[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
:: Volume 20, Issue 2 (9-2017) ::
IJAL 2017, 20(2): 113-156 Back to browse issues page
Autonomy-Supportive Teaching, Willingness to Communicate in English, Motivation, and English Speaking Self-Efficacy among EFL Learners: A Structural Equation Modelling Study
Mohammad Nabi Karimi , Afsaneh Abaszadeh
Kharazmi University
Abstract:   (173 Views)
This study examines the potential connections among learners’ willingness to communicate (WTC) in English, their perceptions of autonomy-supportive teaching and two individual difference variables, i.e. motivation and English speaking self-efficacy. Two hundred and five Iranian EFL learners responded to four questionnaires. The data obtained from the collected instruments were subjected to structural equation modeling (SEM). The findings revealed significant positive paths from autonomy-supportive teaching to motivation, WTC in English, and English speaking self-efficacy. Further significant paths were found leading from motivation to WTC and from English speaking self-efficacy to motivation. The findings also indicated that autonomy-supportive teaching style and English speaking self-efficacy could indirectly affect learners’ WTC through the mediation of motivation. Furthermore, autonomy-supportive teaching was found to indirectly predict learners’ motivation through the mediating role of self-efficacy. The implications of the study for teachers and teacher educators are discussed.
Keywords: Autonomy-supportive teaching, Willingness to communicate, Motivation, English speaking self-efficacy
Full-Text [PDF 1035 kb]   (99 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2017/06/28 | Accepted: 2017/07/25 | Published: 2017/08/15
References
1. Assor, A. (2012). Allowing choice and nurturing an inner compass: Educational practices supporting students' need for autonomy. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly., & C. Wylie (Eds), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 421-439). New York: Springer.
2. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
4. Bandura, A. (1998). Health promotion from the perspective of social cognitive theory. Psychology and Health, 13(4), 623-649. [DOI:10.1080/08870449808407422]
5. Bandura, A. (2006). Adolescent development from an agentic perspective. In F. Pajares, & T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 1–43). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
6. Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really? Educational Psychology Review, 15(1), 1-40. [DOI:10.1023/A:1021302408382]
7. Cao, Y., & Philp, J. (2006). Interactional context and willingness to communicate: A comparison of behavior in whole class, group and dyadic interaction. System, 34(4), 480–493. [DOI:10.1016/j.system.2006.05.002]
8. Chirkov, V. (2009). A cross-cultural analysis of autonomy in education: A self-determination theory perspective. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 253-262. [DOI:10.1177/1477878509104330]
9. Chirkov, V. I., & Ryan, R. M. (2001). Parent and teacher autonomy support in Russian and U.S. adolescents: Common effects on well-being and academic motivation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(5), 618–635. [DOI:10.1177/0022022101032005006]
10. Chirkov, V. I., Ryan, R. M., & Willness, C. (2005). Cultural context and psychological needs in Canada and Brazil: Testing a self-determination approach to internalization of cultural practices, identify, and well-being. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36(4), 423–443. [DOI:10.1177/0022022105275960]
11. Clément, R., & Kruidenier, B. G. (1983). Orientations in second language acquisition: The effects of ethnicity, milieu and target language on their emergence. Language Learning, 33(3), 273–291. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1983.tb00542.x]
12. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum [DOI:10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7]
13. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(6), 1024-1037. [DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.53.6.1024]
14. Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic dialectical perspective. In E. Deci, & R. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3–33). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
15. Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2012). Motivation, personality, and development within embedded social contexts: An overview of self-determination theory. In E. Deci, & R. Ryan (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of human motivation (pp. 85–107). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. [DOI:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195399820.013.0006]
16. Dörnyei, Z. (1990). Conceptualizing motivation in foreign language learning. Language Learning, 40(1), 45–78. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1990.tb00954.x]
17. Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Creating a motivating classroom environment. In J. Cummins & C. Davidson (Eds.), International Handbook of English Language Teaching (pp. 719–731). Boston, MA: Springer. [DOI:10.1007/978-0-387-46301-8_47]
18. Dörnyei, Z., & Kormos, J. (2000). The role of individual and social variables in oral task performance. Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 275-300. [DOI:10.1177/136216880000400305]
19. Eddy-U, M. (2015). Motivation for participation or non-participation in group tasks: A dynamic systems model of task-situated willingness to communicate. System, 50, 43-55. [DOI:10.1016/j.system.2015.03.005]
20. Fallah, N. (2014). Willingness to communicate in English, communication self-confidence, motivation, shyness and teacher immediacy among Iranian English-major undergraduates: A structural equation modeling approach. Learning and Individual Differences, 30, 141–147. [DOI:10.1016/j.lindif.2013.12.006]
21. Freiermuth, M., & Jarrell, D. (2006). Willingness to communicate: Can online chat help? International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16(2), 189-212. [DOI:10.1111/j.1473-4192.2006.00113.x]
22. Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitude and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.
23. Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury.
24. Ghonsooly, B., Khajavy, G. H., & Asadpour, F. (2012). Willingness to communicate in English among Iranian non-English major university students. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 31(2), 197–211. [DOI:10.1177/0261927X12438538]
25. Ghorbani, N., Bing, M. N., Watson, P., Davison, H. K., & Lebreton, D. L. (2003). Individualist and collectivist values: Evidence of compatibility in Iran and the United States. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(2), 431-447. [DOI:10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00205-2]
26. Held, D. (2000). Global transformations: politics, economics and culture. Oxford: Polity.
27. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60.
28. Jang, H., Kim, E. J., & Reeve, J. (2012). Longitudinal test of self-determination theory's motivation mediation model in a naturally occurring classroom context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104 (4), 1175–1188. [DOI:10.1037/a0028089]
29. Joe, H., Hiver, P., Al-Hoorie, A. H. (2017). Classroom social climate, self-determined motivation, willingness to communicate, and achievement: A study of structural relationships in instructed second language settings. Learning and Individual Differences, 53, 133-144. [DOI:10.1016/j.lindif.2016.11.005]
30. Kang, S. (2005). Dynamic emergence of situational willingness to communicate in a second language. System, 33(2), 277-292. [DOI:10.1016/j.system.2004.10.004]
31. Khajavy, G. H., Ghonsooly, B., Hosseini Fatemi, A., & Choi, C. W. (2014). Willingness to communicate in English: A microsystem model in the Iranian EFL classroom context. TESOL Quarterly, 50(1), 154–180. [DOI:10.1002/tesq.204]
32. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 3rd edition. New York: The Guilford Press.
33. Lee, G. (2009). Speaking up: Six Korean students' oral participation in class discussions in US graduate seminars. English for Specific Purposes, 28(3), 142-156 [DOI:10.1016/j.esp.2009.01.007]
34. MacIntyre, P. D. (1994). Variables underlying willingness to communicate: A causal analysis. Communication Research Reports, 11(2), 135-142. [DOI:10.1080/08824099409359951]
35. MacIntyre, P. D., & Charos, C. (1996). Personality, attitudes, and affect as predictors of second language communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15(1), 3–26. [DOI:10.1177/0261927X960151001]
36. MacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clément, R., & Conrod, S. (2001). Willingness to communicate, social support, and language-learning orientations of immersion students. Studies in second language acquisition, 23(3), 369–388. [DOI:10.1017/S0272263101003035]
37. MacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clément, R., & Donovan, L. A. (2002). Sex and age effects on willingness to communicate, anxiety, perceived competence, and L2 motivation among junior high school French immersion students. Language Learning, 52(3), 537–564. [DOI:10.1111/1467-9922.00194]
38. MacIntyre, P. D., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. The Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 545–562. [DOI:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb05543.x]
39. McCroskey, J. C. (1992). Reliability and validity of the willingness to communicate scale, Communication Quarterly, 40(1), 16-25. [DOI:10.1080/01463379209369817]
40. Miller, J. G. (1999). Cultural conceptions of duty: Implications for motivation and morality. In D. Munroe, J. F. Schumaker and S. C. Carr (Eds.), Motivation and Culture, (pp. 178–92). New York: Routledge.
41. Noels, K. A. (2009). The internalization of language learning into the self and social identity. In Z. Dörnyei, & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 295–313). Bristol, England: Multilingual Matters. [DOI:10.21832/9781847691293-016]
42. Noels, K. A., Pelletier, L. G., Clement, R., & Vallerand, R. J. (2000). Why are you learning a second language? Motivational orientations and self-determination theory. Language Learning, 50(S1), 57–85. [DOI:10.1111/0023-8333.00111]
43. Pajares, F. (2001). Toward a positive psychology of academic motivation. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(1), 27-35. [DOI:10.1080/00220670109598780]
44. Peng, J. (2007). Willingness to communicate in an L2 and integrative motivation among college students in an intensive English language program in China. University of Sydney papers in TESOL, 2, 33-59.
45. Peng, J. (2014). Willingness to communicate in the Chinese EFL university classroom: An ecological perspective. Bristol, England: Multilingual Matters. [DOI:10.21832/9781783091560]
46. Peng, J., & Woodrow, L. (2010). Willingness to communicate in English: A model in the Chinese EFL classroom context. Language Learning, 60(4), 834–876. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00576.x]
47. Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40. [DOI:10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33]
48. Rauthmann, J. F., Sherman, R. A., & Funder, D. C. (2015). Principles of situation research: Towards a better understanding of psychological situations. European Journal of Personality, 29(3), 363-381. [DOI:10.1002/per.1994]
49. Reeve, J. (2009). Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style toward students and how they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational Psychologist, 44(3), 159-175. [DOI:10.1080/00461520903028990]
50. Reeve, J., & Jang, H. (2006). What teachers say and do to support students' autonomy during a learning activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 209–218. [DOI:10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.209]
51. Reeve, J., Vansteenkiste, M., Assor, A., Ahmad, I., Cheon, S., Jang, H., Kaplan, H., Moss, J., Olaussen, B., & Wang, J. (2014). The beliefs that underlie autonomy-supportive and controlling teaching: a multinational investigation. Motivation and Emotion, 38(1), 93-110. [DOI:10.1007/s11031-013-9367-0]
52. Robertson, L., & Jones, M. G. (2013). Chinese and US middle-school science teachers' autonomy, motivation, and instructional practices. International Journal of Science Education, 35(9), 1454-1489. [DOI:10.1080/09500693.2013.792439]
53. Sheldon, K. M., Elliot, A., Ryan, R. M., Chirkov, V. I., Kim, Y., Wu, C., Demir, M., & Sun, Z. (2004). Self-concordance and subjective well-being in four cultures. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 35(2), 209–223. [DOI:10.1177/0022022103262245]
54. Subtirelu, N. (2013). A language ideological perspective on willingness to communicate. System, 42(1), 120–132.
55. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th Ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
56. Wallace, T., & Sung, H. (2016). Student perceptions of autonomy-supportive instructional interactions in the middle grades. The Journal of Experimental Education, 85(3), 1-25.
57. Wang, C. (2004). Self-regulated learning strategies and self-efficacy beliefs of children learning English as a second language (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
58. Wang, C., Kim, D., Bai, R., & Hu, J. (2014). Psychometric properties of a self-efficacy scale for English language learners in China. System, 44(1), 24-33. [DOI:10.1016/j.system.2014.01.015]
59. Wang, J., N, B., Liu, W., & Ryan R. M. (2016). Can being autonomy-supportive in teaching improve students' self-regulation and performance? In L. W. Chia, J. Wang, R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Building autonomous learners: perspectives from research and practice using self-determination theory (pp. 227-243). New York: Springer. [DOI:10.1007/978-981-287-630-0_12]
60. Wang, C., & Pape, S. (2005). Self-efficacy and self-regulation in learning English as a second language. The CATESOL Journal, 17(1), 76-90.
61. Wen, Q., & Johnson, R. K. (1997). Second language learner variables and English achievement: A study of tertiary level English majors in China. Applied Linguistics, 18(1), 27-48. [DOI:10.1093/applin/18.1.27]
62. Wheaton, B., Muthén, B., Alwin, D. F. & Summers, G. F. (1977). Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. In Heise, D. R. (Eds.), Sociological methodology (pp. 84-136). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [DOI:10.2307/270754]
63. Wigfield, A., Guthrie, J., Tonks, S., & Perencevich, K. (2004). Children's motivation for reading: Domain specificity and instructional influences. The Journal of Educational Research, 97(6), 299-309. [DOI:10.3200/JOER.97.6.299-310]
64. Williams, G. C., & Deci, E. L. (1996). Internalization of bio-Psychosocial values by medical students: A test of self-determination theory. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 70 (4), 767–779. [DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.70.4.767]
65. Williams, G. C., McGregor, H. A., Zeldman, A., Freedman, Z. R., & Deci, E. L. (2004). Testing a self-determination theory process model for promoting glycemic control through diabetes self-management. Health Psychology, 23 (1), 58–66. [DOI:10.1037/0278-6133.23.1.58]
66. Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 54–66. [DOI:10.1111/1540-4781.00136]
67. Yashima, T. (2012). Willingness to communicate: Momentary volition that results in L2 behavior. In S. Mercer, M.Williams, & S. Ryan (Eds.), Psychology for language learning: Insights from research, theory and practice (pp. 119–135). Basingstoke, England: Palgrave. [DOI:10.1057/9781137032829_9]
68. Zarrinabadi, N. (2014). Communicating in a second language: Investigating the effect of teacher on learners' willingness to communicate. System, 42, 288-295. [DOI:10.1016/j.system.2013.12.014]
69. Zhang, J., Beckman, N., & Beckmann, J. (2018). To talk or not to talk: A review of situational antecedents of willingness to communicate in the second language classroom. System, 72, 226-239. [DOI:10.1016/j.system.2018.01.003]
70. Zhang, D., Skilling, K., & Bobis, J. (2016). Autonomy supportive teaching practices: International perspectives. Paper presented at the Fourth International Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics in Education (STEM 2016), Beijing, Beijing Normal University.
71. Zhong, Q. (2013). Understanding Chinese learners' willingness to communicate in a New Zealand ESL classroom: A multiple case study drawing on the theory of planned behavior. System, 41(3), 740–751. [DOI:10.1016/j.system.2013.08.001]
Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA code


XML     Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Karimi M N, Abaszadeh A. Autonomy-Supportive Teaching, Willingness to Communicate in English, Motivation, and English Speaking Self-Efficacy among EFL Learners: A Structural Equation Modelling Study . IJAL. 2017; 20 (2) :113-156
URL: http://ijal.khu.ac.ir/article-1-2825-en.html


Volume 20, Issue 2 (9-2017) Back to browse issues page
Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.15 seconds with 31 queries by YEKTAWEB 3731