Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

System 39 (2011) 202e214

www.elsevier.com/locate/system

An exploration of speaking-in-class anxiety with Chinese ESL

learners
Barley Mak*
Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Faculty of Education, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, China
Received 29 August 2009; revised 18 February 2011; accepted 24 February 2011
Available online 7 May 2011

Abstract
This article reports the findings of a study investigating factors contributing to the speaking-in-class anxiety of a group of 313
Chinese ESL first-year university students in Hong Kong. Results using the Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS)
of Horwitz et al. reveal five factors leading to the groups speaking-in-class anxiety. The five factors, identified by factor analysis,
include: speech anxiety and fear of negative evaluation; uncomfortableness when speaking with native speakers; negative attitudes
towards the English classroom; negative self-evaluation; and fear of failing the class/consequences of personal failure. In addition,
survey results show that speaking in front of the class without preparation, being corrected when speaking, inadequate wait-time
and not being allowed to use the first language in a second language class were also identified by the respondents as important
factors leading to speaking-in-class anxiety. The article concludes with pedagogic implications, for second/foreign language
teachers when attempting to create a low-anxiety classroom.
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Speaking-in-class anxiety; Chinese ESL learners; Hong Kong university students

1. Introduction and background

This section provides the background to an investigation into the anxieties of Hong Kong Chinese students of
spoken English. Scovel (1978: 134) defines anxiety in language learning as a state of apprehension, a vague fear.
Given that learners feelings about learning affect their ability to learn, research evidence reveals that one of the most
important affective variables in the process is anxiety (Brown, 1987; Chastain, 1976; MacIntyre and Gardner, 1991).
Hurd (2007: 488) believes that language anxiety has become central to any examination of factors contributing to
learning process and learner achievement while Arnold and Brown (1999) believe that anxiety in language learning
may possibly be the most pervasive obstruction to the learning process.
Aida (1994), Cheng (1994) and Gregersen (2003) have established a negative association between anxiety and
second/foreign language performance (in this article, second language or L2 is used to refer to both second and foreign
languages). However, the elements of causation between them are not clear (MacIntyre, 1995; Sparks and Ganschow,
2007).
* Tel.: 852 2609 6912 ; fax: 852 3163 4205.
E-mail address: barleymak@cuhk.edu.hk.
0346-251X/$ - see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.system.2011.04.002

B. Mak / System 39 (2011) 202e214

203

1.1. Anxiety and speaking-in-class anxiety

Speaking in class is probably the most frequently cited concern of anxious second language learners (Aida, 1994; Liu
and Jackson, 2008; Mak and White, 1997). Horwitz et al. (1986) call second language performance anxiety communication apprehension. There is plenty of research to evidence this phenomenon: Kleinmann (1977) found her Spanish
and Arabic EFL students oral performance was positively related to anxiety while Baileys (1983: 67) students cited the
stressful, competitive nature of oral public performance as the major source of anxiety in their SL classrooms; American
university students of Spanish reported oral presentations, role plays and charades as their most anxiety-provoking
language activities (Koch and Terrell, 1991); Prices (1991) American students of French reported speaking in the
foreign language created the greatest anxiety while Samimy and Tabuse (1992) found that speaking anxiety was one of
the most important factors in determining the oral performance of American university students of Japanese.
Horwitz et al. (1986) were the first to carry out a detailed examination of the dynamics of foreign language anxiety
by creating and using the Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS). Young (1990), following Horwitz,
developed a questionnaire to examine more systematically the types of in class, speaking-oriented practices that evoke
anxiety from language students.
Research into language anxiety was first carried out largely with English-speaking learners of Indo-European
languages (e.g. Kleinmann, 1977), and, later, Japanese (e.g. Aida, 1994) mainly in the United States with highachieving students (e.g. Aida, 1994; Saito et al., 1999).
Given that earlier studies were conducted in the United States, it would seem worthwhile to consult studies of other
ethnic groups of language learners in different learning contexts. Sila (2010), investigating foreign language anxiety in
Turkish adolescent students, found that anxiety exists in the receptive skills at beginner level but that, as levels of
proficiency increase, anxiety emerges in the productive skills. In the context of non-USA studies of Chinese learners
of English, Mak and White (1997) noted that Chinese learners of English as a second language (ESL) in New Zealand,
experienced greater speaking-in-class anxiety than their American counterparts. In Mainland China, Liu and Jackson
(2008) noted that ESL learners who participated in inter-personal conversations exhibited speaking-in-class anxiety.
In the context of non-USA studies, Yan and Horwitz (2008) identified 12 major thematic affinities (variables) with
Chinese FL learners: regional differences; language aptitude; gender; foreign language anxiety; language learning
interest and motivation; class arrangements; teacher characteristics; language learning strategies; test types; parental
influence; comparison with peers and achievement.
It is possible that these findings may be specific to Chinese students of English. Given the American education
systems emphasis on self-expression, there is evidence that Chinese students focus more on listening, rote memorisation and teacher instructions (e.g. DeHaan, 2006; Kember and Gow, 1989; Levinsohn, 2007; Li, 2007). As
American foreign/second language students responses cannot be automatically equated with Chinese students, the
present study thus focuses on the speaking-in-class anxiety of Chinese ESL learners in Hong Kong. Some of the areas
that emerged from qualitative feedback from respondents, beyond those encompassed by Horwitzs model, and their
implications for learners and teachers were identified as wait-time (the length of time that the teacher is normally
prepared to wait for a student to respond to a question or prompt before selecting another student to answer the
question or moving on), insufficient time for preparation before speaking in class, being corrected in class, and not
being allowed to use the L1 (Butzkamm, 2003; Copland and Neokleous, 2010; Macaro, 2005). These issues are
discussed below in the context of speaking anxiety and their implications for pedagogic practice not only in Hong
Kong but also in other countries.
1.2. Impact of ESL speaking-in-class anxiety on Hong Kong students
Hong Kong has a nine-year free and compulsory education system (6 primary 3 secondary years) although most
students complete five years of secondary education and many progress for a further 2 years to prepare for university
entrance, similar to the British system. The system will change in 2012 to a 6 3 3 system with one examination at
the end of 12 years. To compensate for the loss of one year, tertiary education will move from 3 years to 4 years.
Based on the 2006 census, (Hong Kong conducts a census every 5 years) the population is 95% Chinese with 91%
using Cantonese as their L1 and a further 6% claiming they could speak it (Census and Statistics Department, 2007).
English, one of two official languages, is considered an important curriculum element although Liu and Littlewood
(1997) reveal that Hong Kongs students have few opportunities to speak English in class. English in Hong Kong has

204

B. Mak / System 39 (2011) 202e214

an input-poor environment where most communication both in and outside the English classroom is in the L1
(Kouraogo, 1993), a major factor contributing to students poor English performance and speaking-in-class anxiety.
This paper identifies speaking-in-class anxiety as an important factor in student attitudes to English. This existing
classroom anxiety is exacerbated by Hong Kongs public examinations in English where the examinations oral
component requires role plays, discussion of a topic, oral presentations and participation in group discussions. Thus,
existing speaking-in-class anxiety mounts as students practice their speaking skills in class when preparing for public
examinations (Walker, 1997; Fung, 2005; Phillips, 2005).
In 2004, concern about low standards of speaking proficiency in English in Hong Kong led to calls for ways to reduce
Chinese ESL students speaking-in-class anxiety levels in early Key Learning Stages. When the Territory-wide System
Assessment (TSA) was implemented to measure competency in Chinese, English and Mathematics at Primary 3,
Primary 6 and Secondary 3 (Grade 9), speaking in English was specifically addressed by the inclusion of group
discussion in the English papers. In 2007, 2008 and 2010, results showed that the attainment rate for Secondary 3 students
was lower than that achieved by Primary 3 and 6 students (Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority, 2009).
Comparative figures for 2009 are not available because the TSA was cancelled because of the H1N1 Swine Influenza
outbreak. One reason for the poorer speaking results may be that adolescence, and its concomitant self-consciousness,
contribute to Secondary 3 student anxiety (Ollendick et al., 1994). Sila (2010) noted that when called upon to
demonstrate productive skills, older adolescents in Turkey feel more anxious than their younger peers.
Since no systematic studies of the factors contributing to the speaking-in-class anxiety of Chinese ESL students in
Hong Kong exist, it is important an issue worthy of investigation is explored so that data can be available for policymakers to devise ways of mitigating anxiety while improving students oral proficiency. The relationships between
speaking-in-class anxiety, wait-time, the use of the first language by Chinese ESL learners and their implications for
pedagogy in Hong Kong and elsewhere have not hitherto been explored. They will be explored in this paper. The
research question is: What are the factors contributing to the speaking-in-class anxiety of Chinese ESL first-year
university students in Hong Kong?
2. Research method
2.1. Participantss demographic details
Participants were 313 first-year randomly-selected participants from a Hong Kong university taking compulsory
English for Academic Purposes Courses. All but 3.4%, who had a variety of equivalent qualifications, met the
university language entrance requirement for English and Chinese in public examinations.
2.2. Research design and instrumentation
The research was carried out in three phases: the pilot, the quantitative phase (questionnaires) and the qualitative
phase (semi-structured interviews, discussion and participant observation). This paper focuses on the quantitative
findings of the study although qualitative data that emerged during the pilot phase affected the eventual creation and
design of the questionnaire.
The following paragraphs describe the design of the questionnaire, explain the 33 items constituting Part One,
Section A of the questionnaire which replicate those used by Horwitz et al. (1986) in their Foreign Language
Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS). The FLCAS was adopted in the development of instruments for the present study
since it employs a situation specific approach, an approach which has yielded more meaningful and consistent results
than other approaches in second language speaking anxiety studies (e.g. MacIntyre and Gardner, 1991). Part One,
Section B is used to describe the additional six questionnaire items that were developed after feedback from the
students during the pilot phase of the study. Among the 39 items in Part One of the questionnaire, the majority of the
items (28 items) are positively worded; 11 items are negatively worded in order to serve as a crosscheck. Finally, Part
Two of the questionnaire consists of 8 items, used for purposes of data triangulation. These too arose from students
during the pilot phase.
As summarized above, data collected during the pilot phase, consisting of semi-structured interviews, informal
conversational interviews and participant observation, formed the basis for the English language questionnaire.
Designed to elicit participants speaking-in-class anxiety levels, the items were administered during English classes.

B. Mak / System 39 (2011) 202e214

205

Each item contains a statement intended to elicit factors in ESL speaking-in-class anxiety. In Part One, Section A of
the questionnaire, only the first thirty-three items adapted from Horwitz et al. (1986) were included e.g. the terms
foreign language and language were changed to English to match the Hong Kong context. Part One, Section B of the
questionnaire, items 34e39, included 6 items related to concepts such as wait-time, the use of the first language in the
class (Chinese in this context) and error correction. These items, as stated above, were based on information elicited
from participants during the pilot phase of the investigation. All three parts of the questionnaire were administered at
the same time.
Horwitz et al.s (1986) well-validated FLCAS is based on an analysis of three potential factors of anxiety, namely
communication apprehension, negative evaluation of performance and test anxiety. Their study suggests that language
anxiety can be discriminated reliably from other types of anxiety.
The FLCASs thirty-three items use a five-point Likert scale. In the present study, the five-point Likert scale was
used in the pilot study but as most responses were at the mid point, a four-point scale was adopted for the current study
in order to force respondents to commit themselves. Aggregating the ratings on the thirty-nine items in Part one of the
questionnaire derived an anxiety score for each participant. The theoretical range for the 33 items of the FLCAS is
33e165 (the 33-item questionnaire with a five-point Likert scale) while the range for Part One Section A of the present
study is 33e132 (a 33-item questionnaire using a four-point scale).
Part One section B of the questionnaire (items 34e39), includes the additional questionnaire items administered
after student feedback in the pilot phase of the study. These relate to concepts such as wait-time, the use of the first
language in the class (Chinese in this context) and error correction. The theoretical range of this part is 6e24 (a 6-item
questionnaire with a four-point scale).
In Part Two of the questionnaire, participants indicated the degree of anxiety level they experienced when asked to
speak in the English class, when insufficient wait-time occurred and when the use of L1 was prohibited.
The scale ranges from 1 (very low) to 100% (very high) with intervals of 20%. The higher the percentage, the
greater the anxiety. These items were administered at the same time as Part One, Sections A and B.
To test the consistency of participants choices and provide triangulation for data reliability, some items, identified
as important by participants in the qualitative pilot data were included in both Part One and Part Two of the questionnaire, e.g. speaking without preparation, wait-time and using Chinese in an English class. Table 1 reveals this
aspect of the research design regarding triangulation for data reliability.
It should be noted that previous speaking-in-class anxiety studies (for example, Aida, 1994; Horwitz et al., 1986;
Liu and Jackson, 2008; Yan and Horwitz, 2008) did not include wait-time and use of L1. These factors were included
in Part One Section B and Part Two of the questionnaire because participants identified them, during the pilot, as
contributing to speaking-in-class anxiety.
2.3. Data collection procedures
In the pilot, participants found difficulties with a five-point Likert scale in Part One Section A because of mid-point
selection. They also had problems making choices in Part One, Section B. Therefore both sections were modified to
provide four choices. In the main study, a total of 313 first-year university students filled out the questionnaire in their
English lessons.
2.4. Data analysis
The first 33 items in Part One of the questionnaires (FLCAS) four-point scale: strongly agree, agree, disagree
and strongly disagree and the six items in Part One Section B were given numerical values of 4 for strongly agree,
Table 1
Cross referencing of items in Part One and Part Two.
Factors
a
b
c
d

Degree of being exposed when speaking

Wait-time
Test Anxiety
Use of L1 (Chinese in this context)

Part One (Sections A and B)

Part Two

9, 18, 24, 33,35

37
2, 6, 8, 10, 21, 22
39

1, 2, 3
4, 5
6, 7
8

206

B. Mak / System 39 (2011) 202e214

3 for agree, etc. In the analysis, responses of the 11 negatively-worded items were reversed and recoded to ensure
that, in all instances, a high score represented high anxiety in the English class. Missing responses were not counted.
As early as the 1960s, factor analysis was employed in language learning studies (e.g. Carroll et al., 1962;
MacIntyre and Gardner, 1989, 1991; Pimsleur et al., 1962). They have shown consistently that language anxiety is
associated with factors defined by self-rated proficiency, actual proficiency or both with the second language (e.g.
Aida, 1994; Gardner et al., 1984; Liu and Jackson, 2008; MacIntyre et al., 1997). As factor analysis is commonly
employed in SL anxiety studies and this study aims at investigating factors contributing to speaking-in-class anxiety,
factor analysis with varimax rotation was also adopted in the present study. In using Horwitz et al.s model with
students of Japanese, Aida (1994) notes that principal component analysis with varimax rotation was used because of
conceptual simplicity and ease of description. The purpose of using this method of data analysis is to reduce data and
make interpretation of that data easier.
3. Results and discussion
The Cronbach coefficient alpha referring to the internal consistency (reliability) for the adapted four-point FLCAS
(Part One Section A) computed on participants was 0.91, indicating that the internal consistency of the adapted fourpoint scale FLCAS is satisfactorily reliable. Results showed that the participant mean score was 80.09 for the 33 items
using a four-point scale FLCAS (Part One Section A, with a range of 1e132). The figure of 80.09 is very close to the
mean of 82.5. As a percentage, 60.7% (80.09/132) is also very comparable to the 61.3% (101.22/165) reported by
Truitt (1995) on the speaking-in-class anxiety of Korean students learning English as a second language.
The results of the research are presented here in two segments, 3.1 and 3.2. Segment 3.1 presents and discusses the
results of the factor analysis of Part One Section A of the survey which contains items 1e33. Segment 3.2 discusses
Part One Section B of the survey e the results of the analysis of items 34e39. To further validate and triangulate the
results generated from Part One, results from Part Two, indicating the anxiety that emerged in the eight questionnaire
items, will also be discussed.
3.1. Factors contributing to speaking-in-class anxiety identified by factor analysis (items 1e33 of the FLCAS)
In the initial run of rotated component matrix on the first thirty-three items, five factors emerged. Table 2 shows the
loadings of variables on factors, communalities, and the percentage of the variance in Part One, Section A of the
questionnaire. The names given to the factors described here are those given by the researcher.
As Table 2 shows, factor analysis with varimax rotation identified 5 major factors contributing to students ESL
speaking-in-class anxiety. The names allocated to the five factors are those created by the researcher.
Factor one contains fifteen items with examples such as I never feel quite sure of myself when I am speaking in my
English class (item 1) and It embarrasses me to volunteer answers in my English class (item 13). This factor is
named speech anxiety and fear of negative evaluation because items loaded on this factor covered both of these
aspects. Analysis indicates that speech anxiety and fear of negative evaluation are not wholly independent concepts.
The second factor, with items 8, 11, 14 and 32, is called uncomfortableness when speaking with native speakers.
Examples are I would not be nervous speaking English with native speakers (item 14) and I would probably feel
comfortable around native speakers of English (item 32).
With three items (5, 6 and 17), factor three is categorised as negative attitudes towards the English class e.g. It
wouldnt bother me at all to take more English classes (item 5) and I often feel like not going to my English class
(item 17).
Factor 4s two items (7 and 23), entitled negative self-evaluation, are I keep thinking that the other students are
better at English than I am (item 7) and I always feel that the other students speak English better than I do (item 23).
Factor five includes three items (10, 15 and 22) and is called fear of failing the class/consequences of personal
failure. Examples are I worry about the consequences of failing my English class (item 10) and I get upset when
I dont understand what the teacher is correcting (item 22).
Table 3 presents the ranking of the mean of each of the 33 items (the same as Horwitz et al.s FLCAS, 1986). The
situations/activities described in items with a mean above 2.5 are regarded as comparatively more anxiety-provoking
than those with a mean below 2.5.

B. Mak / System 39 (2011) 202e214

207

Table 2
The loadings of variables on factors, communalities, and percent of the variance in Part One Section A of the questionnaire.
Label

Speech Anxiety and

Fear of Negative
Evaluation

Uncomfortableness
when speaking with
Native Speakers

Negative Attitudes
towards the English
Class

Negative
Self-evaluation

Fear of Failing the

Class/Consequences
of personal failure

Item

Factor 1

Factor 2

Factor 3

Factor 4

Factor 5

Item 27
0.69a
Item 3
0.69
Item 9
0.67
Item 31
0.64
Item 4
0.64
Item 33
0.64
Item 12
0.61
Item 13
0.59
Item 19
0.57
Item 24
0.57
Item 26
0.56
Item 29
0.56
Item 16
0.55
Item 1
0.54
Item 20
0.54
Item 32
0.74
Item 14
0.71
Item 11
0.66
Item 8
0.65
Item 17
Item 5
Item 6
Item 23
Item 7
Item 10
Item 22
Item 15
11.3
% of variance
20.4b
% of total variance accounted for by the solution

0.72
0.70
0.66
0.80
0.75

9.9

6.7

0.68
0.51
0.50
6.2

h2c
0.68
0.63
0.55
0.48
0.57
0.53
0.48
0.52
0.46
0.48
0.51
0.57
0.51
0.58
0.45
0.61
0.62
0.57
0.60
0.63
0.57
0.52
0.73
0.70
0.57
0.45
0.51
54.5

Factor loading means correlation between the item and factor. The maximum is 1 (highly correlated), the minimum is 0 (no relation). 0.5 is used
as a cutoff for the inclusion of items in interpretation for the factor. Loading means how much that factor can explain for the variance of that item.
b
Among the 5 factors, they account for 54.5% of total variance for the solution. For each of the factors, the % of variance is shown. The higher the
% of variance, the more important that factor accounts for the solution.
c
The proportion of the variance of the ith item contributed by the factors is called the ith item. h2 means the variance accounted by the 5 factors,
the higher the value, the more suitable the factor chosen.

The mean scores range from 2.11 for item 12 (In English class, I can get so nervous I forget things I know) to 2.81
for item 10 (I worry about the consequences of failing my English class). The mean scores of thirteen items are above
the mean (2.5), ranging from 2.54 to 2.81, implying that these thirteen items provoke higher ESL speaking-in-class
anxiety levels than the other twenty items.
The means of items 11 (2.76), 14 (2.63), 8 (2.61) and 32 (2.57), labelled uncomfortableness when speaking with
native speakers (factor 2) are all above the mean while the means of items 7 (2.6) and 23(2.59) labelled as negative
self-evaluation (factor 4) are also above the mean, meaning that these items are more anxiety provoking than other
items. In factor five, fear of failing the class/consequences of personal failure, items 10 (2.81) and 15 (2.58) score
above the mean.
These five factors account for 54.5% of the total variance for the solution. This means that using varimax rotation in
the analysis of data in the FCLAS (Part One Section A) revealed its underlying components e a five factor solution.
Factor one, speech anxiety and fear of negative evaluation is the most important factor contributing to second
language learning speaking-in-class anxiety. The five factors contributing to ESL speaking-in-class anxiety are
presented below in level of importance:

B. Mak / System 39 (2011) 202e214

208

Table 3
Ranking of the mean of each of the 33 items in Part One Section A of the questionnaire.
Item No.

Statement

Mean

Factor

10
11*
28*
18*
14*
20
8*
7
23
15
32*
33
9
30
5*
2*
1
22*
29
27
6
17
3
13
31
4
24
26
21
16
19
25
12

I worry about the consequences of failing my English class.

I dont understand why some people get so upset over English classes.
When Im on my way to English class, I feel very sure and relaxed.
I feel confident when I speak English in English class.
I would not be nervous speaking English with native speakers.
I can feel my heart beating when Im going to be called on in English class.
I am usually at ease during tests in my English class.
I keep thinking that the other students are better at English than I am.
I always feel that the other students speak English better than I do.
I get upset when I dont understand what the teacher is correcting.
I would probably feel comfortable around native speakers of English.
I get nervous when the English teacher asks questions which I havent prepared in advance.
I start to panic when I have to speak without preparation in English class.
I feel overwhelmed by the number of rules you have to learn in order to speak English.
It wouldnt bother me at all to take more English classes.
I dont worry about making mistakes in English class.
I never feel quite sure of myself when I am speaking in my English class.
I dont feel pressure to prepare very well for English class.
I get nervous when I dont understand every word the English teacher says.
I get nervous and confused when I am speaking English in my English class.
During English class, I find myself thinking about things that have nothing to do with the course.
I often feel like not going to my English class.
I tremble when I know that Im going to be called on in English class.
It embarrasses me to volunteer answers in my English class.
I am afraid that the other students will laugh at me when I speak English.
It frightens me when I dont understand what the teacher is saying in English.
I feel very self-conscious about speaking English in front of other students.
I feel more tense and nervous in my English class than in my other classes.
The more I study for an English test, the more confused I get.
Even if I am well prepared for English class, I feel anxious about it.
I am afraid that my English teacher is ready to correct every mistake I make.
English class moves so quickly I worry about getting left behind.
In English class, I can get so nervous I forget things I know.

2.81
2.76
2.76
2.71
2.63
2.62
2.61
2.6
2.59
2.58
2.57
2.55
2.54
2.47
2.45
2.44
2.38
2.38
2.37
2.31
2.31
2.31
2.29
2.29
2.27
2.25
2.25
2.18
2.18
2.17
2.17
2.15
2.11

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

Notes: 4 Strongly Agree; 3 Agree; 2 Disagree; 1 Strongly Disagree; Mean: (1 23 4)/4 2.5; * with negative loading.

Factor
Factor
Factor
Factor
Factor

1
2
3
4
5

e
e
e
e
e

speech anxiety and fear of negative evaluation (20.4% of variance)

uncomfortableness when speaking with native speakers (11.3% of variance)
negative attitudes towards the English class (9.9% of variance)
negative self-evaluation (6.7% of variance)
fear of failing the class/consequences of personal failure (6.2% of variance)

3.2. Factors contributing to speaking-in-class anxiety as identified by items 34e39 in Part One, Section B of the
questionnaire
Items 34e39 emerged as a result of student feedback from the pilot study. They were considered important enough
to be included in Part One Section B of the questionnaire. Here, they are analysed and their means identified in the
same way as the other 33 items in Table 3. Table 4 ranks the means of items 34e39.
Results indicate that enough wait-time helps lower the ESL speaking-in-class anxiety of participants because the
mean for item 37 of 3.02 (When I am given enough time to think of the answer, I feel more confident to speak in an
English class) is the highest of all 39 items.
Four items (35, 36, 37 and 39) out of the six added by the researcher for the present study have a mean higher than
2.5, revealing important aspects of speaking-in-class anxiety for Chinese ESL learners of English. In addition to item
37, they are: item 35 (I start to panic when I have to speak in front of the class without preparation in English class.)

B. Mak / System 39 (2011) 202e214

209

Table 4
Ranking of the means of items 34e39 in Part One Section B of the questionnaire.
Item No

Statement

Mean

37
39
36
35
38a
34a

When I am given enough time to think of the answer, I feel more confident to speak in an English class.
If my English teacher allows me to use Chinese at times, I feel more comfortable to volunteer answers in class.
I will speak more in class if my classmates do not laugh at my mistakes.
I start to panic when I have to speak in front of the class without preparation in English class.
I feel relaxed when speaking English with friends I know.
I like my English teacher to correct me once I make a mistake.

3.02
2.76
2.74
2.52
2.20
2.04

Item with negative loading.

2.52; item 36 (I will speak more in class if my classmates do not laugh at my mistakes.) 2.74; and item 39 (If my English
teacher allows me to use Chinese at times, I feel more comfortable volunteering answers in class.) 2.76.
To further validate and triangulate the results generated from Part One, when asked to speak in English in an
English class, participants were asked in Part Two to indicate anxiety when eight different kinds of activities or
behaviour occurred. The scale ranges from 1 (very low) to 100% (very high) with intervals of 20%. Table 5 presents
the means of speaking-in-class anxiety levels in Part Two.
Results in Part Two show that the most anxiety-provoking items are: speaking with exposure to others; and short
wait-time (the mean for when the teacher is assessing you when you speak 72.9; when speaking in front of the
class 72.2 and when given a short time to think about the answer before speaking in class 69.1.)
These findings are consistent with those in Part One because fear of negative evaluation and speech anxiety also
emerged as one of the five factors contributing to second language learning speaking-in-class anxiety in the present
study. Short wait-time is also a factor of ESL speaking-in-class anxiety. In Part One of the questionnaire, results
indicate that participants feel that enough wait-time helps lower their speaking-in-class anxiety. This perception is
verified by the high mean of 3.02 for item 37 When I am given enough time to think of the answer, I feel more
confident to speak in an English class.
The mean of item 35 (I start to panic when I have to speak in front of the class without preparation in English class)
is 2.52, slightly above the mean of 2.5, implying that this item provokes higher speaking-in-class anxiety level when
compared to other items with a mean below 2.5. These findings are also confirmed in part two of the questionnaire.
Items 9 (I start to panic when I have to speak without preparation in English class) and 33 (I get nervous when the
English teacher asks a question which I havent prepared in advance) are similar in nature. Item 35 (I start to panic
when I have to speak in front of the class without preparation in English class) goes beyond items 9 and 33 as the
participants had to speak in front of the class without preparation.
The finding that feeling exposed when speaking provokes higher speaking-in-class anxiety is similar to that of
Young (1990) as well as Mak and White (1997). However, results in the present study go further by confirming that
speaking in front of the class in a second/foreign language classroom without preparation is the most speaking-in-class
anxiety-provoking factor.
The present study reveals that although error correction by teachers as part of the learning process is considered
normal, correction by peers or teachers when speaking is regarded as anxiety-provoking when the highlighting of
learner mistakes is used to elaborate teaching points.
Table 5
Mean of percentages in speaking-in-class anxiety levels in Part Two of the questionnaire.
Item No

Teacher behaviour or classroom activities

Mean (out of 100)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Anxiety
Anxiety
Anxiety
Anxiety
Anxiety
Anxiety
Anxiety
Anxiety

72.2
33.6
27.8
32.7
69.1
72.9
67.9
26.1

level
level
level
level
level
level
level
level

when speaking in front of the class.

when speaking in a group of 3 - 4 people in class.
when speaking in a pair in class.
when given a long time to think about the answer before speaking in class.
when given a short time to think about the answer before speaking in class.
when the teacher is assessing you when you speak.
when your classmates are assessing you when you speak.
when you are allowed to use some Chinese in an English class.

210

B. Mak / System 39 (2011) 202e214

The mean of 2.76 for item 39 (If my English teacher allows me to use Chinese at times, I feel more comfortable to
volunteer answers in class) indicates that being allowed to use the L1 at times lowers speaking-in-class anxiety. These
results are confirmed by findings identified in part two.
To summarise, the factors contributing to second language learning speaking-in-class anxiety identified in the
study are:










speech anxiety and fear of negative evaluation;

uncomfortableness when speaking with native speakers;
negative attitudes towards the English class;
negative self-evaluation;
fear of failing the class/consequences of personal failure;
speaking in front of the class without preparation;
being corrected when speaking;
inadequate wait-time;
not being allowed to use the first language in a second/foreign language class.

The most important factor contributing to ESL speaking-in-class anxiety identified in the present study is speech
anxiety and fear of negative evaluation accounting for 20.4% of the variance. Speech anxiety and fear of negative
evaluation are identified in some studies as separate factors leading to second language learning speaking-in-class
anxiety (for example, Horwitz et al., 1986; Liu and Jackson, 2008; MacIntyre and Gardner, 1989). In the present
study, however, the label of speech anxiety and fear of negative evaluation is given to factor one because items
included in this factor indicate a students apprehension about speaking in an English class (items 9 and 33) and fear of
embarrassment when negatively evaluated by others (items 13 and 31).
Although it may appear initially that two separate concepts exist (speech anxiety and fear of negative evaluation),
they are, in fact, linked. They overlap and are not wholly independent of each other. It can be asserted that they are
probably two labels describing one phenomenon in a language-learning situation. This assertion is supported by
MacIntyre and Gardner (1991), who report that McCroskeys (1984) Personal Report of Communication Apprehension Scale as well as Watson and Friends (1969) Fear of Negative Evaluation measure loaded on the same factor.
Of the 15 items in the factor entitled speech anxiety and fear of negative evaluation (items 27, 3, 9, 31, 4, 33, 12, 13,
19, 24, 26, 29, 16, 1, and 20) that account for 20.4% of the variance, thirteen also load on the same single factor
(speech anxiety and fear of negative evaluation) in Aidas study. Item 19 in the present study is classified by Horwitz
et al. (1986) as test anxiety and does not load on any factors in Aida (1994). This is unsurprising as item 19 can
indeed be classified as test anxiety or fear of negative evaluation, depending on the participants viewpoint. Item 26
(I feel more tense and nervous in my English class than in my other class) loads on the factor fear of failing the class/
consequences of personal failure in Aidas (1994) study. It is just as likely, it can be argued, that participants anxiety
is aroused by fear of failing the class/consequences of personal failure or fear of negative evaluation, depending on
the participants view of item 26.
Four items (32, 14, 11 and 8) in the factor entitled uncomfortableness when speaking with native speakers account
for 11.3% of the variance and are negatively associated with factor two. All items except item 8 (I am usually at ease
during tests in my English class) load on the same factor, using the same label, in Aidas (1994) study. Though this
factor is not the second, but the third most important factor with a variance of 5.6% in Aidas (1994) study, the results
in the two studies are comparable and indicate that speaking with native speakers provokes speaking-in-class anxiety
in SL/FL learners.
Item 8 (I am usually at ease during tests in my English class) loads on speech anxiety and fear of negative
evaluation in Aidas (1994) study and is categorised as test anxiety by Horwitz et al. (1986) as well as Liu and Jackson
(2008). The difference in category labels can be accounted for because the contacts/communications between
participants in the present study and native speakers of English usually happen in the classroom when the native
speaker is both teacher and assessor, making it difficult to specify whether the speaking-in-class anxiety is aroused by
test anxiety as suggested by Horwitz et al. (1986) and Liu and Jackson (2008) or feeling uncomfortable speaking with
native speakers of English as suggested in the present study.
Three items (17, 5 and 6) load on the factor negative attitudes towards the English class, accounting for 9.95% of
variance. Item 5 is negatively associated with this factor. Items 5 (It wouldnt bother me at all to take more

B. Mak / System 39 (2011) 202e214

211

English classes) and 17 (I often feel like not going to my English class) also load on the factor with the same label in
Aidas (1994) study (with a variance of 4.7%). Item 6 (During English class, I find myself thinking about things that
have nothing to do with the course) is categorised by Horwitz et al. (1986) as test anxiety while items 5, 6 and 17 are
unloaded in Liu and Jackson (2008).
MacIntyre and Gardner (1991) as well as Aida (1994) state that students attitudes towards a new language can be
affected by their previous learning experiences. This study confirms their findings but also provides evidence that
students negative attitudes towards the language class can contribute to their overall levels of second/foreign
language anxiety.
Two items (23 and 7) load on the fourth factor, negative self-evaluation, accounting for 6.7% of the variance. Both
items are categorised by Horwitz et al. (1986) as fear of negative evaluation and load on Aidas (1994) factor speech
anxiety and fear of negative evaluation. The difference in terms of labels is not surprising because it can be argued
that negative self-evaluation, identified in the present study, can be a sub-category within the concept fear of
negative evaluation used in other studies.
The fifth factor, fear of failing the class/consequences of personal failure, includes three items (10, 15 and 22)
accounting for 6.2% of the variance. Item 22 (I dont feel pressure to prepare very well for English class) is negatively
associated with factor five. Both items 10 (I worry about the consequences of failing my English class) and 22 load on
the factor with the same label in Aidas (1994) study. Item 15 (I get upset when I dont understand what the teacher is
correcting) which does not load on any factors in Aidas study, is categorised as fear of negative evaluation in
Horwitz et al. (1986), implying that fear of failing the class/consequences of personal failure can be part of Horwitzs
fear of negative evaluation. The participants in the present study, however, are very much concerned about the
consequences of failing English. Indeed, passing the English course is a prerequisite for graduation.
Horwitz et al. (1986) and Liu and Jackson (2008) have identified test anxiety as a component of second/foreign
speaking-in-class anxiety. Results in the present study, however, do not support this. The findings of the present study
are similar to the results of some anxiety studies e.g. Aida (1994) and MacIntyre and Gardner (1989) for whom
speaking-in-class anxiety and peer evaluation are part of the elements of foreign language classroom anxiety but for
whom test anxiety is not. Test anxiety may be a general problem, non-specific to the language classroom.
The test anxiety findings here are consistent with MacIntyre and Gardner (1991) who conclude, as does Aida (1994:
162), that test anxiety is a general anxiety problem e unlike Horwitz et al. (1986). Speech anxiety and fear of negative
evaluation are considered relatively enduring personality traits whereas test anxiety is regarded as a state marked by
temporary reactions to an academic or evaluation situation.
4. Conclusions and implications
In this concluding section, the implications of the findings of this study are discussed not only for Chinese speakers
of English but also for non-Chinese learners.
Second language learning speaking-in-class anxiety in the Chinese context warrants attention because in addition
to confirming previous findings (for example, Aida, 1994; Horwitz et al., 1986; Liu and Jackson, 2008), this study has
also provided evidence that students negative attitudes towards the language class can contribute to their overall
levels of second/foreign language anxiety. It reveals that negative self-evaluation is an important factor leading to
speaking-in-class anxiety. Negative attitudes can affect oral performance and grades when meeting compulsory
requirements to speak and contribute to role-plays and discussions in a positive manner. These requirements are
unlikely to abate, with more and more emphasis placed on the ability to communicate satisfactorily so all language
teachers, not just teachers of Chinese students, should endeavour to mitigate the effects of anxiety wherever possible.
Given that the results reveal that affective variables such as anxiety influence learners L2 performance the implications are that all language professionals need to respond not only to students linguistic but also affective needs, by
attempting to provide a secure and comfortable learning atmosphere, free from fear of speaking and conducive to risk
taking in the target language.
One finding that has strong implications for all teachers of EFL, but particularly for teachers of Chinese-speaking
EFL students, is the influence of appropriate wait-time in reducing anxiety. Wait-time, originally identified for science
students by Rowe (1974a, 1974b, 1986), is culturally significant for Chinese students in the L2 language classroom.
The Chinese students are clear that they usually require longer wait-time to speak up and respond than their European
counterparts because group unity and face are important elements of their culture. These two elements are

212

B. Mak / System 39 (2011) 202e214

threatened by an inability or reluctance to speak when they feel pressured. Tsui (2001: 124), when investigating
classroom interaction, concludes that not giving enough wait-time for learners to process a question and formulate an
answer is another reason for lack of response from students. However, she also finds that .excessive lengthening of
wait-time exacerbated anxiety amongst students (Tsui, 2001). The anxiety caused by the long-standing but invidious
practice of calling upon a student to respond to a teacher initiation and then making them stand if they fail to answer
until after the teacher becomes exasperated, moves on and asks her question of another student, cannot be overestimated. Falvey (personal communication) cites the case of a sixteen-year-old female student from a secondary
school in the New Territories of Hong Kong who confessed to avoiding ever speaking English in class. She was so
anxious about speaking that she was willing to suffer the humiliation of standing exposed to the teacher and her
classmates for long periods in every English classroom during her five years of secondary education.
The use of learners L1 in the second language classroom is a controversial issue in applied linguistics in all
language teaching situations and used to be frowned upon. This perspective, however, has altered somewhat in recent
years (Cook, 2001; Turnbull, 2001) with researchers such as Butzkamm (2003), Brooks-Lewis (2009), and Macaro
(2005), promoting the advantages of using L1. The present study supports the views of Cook (Ibid) and Turnbull
(Ibid). It finds that allowing learners to use their L1 in the ESL classroom reduces speaking-in-class anxiety because
the use of the L1 will build up learners confidence and, in turn, encourage speaking. Teachers of all languages should,
however, note that the amount of L1 to be used should only be enough in order to ensure that adequate exposure to the
target language also takes place. In this context, Copland and Neokleous (2010) draw attention to the use of the L1 in
Cyprus by noting that teachers feel guilt abut the use of L1 in the L2 classroom. Furthermore, they reveal that what
teachers say about the use of L1 and what they do, differ.
It is generally recommended that L1 use should be minimized gradually as SL confidence and proficiency develop.
Over-dependence on L1 is not advised. Indeed, in the course of establishing language benchmarks for primary and
secondary teachers of English in Hong Kong, Coniam and Falvey (2002) found that excessive use of the L1
(Cantonese) correlated strongly with lack of teacher L2 proficiency.
The study found that being corrected by peers or teachers when speaking and using student mistakes to elaborate
teaching points were anxiety-provoking. Establishing a balance between accuracy and fluency is a delicate part of
a teachers repertoire of strategies. A focus on fluency to build up confidence may be preferable to an undue focus on
accuracy. Using student errors as an immediate stimulus for a teaching point is unlikely to be productive so teacher
development programmes that use teachers reflective practices may well benefit both the teachers and their students
(Alexander, 2006). It would appear that the practice of using errors to illustrate syntactic points should only be
recommended when the focus of the class and the activities being used by the teacher is accuracy.
It is generally accepted that large amounts of teacher talk and limited student talk neither facilitate nor encourage
students speech in the classroom (Ma, 2006; Lei, 2009). Using the target language in front of the class can be
frustrating as the process places linguistic, cognitive and psychological demands on the learner. It is therefore recommended that teachers should ensure that learners are given time to prepare the speech/presentation before being
asked to speak in front of the class.
Test anxiety is not a factor leading to Chinese ESL speaking-in-class anxiety. Test anxiety appears to be a general
problem, part of social anxiety and not specific to the Chinese learners English language classroom.
It can thus be seen that this study has a number of implications not only for Chinese teachers of English but also for
non-Chinese teachers of language. The study also has implications not only for tertiary education but also for
secondary and possibly primary language education.
5. Limitations and suggestions for future research
Only the relationships between second language learning speaking-in-class anxiety and factors which can be
controlled within the classroom setting have been investigated. Factors such as improvements in language proficiency
from private tutorials, self-access learning and discussion outside class cannot be controlled and have not been
considered.
Inferences drawn from the results of this study are limited because the participants were solely first-year undergraduate students in one university in Hong Kong. To make the results more generalizable, the study could be
replicated with students in other universities, both in Hong Kong and overseas, to investigate whether cultural
background plays a role in speaking-in-class anxiety levels. In addition, the interesting phenomenon of wait-time

B. Mak / System 39 (2011) 202e214

213

could be investigated for Taiwanese, Korean and Japanese students to see whether their cultures require face-saving
behaviour in the classroom.
The present study has focused on students responses. It is possible that investigating the teachers perspective on
anxiety creation through qualitative data such as classroom observations, teacher reflections and teacher interviews
would deepen our understanding of speaking-in-class anxiety.
To conclude, the present study has deepened our understanding of speaking-in-class anxiety levels of Chinese ESL
students and the factors contributing to them from the students perspectives and provided implications for wider
applications. Using these findings, language teachers and educators can, hopefully, adopt and sustain the kinds of
teaching behaviour and classroom practices which reduce speaking-in-class anxiety and promote spoken English in
the language classroom which in turn would, ideally, lead to better attitudes and improved oral performances and
educational outcomes for our students.
References
Aida, Y., 1994. Examination of Horwitz, Horwitz, and Copes construct of foreign language anxiety: the case of students of Japanese. Modern
Language Journal 78 (2), 155e168.
Alexander, L., 2006. Did you know that your command of English is a delicate balance between accuracy and fluency. http://www.
linguaphonegroup.com/learningadvice/accuracyfluency.cfm Accessed October 23 2010.
Arnold, J., Brown, H.D., 1999. A map of the terrain. In: Arnold, J. (Ed.), Affect in Language Learning. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
pp. 1e24.
Bailey, K.M., 1983. Competitiveness and anxiety in adult second language learning. In: Seliger, H.W., Long, M.H. (Eds.), Classroom Oriented
Research in Second Language Acquisition. Newbury House, New York, pp. 67e102.
Brown, H.D., 1987. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Brooks-Lewis, K.A., 2009. Adult learners perceptions of the incorporation of their L1 in foreign language teaching and learning. Applied
Linguistics 30 (2), 216e235.
Butzkamm, W., 2003. We only learn language once. The role of the mother tongue in FL classrooms: death of a dogma. Language Learning
Journal 28 (1), 29e39.
Carroll, J., Bennett, J.M., Hanna, G., 1962. The prediction of success in intensive foreign language training. In: Glaser, R. (Ed.), Training and
Research in Education. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, pp. 87e136.
Census and Statistics Department, February 22, 2007. Press Release: Summary Results of the 2006 Population By-census Announced. Accessed
on 22.08.08 on. Census and Statistics Department, HKSAR Government, Hong Kong. http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/200702/22/
P200702220129.htm.
Chastain, K., 1976. Affective and ability factors in second language learning. Language Learning 26, 377e389.
Cheng, Y.K., 1994. The effects of attitudinal, motivational, and anxiety factors on the English language proficiency of Taiwanese senior high
school students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens.
Coniam, D., Falvey, P., 2002. Selecting models and setting standards for teachers of English in Hong Kong. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication 12 (1), 13e27.
Cook, V., 2001. Using the first language in the classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review 57 (3), 402e423.
Copland, F., Neokleous, G., 2010. L1 to teach L2: complexities and contradictions. ELTJ first published online September 22, 2010.
DeHaan, R.L., 2006. Education for innovation: a look at China and the U.S. China Currents 5 (3) Retrieved October 2010 from. http://www.
chinacenter.net/China_Currents/fall_2006/cc_dehaan.htm.
Falvey, P. Personal communication.
Fung, C.K.W., 2005. A study of the effect of Anxiety in a drama-oriented second language classroom. Unpublished MA thesis. The University of
Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Gardner, R.C., Smythe, P.C., Lalonde, R.N., 1984. The Nature and Replicability of Factors in Second Language Acquisition. In: Research Bulletin
605. The University of Western Ontario, Ontario, London.
Gregersen, T., 2003. To err is human: a reminder to teachers of language-anxious students. Foreign Language Annals 36, 25e32.
Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority, 2009. Report of the 2008 territory-wide system assessment. Retrieved on 12.09.2010 from.
http://www.bca.hkeaa.edu.hk/web/TSA/en/2009tsaReport/eng/Ch7c_S3_ENGLISH_LANGUAGE_E.pdf.
Horwitz, E.K., Horwitz, M.B., Cope, J.A., 1986. Foreign language classroom anxiety. Modern Language Journal 70 (2), 125e132.
Hurd, S., 2007. Anxiety and non-anxiety in a distance language learning environment: the distance factor as a modifying influence. System 35,
487e508.
Kember, D., Gow, L., 1989. A model of student approaches to learning encompassing ways to influence and change approaches. Instructional
Science 18 (4), 263e288.
Kleinmann, H.H., 1977. Avoidance behaviour in adult second language acquisition. Language Learning 27 (1), 93e107.
Koch, A.S., Terrell, T.D., 1991. Affective reactions of foreign language students to natural approach activities and teaching techniques. In:
Horwitz, E.K., Young, D.J. (Eds.), Language Anxiety: From Theory and Research to Classroom Implications. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs,
New Jersey, pp. 109e126.
Kouraogo, P., 1993. Language learning strategies in input-poor environments. System 21 (2), 165e173.

214

B. Mak / System 39 (2011) 202e214

Levinsohn, K.R., 2007. Cultural differences and learning styles of Chinese and European trades students. Institute for Learning Styles Journal
1, 12e20.
Lei, X., 2009. Communicative teacher talk in the English classroom. English Language Teaching 2 (1), 1e5. www.ccsenet.org.
Li, R., 2007. When West Meets East: Communicative Language Teaching in China. Unpublished MA Thesis. Provo, Utah: Brigham Young
University.
Liu, M., Jackson, J., 2008. An exploration of Chinese EFL learners unwillingness to communicate and foreign language anxiety. Modern
Language Journal 92 (1), 71e86.
Liu, N.F., Littlewood, W., 1997. Why do many students appear reluctant to participate in classroom learning discourse? System 25 (3), 371e384.
Ma, X., 2006. Teacher Talk and EFL in University Classrooms. MA Thesis. School of Foreign Languages and Literature, Chonquing Normal
University and Yangze Normal University, China.
Macaro, E., 2005. Code switching in the L2 classroom: a communication and learning strategy. In: Llurda, E. (Ed.), Non-native Language
Teachers: Perceptions, Challenges and Contributions to the Profession. Springer, New York.
MacIntyre, P.D., 1995. In seeing the forest and the trees: a rejoinders to sparks and ganschow. Modern Language Journal 79 (2), 245e248.
MacIntyre, P.D., Gardner, R.C., 1989. Anxiety and second-language learning: toward a theoretical clarification. Language Learning 39 (2),
251e275.
MacIntyre, P.D., Gardner, R.C., 1991. Methods and results in the study of anxiety and language learning: a review of the literature. Language
Learning 41 (1), 85e117.
MacIntyre, P.D., Noels, K.A., Clement, R., 1997. Biases in self-ratings of second language proficiency: the role of language anxiety. Language
Learning 47, 265e287.
Mak, B.S., White, C., 1997. Communication apprehension of Chinese ESL students. Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics 2 (1), 81e96.
McCroskey, J.C., 1984. The communication apprehension perspective. In: Daly, J., McCroskey, J. (Eds.), Avoiding Communication: Shyness,
Reticence, and Communication Apprehension. Beverly Hill. Sage, California, pp. 13e38.
Ollendick, T.H., King, N.J., Yule, W. (Eds.), 1994. International Handbook of Phobic and Anxiety Disorders in Children and Adolescents. Plenum
Press, New York.
Phillips, L., 2005. A study of the impact of Foreign Language Anxiety on tertiuary students oral performance. Unpublished MA Thesis. Hong
Kong: The University of Hong Kong.
Pimsleur, P., Mosberg, L., Morrison, A.L., 1962. Student factors in foreign language learning. Modern Language Journal 46, 160e170.
Price, M.L., 1991. The subjective experience of foreign language anxiety: interviews with anxiety students. In: Horwitz, E., Young, D. (Eds.),
Language Anxiety: From Theory to Research to Classroom Practices. Prentice-Hall, New York, pp. 101e108.
Rowe, M.B., 1974a. Wait time and rewards as instructional variables, their influence on language, logic, and fate control: part one e wait time.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching 11 (2), 81e94.
Rowe, M.B., 1974b. Wait time and rewards as instructional variables, their influence on language, logic, and fate control: part two e rewards.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching 11 (2), 219e308.
Rowe, M.B., 1986. Wait time: slowing down may be a way of speeding up! Journal of Teacher Education 37 (1), 43e50.
Saito, Y., Horwitz, E.K., Garza, T.J., 1999. Foreign language reading anxiety. Modern Language Journal 83 (2), 202e218.
Samimy, K.K., Tabuse, M., 1992. Affective variables and a less commonly taught language: a study in beginning Japanese classes. Language
Learning 42 (3), 377e398.
Scovel, T., 1978. The effect of affect on foreign language learning: a review of the anxiety research. Language Learning 28 (1), 129e142.
Sila, A.Y., 2010. Young adolescent students foreign language anxiety in relation to language skills at different levels. The Journal of International
Social Research 3 (11), 83e91.
Sparks, R.L., Ganschow, L., 2007. Is the foreign language classroom anxiety scale measuring anxiety or language skills? Foreign Language
Annals 40 (2), 260e287.
Tsui, A., 2001. Classroom interaction. In: Carter, R., Nunan, D. (Eds.), The Cambridge Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of Other
Languages. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Truitt, S.N., 1995. Anxiety and beliefs about language learning: a study of Korean University students learning English. Unpublished Doctoral
thesis, The University of Texas: Austin.
Turnbull, M., 2001. There is a role for rhe L1 in second and foreign language teaching, but.. Canadian Modern Language Review 57 (4),
531e540.
Walker, E., 1997. Foreign Language Anxiety in Hong Kong secondary schools: Its relationship with age-related factors, school form and selfperception. Unpublished PhD thesis. Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong.
Watson, D., Friend, R., 1969. Measurement of social-evaluative anxiety. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 33 (4), 448e457.
Yan, J.X., Horwitz, E.K., 2008. Learners perceptions of how anxiety interacts with personal and instructional factors to influence their
achievement in English: qualitative analysis of EFL learners in China. Language Learning 58 (1), 151e183.
Young, D.J., 1990. An investigation of students perspectives on anxiety and speaking. Foreign Language Annals 23 (6), 539e553.