so I never,
you know, for a lot of other reasons,
I dont want to stop them talking, I
want them to keep talking. But in
writing I correct selectively, I dont
correct everything, but it depends,
you know if I say this week were
going to work on structure, this
week were going to work on
grammar. I usually have a focus, you


































ANX COPING
STRATEGY
















































NO ERROR
CORRECTION IN
SPEAK (it puts you
off)









SELECTIVE
ERROR
CORRECTION IN
291

know a writing activity, and I make
the corrections based on you know
what the focus is. I dont correct
every little sense mistake but the big
things.
I: So when they get a composition
back, or an essay, or something, do
you think that students are afraid of
mistakes? How do they feel?
L: Well, thats a good question. Just
recently these few weeks, weve
been working on a little project, so
the book that they are reading every
week afterward we are discussing it,
their homework assignment is to
choose a scene, describe you know,
whats important to them in that
section of the book, describe the
scene in a paragraph, and then next
week theyre going all to bring me
their pages and were going to make
a book and bind them. So its a
book, their own recollections of the
story. So before they make the final
copy with the art work, I want them
to give me you know just on a
scratch paper their writing so I can
correct it, the spelling, before they
put it in the beautiful book version.
So on that I correct just about
everything because when they turn
in the book they want it to be
something thats going to be
beautiful that theyll remember and I
can see this Why have I made all
these mistakes?. And I say Well,
they are tiny mistakes. I mean a
spelling mistake is silly, I mean that
doesnt mean that you dont know
English, so yes sometimes they get a
little nervous, they, they feel, I think
if youre not careful, they feel like
they dont know very much when
they see mistakes. We all make
mistakes, I make mistakes when I
speak English, I mean just I do, not
grammar mistakes but I start talking
really fast, you know, its natural.
But they are not experienced enough
to know that, so they, they take it as









































ANX CAUSE








WRIT (depends on
focus of writing task)







































CONCERN OVER
ERRORS (they feel
like they dont know
very much when they
see mistakes)




292

a sign that they dont know
something. So I have to be really
careful how I, you know, present
that to them, and always say
something like well, you know, Im
grading, always give some kind of a
comment that softens the way they
receive the correction.
I: Do you think that they care a lot
about their grades? Do you give
grades?
L: In this class I give, Ill tell you
about my other school because I
have to give grades there. This one I
give, a plus is very good, Ill show
you on the board (writes on the
board). This means excellent, this
means OK and that means not, not
very good, so mostly they get this
and this. I dont put, but I write
comments, you know I write, you
know, I really like you know the
discussion, you know, the character,
you wrote elegant sentences, or here
I would say This was nice, but it
would be nicer if you had more
details. You had a few mistakes. I
think that you may, you
misunderstood a few things about
the book, because the character
wasnt really very nice. You know,
so I give them some comments, and
again I try to write comments in a
way that doesnt, you know,
accentuate the errors so much, as
you know what you can learn from
it. But in the school where I work
during the day, I had to give 95, 98, I
have to give a real fixed grade for
everything, and the kids are really
anxious to see what their grades are.
I: Is there anything else that you
would like to add?
L: About stress? Well, I guess as a
teacher my, one of my major
objectives is to create the kind of
classroom environment where stress
is minimised, because the work itself
is stressful. I mean, when you are
doing, when you are getting ready




ANX COPING
STRATEGY
















































ERROR
CORRECTION:
POSITIVE
COMMENT (which
softens the way Ss
receive correction)





















COMMENTS THAT
DO NOT
ACCENTUATE
THE ERRORS SO
MUCH














293

for a language exam or when you are
reading a difficult book, that by,
even with a great class that you
really like as a teacher, thats
stressful. Any time you learn
anything new and leave behind the
old part of yourself, thats stressful.
So learning by definition has some
stress built in, so I try really hard to
be relaxed but firm, you know kind
of laid back, that there are clear rules
and this is what I want and when its
time to work, its time to work. You
know, they are young, give them a
break, let them be themselves, but
make it clear that there is a time to
work and a time to goof off. So I
usually let them kind of goof off the
first five minutes and you know they
are chatting and all that, and then we
have a really serious work period,
and then the second half of the class,
thats when I do group work, you
know something thats more
relaxing, and in the last five minutes
they are kind of chattering. So I try
to structure the lessons so that they
are not always asked to be perfect,
you know they can be relaxed a little
bit, and I try to be friendly but you
know not let anything happen, you
know not just to let them do
anything, but to let them know you
know that I care about them and I
think of them as my young friends,
to make a sweet environment, a
place where they would like to
come.
I: Thats very important, the
teachers behaviour and the teacher
being friendly.
L: I think so too. So I try really hard
to build that kind of a classroom
environment. Thats, thats a major
goal of mine actually in all my
classes.
I: Do all students take the literature
classes?
L: No, no. Argiris started it this year
because I know a little bit about that






















































LEARNING STH
NEW, LEAVING
BEHIND THE OLD
PART OF
YOURSELF
LEARNING BY
DEFINITION HAS
SOME STRESS
BUILT IN



















AIM: TO MAKE A
SWEET
ENVIRONMENT, A
PLACE WHERE SS
WOULD LIKE TO
COME












294

and I use literature a lot, so he asked
me if I would come and do this you
know start it off. So I did a literature
class in the fall, Im doing this one
on literature with university
students, and he is doing another one
too. So its kind of, were
experimenting and I think, you
know, hell decide in April whether
he wants to keep with the same or
just a few, or expand it. I havent
spoken to him yet, I dont know
what his plans are, but hes really
excited about literature on a personal
level. I dont know about other
teachers, if you know there is
interest but we both are.
I: Good. Do you feel anxious when
you teach?
L: No, no, never. I do in my other
job. Ill tell you when I feel anxious.
I have a lot of work, a lot of work, a
lot of classes, a lot of papers to
grade, and for example today I had
three groups to meet and in one I
wasnt as well prepared as I wanted
to be, just because, not because I
was lazy, but because I had to go to
bed last night, I just couldnt finish.
So thats what makes me anxious,
when I am not as well prepared as I
know I should be. You know
sometimes its not possible because
you have too many other things to
do, but it doesnt just make me
anxious, it makes me feel upset with
myself. So thats what makes me
anxious. But mostly I feel
comfortable, especially here with
these students, theyre from the
neighborhood, I see them at
Masoutis, I see them you know
around the neighborhood, and my
other school too, even though I dont
have that same closeness, these are
not kids so I like them and its
mostly stress you know when I
havent finished grading the papers
that Ive promised them, you know
the workload is what stresses me,




































































































295

not the students. The workload can
be very stressful in a teachers life,
as I am sure you know.
I: Im still studying and working not
as an EFL teacher. I will do that over
summer. But Im doing, Im
teaching some undergrads in Essex.
L: Like applied linguistics classes?
I: Its Foundations of Linguistics,
its a lecture-based class, so I have
two groups of students there and I
really feel anxious and what makes
me anxious is that most of them are
English and I am not, so Im afraid
of the types of questions they might
ask or the vocabulary they might
use. Till now I didnt have any
problem and I could cope with their
questions, but you know its a
different kind of context and
different reasons for being anxious.
But its a good experience anyway.
L: Oh, Im sure it is. Yes, perfect for
you.
I: But I am looking forward to EFL
classes. They are different.
L: Yes, they are. Different kind of
skills involved. Its a, I like teaching
linguistics classes too, but this is
somehow more personal than
language learning. Your identity is
wrapped up in the language that you
use and, so you have to push people
to go out on a limb. These students,
Ive been pushing with this book that
is too hard, you know they kind of
resist but on the one hand I know I
made a mistake, the book is too
hard, but on the other hand I know
as a language learner and as a
language teacher that if you always
give people what theyre
comfortable with, they dont learn.
You know, you have to give them
something thats a little bit too hard
and provide a safe little
environment, so you know thats,
thats the way it works when you
teach. You have to be a little out
there in a, in a terrain. And when we




































































































296

teach too, what youre doing with
your linguistics course, I mean
youre growing and developing by
doing that you know with native
speakers. Im sure you cover the
class competently and beautifully,
but youre you know you have to
prove it to yourself that you can do it
and thats what you are doing.
I: Thats very true. Is there anything
else you would like to add?
L: Well I hope when youre done
with your research youll come and
let us know how the project goes. Id
love to hear about it.
I: I will.
L: And last thing to say. As for
stress, the classroom management
has a lot to do with it and planning
materials that are suited for the
particular group of students. Like I
just said, I didnt do that so well
with this group and Im seeing the
results. I mean you know if the
materials had been a little easier, I
would see a little different
interaction in class, so thats part of
it too.
I: I see, thank you very much.
L: Oh youre welcome. Its been a
pleasure.

















ANX COPING
STRATEGY



























CHOOSING
MATERIALS THAT
MATCH THE SS
LEVEL
OF PROFICIENCY






















297

Interview transcript #2
I: First of all, I would like to thank
you for attending my interview and I
would like to ask you first what you
think about the role of anxiety in the
classroom.
A: Do you mean if it, if it plays a
role?
I: Yes.
A: Well, yes. What I try to tell a lot
of students even the younger ones,
from A senior level to, to my
students in Lower, what I say is
everything, not only teaching and
learning a language, you need a bit
of stress, and the amount of stress
you have can be both good and bad.
But if I have too much stress, it has a
negative effect on the results. And if
I am not stressed at all, which is the
situation with a lot of students right
now, they are not seeing the
importance of what they are doing, if
they are not stressed they dont have
good results either. So you have to
have stress which is in the middle
somewhere, which is sometimes
hard to have. They either stress too
much or they dont stress at all.
I: So you think it can be both.
A: Definitely, definitely.
I: So, when you lets say have to
teach students who are indifferent,
probably not anxious at all
A: Sometimes they are indifferent,
but I think it doesnt have to do with
the, with the class itself, or with
lessons, or even with me sometimes.
I think it has to do with the, the
stress that they generally have in
their lives today because they have
to go to private schools, they have to
do all the different activities, the
extra activities apart from the school
or the university, which I think is too
much for the students here. And I
can compare it, because Ive seen,
Ive been to school and gone to
school in Sweden, and its nothing
like it, nothing like it. And I think















ANX TYPE





















SOURCE


























FACILITATING





















EDUCATION/SCHO
OLING SYSTEM










298

one of the things that stresses the
students the most and the result is
that they sort of lean back and they
say OK, Im not gonna do
anything.
I: I see. So it has to do with them.
A: Not always, not always but a lot
of the times, if it has to do with
them, usually I cant do anything
about it. But if I see that they
actually make a difference when Im
trying something different, or saying
something, or trying to sort of get
their attention and try to make them
understand how important it is for
them to study, or to listen, or even
try, ok? When they do that, then I
know that they are not indifferent
and I know that it plays a role what I
do. But I cant affect all the students,
so it has to do both with them and
with me, the teacher.
I: Yes, its a combination.
A: Yeah, it is.
I: Which students do you think are
more anxious? The advanced
students or the lower level learners?
A: I think like A senior level at least
and C senior level are more stressed
than the older ones.
I: Why?
A: Because the younger ones are still
in a phase where they take it more
seriously. The older ones, even
though they are taking exams soon
are sort of thinking about a hundred
other things, internet, the mobile
phones, sending messages, love,
fights with parents, and all these
other things, which is a part of their
lives. On the other hand, yes sure,
the younger kids have life too, but
they are still not in control of their
life. So they should have had their
parents looking after them and
telling them You have to study. So
I think the younger students are
more stressed than the older ones,
thats what I seem to get from the
students.



MANIFESTATION
OF ANX

























GRADE LEVEL
AND ANX





















AVOIDANCE
BEHAVIOUR

























LOWER LEVEL
YOUNGER AGE


















299

I: Does this imply that it has to do
with their age rather than with their
level?
A: Probably, probably, yeah,
because even the adults, I think they
have the, the amount of stress that
they should have, because they are
adults, they know how to study, they
know how to, when to study, they
have learnt a lot of things growing
up, so they know OK, I have to do
it this way, whereas I see and a lot
of times when I do, when I see
students I say OK, tell us how do
you study?. How do you study?
How do you do this? So people can
get ideas, because the problem a lot
of times is that they think they are
studying when sitting and doing
their homework and they might be
sitting for an hour and do nothing
and that stresses them. And they
stress and they come to class saying
I tried to do it but I couldnt, I
didnt manage to do it, etc. The
adults know how to handle that, they
know how to study, they know
which time of the day works best, so
they dont have the hundred other
factors that stress the younger kids
than the adult. They know how to
cope with it. The younger students,
OK, its not that difficult for them,
so they, they have a little stress for
silly things for us.
I: Are the adult students more
experienced as students, or as
learners, than young learners?
A: As learners, yes, definitely.
I: What about the level of their
knowledge, their level of
proficiency? Do you think that a
student who is in a CPE class, lets
say, whose level of English is
higher, do you think that this student
feels more confident?
A: Yes, I do. Because being good at
something, whatever it is, it gives
you confidence, because you, you
identify yourself as being a good



FACTORS
RELATING TO ANX
















































AGE














































300

learner and having knowledge of
something and being better than
someone else, which means that
youre, this is may be, not may be, it
is a bad thing to sort of look down
on others and say that OK, I am
better than them. So, sure,
definitely, it does play a big role for
the confident, for the confidence in
the student, in the adult, whatever it
is.
I: OK, thank you. What about the
anxiety in relation to speaking and
writing?
A: I think that the students I teach
are more stressed when it comes to
speaking than writing, because when
youre writing you can rub out any
mistakes youve made, you can
correct it, you can think about it, you
can rewrite it, you can write
something, leave it for a day and
look through it again, which they
dont do anyway, but you have the
opportunity to do it and thats a
relief. Whereas in speaking whatever
youve said, you cant take it back,
so their problem, they are more
stressed with that part I think. They
have more anxiety into how to speak
and what should I say, and in that
moment you usually think in Greek
which is something we try to help
them with, so that they think in
English when they are expressing
themselves, to use the English
grammar not the Greek one, because
thats when they make mistakes,
when they try to express themselves.
I think most anxiety is experienced
in speaking and not writing.
I: Writing is more personal, it gives
them more chances to
A: Yes, they have the chance to
correct it and review it and think
about it and perhaps look up words
to, to express themselves exactly as
they would like. And they cant
really do it in speaking in a
classroom or being in a foreign

FACTORS
RELATING TO ANX













SKILL-SPECIFICITY


































LEVEL OF
PROFICIENCY

SOURCES:
peer pressure
competitiveness









SPEAKING
MISTAKES FEAR
































301

country and have to speak.
I: OK. So what do you think are the
sources of anxiety? Why do students
get anxious?
A: Where does stress come from?
(laughs) I should know, Im a person
that stresses a lot. Im not sure, Im
not sure. Probably when they are not
feeling confident, it comes out.
Competition, afraid to make a
mistake, because a lot of them, the
first thing they would say is No, no,
I dont know how to say. How do I
say this?, and they start speaking in
Greek. And then you have to sort of,
OK, if you knew everything, you
wouldnt be in a private school, you
wouldnt attend it at all, if you knew
everything. You are here to make
mistakes and other people are in a
class and wont do private, because
we learn from each others mistakes.
Thats one thing that we try to do to
make them feel more calm, but I
think the stress comes from that,
competition, always wanting to be
on top, so if you make a mistake it
means that you dont know it very
well. And that they are not feeling
that confident as someone who uses
language more frequently and knows
it, as we do or as an adult does.
I: I see. Is it a personality thing?
A: Yes, perhaps thats personality.
I: What do you think about the role
of the teacher?
A: A very important one. You mean
in relation to anxious, anxiety?
I: Yes.
A: We can, for the students that
actually are there a hundred and fifty
percent, not the ones that are laid
back and dont pay attention that
much, those people I dont think we
affect them that much. We do affect
them because we affect people every
day without knowing it, but a
teacher does, we can make them feel
as stressed as we want them, we can
make them feel more relaxed if we








SOURCE











ANX COPING
STRATEGY






FACTORS
RELATING TO ANX









TEACHER
INFLUENCE

















LOW SELF-
CONFIDENCE
PEERS
MISTAKES








MAKING SS
UNDERSTAND
THAT MISTAKES
ARE A NATURAL
PART OF THE
PROCESS


PERSONALITY





















302

want to. We can sort of, we can push
them but these are the students that
really listen to you and may be look
up to you and focus on whatever
youre telling them. Those students
you can, you can give them a lot of
anxiety and stress but also you can
make them feel more relaxed. But
its I think a mixture of what weve
said before, that if theyre not
confident enough, whatever I say
wont change it. Its something that
they have to cope with and try to
change, because all the changes can
be made only if a person wants to
make a change. And stress is
something important and difficult to
sort of get away from. Its difficult
like if I look back at, and just look at
myself, and I stress in most of the
situations, Im, Im a stressful
person, and Ive tried many times to
sort of think OK, when am I
stressing? Ive done this before, I
know what to do. But then again,
the next time Im in the same
situation, Ill be stressed like it was
the previous time. So, we do affect
them but I dont know to what
degree we affect them and change it
in a way.
I: OK, so the, the only case that the
teacher can make students anxious is
because the teacher has to do it, lets
say.
A: That we have to make them feel
stressed?
I: Yes, because they dont care that
much, so you have to make them
feel stressed, to understand, to
realize the importance of what they
are doing and to realize why their
parents are paying for these classes.
A: For me I think yes. Thats the
only time I want to stress someone. I
prefer preparing them than stressing
them, so telling them two, three, four
weeks ahead what theyre having in
the, in the weeks to come so they
can sort of plan and know what they




































































































303

are doing, so they wont stress. So a
lot of times what I do is, not a lot of
times, I think always, I try to prepare
them so I wont have to come to the
situation where I have to stress them,
in order to have a, a good result in
something.
I: I see. Do teachers make students
anxious?
A: Yes, sure, when being strict,
being demanding. The thing is, I
think there is a difference between,
because thats the thing, I didnt go
to school here at all, never. The
students, the teachers dont work
like the way they work here from
what Ive come to understand, thank
God (laughs).
I: From the students?
A: Yes, because we have a lot of
discussions with people, and
students have felt that the teachers
dont give them credit for the things
that they do well, that they sort of
separate the good students from the
bad ones, if they have good
relationships with their parents, if
the parents have a good job, they
show that, the teachers have shown
very clearly to the students that we
have our favourites and the students
feel very very bad, really bad. They
come and, and discuss it with me a
lot of times and I said OK, of course
it happened to me as well, that I
have had teachers that did that, but
most of them werent like that, in
Sweden at least. The system is
totally different, the school is totally
different, there is much more
pressure to the teachers at school,
that they have to be good and they
have to, they have to reach a few
goals, and not only teaching a book
in a subject, but teaching the
students manners, and a student
cant learn manners from a teacher
who isnt a good role model. So I
think, we do have a lot of bad
experiences, of course, but I dont






























SOURCE
TEACHER
INFLUENCE















































T BEHAVIOUR
FAVOURITISM


















304

think I have as many as the students
here (laughs).
I: I see. You referred to the fact that
the students are afraid of making
mistakes and that this is a source of
anxiety.
A: Yes.
I: What do you do about it?
A: I use different techniques
depending on the ages. The younger
students, the A senior level lets say,
sometimes I dont correct them. Not
at that minute. I would let them
finish whatever they are saying,
because I dont think its correct to
interrupt when they have sort of
organised an idea either in their head
and they want to express it, I think I
push away from trying if I correct
them at that minute. So I usually let
them finish and may be afterwards
when they finish, and this is a very
usual, a very common technique,
because Ive done, Ive asked the
same question to other teachers in
Sweden actually (laughs), I was
observing the same thing. Its very
common to do that, when theyve
said something wrong, I repeat it but
I dont repeat the mistake, I say it
correctly. Other times I wont
correct anything if I am asking a
question to all students, I would ask
everyone so more people are, are
gathered and make the same
mistake, so then I can write on the
board and no one feels like it was me
who made that mistake and they feel
that OK, its very normal to make
this type of mistake, and then I say
So what do you think? What do you
think?, more people answer, and
then I say OK, lets remember that
when were expressing this, we use
this, remember, weve said it, and
sort of look back at it as a group and
not individually, because a lot of
mistakes that are made are usually
very common in more than one
students and they dont see that.





























STRATEGY

















































ERROR
CORRECTION
RECASTS













WHOLE CLASS
CORRECTION



305

Even though I know it and they
would know it as well, they stress
about it anyway, even though they
know, I say that as well, I say that a
lot, that if you knew everything you
wouldnt be here. You have to make
mistakes, its normal to make
mistakes, I make mistakes, and we
are here to learn from each other, so
its good that you made a mistake,
because now the others wont make
the same mistake, so I try to sort of
make them understand that we are
actually learning from the mistakes
and that its not ideal always to be
perfect. If they were, they wouldnt
be here. So I just, my way of
correcting is usually either repeating
what theyve said in a, in the correct
way, or just not paying attention to
that exact moment, making more
people to say something and see if
theyve made the same mistake.
I: Did you receive any training?
A: Yes. In Sweden we have to do
practice.
I: Teaching practice?
A: Yes. We had to do it for like, we
were sent to a school where we had a
person who was like a supervisor
who would be with us during the
lessons, but we had to organise the
lessons, and all the lessons, as a
teacher would, for about I think two
months, may be more, but then we
had to go and have contact with this
school and with the classes etc. And
Ive done these types of questions
with other teachers as well in the
same schools.
I: OK. Do you think that there is any
particular activity that makes
students anxious?
A: Perhaps, like we said before, the,
the speaking perhaps, because they
are not used to it, they are not used
it, and thats why what we try to do
here in this school anyway is that we
try to speak as much English as
possible from the younger ages as































































TALK TO SS
ABOUT PROCESS
OF LEARNING,
THAT MISTAKES
ARE ONLY
NATURAL































306

well, even though they wont
understand everything, and may be,
may be thats an anxiety for them,
when they start and they come to
school and everyone speaks English,
and they have that reaction a lot of
times when they come from B
juniors to A seniors and I say
everything in English in the
beginning and they sort of, you see
the looking on their faces, when
theyre looking Oh my God, what
is she saying? (laughs). We just try,
I think when, when the kids
understand that youre doing this for
their good, but they dont, usually
they dont understand it the first
year, like I have my C seniors that I
have for three years, they dont get
that stressed anymore because they
know me, they feel secure, they feel
confident, they know that they can
ask everything, so I dont think any
activity stresses them more than
another one. But perhaps that we
speak too much English, the
speaking part, I think thats, yes I
think its the speaking more
stressful.
I: Do you think that they show this
kind of anxiety to you? Do they
make it obvious?
A: Yes, they do.
I: In what ways?
A: They say it, Ah I know, I
know. The way they speak, they
stress their body language (laughs),
they dont have to say it sometimes,
the body language. Some of them of
course show that they are stressed,
because they want you to sort of,
not, how to say it, not feel sorry for
them, but sort of show compassion
Oh may be I shouldnt give you
that much. But they show it by just
saying it. Some other students, you
know, biting nails, that type of thing,
but I dont know.
I: Do you help your students to cope
with their stress?


























SOURCE
(ACTIVITY)















SYMPTOM














SPEAKING:
Ss not used to
speaking
in/listening to
English all the
time.
Therefore, Ss
cannot always
understand the T
frustration.

























BEHAVIOURAL






307

A: Yes, I try to make them
understand that there is no point in
stressing, because we know our job,
we know when we are giving too
much homework and we know how
much we should give them or what
to expect of them, so they sort of
have to understand that there is no,
there is no meaning to, theres, its
useless stressing for something that
we know you dont have to stress
about, even though thats tough to
sort of get through to the kids,
because they are young. I wouldnt
ignore it totally, but I would try to
make them understand, thats what I
do when they are complaining Oh
my God. Miss, we wont have time
to do this and We wont do this
and How can we do that?. They
show this and give you the
impression that they are really
stressed and they wont be able to,
they wont manage to do it, and you
just say Yes, you will. You have to
plan your time. Thats why we tell
you one week in advance, you plan
it. And thats what adults do, and
thats what you have to do, you
wont leave it, thats why I said like
before, I sort of prepare them instead
of sort of pushing them in a situation
where they have to stress in the end.
So yes, sure they show it, but
sometimes they do it just to be
pampered, and other times they are
really stressed, they are having it as
a character in them, because some,
some people are stressed and its not
always a negative thing, it doesnt
have to be a negative thing.
I: Yes. Is there any other strategy
that you have used with anxious
students and think it works?
A: The anxiety that I see to my
students in the Lower class, what I
try to do there is usually if I can,
something I believe in is that, like all
people they want to be seen as an
individual, as a person. So what I am











































































TEACH TIME
MANAGEMENT
SKILLS?

PLAN/ASSIGN
TASKS/HOMEWOR
K/ IN ADVANCE

PREPARATION
















308

trying to do there is, in a way that
others wont notice it, show that I
am there for them, that I can listen to
them, that they can talk to me, that
they can ask for help, whatever it is,
may be its not about English, so
they feel confident with me. If they
feel confident with me, and again
its about the students that actually
care because if you dont care, they
will not even be stressed, they wont
even be anxious, so what I am trying
to do is that, to show them that I am
there for them so that they can talk
about it, and I think then they trust
me, and when I say that you dont
have to stress about this, you can do
it, you should do this, and this, and
this, if they have the trust in me, they
will be able to manage whatever
they have in front of them, if it is an
exam, or a writing, or whatever it is,
and they will do it without being that
stressful. So I think that, thats what
I try to do. And I think even a clap,
you know, on the shoulder
sometimes is enough to show them
that OK, she is here, you know, she
is looking, she is noticing.
I: What about pair work and group
work? Do you think it helps students
to release the stress they might feel?
A: When I did it the first time in the
class, it was group work actually, not
even pair work, it was difficult for
them to sort of get organised with it,
they werent used to it, so I think
when they are used to pair work or
group work, I think it can be really
useful and that it actually helps
because it goes back to what Ive
said before, that a lot of people share
the same thoughts, or have the same
questions, so they have to feel like
OK, I am not different from the
others. We are the same, we have the
same questions, were wondering
about the same things. They learn
from each other. But when they are
not used to it and, its easy for them,


ANX COPING
STRATEGY


BUILD T-S TRUST















































309

because they are not organised, its
easy for them to sort of not do what
they have to. So they start talking in
Greek, and fool around, you know
doing other things and not
concentrating, so thats the negative
part, it doesnt release the stress or
help them with the stress if they are
not well organised. But this is
something, if you want to be
successful with pair work or group
work, this is a process that you have
to go through anyway. But I think
its, it is helpful.
I: OK. Is there anything else that you
would like to add?
A: No.
I: OK. Thank you very much then.
A: Thank you.
VIEWING
LANGUAGE
CLASSROOM AS A
COMMUNITY
































310

Interview transcript #3
I: First of all, I would like to thank
you for attending the interview and
the first question is whether you
think that anxiety is positive or
negative for the students.
A: Anxiety. Well, I think that lets
talk, if, if we define what anxiety is
and the symptoms of anxiety like
stress. Would stress be a synonym to
anxiety?
I: Yes.
A: Lets say, its not necessarily, its
good to be anxious about something
in order to motivate you to finish it.
However, its unhealthy to have
prolonged periods of anxiety, where
you are forever anxious. So within
the class there should be no anxiety,
but generally you should be anxious
to finish something. There is a huge
difference. And I believe that, if
youre anxious in the class, then
youre blocked and you dont learn,
so no, you shouldnt have anxiety
within the lesson, but you should be
anxious in a positive way to finish,
to help you finish. Because if youre
not anxious and youre indifferent,
you might just give up. And if
youre too anxious and you are
overwhelmed by the anxiety, you
may also give up, because you cant
handle the anxiety, or the symptoms
of it, or whatever.
I: What about anxiety in relation to
students level of proficiency? I
mean, do you think that advanced
students are more anxious than
intermediate students, or vice versa?
A: Depending on their age. If you
have a student who is finishing
university and is intermediate and
hasnt gone into first certificate
level, the lower, they are very
anxious, because they want to finish,
they think that theyve, sort of, the
years have passed and they havent
reached certain levels, they become
very anxious, and students who







ANXIETY AND
STRESS


FACILITATING
ANX



TRAIT ANXIETY





SYMPTOM














FACTOR
AFFECTING ANX
LEVELS




















Motivates you to
finish something



DEBILITATING





BLOCK NO
LEARNING



In-class anxiety vs.
trait anxiety

Low anxious Ss or Ss
who never become
anxious lack of
motivation



AGE (perhaps
stronger influence
than level of
proficiency)

IMPLICATIONS
ABOUT GREEK
FOREIGN
LANGUAGE
EDUCATION
SYSTEM

311

Well, it depends, if they are good
students, they are not that anxious.
And it depends on the personality as
well, so I wouldnt say that there is a
huge difference between proficiency
and intermediate and their level of
anxiety. I would say its more on the
personality and how confident they
are in the, in the subject.
I: OK. What about speaking and
writing in relation to students
anxiety? Are they more anxious
when they speak in English, or when
they write in English?
A: Oh, OK. They become anxious
when there is a time, as far as
writing is concerned, they become
anxious when they are limited. They
have to write an essay in half an
hour, they become very anxious. If
they are given ample time, they
write and they write very well. I do
both, I get to write at home for as
long as they like, and then at the
frontistirio, at the school, where they
have to write within a certain limit
of time. When they have to write
within a certain limit of time, they
are anxious to finish, so there is a lot
more anxiety there. But when they
are writing with, they can refer to the
dictionary or resources or vocab and
stuff like that, I dont think that there
is any anxiety there. In fact, that
could be pleasure. With speaking,
there is anxiety when there is, there
is lack of knowledge, like when
there is a lack of grammar or vocab,
they, they might become anxious.
Yes, all that might be embarrassed, I
dont know if, if you can call that
anxious, there might be embarrass,
shy, other factors might come into it.
I: Because of their classmates?
A: Yes, they feel exposed lets say,
or they feel, yes they feel that you
know they might say something
wrong.
I: Regarding writing, why do they
have to write in thirty minutes?


PERSONALITY



CONFIDENCE







SKILL-SPECIFICITY



















SKILL-SPECIFICITY









SOURCE OF
SPEAKING ANX




HIGH
PERFORMERS




Self-confidence but
also self-efficacy
here (how confident
they are in the
subject)



WRITING
ANXIETY: time
constraints
(effect on
achievement)















SPEAKING ANX:
no input
Ss may find this
embarrassing






EMBARRASSED:
Peer pressure
Fear of making a
mistake


312

A: Because its an exam skill, so
they are prepared for the exam. Near
the end they are prepared for this,
but throughout the year we teach
them how to write properly and at an
academic level. And we allow them
to take time over writing and to
experiment with words, expressions,
etc, to develop ideas. They like that,
its good.
I: Are there special classes about
writing?
A: Yes, there are. I do most of the
writing classes with them in this
school.
I: So what do you think causes this
anxiety to the students? One source
might be their classmates, as we said
before.
A: With all the skills? Yes, anxiety
in the classroom. What causes
anxiety in the classroom? Generally
now, what causes anxiety in the
classroom would be the fact that
they do not understand what I am
talking about, and they feel they are
missing out, and Ive explained the
grammar point on the board, and
they havent a clue of what I am
talking about. This might cause
anxiety. They are too embarrassed to
ask me to repeat it, or they are too
embarrassed to, to show that they
dont understand. Then they think
Oh my god, I havent understood
this. That might cause anxiety.
Anxiety may also be caused by the
teachers reactions, or a negative
reaction, or if its, if you insult the
student, and the student is a little bit
more sensitive and you are not
aware. You might unwillingly say
something without, unintentionally
rather, say something and they take
it the wrong way. But I dont know
if that causes anxiety, or if it causes
something else, like worry. Because
I define anxiety with stress, you
know like heartbeat, blocking of the
mind, worrying. In relation to the
























ANX SOURCE

















































NOT
UNDERSTANDING
THE TEACHER



BELIEF THAT THE
TEACHER MAY
THINK LESS OF
THEM






T ATTITUDE









313

teacher in general, students feel that,
if they feel worried in the lesson
because the teacher might have said
something and they took it wrong,
they might not want, they might feel
anxious for the next lesson. They
might not want to go to the lesson.
And each student is different. Some
people have a different sense of
humour, others are more
hypersensitive, others do not take to
jokes easily, others are very nervous
and they dont understand your
humour. And again its a cultural
thing, because I am a native speaker
and I use a different type of humour.
But going back to what I said before,
if they havent understood
something, I give them time within
the lesson, in the writing, I see them
individually as well, and this allows
them to ask any questions, and then
allows me to focus on them as
individuals. Its not just a classroom
situation, we, we, I assign something
for the rest of the class to do. Then I
see them individually. It depends on
the student, and it also depends on
the class size. The smaller the class
size, the easier I think it is. I think.
I: Is there any particular classroom
activity that you think makes your
students anxious?
A: Yes, when I give them a topic to
talk about, and I do this on purpose,
to make them anxious actually. I
give them a topic. This is near the
end actually I do this. I give them a
topic and I time them to speak for
two minutes non-stop. Whatever.
Near the end of the course, so they
are quite proficient, they are quite
fluent. They, they have enough
vocab. I wouldnt do that in the very
beginning, but by the end of the
course they should be at a certain
level, and this is more like a game. I
give them like, whats the
importance of history in education,
because its something. May be






































ANX-PROVOKING
ACTIVITY












Teacher attitude
affects levels of
student motivation

































TIMED SPEAKING











314

something even easier, describe your
favourite meal. And they have to
talk about this non-stop for two
minutes. Even though they run out
of things to say, the time still like,
you give them that two minutes
thing, and there is a gap of silence
that causes them to become anxious.
Thats, thats to train them, to see
what, to train them to be able to
speak more, to expand on their
points, to you know like, to help
them speak. And probably be quick.
Yes, for example, the importance of
history. So they begin and they say
whatever they have to say and then I
say Well, you could have said this,
You could have used your own
experiences. If you use your own
experiences, then you have more to
say. Or you can bring up a memory
of your history class, giving them
ideas then, first to show them what,
how they would do it, and then
provide some suggestions for them
to find tricks in filling up the two
minutes. Again, this is an exam skill,
what I am teaching them. And it
becomes fun actually, I think. You
know, they start laughing or to
break, to break the kind of anxiety,
you may get, it depends on how you
handle the situation as well. If you,
if I see that a student cant talk, I
dont force them to. I dont make
them talk, I just think all right, OK.
There is no point in causing them the
anxiety.
I: How do you help your students to
overcome or reduce their anxiety?
A: By saying that youre good, by
encouraging them, thats really
good, especially when they come up
with Ah, Im not good at this, I
didnt do this well, point out the
things that they are good at, But
look, here you did pretty well, and
keep emphasising, as I do, that I am
very strict and that I have high
expectations, so really they are at a








































ANX-COPING
STRATERY
















































PRAISE









315

very good level, but as far as I am
concerned, I am a little bit strict and
I demand more of them than what is
needed. And I make that clear, that
your performance is good and that
you are capable of passing, even
though Ive given you a lower mark,
because I expect more from you.
And basically offer suggestions, or,
for example with writing. If they get
something wrong in their writing, or
if they havent understood, the
introduction isnt good, I give them
a model for, individually.
I: A model composition?
A: No, a model introduction. No, I
write, I write the introduction for
them in a very simple way knowing
very well that they could do the
same. Or if with the writing, because
the writing a lot of the time they
might write word for word in Greek,
point out when they are translating
word for word and keep repeating,
repeating their mistakes. Learning
from their mistakes. And the more
they learn, the more familiar they
become. I think the more familiar
they become with my method, the
less anxious they also become.
I: You said that you give them low
marks for a good purpose of course.
Do you think that they pay attention
to marks?
A: Yes. The mark is very important
for them. Its an indication of their
level.
I: Does it make them anxious?
A: I dont know. It must, of course it
must. And in fact I think it, it breaks
the trust. Subconsciously, if not
consciously, they resent their low
marks. And I think its only natural.
If I were given a mark by you and
you gave me five out of ten instead
of eight, I would resent you, even
though its not your fault, its my
performance, I would resent you. Its
only natural I think.
I: I see. Do you think that mistakes


























ANX-COPING
STRATEGY














SOURCE

































FAMILIARISING
SS WITH
TEACHING STYLE













MARKS







316

make them nervous?
A: Yes, at the beginning yes. Im all
for correcting everything. I dont
know why. I just think that you need
to correct. If youre writing and
youre here, your purpose is to learn,
especially at a proficiency level.
When youre doing proficiency,
youre at a level where you want to
learn more and you already know a
lot and you are perfecting what you
know. So basically yes I give, I
have, I give a lot of corrections. And
that way I believe that as the time
progresses which has been my
experience, the errors get less, fewer
and fewer, and they feel proud of
themselves. And I dont think its
bad to make them anxious at the
beginning, to show them that You
dont know that much, and yes, its
the reward at the end that they have
developed. At the beginning its hard
to accept but you do, Im for that.
I: Yes. Do you think that they
express their anxiety in certain ways
in the classroom?
A: Yes, I think they do, unless they
hide it well.
I: Is there any specific behaviour that
youve noticed?
A: They talk to the person next to
them to explain it rather than ask me.
And because this is a very small
class and its very easy to manage
that, you allow that to happen. How
else do they express their anxiety?
By challenging you about their
mistakes, yes they challenge. I say
this and I think this is correct, you
know, in their anxiety to be right,
that kind of thing, they challenge
you. What else? I cant think of
anything else.
I: Thats OK. I think this is my last
question. Do you ask them to work
in pairs or groups during the lesson?
A: No, very rarely.
I: What for?
A: No, this is done individually,











ERROR
CORRECTION




















BEHAVIOUR











Error correction may
make Ss anxious, but
helps them to see
what they need to
improve in, and also
how much they
developed.















Asking peers
questions
embarrassed to ask
the T


Challenging the T
not accepting the fact
that they have made a
mistake







317

because we do process writing. I
give them a topic and I give them,
now write an introduction. And they
write an introduction. And then I
correct it with them. And if its a
very small group, if its a very small
group, if there is four of them, I
correct each persons work with the
others watching, so using it as a
model for everybody. That kind of
thing. No, I dont get them to do a
lot of group work or pair work. And
I dont ask them to correct each
others essays either. I dont see the
point. But a lot of them actually do
want to listen, they are really
interested. There is a lot of
motivation in this school, where they
might sit and say Oh that as well. I
do the common mistakes at first, at
the beginning, common mistakes on
the board, and we play a game, its
like a game. We go round in class,
you know spending game or
something, and then I give them
something to do while I see each one
individually. And if someone is
sitting close by, they might pick up
something, or they might ask, and
thats it. They learn from each
others mistakes.
I: Thank you. Is there anything else
you would like to add?
A: Not really (laughs).
I: Thank you very much then.
A: Thank you.

























318










APPENDIX H:
EXAMPLE OF CODING DIARY
DATA










319

Ioannas diary
20/1/2011
Todays English lesson was very
enjoyable. It was nice to start
differently today. Firstly we talked
about the UK terror detention limit
which I found quite interesting and
was a relaxing way to start the
lesson with. We didnt do any
writing today which was a relief to
me since writing usually makes me
anxious. Correcting the homework
was a bit boring though later we had
a lot of fun talking about the
preparations we would make if we
had a big event going on. It was
really nice to listen to everyones
ideas. Later on we did some
grammar exercises concerning
inversions. Even though we had
some time pressure when asked to
do an exercise in class, I didnt feel
anxious and most of my answers
were correct too. Everyone
participated and seemed interested in
the lesson which gave a pleasant
tone to the atmosphere. The
highlight of the lesson was the end
when we watched a very interesting
video about a professor who made
some interesting points on how we
could solve the economic crisis in
Greece. I really found todays lesson
pleasant and interesting and I believe
that my oral participation in class
was satisfactory. I hope we have
more lessons like todays without
any anxiety and a lot of positive
energy.

28/1/2011
Today we had another pleasant
English lesson. First of all the test
we were supposed to have was
postponed. That was a small relief
since I wont have to stress about it.
We started the lesson with listening.
I actually got a bit stressed because
we had to do part 3 of the listening
test which is the most difficult part.







SOURCE











SOURCE























SOURCE


ANX PROVOKING
ACTIVITY








WRITING











LIMITED TIME

MARKS
FIXATED ON
ACCURACY



















TESTING


LISTENING (but the
specific part of this
specific exam)
320

Though I thought I hadnt done that
well it turned out to be exactly the
opposite and had only two mistakes
out of fifteen. After that everything
was relaxing. We had a talk about
guns in America and in Greece
which was the topic of the writing
we have for homework. Though we
didnt get much homework the
writing makes me a bit anxious. We
also did a small reading exercise in
the book which was easier than it
seemed at first. However there was
some time pressure from our teacher.
Other than that the lesson was very
pleasant. The positive atmosphere
and the interaction we all had, and
generally have, with each other
made the lesson enjoyable.

3/2/2011
Today the English lesson was a little
stressful due to the reading paper we
had to do. Generally the whole week
has been loaded with tests for the
MSU exam because its new and we
all believe that its actually a good
choice for us. The reading paper
seemed very easy but I got a bit
stressed about the time without a
reason since I had plenty to finish
the test. I have to say that the last
parts were a bit more difficult and
Im expecting to have some mistakes
there. We also got back our writing
results which were lower than the
rest of the test but still good. I have
to admit I hadnt done a good job on
the writing because I didnt have
time to finish it properly. Anyway
we finished the test and then
watched a documentary about guns
in America. At the end we were told
by our teacher that on Monday we
will write an essay on the same topic
which freaked me out a little. At
least I now know that I will have to
prepare for this writing.

10/2/2011
WEAK SELF-
CONCEPT






WRITING ANXIETY




SOURCE














SOURCE








SELF-
EVALUATIONS





SOURCE





LOW SELF-
EFFICACY
FIXATED ON
ACCURACY









LIMITED TIME














LIMITED TIME








SOURCE: LIMITED
TIME





WRITING

PREPARATION



321

Todays lesson was quite stressful.
We worked on grammar and
vocabulary exercises in class. I have
to say that the exercises were too
difficult. I felt that I wasnt going to
have much time but it turned out to
be exactly the opposite. Because I
finished a bit earlier my teacher
actually checked my exercises and
she said I did very well. That was a
small relief.
After this we put on the rest of the
documentary about guns in America.
We didnt have much time to watch
it but it was a good way to relax a
bit.
I find all these exercises too stressful
and I feel pressured by my teacher. I
would like us to work on something
more creative. For example, I like
the documentaries that we watch and
then discuss. I know the teacher is
doing this because she wants to
finish the book, but I really feel
stressed and I just cant wait for this
period to be over.

Annas diary
09/02/2011
Today the English lesson made me
feel nervous. We did a writing about
how teachers should be in the
classroom. It was a nice topic. I
wrote what I wanted although I think
I wrote too many words. We also got
our vocabulary exercises back. I
took a good mark. Im so happy
about that. Ive studied so hard for
this and this mark really means a lot
to me. I hope it will make me feel
better. I dont know why but this
period of time I feel a little bit sad
about English. I think that this is
caused because I feel anxious when I
speak in the class. I love speaking
but I cant speak in front of all these
people. I forget what I want to say
and I make mistakes. I hope this will
change.



SOURCE














SOURCE
























SOURCE

SOURCE OF
SPEAKING
ANXIETY





DIFFICULT INPUT
LIMITED TIME




FIXATED ON
ACCURACY







TYPE OF
ACTIVITIES

















FIXATED ON
ACCURACY




SPEAKING

PEER PRESSURE
FEAR OF MAKING
A MISTAKE



322

16/02/2011
Today the lesson was great. We did
some exercises and a listening too.
We also spoke about wild animals,
zoos and the Megafona extinction. I
enjoyed very much this lesson. Not
to forget we also saw some images
about a bird, geneornis, which
existed in Megafona.
Im happy! I like English! I really
want to try and study hard. I dont
care about exams and the certificates
but I really care about the
preparation. My teacher told me I
am good and she gave me more
homework and a book to read.

22/2/2011
Well Im happy! Today the lesson
was great. I got my reading and I
had 68%. I also got my use of
English in which I had 88%. I know
I must study hard. I know that I have
to review the lessons and thats what
I plan to do.
As for the lesson, I think we had a
great time reading about pandas. We
practised on summary writing. I like
practising although I sometimes
complain about it. We also did a
listening which was quite difficult I
have to admit. My teacher pause the
CD to help us find the answer. I
guess this made it easier and I found
six answers out of nine.
Im looking forward to the next
lesson in which we learn about
writing an essay.

Kikis diary
3/2/2011
This week we are having a look at
different types of writing. I cant
decide which one is the easiest for
me as they all have advantages and
disadvantages. One of these looks
more easy than the others but... it has
its tricks! The grammar and syntax
looked very simple but suspicious
too, which meant that I had to be









METACOGNITION,
POSITIVE
ATTITUDES




















































HIGH PERFORMER




HIGH PERFORMER
FIXATED ON
ACCURACY
METACOGNITION
(reviewing)





















INPUT
DIFFICULTY



323

very careful! And I made many
mistakes on sentences which were so
stupid! The answers were so obvious
that I believed they had traps. But
they didnt and I was disappointed...
again!
Yet, we still have enough time to
practise and to learn more things and
there is no reason to be anxious.
Anxiety is the worst enemy for the
students and I know it very, very
well...

10/2/2011
I think we are all afraid in the class
of grammar and vocabulary. And its
true that the English language is very
complicated! One word can mean
many things! For example minutes
means the minutes of the hour but
also the records of a meeting.
Couldnt English people find another
word? Another example is the very
give. There are so many uses of it,
how could we remember all of
them? I think that what we should
do, besides our efforts to learn, is to
trust our instinct and our luck and to
remain as calm as we can...
My teacher says that Im good in
reading comprehension. Vocabulary
needs studying, listening needs
attention, writing needs
concentration, speaking needs
courage, grammar needs practise... I
need the certificate, so everyone is
happy!
Im not complaining, I dont mind
studying, its just this feeling of
anxiety that Ive felt many times in
my life, and Im going to feel it
again... On the other hand, trying
and learning is more creative than
being anxious. So, I must relax and
concentrate on my duty.

17/2/2011
Yesterday we were talking in class
about theatre and when it was my
turn to tell my opinion, I was



EMOTIONS


ANX COPING
STRATEGY







SOURCE


















AGENCY





TRAIT ANXIETY

SELF-TALK






SPEAKING



DISAPPOINTMENT


POSITIVE
THINKING







INPUT
DIFFICULTY
(polysemy)































SPONTANEITY
324

blocked. I have a problem in saying
something. I feel that I should have
plenty of time so as to think and to
organise my thoughts, to choose the
correct words, and, finally, to
express my opinion. In contrast, I
dont find difficulties in writing.
Although our teacher is talking to us
in English, I almost always answer
in Greek. What I need, obviously, is
to try harder. How much better
things would be without the
speaking!
Another problem is grammar,
because I realised that I must
remember all the rules I have
learned. For example, the
conditionals and the inversions. And
in grammar exercises, multiple
choice, the answers that well have
to choose will be very similar
sometimes. A few seconds is all the
time we have in class to choose the
correct one. And this is so stressful!
Nevertheless, I know that I have
made progress and that Im able to
read, to listen and to understand the
English language and Im very glad!
ANXIETY







METACOGNITION





SOURCE






SOURCE




STRONG SELF-
CONCEPT
AND SPEED







PRACTICE





INPUT
DIFFICULTY
(grammar)

TRICKY
QUESTIONS

LIMITED TIME






325






APPENDIX I: CODING SCHEME
FOR TEACHER INTERVIEWS





326

Teacher interviews Coding scheme

1. Anxiety causes 1. Fear of negative evaluation
1.1 By the teacher
1.2 By the peers
2. The teacher
2.1 Teacher expectations
2.2 Teaching practice
2.2.1 Choosing a book that is not appropriate
3. Individual learner characteristics
3.1 Competitiveness
3.2 Perfectionism
4. Self-concept
4.1 Self-confidence
4.2 Self-perceptions of ability
4.3 Negative self-image
5. The education system
6. Learner agency
6.1 Job opportunities
7. The input
7.1 Verb tenses
7.2 Input difficulty (activities that are too hard for
the students)
2. Writing anxiety 1. L1 writing deficiencies
2. Lack of ideas
3. Less experience with foreign language writing
strategies
4. Concern over errors
5. Limited time to work on an activity
3. Speaking anxiety 1. School policy not to use the L1 in class
2. Nature of speaking as a skill
3. Fear of negative evaluation
4. L1 interference
5. Classroom dynamics
6. Self-concepts
4. Coping strategies 1. Praise
1.1 Students confidence
1.2 Students strengths
2. Error correction
2.1 Mistakes, part of language learning process
2.2 Sensitivity to student feelings
2.3 Selective error correction (depending on the
focus of each task)
3. Team work
4. Teaching practices
4.1 Recasts
4.2 Pre-teaching vocabulary
327

4.3 Brainstorming
4.4 Big task small, manageable tasks











328






APPENDIX J: CODING SCHEME
FOR DIARY STUDY





329

Learner diaries: Coding scheme


1. Anxiety cause

1.1. Input
1.1.1 Detailed / Complicated input
1.1.2 Unknown input
1.1.3 Insufficient input
1.1.4 Vocabulary
1.1.4.1 Polysemy
1.1.4.2 Word groupings
1.1.4.3 Difficult to memorise
1.2 Teaching practice
1.2.1 Setting time limits
1.3 Fear of making mistakes
1.4 Learner agency
1.4.1 Job reward
1.5 Fear of failure
2. Skill-specific LA 2.1 Speaking anxiety
2.1.1 Nature of the skill
2.1.2 Fear of negative evaluation
2.2 Writing anxiety
2.2.1 Task set unexpectedly
2.2.2 Error correction
2.2.3 Limited time
3. Coping strategies 3.1 Affective
3.1.1 Encouraging yourself
3.1.2 Making positive statements
3.2 Metacognitive
3.2.1 Setting objectives
3.2.2 Seeking practice opportunities
3.2.3 Self-evaluating / Self-monitoring
3.3 Extrinsic rewards
3.3.1 Teacher praise
3.3.2 Teacher support
3.3.3 Good marks
3.4 Teaching practices
3.4.1 Group work
3.4.2 Congruence between lessons content and
students likes




330






APPENDIX K: CODING SCHEME
FOR STUDENT INTERVIEWS





331

Student interviews Coding scheme

1. Anxiety causes 1.1 Weak self-concepts
1.1.1 Low self-perceptions of ability
1.1.2 Low self-efficacy
1.1.3 Low self-confidence
1.2 Competitiveness
1.3 Fear of negative evaluation peer pressure
1.4 Meeting teachers expectations
1.5 Fear of failure
1.6 Fixated on marks
1.6.1 Pass marks border line
1.7 Being unprepared
1.8 Negative past experiences
1.8.1 Very anxious teachers
1.8.2 Teachers condescending manner
1.8.3 Success (if students succeed, the school is
good)
1.8.4 Failure
1.8.5 Pass marks border line
1.8.6 Interpersonal interaction derision by
peers
1.9 Personality
1.10 Agency
1.11 Goals set
1.12 Being told that a task is difficult
1.13 Anxious peers
1.14 Group work
1.15 Perfectionism
1.16 Input Vocabulary
1.16.1 No equivalent in Greek

2. Speaking anxiety 2.1 Pronunciation sounding too foreign
2.2 Pronunciation may be inaccurate
2.3 Spontaneity
2.4 Fear of making mistakes
2.5 Accuracy
2.6 Not being understood
2.7 Low self-confidence

3. Writing anxiety 3.1 Time limit
3.2 Writing in class
3.3 Lack of ideas
3.4 Teachers not as tolerant with mistakes
3.5 L1 writing deficiencies

4. Coping strategies 4.1 Positive thinking success scenarios
4.2 Praise from teacher
4.3 Realistic expectations
4.4 Metacognition
332

4.5 Preparation
4.6 Peer seeking
4.7 Relaxation















































333





APPENDIX L:
CONSENT FORM






334

UNIVERSITY OF ESSEX
FORM OF CONSENT TO TAKE PART IN A RESEARCH PROJECT
CONFIDENTIAL
Title of project / investigation: A mixed methods approach to researching language anxiety in Greek
EFL learners.
Brief outline of project, including an outline of the procedures to be used:
The project will investigate issues of the English language anxiety of Greek EFL learners. The research
methodology will involve a combination of questionnaires, interviews, and learner diaries. The
questionnaire includes items regarding causes of language anxiety, fear of negative evaluation, speaking
and writing anxiety, as well as anxiety-coping strategies. The interviews aim to function as a follow-up to
the diaries and to the students answers to the questionnaires, and as a means of exploring the teachers
perspective on their learners anxiety. As for the diaries, they intend to examine in depth the students
negative emotions and anxiety when learning English in class.
I, .................................................................................................................. *(participants full
name) agree to take part in the above named project / investigation, the details of which have been
fully explained to me and described in writing.

Signed .................................................................. Date .........................................................
(Participant)

I, GKONOU CHRISTINA ................................................................. *(Investigators full
name) certify that the details of this project / investigation have been fully explained and
described in writing to the subject named above and have been understood by him / her.

Signed .................................................................. Date ........................................................
(Investigator)

*Please type or print in block capitals


Research and Business Development Office (smp) 01/10/04