STUDENTS’ FOREIGN LANGUAGE CLASSROOM ANXIETY (FLCA) IN EFL CLASSROOM : IT’S LEVELS, SOURCES AND COPING STRATEGIES A Case Study in A State University In Bandung).

(1)

S

TUDENTS’

FOREIGN LANGUAGE CLASSROOM ANXIETY (FLCA)

IN EFL CLASSROOM:

IT’S LEVEL

S

, SOURCES AND COPING STRATEGIES

(A Case Study in A State University In Bandung)

A THESIS

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Master’s Degree

in English Education

By:

Siti Nuraeni Muhtar 1201205

ENGLISH EDUCATION PROGRAM SCHOOL OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION

(2)

STUDENTS’ FOREIGN

LANGUAGE CLASSROOM

ANXIETY (FLCA) IN EFL CLASSROOM:

IT’S LEVELS, SOURCES AND COPING STRATEGIES

Oleh

Siti Nuraeni Muhtar

S.Pd UIN SGD Bandung, 2010

Sebuah Tesis yang diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat memperoleh gelar Magister Pendidikan (M.Pd.) pada Fakultas Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni

Juli 2014

Hak Cipta dilindungi undang-undang.

(3)

(4)

iv Siti Nuraeni Muhtar_{, 2014}

STUDENTS’ FOREIGN LANGUAGE CLASSROOM ANXIETY (FLCA)

IN EFL CLASSROOM: IT’S LEVELS, SOURCES AND COPING STRATEGIES

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu TABLE OF CONTENTS

2.5 Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety (FLCA) ... 15

2.6 Types of Foreign Language Anxiety (Horwitz et al.’s (1986))... 16

2.6.1 Communication Apprehension ... 16

2.6.2 Test Anxiety ... 18

2.6.3 Fear of Negative Evaluation ... 18

2.7 Factors of Anxiety ... 20

2.8 Coping Strategies (Defense Mechanism) ... 21

2.8.1 Flight Behaviors ... 22

(5)

v Siti Nuraeni Muhtar_{, 2014}

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

2.8.3 Group Manipulation Behaviors ... 22

2.8.4 Compromise Behaviors ... 23

2.9 Implications for Teaching and Learning ... 24

2.10 Previous Studies ... 26

4.1 The Kind of Anxiety Experienced by Students in Learning English ... 49

4.2 The Source of Students Anxiety in Learning English ... 53

4.2.1 Communication Apprehension ... 55

4.2.2 Test Anxiety ... 60

4.2.3 Fear of Negative Evaluation ... 63

4.3 The Coping Strategies Students Use for Their Language Anxiety ... 67

4.3.1 Flight Behaviors ... 68

4.3.2 Aggressive Behaviors ... 75

4.3.3 Group Manipulation Behaviors ... 77

4.3.4 Compromise Behaviors ... 78

4.4 Concluding Remarks ... 80

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION, LIMITATION, & RECOMMENDATION 81

5.1 Conclusion ... 5.2 Limitation of the Study ... 84

(6)

vi Siti Nuraeni Muhtar_{, 2014}

REFERENCES ... 86

APPENDICES ... 95

APPENDIX 1 : Interview Transcripts and Coding ... 96

APPENDIX 2 : Sources and Coping Strategies from Interview ... 128

APPENDIX 3 : Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale ... 130

APPENDIX 4 : Level Of Students’ Foreign Language Anxiety ... 133

LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Specifications of Defense Mechanism by Ehrman ... 23

Table 2.2 A Model of the Role of Anxiety in Language Learning ... 24

Table 3.1 The Schedule of Data Collection ... 37

Table 3.2 The Detail Schedule of the Interview ... 43

Table 3.3 Likert’s Scoring Table Adopted from Horwitz et al. (1986) ... 46

Table 3.4 FLCAS Anxiety Scale ... 47

Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistics for Students’ FLA ... 49

Table 4.2 EFL Students’ Foreign Language Anxiety Levels ... 49

Table 4.3 Means of FLCA Items ... 52

Table 4.4 Three main Sources of EFL Students’ FLA ... 54

Table 4.5 Means of Communication Apprehension Items ... 55

Table 4.6 Means of Test Anxiety Items ... 60

(7)

vii Siti Nuraeni Muhtar_{, 2014}

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu LIST OF CHARTS

(8)

Siti Nuraeni Muhtar_{, 2014}

viii ABSTRACT

This study reports students’ foreign language anxiety in EFL classroom at university level. It investigates students’ foreign language anxiety levels, their sources of anxiety and their coping strategies. This study employed a qualitative research design, embracing the characteristics of a case study. Three kinds of instruments were applied for this study: observation, questionnaires (adapted from Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale by Horwitz) and semi structured interview. The data were collected by means audio and video recording to capture students’ sources of anxiety and their coping strategies. It was collaborated with semi structured interview. Those data were transcribed and coded by using the categorization from Alwasilahs’ coding strategy (2002). The data were also obtained by quantifying questionnaires in order to know students anxiety level. The first finding reveals that the students who experience moderate level of anxiety have the highest percentage (37,14%), while those who experience low level of anxiety have the lower of percentage than the moderate (34,28%). Meanwhile, the students with high level of anxiety have the lowest percentage (28,58%). Secondly, the sources of students’ language anxiety is communication apprehension (41,52 %). Meanwhile, test anxiety has the lower percentage than communication apprehension (32,81 %). The last source, fear of negative evaluation, has the lowest percentage among the other sources (25,67). Lastly, the most common coping strategies exhibited by the participants of this study were the flight behaviors such as avoidance, rationalization and withdrawal. Relating to compromise behavior, this kind of defense mechanism can be viewed in this study was only in anticipation behavior. In contrast, aggressive behaviors (displacement, cynicism or negativity, interrogation, and acting out) were not observed. Only competition which specifically means the effort to demonstrate superiority either in front of their friends or their lecturer in order to avoid a negative evaluation of overall incompetence. The result implies that language anxiety is not only situation-specific in that its level can differ from one situation to another, but also response-specific in that its level can vary depending on what defense mechanism has been employed and what kind of sources they have. Additionally, it can be stated that interaction between language anxiety and defense mechanisms employed is an on-going process. Based on the results of this study, the researcher reveals some limitations and proposes some recommendations for English teachers and others who are concerned with English education, especially on EFL subject.

(9)

1 Siti Nuraeni Muhtar_{, 2014}

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The first chapter is an initial description that sets the nature of the present

research in exploring students’ foreign language anxiety in EFL Classroom in a University in Bandung. This chapter discusses the background of the study, the research questions, the purposes of the study, scope of the study, significance of the study, clarification of the terms, research location and thesis organization.

1.1Background of The Study

Learning at least one foreign language is a current demand for every learner especially in university level. Nowadays, mastering more than one foreign languages is an obligatory for educators either teachers or students. In order to answer that challenge, many programs have been built by some universities in Indonesia. One of the programs is by developing a boarding school project, where students can stay and study in one place. They learn many things include foreign language subjects. Two or more foreign languages are taught in that program. In other hand, most foreign language learners experience of nervousness when they speak the foreign language in front of their classmates or native speakers. Some may forget even easy words, and others may be worried about making mistakes. Horwitz (2008) stated that “some language learners become anxious when they

cannot be themselves when speaking in the new language” (p. 9). As Horwitz,

(10)

When a student cuts class, fails to prepare for class or to do homework, or is unable to answer even simple questions about the topic being studied in class, it is clear that the student is not learning well, and teachers and educators may wonder why. There may be many causes of these types of behavior. In an attempt to better understand why some language learners have more difficulty acquiring a target language than other learners do, there has been a relatively recent increase in research into potential relationships between foreign language acquisition and affective variables (Gardner, 1997). Specifically, in her work, Rebecca Oxford (2005) suggested that foreign language anxiety (FLA), or the experience of anxiety when an individual is working towards attaining a foreign language, is one of them. According to a variety of researchers (e.g., Horwitz, Horwitz, & Cope, 1986; MacIntyre & Gardner, 1989, 1991a, 1991b), FLA can be a predictor of success in learning the foreign language. Since anxiety can have profound effects on many aspects of foreign language learning, it is important to be able to identify those students who are particularly anxious in foreign language class. _{Based on} the phenomenon, this study tries to investigate foreign language classroom anxiety

(FLCA) by questioning students’ levels of anxiety, to explore its sources stemming from the foreign language classroom and to find out the coping strategies students used in their foreign language classroom.

1.2Research Questions

Based on the research background the following research questions are revealed

1. What kind of anxiety do students experience in learning English? 2. What are the sources of anxiety among EFL students?

(11)

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu 1.3Purpose of The Study

Based on research questions the following purposes were drawn up as possible answers to the research questions presented.

1. To find out the different levels of students’ Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety (FLCA).

2. To find out the sources of FLCA are likely to lie in the EFL classroom.

3. To investigate students’ coping strategies for their foreign language anxiety in their learning situation.

1.4Scope of The Study

This study is conducted to undergraduate students in one of Islamic University in West Java Province, Indonesia. The students were in the second semester in the university majoring various study that learn English as foreign language. It aims to know their levels of anxiety, the sources of their language anxiety and their coping strategies to their language anxiety. Moreover the observation, questionnaires and interview analysis attempt to find out types of

students’ anxiety, the sources of students’ anxiety, the coping strategies of their anxiety.

1.5Significance of the Study

(12)

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu 1.6Clarification of the Terms

1.6.1 Anxiety

Anxiety is defined by Spielberger, (1983; p. 15) as a “subjective feeling of

tension, apprehension, nervousness, and worry associated with an arousal of

autonomic nervous system” (cited in Horwitz, Horwitz & Cope, 1991, p. 27).

1.6.2 Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety (FLCA)

“A distinct complex of self-perceptions, beliefs, feelings, and behaviors related to classroom language learning arising from the uniqueness of the

(foreign) language learning process” (Horwitz et al., 1986, p. 128).

1.6.3 Coping Strategies (Defense Mechanism)

“A variety of behaviors for softening failures, protecting ourselves from overwhelming anxiety, and maintaining our sense of personal worth.”

(Ehrman, 1996 as cited in Tasnimi, 2009, p.120)

1.7Thesis Organization

(13)

(14)

34

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter describes the methodology used to collect and analyze data in this study. There are six sections in this chapter. In the first section, aims of the study are displayed in the introduction section to show readers the research problems addressed in this study. Second, research design is discussed to inform research method and approach applied in this study. Next, data collection is described to show research site, subjects of study, steps of data collection and techniques used in collecting the data. Finally, data analysis is explained to report how the collected data are analyzed step by step to answer research questions.

3.1 Introduction

It was acknowledged in chapter one that this research mainly aims to report students‟ anxiety in English foreign language classroom. To fulfill the aim, three research questions are proposed; the first deals with language anxiety level

that students‟ experienced in EFL classroom, the second relates with sources of

students‟ language anxiety and the last investigates the coping strategies students‟

used for their foreign language anxiety. The following sections elaborate the methodology used in collecting and analyzing the data to answer the proposed research questions.

3.2 Research Design

(15)

35

behavior which had a beginning and an end) and bounded instance (this study focused on one classroom). This study was also conducted in naturally occurring situation and context without manipulating variables (p.162). Hence, the result is centered one description, inference and interpretation.

Three types of case study research designs includes exploratory, explanatory and descriptive. (Hancock & Algozzine, 2006). This study belongs to descriptive designs which attempt to present a complete description of a phenomenon within its context. (p.33)

This study applied a qualitative approach by giving questionnaires and taking transcripts of observation and interview to find students‟ language anxiety in EFL classroom. To make the description clearer, some qualitative data were quantified to show the number, percentage and distribution of students‟ language anxiety. In this case, Nunan and Bailey (2009) state:

All qualitative data can be quantified in some way. In other words, things can be counted in qualitative data. In fact, there is almost no limit to the things that can be counted in qualitative data sets. Consider a lesson

transcript….(Nunan & Bailey, 2009, p.414)

The description of research design and data analysis hopefully can give a clear picture on how this study was carried out to answer the three research questions mentioned above.

3.3 Data Collection

This part answers who were taken as subjects of study and where, when and how the data were collected:

3.3.1 Research Site

(16)

36

English as foreign language (EFL). There were three classes (class A, class B, and class C). The class was divided based on the placement test scores. Class A belongs to students who get the highest scores, class B belongs to moderate students, and class C belongs to those who get the lowest scores.

This course was chosen as research site for several reasons. The first reason was the English course serves as a typical case (Nunan & Bailey, 2009) to find out information from a specific case to fill in the gap of previous research. In this case, the site fit with the researcher‟s intention to investigate students‟ language anxiety in EFL classroom. The program in this course is very fit with this study which related to EFL learning.

The second reason was the researcher‟s convenience (Patton, 1980, in Alwasilah, 2002) to conduct research in chosen research site due to its support and accessibility. The research was fully supported by the director and the lecturers since the researcher is one of the lecturer there and the research was expected to improve the teaching learning activity in the classroom. In addition, the research site was fully accessible. In this case, the researcher was fully permitted and supported to conduct research in the classroom.

3.3.2 Subjects of the Study

After several considerations, class A was chosen. This class was taken due to several reasons. The students in class A was more expressive and corporative comparing to other classes. The class consists of 35 students who got the best scores in placement test. The students in the class were also considered as active students who usually take part in class interaction.

(17)

37

same required classes offered by the university to students of different ability levels that would train them in the skills of English listening, speaking, reading, and writing. It should be noted that although the participants were homogeneously grouped for English classes, when the data collection procedure was undertaken, they were only at their second semester.

3.3.3 Steps of Data Collection

Data collection for the present study was conducted in four weeks. The following table is the schedule of data collection for this study:

Table 3.1

The Schedule of Data Collection

Monday, March 3rd, 2014 90 minutes Video – audio recording, field note

Wednesday, March 5th, 2014 90 minutes Taking questionnaire data

Monday, March 10th, 2014 90 minutes Video – audio recording, field note

Wednesday, March 12th, 2014 30 minutes Taking interview data (2 participants)

Monday, March 17th, 2014 30 minutes Taking interview data (2 participants)

Wednesday, March 19th, 2014 30 minutes Taking interview data (2 participants)

Monday, March 24th, 2014 90 minutes Video – audio recording, field note

Observation in the class was conducted for three meetings. Those three meetings covered listening-speaking class, reading class and grammar class. The interviews were conducted before the class started.

(18)

38

This section describes the procedures utilized to collect the data. Broadly speaking, there are three techniques for collecting qualitative data: observation, interview, and document review (Best & Kahan, 2005). There was also three data collection techniques employed in this study. Questionnaires, observation and semi-structured interview. The three techniques were used to corroborate the findings to answer the research questions. By employing three different techniques, this study is expected to provide triangulated findings and analysis on

students‟ language anxiety in EFL classroom.

First, the participants were observed in their EFL classroom for a period of four weeks. Informal interviews were conducted as frequently as possible in order to acquire additional information useful in checking the accuracy of the impressions obtained during the observation period. In addition, semi-structured interviews were conducted in the period of observation with more detailed questions. Field notes were written during and immediately after each observation, as suggested by Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw (1995). The interviews were conducted in native languages, Indonesian in the case of the student participants. All semi-structured interviews were tape-recorded and transcribed.

3.3.4.1 Observation

(19)

39

on sensitive topics, such as interpersonal competition among certain students, that they may not be willing to talk about in an interview; 4) provide the resources otherwise unattainable - observer‟s impression, feeling, reflection and introspection. These can be part of meaningful data to allow for understanding and interpreting the events and behaviors with a holistic perspective.

To achieve those purposes, the classroom interaction was observed electronically by recording the interaction using audio and video recording (Nunan & Bailey, 2009). Besides, the researcher presented there to make sure the recorders worked well and jot down some important things regarding the focus of this study. During three meetings (90 minutes per meeting) of lesson were recorded using a video camera and a digital audio recorder. Before the students entered the class, the camera was turned on and put on the three port behind the students. to make sure the voice could be well recorded; an audio recorder was

turned on and put on teachers‟ table in front of the class. By setting up a camera at

the back side and an audio recorder in the front side of the classroom, it was hoped that all interactions were well documented.

In observing classroom interaction, the researcher took a role as a non-participant observer. The researcher did not take a part in planning the lesson nor in teaching and learning process. She only put the video and audio recorder in a hidden place in the classroom. The lecturer was informed that the researcher was going to record the classroom interaction without specifically mentioning what features of interaction were going to be investigated.

(20)

40

behaviors relevant to the purpose of this study, but also makes the observation work manageable (Patton, 1987). Conforming to this strategy, the focus of the observation (i.e., what to observe) in this study was made on the following elements, as suggested by Merriam (1998, as cited in Cha, 2006):

1) The physical setting

A close observation on physical environment (e.g., classroom layout) is indispensable in this study, since it can affect students‟ feelings and behaviors. For instance, a particular classroom layout facilitating group work, can promote a higher level of student to student interactions during class and thus their sense of camaraderie, which has been found to render a diminishing effect on language anxiety (Young, 1990; Samimy & Rardin, 1994)).

2) The participants

This element of observation will identify who are in the classroom, that is, demographic characteristics of participants, including not only main participants but also their classmates and teachers. It is important to understand the demographic characteristics of all participants, for they may yield useful clues to appreciating the mechanism of language anxiety, which is otherwise difficult to grasp.

3) Activities and interaction

The observation was made on specific activities and behaviors of all participants relevant to language anxiety, such as the competitiveness, level and types of interactions, sequence of activities. For example, the researcher tried to find out the pattern of teacher‟s manner of error

correction, and to see whether or not student‟s making a mistake in

(21)

41

The content of conversations among students as well as with teachers was noted. Their conversations were directly quoted, paraphrased or summarized in the field notes, as needed to answer the research questions. In addition, I also noted silence and nonverbal behaviors, such as avoidance and withdrawal that have important bearing of language anxiety.

5) Subtle factors

The researcher looked for less obvious but relevant behaviors to language anxiety that contain symbolic and connotative meanings such as biting nails, making face, sweating, gazing, the way of raising hand, etc. More importantly, the researcher was equally attentive to „what does not

happen,‟ in other words, “absence of occurrence” (Patton, 1987; p. 91).

6) My own behaviors

Merriam (1998) points out that the thoughts, comments, roles of the observer are as important as those of participants, since like the latter, the former also affect what is being observed. Put differently, the observation is not merely a close look on the scene with perfect neutrality, but necessarily involves a cognitive process that cannot totally exclude subjectivity of the observer (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003). Therefore, what the observer is thinking about what is going on in observation is necessary to be noted, for it can be used later to have as wide a perspective as possible in deciphering the sequences and patterns of events and activities recorded in the field notes.

3.3.4.2 Semi-Structured Interview

(22)

42

structured or standardized) interview (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003; Merriam, 1998). These types of interview are distinguished by the amount of structure involved. The informal interviews of this study do not have any predetermined question topics or sequence of questions or any particular forms of questioning. Questions would come forward from the immediate context as the conversation unfolds, and would be asked in the natural course of conversation.

Although informal interview is prone to produce less systematic and comprehensive data, it allows the researcher to be responsive to individual differences of participants and to enhance the salience and relevance of questions (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003). The second type of interview used in this study was a semi-structured interview. The semi-structured interview has a fairly open framework, thereby allowing a great deal of flexibility in the kind of information that interviewees choose to give (Patton, 1990). Furthermore, this type of

interview offers “sufficient flexibility to probe some aspects in depth and, where

(23)

43

hand while bringing up information that the researcher might not anticipate, potentially shedding a whole new insight onto a problem (Merriam, 1998; Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003). In summary, semi-structured interview can be characterized as a relatively guided and relaxed discussion based around a predetermined topic.

Furthermore, To make the interview like a guided conversation, broad questions were asked so as not to constrain the conversation. As the semi-structured interview, moreover, the set of questions had been prepared in advance, but they were open enough to allow the interviewees to express their thoughts, feelings, or opinions freely throughout the interview. And questions were generally simple with a logical sequence to help the interview move naturally. For an example, first, a broad question was asked such as “How was speaking English

in EFL class?” If the answer to the above question is “difficult,” then, new questions came forward as a result of the answer, such as “Why is that so?”

The complete set of interview questions had not been formulated in advance, since many of relevant interview questions emerged during observation. They were formulated fully as observation showed issues, behaviors, events and so on that formed the basis of interview questions. The language used in interviews with participants was Bahasa Indonesia. Since the researcher conducted interviews with the participants in Bahasa Indonesia, their native language, it was possible for the researcher to catch the linguistic nuances and cultural connotations behind their overt expressions. It appeared that the use of native language in interviews has compensated the difficulties often arouse by the interviewees to express themselves clearly.

To conduct a semi-structured interview, the interviewer focused on the

analysis of students‟ language anxiety using Foreign Language Classroom

(24)

44

exhibited high level of anxiety were interviewed according to a set of semi-structured questions to find out their source of language anxiety and their coping strategies. In addition, two EFL students who exhibited moderate level of anxiety and two EFL students who exhibited low level anxiety were interviewed also. The time required for the interview ranged from 10 – 15 minutes.

The detail schedules for the interview can be seen as follows.

Table 3.2

The Detail Schedule of the Interview

No Student/Subject Date Duration

1. Student 1 (high anxiety student) Wednesday, March 12th, 2014 9:54 minutes

2. Student 2 (high anxiety student) Wednesday, March 12th, 2014 10:13 minutes

3. Student 3 (moderate anxiety student) Monday, March 17th, 2014 12:05 minutes

4 . Student 4 (moderate anxiety student) Monday, March 17th, 2014 9:30 minutes

5. Student 5 (low anxiety student) Wednesday, March 19th, 2014 10:11 minutes

6. Student 6 (low anxiety student) Wednesday, March 19th, 2014 11:32 minutes

Henceforth, the interview data were interpreted to answer research problems and compared to the theory underpinning the study (Emilia, 2009, p. 197).

3.3.4.3 Questionnaires

(25)

45

different point per item (1 = strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = neither agree nor disagree ; 4 = agree; 5 = strongly agree). A good instrument (whether test or non-test) must be valid and reliable (Sugiyono, 2011,. P.169). This is intended to collect the valid and reliable data. Sugiyono (2011,p. 168) notes that by using the valid and reliable instruments in collecting data, it is expected that the result of the study is also valid and reliable. The Indonesian version of this instrument is highly reliable, with a coefficient alpha of .96. In terms of validity, basically, validity is divided into three types: content validity, criterion-related validity, and construct validity (Hatch and Farhady, 1982, p.251). Since the instrument used in this study was a non-test instrument, which was FLCA, according to Sugiyono (2011, p.170), to be stated as a valid instrument, it only needed to fulfill construct validity.

Dealing with construct validity, Hadi (cited in Sugiyono, 2011, p.170) treats construct validity like logical validity or validity by definition. Thus, an instrument can be stated for having construct validity if it can be used to measure the phenomenon as its definition is. Further, to utter an appropriate definition, the researcher needs several theories to consult with. In this case, Hadi states that when the theories used to utter a definition are already appropriate, the result of measurement using the instrument which is based on those theories is already able to be stated as a valid result.

To test the construct validity, the judgment from experts was employed in this study. For expert judgment, at least three doctorate experts are needed (Sugiyono, 2011, p. 172). Hence, in this study, the judgment was done by two doctorate lecturers from English Education (who concern in Second Language Acquisition) and a doctorate lecturer from Educational Psychology.

(26)

46

Data analysis in this study focused on data collected above: data from observation, interview and questionnaire. The observation data result was transcribed, coded, categorized and analyzed. Meanwhile, the result of interview was coded and analyzed. Then the data from questionnaire was counted, displayed and analyzed. At last, the analysis of each data collection was synthesized and discussed to answer the research questions. The following parts explain the process of analysis of each collected data to fulfill the aims of study.

3.4.1 Analyzing the Data from Observation

The data from observation (audio and video recording) were transcribed, coded, categorized, described and analyzed to reveal the different types of language anxiety source and coping strategies.

The process of analysis started with transcribing the data. In this case, the transcription focused on the following elements, as suggested by Merriam (1998, as cited in Cha, 2006):

1) The physical setting 2) The participants

3) Activities and interaction 4) Conversation

5) Subtle factors 6) My own behaviors

After the recording of interaction were transcribed, the data were coded and categorized by adapting the categorization of language anxiety coping strategies by Erhman (1996) to answer the third research question collaborating with interview result.

(27)

47

The data from interview were transcribed and analyzed qualitatively. The interview data were analyzed to collaborate and confirm the findings from observation and questionnaire in answering the second and third research question. In analyzing the data, the researcher carried out several steps. First, data from interview were transcribed. Second, the transcribed data were coded by

following Alwasilah‟s coding strategy (2002, p.232) by categorizing the data

based on the responses given by the teacher. Third, the result of coding was condensed to confirm or contradict the findings obtained from observation and questionnaire.

In supporting the findings from observation, the findings from interview were cited in the analysis following Creswell‟s (2003, p.197) suggestion to use the wordings from participants to give a detailed descriptive portrait. The wordings from interview were also compared and contrasted with the data from observation, theories and previous studies on language anxiety.

Considering the guidelines for interview data, in categorizing this result, the researcher used Horwitz categories for language anxiety sources (communication apprehension, test anxiety and fear of negative evaluation) in order to answer the second research question. Besides, Ehrman‟s (1996) defense

mechanism categories for students‟ coping strategies of language anxiety (flight

behavior, aggressive behavior, group manipulation behavior, and compromise behavior) were used to answer the third research question.

3.4.3 Analyzing the Data from Questionnaire

(28)

48

“Strongly Disagree”. They are 9 positive statements in the questionnaire which are

number 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, 18, 22, 28, and 32. While, the negative statements are in number 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, and 33. The data were calculated manually with the range of score started from 61 to 139. After the each score from students‟ results of FLCAS gained, it

was categorized into some levels of anxiety started from “High Anxious”,

“Moderate Anxious”, and “Low Anxious”.

The Likert‟s scoring scale table to measure students‟ anxiety level using FLCAS is

shown below:

Table 3.3

Likert‟s Scoring Table adopted from Horwitz et al. (1986)

Statement

Scoring Strongly

Agree Agree

Neither Agree nor

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Positive 1 2 3 4 5

Negative 5 4 3 2 1

The following table is the score for each anxiety level perceived by students:

Table 3.4 FLCAS Anxiety Scale

Range Level

(29)

49

87 – 113 113 – 139

Moderate Anxious High Anxious

In order to give more description, the result was transformed into percentage. Furthermore, to calculate the mean of anxiety level to each item, first multiplied a score of each answer by its percentage, divided the calculated score by the sum of percentage. The means of every item can clarify the overall level of

students‟ language anxiety.

3.5 Validity and Reliability

In maintaining validity, the researcher did several things:

a. Methods Triangulation: Multiple methods were used in collecting the data including observation, interview and questionnaire.

b. Theory triangulation: Various theories were brought to bear in this study including interaction, output and noticing theories.

c. Member validation/member checking: It involved asking the participants after the questionnaire to confirm their answers and interpretation.

In maintaining reliability of this study, the researcher applied interceding process, following Nunan&Bailey (2009) who suggest researchers to conduct intercoder agreement with the following steps:

One way to sort out this problem is to determine intercoder agreement-an index of the consistency with which different people categorize the same data. A simple percentage is calculated by dividing the number of items upon which coders agree by the total number of items that were coded. The general rule of thumb is that intercoder agreement should be at least 85% for readers to have confidence in the reported findings (Nunan&Bailey, 2009, p. 428)

(30)

50

the researcher‟s assumption of her linguistic ability. Second, the partner was

trained to code the data base on detail descriptors. Third, the researcher and the intercoder coded 10 % of data together as an internalization of agreement toward the descriptor. Fourth, the researcher asked a partner to code 90 % of data (see Sheen, 2004) and looked at the result whether agreement reached more or less than 85 % after the coding process was finished; the results were compared to

look at the level of agreement. As a result, the agreement for learners‟ anxiety

codification reached 95 % while the agreement for interview codification reached 86 %. The differences were resolved by discussion and modification of descriptor.

3.6 Concluding Remarks

(31)

81 CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION, LIMITATION, AND RECOMMENDATION

This chapter reveals conclusions of the data analyses and discussions that are exposed in the previous chapter. It states the answers for the research questions that have been directing this paper. It also presents several gaps in some areas. These gaps are discussed as limitations of the study. Then, the limitations provide several recommendations for further studies in the same area.

5.1 Conclusion

This study reports language anxiety levels of students in EFL classroom, their anxiety source and their coping strategies. The study was conducted in university EFL classroom in Bandung. The findings of discussion can be described as follow:

(32)

82

whereas learners” of Spanish and French anxiety decreased as their language proficiency decreased (Frantzen & magnan, 2005).

Secondly, the participants stated that the highest percentage of their source of

students‟ language anxiety is communication apprehension (41,52 %). Meanwhile, test anxiety has the lower percentage than communication apprehension (32,81 %). The last source, fear of negative evaluation, has the lowest percentage among the other sources (25,67). Supporting this result, Horwitz stated that most people experience communication apprehension when they learn a foreign language. (Horwitz : 1996). However, Horwitz also revealed that because of test anxiety, “even the brightest and most prepared students often make errors” (p. 128). In addition, in his study Machida (2006) stated that “the instructors‟ perceptions of learners‟ mistakes may be another factor to allay anxiety. The main source in communication apprehension came from speaking anxiety. Supporting this result, many researchers (e.g., Price, 1991; Williams & Andrade, 2008) stated, speaking in front of other students was a greatest source of foreign language anxiety. Williams and Andrade also mentioned that not only spontaneous use of the target language but also prepared language use in public make learners feel pressure in a classroom.

(33)

83

stemming from the fear of failure (hence negative evaluation) in a particular test. Rather, it seems to be an apprehension about the negative halo effect (or devil effect), whereby a person evaluates another as low on overall competence because the individual is low on one aspect such as linguistic competence (Asch, 1946). As seen above, the participants of this study had displayed their anxiety more out of fear about negative evaluation of their overall competence by others than that of English made by themselves.

The last, coping strategies that students used in this study were generally flight behavior. Of the four defense mechanisms, the most common coping strategies exhibited by the participants of this study were the flight behaviors such as avoidance, rationalization and withdrawal. The results supported the previous studies. Kleinmann, 1977; McCroskey, 1984; and Pappamihiel, 2002 have demonstrated the typical behavior patterns of language learners to cope with language anxiety are avoidance of and withdrawal from anxiety-eliciting situations. In contrast, aggressive behaviors (displacement, cynicism or negativity, interrogation, and acting out) were not observed. Only competition which specifically means the effort to demonstrate superiority either in front of their friends or their lecturer in order to avoid a negative evaluation of overall incompetence. (Ehrmans, 1996). In other hand, relating to compromise behavior, this kind of defense mechanism can be viewed as constructive responses to language anxiety, and usually shown by relatively mature language learners. (Ehrman, 1996). In line with this statement, all the participants in this study showed this mechanism. However, it‟s only anticipation behavior that they revealed from interview and observation data.

(34)

84

that its level can vary depending on what defense mechanism has been mainly employed so far. Additionally, it can be stated that the interaction between language anxiety and defense mechanisms employed is an on-going process. Therefore, a level of anxiety seen today could reflect in part how well an individual has responded to previous anxiety provoking situations. Similarly, no less significantly than the specific situations to be faced in the future or the innate propensity to anxiety, the future level of anxiety would depend on with what defense mechanism the individual will respond to the anxiety eliciting situation in the days to come. This conceptualization is possible in this study for it is the first research attempt to focus on defense mechanism with Ehrman‟s (1996) theoretical framework that specifically addresses how people respond to language anxiety.

5.2 Limitation of the Study

This present study is limited in some ways. As stated in chapter three, this study was conducted only in university level where students learn English in EFL classroom. Therefore, the result cannot be generalized to other contexts.

Secondly, subjects of this study were asked to recall their experiences in the first year English classes and to indicate their feelings about those classes. There was a three month gap between the time when they completed the first year course and the time of their anxiety assessment. For some students, the strong anxiety reactions they had experienced in the first year class may have been lessened by the end of the year. Therefore, the accuracy of their recall of their anxiety experience cannot be completely guaranteed.

(35)

85 5.3 Recommendation

This study offers several recommendations that provide some spaces for further studies in the field of language anxiety and several suggestions that can be useful for teachers to teach EFL in their classroom.

The findings of the study suggests the important role of teachers in lessening classroom tension and in creating a friendly, supportive atmosphere that can help reduce students' fear of embarrassment of making errors in front of peers. Students will appreciate and learn more from teachers who are able to identify students experiencing foreign language anxiety and take proper measures to help them overcome that anxiety.

(36)

86

REFERENCES

Aida, Y. (1994). Examination of Horwitz, Horwitz and Cope’s construct of

foreign language anxiety: The case of students of Japanese. The Modern Language Journal, 78, 155-168.

Alwasilah, A.C. (2002). Pokokmya Kualitatif. Bandung: Pustaka Jaya

Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming Impressions of Personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 41, 258-290

Bailey, P., Daley, C. E., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J., (1999). Foreign language anxiety and learning style. Foreign Language Annals, 32 (1), 63-76. Best, J. W., & Kahan, J. V. (2005). Research in education. Boston: Pearson

Education.

Backman, Nancy. (1976). Two Measures of Affective Factors as They Relate to Progress in Adult Second Language Learning. Working Papers in Bilingualism 10: 100-22.

Brown, J. D., Robson, G., & Rosenkjar, P. (1996). Personality, motivation, anxiety, strategies, and language proficiency of Japanese students. In Dornyei, Zoltan, & Schmidt, Richard (Eds.) (2001). Motivation and second language acquisition (pp. 361-398), Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Campbell, C. M. (1999). Language Anxiety in Men and Women: Dealing with Gender Differences in the Language Classroom. In Dolly J. Young (Ed.), Affect in Foreign Language and Second Language Learning: A Practical Guide to Creating a Low Anxiety Classroom Atmosphere

(pp.191-215). Boston: McGraw-Hill College.

Casado, M. A., & Dereshiwsky, M. I. (2001). Foreign language anxiety of university students. College Student Journal, 35(4), 539-551.

(37)

87

Uhr & J. G. Miller (Eds.), Drugs and behavior (pp. 438-462). New York: Wiley.

Cha, Haekyung. (2006). Korean Elementary ESOL Students' English Language Anxiety and Defense Mechanism in the ESOL and Mainstream Classes: Theoretical and Pedagogical Implications for TESOL. (Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations.). The Graduate School, The Florida State University, Florida.

Chang, S. J. (1990). A Study of Language Learning Behaviors of Chinese Students at the University of Georgia and the Relation of these Behaviors to Oral Proficiency and other Factors. (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Georgia, Athens, GA.

Cheng Y., Horwitz, E. K., & Schallert, D. L. (1999). Language Anxiety: Differentiating Writing and Speaking Components. Language Learning, 49(3), 417-446.

Chastain, K. (1975). Affective and Ability Factors in Second Language Acquisition. Language Learning, 25, 153 _161.

Coulombe, D. (2000). Anxiety and Beliefs of French as a Second Language Learners at the University Level. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation), University of Laval, Québec, Canada.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method. London: Sage Publication.

Crozier, W. R. (1997). Individual learners. New York: Rutledge.

D. Watson & R. Friend. (1969). Measurement of Social Evaluative Anxiety.

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 33, pp. 448-51.

Dewaele, J. (2002). Psychological and Socio-Demographic Correlates of Communicative Anxiety L2 and L3 Production. International Journal of Bilingualism, 6 (1), 23-38.

(38)

88

Ehrman, M. E. & Oxford, R. L. (1995). Cognition Plus: Correlates of language learning success. The Modern Language Journal, 79 (1), 67-89.

Ellis, R. (1994). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. (2008). The Study of Second Language Acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1985). Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Emilia, E. (2009). Menulis Tesis dan Disertasi. Bandung: Alfabeta

Eysenck, M. W. (1979). Anxiety, Learning and Memory: A Reconceptualization. Journal of Research in Personality, 13, 363-385. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2003). How to Design and Evaluate

Research in Education. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Frantzen, D., & Magnan, S. S. (2005). Anxiety and the True Beginner-False Beginner Dynamic in Beginning French and Spanish classes. Foreign Language Annals, 38, 171-190.

Ganshow, L., Javorsky, J., Sparks, R. L., Skinner, Sue, Anderson, Reed, & Patton,Jon. (1994). Differences in Language Performance Among High-, Average-, and Low-Anxious College Foreign Language Learners. The Modern Language Journal, 78 (1), 41-55.

Gardner, R. C., Day, J. B., & McIntyre, P. D. (1992). Integrative Motivation, Induced Anxiety, and Language Learning in a Controlled Environment.

Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14 (2), 197-214.

Gardner, R. C., &MacIntyre, P. D. (1992). A Student’s Contributions to Second Language Learning. Part I: Cognitive variables. Language Teaching, 25, 211-220.

(39)

89

Gardner, R. C., Tremblay, P. F., & Masgoret, A-M. (1997). Towards a Full Model of Second Language Learning: An Empirical Investigation. The Modern Language Journal, 81 (3), 344-362.

Gardner, R. C. (1997). Individual Differences and Second Language Learning. In G. R. Tucker & D. Corson (Eds.), Encyclopaedia of Language and Education, Volume 4: Second Language Education . The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers

Gardner, R.C., Smythe, P. C., & Brunet, G. R. (1977). Intensive Second Language Study: Effects on Attitudes, Motivation and French Achievement. Language Learning, 27 (2), 243-261.

Gregersen, T., &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, 562-570.

Guida, F. V., & Ludlow, L. H. (1989). A Cross-Cultural Study of Test Anxiety. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 20(2), 178-190.

Hancock, Dawson R & Bob Algozzine (2006). Doing Case Study Research.

New York: Teachers College Press Columbia University

Hatch, E. & Farhady, H. (1982). Research Design and Statistics for Applied Linguistics. Massachussetts: Newbury House Publishers, Inc.

Hilleson, M. (1996). “I Want to Talk With Them, but I Don’t Want Them to

Hear”: An Introspective Study of Second Language Anxiety in an

English-Medium School. In K. M. Bailey & D. Nunan (Eds.), Voices From the Language Classroom (pp. 248-277). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 125-132. Horwitz, E.K., Horwitz, M.B., & Cope, J. .A. (1991). Foreign Language

(40)

90

Horwitz, E. K., & Young, D. J. (1991).Language Anxiety: from Theory and Research to Classroom Implications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Humphries, Rebecca. (2001). Language Anxiety in International Students.

Griffith Working Papers in Pragmatics and Intercultural Communication

4, 1/2. 65‐77

Jackson, J. (2002). Reticence in Second Language Case Discussions: Anxiety and Aspirations. System, 30 (1), 65-84.

Kim, S. Y. (1998). Affective Experiences of Korean College Students in Different Instructional Contexts: Anxiety and Motivation in Reading and Conversation Courses. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation) The University of Texas, Austin.

Kitano, K. (2001). Anxiety in the College Japanese Language Classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 85, 549-566.

Kleinmann, H. H. (1977). Avoidance Behavior in Adult Second Language Acquisition. Language Learning, 27, 93 _17.

Kondo, S., & Yang, Y-L. (2003). The English Language Classroom Anxiety Scale: Test Construction, Reliability, and Validity. JALT Journal, 25 (2). 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.

Machida, Tomohisa. (2006). Foreign Language Anxiety among Intermediate-Level University Students of Japanese. Purdue University Journal. May, R. (1977). The Meaning of Anxiety. New York: W. W. Norton &

Company, Inc.

(41)

91

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 Relationship to Other Anxieties and to Processing in Native and Second Languages. Language Learning, 41(4), 513-534

MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner R. C. (1991a). Anxiety and Second Language Learning:Towards a Theoretical Clarification. In: E. K. Horwitz& D. J. Young (Eds.),Language anxiety: From Theory and Research to Classroom Implications (pp. 41-54). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R.C. (1991b). Methods and Results in the Study of Anxiety and Language Learning: A review of literature. Language Learning, 41,85-117.

MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C., (1994a).The Subtle Effects of Language Anxiety on Cognitive Processing in the Second Language. Language Learning, 44, 283-305.

MacIntyre, P .D., & Gardner R. C. (1994b). The Effects of Induced Anxiety on Three Stages of Cognitive Processing in Computerized Vocabulary Learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 1-17.

McKeachie, Wilbert J., Donald Pollie & Joseph Spiesman. (1985). Relieving Anxiety in Classroom Examinations. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 50: 93-98.

Nunan, D. & Bailey, KM. (2009). Exploring Second Language Classroom Research. Boston: Heinle Cengage Learning

Oh, J. (1992). The Effects of L2 Reading Assessment Methods on Anxiety Level. TESOL Quarterly, 26 (1), 172-76.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Daley, C. E. (1996). The Relative Contributions of Examination-Taking Coping Strategies and Study Coping Strategies to Test Anxiety: A Concurrent Analysis. Cognitive Therapy and Research,

(42)

92

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Bailey, P., & Daley, C. E. (2000). The Validation of Three Scales Measuring Anxiety at Different Stages of the Foreign Language Learning Process: The Input Anxiety Scale, the Processing Anxiety Scale, and the Output Anxiety Scale. Language Learning, 50(1), 87-117.

Onwuegbuzie, Anthony, Phillip Bailey, and Christine Daley. (1999). Factors Associated with Foreign Language Anxiety. Applied Psycholinguistics

20:217‐239.

Oxford, R. L. (2005). Anxiety and the Language Learner: New insights. In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in language learning (p. 58) . Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Palacios, L. M. (1998). Foreign Language Anxiety and Classroom Environment: A study of Spanish University Students. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation) The University of Texas, Austin.

Pappamihiel, N.E. (2002). English As A Second Language Students and English Language Anxiety. Issues in The Mainstream Classroom.

Proquest Education Journal, 36(3), 327-355.

Patton, M. Q. (1980). Qualitative Evaluation Methods. Beverly Hill, CA: Sage Publications.

Piniel, K. (2000). Foreign Language Anxiety: The Role of Classroom Factors in the Development of Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety. ELTE: (Unpublished MA thesis)

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). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Riasati, M. (2011). Language learning anxiety from EFL learners' prescriptive.

(43)

93

Rodriguez, M. (1995). Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety and Students Success in EFL Classes. Revista Venezolana de Linguistica Aplicada, 1,

23 _32.

Rodriguez, M., & Abreu, O. (2003).The Stability of General Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Across English and French. The Modern Language Journal, 87,365-374.

Saito, Y., Horwitz, E. K., & Garza T. J. (1999). Foreign Language Reading Anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 202 _218.

Saito, Y., & Samimy, K. (1996). Foreign Language Anxiety and Language Performance: A Study of Learning Anxiety in Beginning, Intermediate, and Advanced-level College Students of Japanese. Foreign Language Annals, 29, 239 _251.

Samimy, K. K. (1994). Teaching Japanese: Consideration of Learners‟

Affective Variables. Theory into Practice, 33, 29-33.

Samimy, K. K., & Tabuse, M. (1992). Affective Variables and a Less Commonly Taught Language: A Study in Beginning Japanese Classes.

Language Learning, 42, 377-398.

Sarason, Irwin G. (1984). Stress, Anxiety, and Cognitive Interference: Reactions to Tests. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46: 929-38.

Sarason. I. G. (1986). Test anxiety, Worry, and Cognitive Interference. In R. Schwarzer (Ed.) Selfrelated Cognitions in Anxiety and Motivation (pp. 19-33). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Scovel, T. (1978). The Effect of Affect on Foreign Language Learning: A Review of the Anxiety Research. In: E. K. Horwitz& D. J. Young (Eds.),

Language Anxiety: From Theory and Research to Classroom Implications (pp.15-23). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Scovel, T. (1978). The Effect of Affect: A Review of the Anxiety Literature.