hospital staff nurses’readiness to communicate in english as a second language
DESCRIPTION
This study intends to determine the degree of readiness to communicate in English of hospital staff nurses and what affects their readiness.TRANSCRIPT
HOSPITAL STAFF NURSES’READINESS TO COMMUNICATE IN
ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE
A Thesis Presented to
the Faculty of the Graduate Program
College of Teacher Education
University of the Cordilleras
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
MASTER OF ARTS IN TEACHING
MAJOR IN ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE
by
LEAH ANGIWAN-SALAYAO
April 2010
APPROVAL SHEET
This thesis entitled HOSPITAL STAFF NURSES’ READINESS TO COMMUNICATE IN English AS A SECOND LANGUAGE prepared and submitted by LEAH ANGIWAN-SALAYAO in partial fulfillment for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN TEACHING MAJOR IN ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE, has been examined and is recommended for acceptance and approval for oral examination.
Ms. Marianita De Guzman, Ph.D. Adviser
Thesis Committee
Ms. Teresita G. De Guzman Ms. Lani R. Valdez DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY MASTER OF ARTS IN TEACHING
Ms. Rosemary T. Basbas DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
PANEL OF EXAMINERS
APPROVED by the Committee on Oral Examinations on _____________________ with a grade of ___________________.
Ms. Rosemary T. Basbas DOCTOR OF PHILISOPHY
Chairperson
Ms. Teresita G. De Guzman Ms. Lani R. Valdez DOCTOR OF PHILISOPHY MASTER OF ARTS IN TEACHING
ACCEPTED AND APPROVED in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN TEACHING MAJOR IN ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE.
Comprehensive Examination passed on ________________.
Ms. Miriam A. Janeo, Ph.D.Dean, College of Teacher Education
THESIS ABSTRACT
1. Title: HOSPITAL STAFF NURSES’ READINESS TO COMMUNICATE IN ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE
a. Total No. of Pages:b. Text No. of Pages: 105
2. Researcher: SALAYAO, LEAH ANGIWAN
3. Type of Document: Thesis
4. Type of Publication: Unpublished
5. Accrediting Institution: University of the Cordilleras
6. Funding Agency:
7. Keywords: readiness to communicate, motivation, linguistic self-confidence, attitude, communicative competence 8. Abstracts:
8.1 Rationale/Background
English as an international language is used by more than a billion people as a first, second or foreign language. Consequently, the purpose of teaching English has shifted from the traditional mastery of structure to the ability to use the language for communicative purposes. Thus, the issue of whether learners would communicate in English when they had the chance and what would affect their readiness to communicate gains importance. In the Philippine context, professionals seeking employment overseas has been a trend for sometime now, particularly for those in the medical arena, such as nurses. The objective of this study is to explore whether Filipino nurses, whose goal is to work and live in an English speaking country, are ready to communicate in English by examining the different affective, socio-psychological, linguistic and communicative variables in the Willingness to Communicate model proposed by MacIntyre et.al. (1998). In facing the challenges of the future, it is envisaged that Filipino nurses need to be competent and ready to use English so that they would be capable of achieving global recognition and accreditation for excellence in their field of profession.
8.2 Summary
This study intends to determine the degree of readiness to communicate in English of hospital staff nurses and what affects their readiness.
The research study aims to answer these specific questions:
1. What are the hospital staff nurses’ perceptions of their:a. readiness to communicateb. level of motivationc. linguistic self-confidenced. attitude toward the international community e. personality
H1: Hospital staff nurses are: a. always ready to communicate in Englishb. highly motivated to learnc. have a moderate degree of linguistic
self-confidenced. have a highly positive attitude towards the
international community e. and are moderately extroverted
2. What is the level of oral communicative competence in English of the hospital staff nurses?
H2: Hospital staff nurses have “good” oral communicative competence in English.
3. What is the relationship between oral communicative competence of the nurses and the following variables?a. readiness to communicate in Englishb. level of motivationc. linguistic self-confidenced. attitude towards the international communitye. personality
H2: Oral communicative competence is significantly correlated with:a. readiness to communicate in Englishb. level of motivationc. linguistic self-confidenced. positive attitude towards the international
community
e. extrovert personality
4. What training program(s) may be developed to improve the nurses’ English language learning in the areas of readiness to communicate in English, motivation, linguistic self-confidence, attitude towards the international community and personality?
The study employed the descriptive-survey design to gather data and the correlational approach to determine the direction and degree of relationship between oral communicative competence and the variables readiness to communicate, linguistic self-confidence, motivation, attitude towards international community and personality. The group of respondents consisted of 32 hospital staff nurses employed in the main hospitals in Baguio City. Each respondent completed a set of questionnaires to determine their readiness to use English, motivation to learn English, their confidence in the language, attitude towards other peoples and cultures, and their degree of extroversion. The respondents also submitted the results of their IELTS speaking examinations to determine their communicative competence in oral English.
8.3 Findings
Based on the data gathered, the following are the major findings:
1. Hospital staff nurses were sometimes willing to communicate in English, more so with their patients in a conversation than with their colleagues and superiors in a large meeting.
2. Hospital staff nurses are moderately motivated to learn English. They feel that self-study and enhancement classes are necessary to improve in the language.
3. Nurses have a moderate degree of linguistic self-confidence. They were moderately anxious when speaking in English and they perceive themselves to be moderately competent in the language.
4. Nurses have a highly positive attitude towards the international community.
5. Hospital staff nurses are moderately extroverted.6. Nurses’ mean IELTS speaking score was 7. 23, meaning
they had “good” command of the English language.
7. There were no significant correlations between communicative competence and readiness to communicate, motivation, linguistic self-confidence, attitude towards the international community, and personality.
8. There were significant correlations between readiness to communicate and linguistic self-confidence; language anxiety and perceived competence; motivation and attitude towards the international community; and linguistic self-confidence and personality.
8.4 Conclusions
Based on the results of the study, the following can be concluded:
1. Hospital staff nurses are ready to communicate in English, preferably with their patients in an interpersonal conversation.
2. Hospital staff nurses are motivated to learn English on their own and through short structured enhancement programs.
3. Hospital staff nurses are not highly anxious when using English and they perceive themselves to be competent in speaking the language. Their anxiety increases when speaking in a large group, and their perception of their competence decreases when speaking to their superiors.
4. Hospital staff nurses have a positive attitude towards other peoples and cultures.
5. Hospital staff nurses are generally extroverted.6. Hospital staff nurses have “good” proficiency in oral
English and meet the requirements in this area for immigration and employment overseas.
7. The nurses’ readiness to speak in English, their motivation to learn, their confidence in the language, their attitude towards other people and cultures, and their being extroverted do not directly influence their competence in spoken English.
8. Hospital staff nurses’ readiness to communicate in English is affected by their confidence in the use of the language. When they have low anxiety and perceive themselves to be competent in speaking, nurses are more ready to engage in communication in English.
9. The nurses’ motivation to learn English is influenced by their attitude towards other peoples and cultures in the international realm.
10. The nurses’ perception of their English competence influences their levels of anxiety in the use of the language.
11. The nurses’ degree of extroversion affects their confidence in the use of English.
12. The proposed program to develop linguistic self-confidence in the English learner is appropriate to decrease the learners’ language anxiety and to develop readiness to use the language.
8.5 Recommendations
Based on the findings, the following are recommended:
1. Hospitals should develop and implement staff training programs to help their nurses develop the readiness to use English in presentations and meetings with their colleagues and superiors. Because these nurses are motivated to learn, the programs can be given on a regular basis to ease the nurses’ anxiety in public speaking. This will allow the nurses to grow professionally and to make them locally and globally more competitive in their field.
2. Universities and non-academic training institutions should continuously promote the enhancement of English competence in their students and professionals. This can be achieved through integrating English in all aspects of the curriculum, as well as through workshops and short programs that allow for meaningful and authentic use of English in real-life contexts.
3. English language education especially for adults, whether in the academe or otherwise, should focus on decreasing the learners’ anxiety in the use of the language through familiarization and constant use. This will in turn develop their readiness to speak in English, allowing them to initiate communication in actual situations. In addition, encouraging the use of English will help students form improved judgments of their language competence and will consequently ease their language anxiety.
4. As part of English language education, learners should be made aware of the culture in which the English language is used. Media can be utilized to bring to the
students English in its actual context. Students can watch shows and movies, after which discussion and feedback take place. Learners should also be encouraged to keep abreast of current events happening in and outside of their country. A healthy attitude towards other people and their culture will keep learners motivated to learn about them and their language.
5. Language classes should be kept small. While this is extremely difficult and unrealistic to pursue in many academic institutions, this is possible in centers that provide language enhancement workshops and programs. A smaller learning group allows for even the most reticent student to speak up. Teachers should expertly facilitate each student’s talking time so that the more talkative student does not take up all of the time, at the expense of the quieter ones.
Other recommendations in relation to the study are as follows:1. Since the study failed to establish connections between
communicative competence and readiness to communicate, motivation, linguistic confidence, attitude towards the international community, and personality, further research may be conducted to investigate the more immediate antecedents of language competence.
2. The study was conducted exclusively among a limited number of nurses, therefore, it is safe to say that the results are applicable to this particular group. Future studies can use a bigger number of participants coming from a variety of professions to allow for more generalized findings and conclusions.
3. According to the Willingness to Communicate model (MacIntyre et.al., 1998) there are both enduring and situational variables that affect one’s readiness to communicate in a foreign or second language. The current study, however, examined only the enduring variables such as confidence and personality. Further research is needed to examine the effect of situation-specific variables, such as a person’s desire to communicate with specific people. This will require a longitudinal qualitative study in various situations both inside and outside the classroom.
4. The current study focused solely on the speaking mode of the English language. Future research needs to consider the readiness to communicate of L2 learners in the other language modes – writing, reading and listening.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The writing of this paper has been a journey in humility and patience for the researcher. It was not an easy
ride, but it was well worth it. The researcher is indebted to:
UC-BCF, who has been a home for learning for three generations, to date, in this researcher’s family.
The educators who shared their expertise and guided this research.
A colleague and friend, Ms. Marifel Tipay, who made the researcher feel that she was not alone in this experience.
Her sisters, Rachel and Keren, for being her best friends and editors, and for so lovingly stepping in as “substitute moms” to Hali.
Her parents, Engr. David C. Angiwan and Mancy Eming-Angiwan, for passing on their passion for education and for preaching and living: “Good, better, best, never let it rest, ‘til your good is better and your better best.”
Her grandfather, Mr. Matias Angiwan Sr., for being a testimony to “teaching and learning must never stop.”
Her husband, Engr. Honor S. Salayao, for allowing her to find her career path, and for supporting and encouraging her to grow in it; for being a faithful prayer partner, shock-absorber and inspiration.
Her daughter Hali, whose young and generous heart gave her mom what she needed to keep going – unconditional love.
Mostly, to the Shepherd of her Soul, whose grace was and will always be sufficient.
l.a.s.
DEDICATION
This is for NOAH’S ARK.
May it be used to “help build lives”.
leah
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
TITLE PAGE....................................... 1
APPROVAL SHEET................................... 2
ABSTRACT......................................... 3
ACKNOWLEDGMENT................................... 10
DEDICATION....................................... 11
TABLE OF CONTENTS................................ 12
LIST OF TABLES................................... 15
LIST OF FIGURE................................... 16
CHAPTER
1 THE PROBLEM
Background of the Study................ 17
Theoretical/Conceptual Framework....... 24
Statement of the Problem and Hypotheses. 50
2 DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
Research Design and Methodology........ 54
Population and Locale of the Study..... 55
Data Gathering Tools................... 58
Data Gathering Procedure............... 63
Treatment of Data...................... 64
3 PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
OF DATA
Readiness to Communicate............... 69
Motivation............................. 72
Linguistic Self-confidence............. 75
Attitude Towards the International
Community.......................... 81
Personality............................ 84
Communicative Competence............... 86
Correlations Between Variables......... 88
Sample Program......................... 104
4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions............................ 118
Recommendation......................... 120
REFERENCES....................................... 124
APPENDICES
A. Letter to Respondents.................. 129
B. Questionnaire on Readiness to
Communicate.......................... 130
C. Questionnaire on Motivation............ 132
D. Questionnaire on Linguistic
Self-confidence...................... 134
E. Questionnaire on Attitude Towards
the International Community.......... 137
F. Questionnaire on Personality........... 139
G. IELTS Band Score Descriptions.......... 141
H. Questionnaire on Language Anxiety
and Perceived Communication
Competence for Proposed Program...... 143
I. Self Introduction Guide................ 146
J. Basics of Effective Communication...... 147
K. Speaking Checklist..................... 148
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
1 Nurses’ Readiness to Communicate in English.. 70
2 Nurses’ Motivation to Learn English.......... 74
3 Nurses’ Communication Anxiety in English..... 77
4 Nurses’ Perceived Competence in English...... 80
5 Nurses’ Attitude Towards the International
Community.................................... 83
6 Nurses’ Degree of Extroversion (Personality). 85
7 Nurses’ Communicative Competence in English.. 87
8 Correlations Among Variables................. 89
The Problem
17
Chapter 1
THE PROBLEM
Background of the Study
English is spoken by more people and is recognized by
more countries as a desirable lingua franca than any other
language in the world (Crystal, 2001, as cited in Mair,
2003). Teaching and learning English as a second language
(ESL) or a foreign language (EFL) to non-native speakers
serves the most obvious and important function of enabling
the learner to become competent in global communication. In
fact, Graddol (as cited in Mair, 2003) says, “native
speakers may feel the language belongs to them, but it will
be those who speak English as a second or foreign language
who will determine its world future” (p. 140).
In a study by Kachru (1991), he divides the use of
English into three concentric circles. The innermost circle
is the native or traditional base of English and includes
countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom,
Ireland, and other countries that historically became white
colonies such as Australia and New Zealand. The outer
circle encompasses those countries where English has
official or historical significance. This includes most of
the former British Empire, populous countries such as India
and Nigeria that became British colonies at one point in
The Problem
18
history, and those who fell under the American influence,
such as the Philippines. The expanding circle refers to
countries, such as China and Korea, where English has no
official role but is nonetheless important for specific
functions such as international trade.
In the Philippines, the English language is not
considered a native language; but interestingly, it is the
language that Filipinos view as their key to economic and
social mobility (McKay, 1992; Gramley & Patzold, 1992).
English is also the country’s medium of educational
instruction; however, it can be argued that in practice,
English is not always the main language inside the
classroom. Nevertheless, the Philippine government
recognizes the importance of the language so that in 2006,
the Department of Education restructured the curriculum to
give special emphasis and increased time for English in
schools (Melencio, 2006).
For professionals seeking employment overseas, there
are available learning and review programs such as those
conducted by the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration
(OWWA) and others by training and review centers for English
enhancement and proficiency tests such as the International
English Language Testing System (IELTS) and the Test of
The Problem
19
English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL). This leads one to
conclude that Filipinos, whether studying or working,
recognize their need to master the world’s lingua franca. In
other words, learning English is a must.
This study will focus on adult nursing professionals
learning to enhance their skills in the English language for
purposes of meeting requirements set by countries where
English is the main code of communication. The most popular
degree in the Philippines today is Nursing. More than
100,000 Filipino nurses have left the country in recent
years to seek employment abroad (Palatino, 2006). According
to the Department of Health, 85 percent of the country’s
total number of licensed nurses is to be found in the
hospitals of other countries, and one reason why the
Philippines is a top supplier of nurses in the world is that
it produces skilled nursing graduates who can speak good
English (Palatino, 2006).
The National Council of State Boards of Nursing in the
USA has set its English proficiency passing standards at an
Overall Band Score of 6.5 and a Speaking Band Score of 7 in
the IELTS examinations (Hellquist, K. & Wendt, A., 2008).
When translated, on a scale of 1-9, the band score of 6.5
means the English user is a “competent user” that is, he has
The Problem
20
“generally effective command of the language despite some
inaccuracies, inappropriacies, and misunderstandings; can
use and understand fairly complex language” (Cambridge ESOL
Department, 2007, p.4) He must also be a “good user”(Band
7)in oral communication meaning one with occasional mistakes
but handles “complex language well and understands detailed
reasoning.” Other countries like the United Kingdom,
Australia, and New Zealand have raised the bar and expect
their foreign nurse practitioners to achieve at least a band
7 in all of the four macroskills tested-Listening, Reading,
Writing, Speaking (Australian Nursing and Midwifery Council,
2009).
It is in this context that the focus on communicative
competence in the English language is strongly applied, more
so because in the past two decades, there has been a shift
in emphasis in second language teaching and learning in the
academe from “mastery of structures” to “expression of
meanings” (Nunan, 2009). MacIntyre, Clement, Dornyei & Noels
(1998) recently developed a “Willingness to Communicate”
(WTC) model that encompasses affective, socio-psychological,
linguistic, and communicative variables. McCroskey and Baer
(1985 as cited in McIntyre et.al., 1998) have defined
The Problem
21
“willingness to communicate” as “the probability of engaging
in communication when free to do so.”
In the pyramid-shaped model, the top most layer labeled
“Communication Behavior”, becomes the goal of any language
learning experience. The relationships among the 12
variables in the model have become the foci of recent
research studies (MacIntyre, Baker, Clement, & Conrod, 2001;
Cetinkaya, 2005; Dornyei, 2003; Hashimoto, 2002; Kim, 2004).
Generally, these studies show direct or indirect
correlations among the variables (Cetinkaya, 2005).
Furthermore, McCroskey and Richmond, (1990 as cited in
Cetinkaya, 2005) who first used the construct of
“Willingness to Communicate” found in their studies that WTC
and its degree of relations among the variables of anxiety,
competence and personality differed among countries. They
likewise suggested that conclusions drawn from research have
to be done in reference to culture.
The objective of this study is to explore whether
Filipino nurses, whose goal is to work and live in an
English speaking country, are ready to communicate in
English by examining the different affective, socio-
psychological, linguistic and communicative variables in the
Willingness To Communicate model.
The Problem
22
The study poses theoretical and pedagogical
significance. First, the respondents in the study will be
examined along five variables found in the WTC model, namely
willingness to communicate, motivation, linguistic self-
confidence, attitude towards the international community,
and personality. Furthermore, the study will establish
whether these variables show a significant correlation with
communicative competence or not, revealing whether these
variables in the proposed WTC model play a significant role
in second language acquisition (SLA). The comprehensive
model acts as a broad framework which employs the
situational approach (social + classroom) and this “appears
to be a particularly fruitful direction for future L2
research” (Dornyei, 2003). The findings in the study will,
thus, contribute to the understanding of second language
acquisition and communication, especially in the Philippine
context.
Results of the study will have implications for
learners, language teachers, trainers and program/material
designers. The needs of English language learners will be
more clearly identified. Since the study will focus on
nurses who are enhancing their English skills in short-term
programs, once the learner knows exactly what he/she needs
The Problem
23
to improve, his/her learning time will be maximized and
improvement in the area of need will take place at a greater
pace. When this happens, nurses can be better prepared for
English proficiency exams that are required of them for
purposes of immigration and employment. Furthermore,
improvement in English skills will make them ready for
communicating in an English speaking country. For the
language teacher, when he/she is aware of learners’ needs,
instruction in these short-term programs can be more focused
and directed to addressing students’ needs on an individual
and a class basis. The teacher can work together with
program designers, or can be one him/herself, so that
existing programs can be improved to accommodate students’
needs or special programs can be developed for this purpose.
This study will also be beneficial generally for further
research into second language acquisition, specifically for
English. The results can be used as a spring board for
conducting further, more widespread surveys of the needs of
students particularly along the five main variables used in
the study. This can be fruitful both here in the Philippine
setting, as well as in other countries such as India, that
also send off many of their professionals to work in English
speaking countries.
The Problem
24
Theoretical/Conceptual Framework
The purpose of this study is to examine whether
Filipino nurses are ready to communicate in English as a
second language and the affective, socio-psychological,
linguistic and communicative variables that are related to
these nurses’ readiness. Relevant studies will be reviewed
in this section under these subheadings: willingness to
communicate, linguistic self-confidence, motivation and
attitudes, personality, and oral communicative competence.
Willingness to communicate. McCroskey and Baer (1985,
as cited in MacIntyre, MacMaster, Baker, 2001) employed the
term “willingness to communicate” to describe a personality
trait reflecting an individual’s inclination to communicate
when given a choice. Willingness to communicate was first
used to refer to first language communication. This concept
was founded upon the works of Burgoon (1976, as cited in
McIntyre, et.al., 2001) on unwillingness to communicate and
on McCroskey and Richmond’s study (1982, as cited in
MacIntyre, et.al., 2001) on shyness. These studies, along
with others (McCroskey & McCroskey, 1988; MacIntyre, 1994,
as cited in MacIntyre et.al., 1998) reveal that the most
immediate influences on willingness to communicate are
communicative competence and communicative apprehension. The
1988 study by McCroskey showed that self-perceived
The Problem
25
communicative competence tends to be more highly correlated
with WTC compared to actual communicative competence.
Studies on communication apprehension (Gardner, Day,
MacIntyre, 1992; MacIntyre & Charos, 1996; Rubin, 1990;
Ayres, 1992; Kuhl, 1994, as cited in MacIntyre et. al.,
2001) showed this antecedent to be consistently one of the
best predictors of WTC, playing a role also in motivation to
use a language. Apprehension to speak has a negative impact
on communicative competence because speakers recall less
information and have more task irrelevant thoughts.
MacIntyre, Clement, Dornyei and Noels (1998) later
expanded the construct of willingness to communicate in the
second language. They suggest that while many factors, such
as the situation and the characteristics of the listeners,
have the potential to change an individual’s WTC, “perhaps
the most dramatic variable one can change in the
communication setting is the language of discourse” (p.
546). Prior to this, MacIntyre and Charos, (1996, as cited
in Cetinkaya, 2005) conducted a study and found that
personality, attitudes, and perceived competence were
correlated with WTC, but they were surprised to find a
missing connection between WTC and motivation.
The Willingness to Communicate model (MacIntyre, 1998)
is shaped in a pyramid to show more basic, enduring
The Problem
26
influences on L2 communication (intergroup variables,
personality, etc.) at the bottom moving towards the tip of
the model where one can find more proximal, situational
variables, such as desire to communicate with a specific
person. It is hypothesized that while the top layers of the
pyramid have more critical influence the bottom layers have
more distant influence on WTC. For instance, communicative
competence, a construct three layers away from WTC, has been
proven in several studies (Lui, 2001; Khanna, Verma, Sinha,
Agnihotri, 1998) to show no direct relationship with WTC.
The model, although fairly recent, has caught the
attention of various researchers, especially in the fields
of applied linguistics and second language acquisition. Most
of the earlier studies on WTC in the L2 were conducted in
the Canadian setting. In 2000, Baker and MacIntyre (as cited
in Cetinkaya, 2005) conducted a study among Canadian high
school immersion and non-immersion students whose first
language is English and who learn French as a second
language. The students completed a questionnaire expressing
positive and negative experiences while learning and
communicating in French. The results showed that between
non-immersion and immersion students, the former were more
willing to communicate, had lower communication anxiety, had
greater competence in and communicated more frequently in
The Problem
27
French. For both groups, WTC showed significant correlation
with communication anxiety, frequency of communication and
WTC in the first language (English). Perceived competence in
French showed significant correlation only for the non-
immersion group. Gender did not play a role in the
motivation of immersion students, however, for those in the
non-immersion program, females showed higher motivation
compared to males.
MacIntyre, Baker, Clement, & Conrod (2001) investigated
relationships among WTC, social support and language
learning orientations of French immersion students. The 9th
grade participants were asked to complete a four-part
questionnaire divided into the following sections: (1) WTC
in the classroom, (2) WTC outside the classroom, (3)
orientations/reasons toward/for language learning, (4) who
offered them support in their French learning. The
researchers found that learners who showed orientations
toward learning French for the purposes of academic
achievement, job considerations, friendship, knowledge, and
travel also were inclined to demonstrate a WTC both inside
and outside the language classroom. The support of friends
was also associated with learners’ WTC outside the
classroom.
The Problem
28
The following year, MacIntyre, Baker, Clement and
Donovan (2002) examined the role of gender and age on WTC
and L2 communication. The participants were 7th, 8th and 9th
grade junior high school students in a French immersion
course. Results showed that the older students (8th and 9th
graders) and the females were more willing to communicate;
and that overall, students showed higher WTC in their first
language (English) than in French. Moreover, students in
grades 8 and 9 communicate more frequently in French than
those in grade 7; however, motivation to learn declined from
grade 7 to 8 and 9. The authors of the study concluded that
the constructs willingness to communicate and frequency of
communication correlate with each other.
The challenge of further exploring WTC was also taken
up by researchers outside of the Canadian setting. Hashimoto
(2002) studied the effect of WTC and motivation on actual L2
use of Japanese ESL students. His structural equation model
showed that WTC and motivation directly affect L2
communication. Furthermore, perceived communicative
competence and language anxiety proved to be strong
antecedents of WTC, L2 anxiety having a negative influence
on perceived competence. Unlike the original study of
MacIntyre and Charos (1996, as cted in Cetinkaya, 2005),
Hashimoto found a strong relationship between motivation and
The Problem
29
WTC. Similar to the Canadian studies, perceived
communicative competence and L2 anxiety showed strong
associations with WTC.
Another study using Japanese participants in the
English as a foreign language (EFL) context was conducted by
Yashima (2002, as cited in Centinkaya, 2005). Instead of
assessing students’ attitude towards the native speaker
group, the author tested their attitude towards the
international community. She tested her proposed structural
equation model and found a relation between WTC and L2 self-
confidence and international posture; motivation as an
antecedent to self-confidence and proficiency in English;
and a relationship between international posture and
motivation.
In the Korean setting, Kim (2004) replicated Yashima’s
(2002, as cited in Cetinkaya, 2005) study and using
structural equation modeling found WTC to be more trait-like
than situational. Attitude towards the international
community did not show a direct relationship with WTC;
however, this variable did show a direct relation with
English learning motivation. Motivation also showed an
indirect relation with WTC through L2 confidence.
Cetinkaya (2005) undertook a study of WTC in the
Turkish context. A novel aspect of this study was in its
The Problem
30
methodology-a hybrid design that used both quantitative and
qualitative data collection and analysis. In the former
method, questionnaires were completed by 365 randomly
selected Turkish university students, after which interviews
were conducted with 15 of these participants under the
latter method. The results of the study revealed that WTC
was directly correlated with the students’ attitude towards
the international community and their perceived linguistic
self-confidence. Personality and motivation were found to be
indirectly related to WTC through self-confidence. Lastly,
personality showed a relation with attitude towards the
international community.
A purely qualitative study was conducted by Nagy and
Nikolov (2007) among English majors studying at the
University of Pecs in Hungary. The study explored WTC on the
situational level by examining students’ personal notes on
the variables that played a role in their willingness to
communicate in English as a foreign language. The study
showed that 85% of students felt most willing to communicate
in English outside the classroom, in an informal context.
Only 9% felt willing to communicate inside the classroom and
the remaining 6% said they were comfortable in both
settings. The study showed students were least willing to
speak in a formal classroom setting (31 out of 61) and the
The Problem
31
other 29 students described events in an informal, non-
classroom setting that were unpleasant which made them
unwilling to use English in those specific situations.
Students explained that they were inhibited to speak because
of their perception that other students in the class were
more proficient and linguistically more experienced than
themselves. When it came to the topic of conversation, the
students felt that if they could not relate to the topic
that they were asked to talk about, or if they did not know
much about it, then they felt less willing to communicate.
Willingness to communicate is a powerful mediating
factor between having the competence to communicate and
actually putting this competence into practice (Dornyei,
2005). Conversely, while it is true that broadly speaking
the goal of communicative language teaching is to promote
the learner’s language competence in the target language, it
is not uncommon to find people who tend to avoid L2
communication even if they possess a high level of L2
competence. Willingness to communicate, as the immediate
antecedent of actual initiation of L2 communication, is
defined in this context by MacIntyre et.al. (1998) as “a
readiness to enter into discourse at a particular time with
a specific person or persons, using a L2” (p. 547). In this
The Problem
32
study, therefore, the term willingness to communicate is
interchangeable with readiness to communicate.
Attitudes and Motivation. Studies on motivation in the
area of second language learning and use were pioneered by
the work of Gardner and Lambert in the 1960’s. Based on
these studies, Gardner later developed his socio-educational
model of motivation to explain second language acquisition
and its relation to motivation from a social-psychological
perspective. Succeeding research on motivation has been
greatly influenced by this framework.
According to Gardner (1985, as cited in Cetinkaya,
2005) the model focuses on motivation composed of two
constructs - integrativeness and attitude towards the
language community. These constructs are founded on the
attitudes of the learner toward other ethnic groups and the
language learning context. Gardner and MacIntyre (1992, as
cited in MacIntyre, 2002) later refined this model
identifying four major components: the social-cultural
milieu, individual differences, language acquisition
contexts, and language learning outcomes. According to the
model’s authors, the socio-cultural milieu plays a role in
influencing both cognitive and affective differences among
language learners. Attitudes and motivation, language
anxiety, and self-confidence are variables under the
The Problem
33
affective domain. In the context of communicative
competence, Clement (1998) found that attitudes and
motivation are not directly related to proficiency.
Moreover, he found attitudes to be influenced more strongly
by other factors such as ethnocentrism, rather than by the
L2.
The integrative motive is the central component of the
social dimension of language learning motivation (Dornyei,
1996). It is comprised of three major variables: attitudes
toward the learning situation, integrativeness, and
motivation. Integrativeness begins with beliefs present in
the socio-cultural milieu and reflects the learner’s
interest in social interactions with the L2 community and
attitudes toward the learning situation. The motivation
component is defined by Gardner (1985, as cited in
MacIntyre, 2002) as the interaction of the learner’s
motivational intensity, desire to learn the language, and
attitudes toward the target language. This satisfies his
general definition of motivation-having a goal, desire to
achieve that goal, positive attitudes, and exerting effort.
While Gardner’s model became the theoretical basis for many
studies in motivation after its conception, it was met with
some criticism. As Dornyei (2003) puts it:
The Problem
34
By emphasizing the sociocultural dimension of L2
motivation, Gardner’s (1985) approach offered a
macroperspective that allowed researchers to
characterize and compare the motivational pattern of
whole learning communities and then to draw inferences
about intercultural communication and affiliation…
However, the macroperspective is less adequate for
providing a fine-tuned analysis of instructed SLA,
which takes place primarily in language classrooms…
Researchers started to examine the motivational impact
of the various aspects of the learning context, for
example, course specific motivational components,
teacher specific motivational components and group
specific components (p.11).
Dornyei (1990, as cited in Cetinkaya, 2005) conducted a
study among Hungarian students in the English-as-a-foreign
language setting. He argued that in this setting
instrumental orientation (motivation to learn a language as
a means of attaining goals such as furthering a career, ones
studies, or for business) would be more strongly associated
with language achievement than would integrative orientation
(motivation to integrate within the culture of the second
language group). In addition, Gardner and Lambert (1972, as
cited in Khanna, et.al., 1998) themselves found in a study
The Problem
35
among Filipinos that instrumental motivation in learning
English exerted as much influence on learning than did
integrative motivation. However, after a large-scale study a
decade later, Dornyei (2001, as cited in Cetinkaya) changed
his previous position and found the integrative motive to
still be more influential in learners’ affective
dispositions, the choice of language, and in the general
effort they put into their language studies.
In contrast, a study by Al-Ansari (1993) found no
direct relationship between integrative or instrumental
motivation and English language competence among
participants in the study. However, students who fell under
the “low achievers” category showed their instrumental
motivation to relate with their English competence.
Clement, Dornyei and Noels (1994, as cited in Dornyei,
1996) did not question the social psychological approach to
understanding language learning motivation, but they
incorporate in their schematic tripartite representation of
motivation what Dornyei (2003) discussed earlier – the
language classroom. They site the three main factors that
affect foreign language behavior and competence as (1)
integrative motive, (2) linguistic self-confidence and (3)
appraisal of classroom environment. A study by Gardner,
Tremblay, and Masgoret (2005) shows that attitudes and
The Problem
36
motivation share a direct relation and that they have a
moderately strong correlation with second language
achievement. Self-confidence showed an even stronger
correlation with L2 achievement. Upon testing five
independent factors – self-confidence in French, language
learning strategies, motivation, language aptitude and
orientation to learn – they discovered that different
processes present themselves depending on how one assesses
language achievement. When achievement is assessed by
relatively objective measures, language anxiety and self-
confidence can show higher correlations with language
achievement than do language aptitude, motivation, and
attitudes.
Linguistic Self-confidence. Clement, Gardner and Smythe
(1977, as cited in Dornyei, 2005) first introduced the
construct of self-confidence in second language acquisition
and defined it as a person’s belief that he has the “ability
to produce results, accomplish goals, or perform tasks
competently” (Dornyei, 2005, p. 73). From a motivational
perspective, linguistic self-confidence describes a powerful
mediating factor in multi-ethnic settings that is an
antecedent to the learner’s motivation to learn and use the
language of the target group. In Clement’s view, linguistic
self-confidence is primarily a socially defined construct.
The Problem
37
Dornyei (1996) underscores the social dimension of language
learning motivation and in an earlier work with Clement and
Noels (1994, as cited in Dornyei, 1996) they presented a
tripartite construct of second language motivation
consisting of integrative motive, linguistic self-
confidence, and appraisal of classroom environment as
antecedents of foreign language behavior and competence.
Dornyei (1996) explains that:
Linguistic self-confidence, including language anxiety,
is a central component in the personal dimension of
motivation. Learners who are less anxious, have better
previous experiences with using the L2, who evaluate
their proficiency more highly, and who consider the
learning tasks less difficult-in short, who are more
self-confident about their L2 language learning and
use-are more motivated to learn the L2 than those whose
motivation is hindered by a lack of self-confidence.
(p. 75)
MacIntyre, MacMaster and Baker’s (2001) study examined
the degree of convergence of the different models of
motivation in L2 learning. They compiled 23 different scales
that represented a variety of variables emerging from
different theoretical models on motivation that can be
applied to language learning research. Results showed that
The Problem
38
the 23 scales could be summarized into three main factors:
attitudinal motivation, self-confidence, and action
motivation. The second factor, self-confidence, was defined
by measures of anxiety, particularly lack of anxiety, and
perceived communication competence. Dornyei (1996) says that
“it should be noted that the emergence of self-confidence as
a distinct factor was not unexpected” (P. 75). Such a factor
has often emerged in studies by Gardner and associates
leading Clement (1980, as cited in MacIntyre, 2002) to
propose self-confidence as a secondary motivational process.
Clement and his associates (Clement & Kruideneir, 1985;
Labrie & Clement, 1986, as cited in Dornyei, 1996) have also
provided sufficient evidence that self-confidence is also a
major motivational antecedent in foreign language learning
(i.e. setting where there is no direct contact with members
of the L2 group).
On the other hand, a study conducted in the Philippines
by Rojo-Laurilla (2007) and later replicated by Feroz (2008)
were inconsistent with the findings above. These studies
showed that confidence in English, specifically its
component, anxiety, was not related to actual competence in
the language.
The Problem
39
Language Anxiety. The main pedagogical purpose for
interest in affective variables in language learning is
aimed at reducing anxiety and inhibitions and enhancing the
learner’s motivation and self-esteem towards the target
language (de Andres, 2002). Brown (1994) distinguishes
between state anxiety-a feeling experienced only in some
particular situation-and trait anxiety-a more permanent
predisposition to be anxious. Many studies have generated
evidence to indicate that foreign language anxiety can have
a negative effect on the language learning process (e.g.
Horwitz, Horwitz & Cope, 1986, as cited in Cetinkaya, 2005;
MacIntyre & Gardner, 1991, as cited in Gardner, Tremblay, &
Masgoret, 1997). In connection, Scovel (1978, as cited in
Garner et.al., 1997), upon reviewing studies on the relation
of L2 anxiety and achievement, concludes that there might be
two types of anxiety-one that is positive, or as
facilitating; the other, negative, or debilitating. Horwitz,
Horwitz, and Cope (1986, as cited in Cetinkaya, 2005) define
language anxiety as distinct from general anxiety as “a
distinct set of beliefs, perceptions, and feelings in
response to foreign language learning in the classroom” (p.
130). These authors also developed the Foreign Language
Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS) to measure three components
of anxiety-communication apprehension, test anxiety, and
The Problem
40
fear of negative evaluation (Gardner, Tremblay, Masgoret,
1997). Shumann (1986, as cited in Dornyei, 2003) proposed
the theory of stimulus appraisal which occurs along five
dimensions: novelty, pleasantness, goal/need significance,
coping potential and self-social image. When the learner
sees the communication task as familiar, attractive,
satisfying, achievable and fitting norms and his/her self-
image, then the learner feels very little anxiety engaging
in the communication task. In contrast, when the learner
sees the task as unexpected and is very concerned about
his/her image to his/her listeners, then anxiety can
increase. In a qualitative study by Nagy & Nikolov (2007),
they found some of their respondents to have a very high
level of L2 anxiety. They said they were very careful to
appear and sound perfect in front of teachers and
classmates. A few expressed their worries about making
mistakes, and that they feared being laughed at by their
peers. A very recent study by Toth (2008) among 117 1st year
English majors in Hungary revealed interesting results. The
data from questionnaires showed that generally, the students
were only slightly anxious, but that the range of responses
was very wide, suggesting a very heterogeneous group. Part
of the research focused on the responses from students who
rated their anxiety as relatively high. These respondents
The Problem
41
identified that this variable to be directly related to
inadequate classroom performance. When asked about their
self-perceived anxiety in using the foreign language (FL)
that is English, 61% said they understood why people can get
upset over English classes and 37% reported that they felt
anxious in these classes even if they were well-prepared for
them. The students were also asked to identify what they
perceive as causes for L2 anxiety. The 216 responses could
be summarized into 7 categories:
1. The nature of FL communication – students compared
the “naturalness” of the L1 versus the “strange-ness”
of the L2.
2. Personality of the learner – students were of the
opinion that a learner feels anxious in the language
classroom if he is “shy,” “lacking self-confidence,”
and “generally nervous not only in English”.
3. Majoring in a foreign language – respondents
expressed that the very fact of being a foreign
language (FL) major may be enough cause for anxiety.
4. Interpersonal factors – students pointed out that
the general characteristics of the classroom
environment, some personal attribute/behavior of the
teacher, and the characteristics of their peers, played
an important role for accounting for anxiety in the FL.
The Problem
42
5. Foreign language competence – students believe that
there is a strong link between language anxiety and
one’s proficiency in the FL. Anxiety experienced in L2
learning and communication is “very much dependent on
how well the learner knows the language.” Lack of
vocabulary and poor grammar were identified as primary
reasons for feeling anxious.
6. Instructional practices – students felt anxious in
their L2 classes because they believe Hungarian
language teaching practices are “rule-ridden,” place
“too much emphasis on accuracy” and “approach the
language only from a grammatical point of view.”
7. Lack of practice in authentic target language
communication – respondents said students who spent no
significant time in a target language country, and
whose experience with the FL is mainly inside the
classroom, experience more L2 anxiety.
On the other hand, several studies (Feroz, 2008; Rojo-
Laurilla, 2007) have failed to find an association between
language anxiety and language competence. The findings
showed participants with high language competence in English
who also reported high anxiety in the use of the language.
Perceived Communication Competence
The Problem
43
Studies have revealed that perceived communication
competence has a stronger link with the initiation of
communication (WTC), and can often override one’s actual
communication competence.
MacIntyre and Charos (1996, as cited in MacIntyre,
Baker, Clement, & Donovan, 2002) found that among beginning
adult learners, perceived communication competence in the L2
was more strongly related to WTC than was language anxiety.
This was supported by MacIntyre and Baker’s study (2000, as
cited in MacIntyre et.al., 2002) where they found that
perceived competence and L2 WTC were strongly correlated
among less advanced high school learners, but among those of
the same age group with more experience in the L2, WTC was
better predicted by language anxiety. MacIntyre et.al.
(2002) found perceived competence in the second language to
increase from grades 7-9.
Feroz (2008) found a direct relationship between
perceived competence with actual competence in English among
the participants in her study. These participants were
tested along different oral tasks such as debating,
persuading, and arguing. In all these tasks, perceived
competence correlated with actual competence.
Among children, Nussbaum, Pecchioni, Baringer and
Kundrat (2002) found in a research study involving children
The Problem
44
attending a day care center for an average of 52 months,
that children with more communicative activities and special
outings are perceived by their teachers to be more
communicatively competent. This reinforces the child’s
competencies and will therefore create a more positive self-
perceived perception of competence as he grows older. In
other words, children in richer linguistic environments have
a better chance of developing and believing they have
superior language abilities. Another factor that may
influence a learner’s perceived competence is culture.
Lailawati (2006) conducted a study in the Asian context and
found that the participants’ perception of their oral
competence was dependent on the relationship they shared
with their listeners. The higher the status of the listener,
the less competent the participants felt.
Personality. Goldberg’s (1993, as cited in MacIntyre
et.al., 1998) “Big Five” independent personality traits have
been used as basis for recent developments in research on
personality and its link with language learning. His traits
include Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness,
Emotional Stability, and Openness to New Experiences.
Several studies (MacIntyre & Charos, 1996; Lalonde &
Gardner, 1984, as cited in Macintyre et.al., 1998) show that
The Problem
45
each of the Big Five personality traits contributes to
motivation for language learning and for WTC, and that the
effect of personality is channeled through more specific
variables such as intergroup attitudes and self-confidence.
MacIntyre et.al. (1998) cautions that personality should not
be understood as a direct influence on language learning
because it is influenced by so many other factors in a broad
social context, such as those found in the WTC model.
MacIntyre et.al. (1998) explains:
The model proposed here shows that personality helps to
set the context in which language learning occurs. The
disposition to react positively or negatively to
foreign people, in combination with the formation of
positive or negative attitudes, in a context with or
without group conflict, is expected to underpin the
social distance or harmony between groups. For this
reason, we regard the intergroup context and the
personality of the learner as variables that set the
stage for L2 communication, but are less directly
involved in determining WTC at a given time (P. 558).
This is supported by Gardner (1985, as cited in Cetinkaya)
who proposes that personality and language achievement do
not share a direct relationship, but that attitudes and
motivation mediate between these variables. This is why
The Problem
46
Pimsleur (1964, as cited in Khanna, et.al., 1998) and Bartz
(1974, as cited in Khanna, et.al., 1998) failed to find a
direct relationship between extroversion and L2 proficiency.
Among the Big Five personality traits, studies
(MacIntyre, 1994; Kaya, 1995, as cited in Cetinkaya, 2005)
show that it is the extroversion/introversion dimension that
has the strongest influence on WTC and language achievement
compared to the other four traits. Extroverted students are
more willing to communicate, as evidenced by their
participation in class. Goldberg (1992, as cited in
MacIntyre, 1998) used a bipolar inventory to measure each of
the five traits. Introversion/extroversion is measured along
a continuum from silent, timid and inactive to energetic,
talkative and bold.
Communicative Competence. The term “communicative
competence” was coined by Dell Hymes (1967; 1972, as cited
in Brown, 1994 & MacIntyre et.al., 1998) as a reaction to
Chomsky’s (1965, as cited in MacIntyre, 1998) definition of
language from a purely grammatical point-of-view.
“Communicative competence then is that aspect of our
competence that enables us to convey and interpret messages
and negotiate meanings interpersonally within specific
contexts” (Brown, 1994, p. 227). This means that a person
The Problem
47
with this kind of competence not only knows vocabulary,
phonology, and grammar (or other parts of linguistic
structure) but also knows when to speak, what to say and to
whom, in an appropriate situation (Saville-Troike, 2006).
Hymes (1967, as cited in Brown, 1994) also distinguished
between “linguistic competence” and “communicative
competence.” The former is described as “knowledge ‘about’
language forms” (Brown, 1994, p. 227) and the latter as
“knowledge that enables a person to communicate functionally
and interactively” (Brown, 1994, p. 227).
Canale and Swain (1980, as cited in Brown, 1994) began
work on giving a comprehensive definition of communicative
competence, which up until today is the reference point for
discussions on the topic. They posited four categories that
will encompass the concept of communicative competence. The
first, they labeled Grammatical Competence (knowledge of the
rules of the language). The second construct was named
Discourse Competence (ability to meaningfully connect
utterances/sentences in simple conversations to lengthy
written texts. Sociolinguistic Competence was the term used
for the third category and means knowing the social and
cultural rules where the language operates. The fourth
category they called Strategic Competence – “the verbal and
nonverbal communication strategies that may be called into
The Problem
48
action to compensate for breakdown in communication due to
performance variables or due to insufficient competence”
(Canale & Swain, 1980, as cited in Brown, 1994, p. 228).
Celce-Murcia, Dornyei, and Thurrell (1995, as cited in
MacIntyre, 1998) expanded this definition and presented five
main constituents of communicative competence.
Linguistic Competence is similar to grammatical
competence and includes rules on syntax, morphology,
vocabulary, phonology, and even orthography.
Discourse Competence adopts the same meaning as was
presented by Canale and Swain (1980, as cited in Brown,
1994); knowledge in selecting, arranging, and organizing
utterances in what is said, and sentences in what is
written.
Actional Competence is simply the ability to use speech
acts appropriately to achieve one’s goal in communication.
Sociocultural Competence adopts as well the meaning
presented in Canale and Swain’s work; knowledge of the rules
of how the language is used in the social and cultural
contexts.
Strategic Competence is described by MacIntyre (1998)
as a “first-aid kit” in communication because it is the
competence to “fix” gaps and deficiencies in communication.
The Problem
49
According to Saville-Troike (2006), the communicative
competence of non-native speakers may differ significantly
with that of native speakers. Differences may lie in
structure or in rules for usage in writing and
conversations. Monolinguals and bilinguals also do not share
the same competence for a language. Bilinguals are at an
advantage in their knowledge of switching between languages,
given a particular context. This difference is due partly
because of the different social functions of the L1 and L2,
as they operate in a given culture.
It is important to note that studies such as those
conducted by McCroskey and Richmond (1991, as cited in
MacIntyre, 1998) show that it is perceived communicative
competence, rather than actual communicative competence,
that has a much greater influence on WTC and other affective
variables that have been discussed earlier.
Statement of the Problem and Hypotheses
This study intends to determine the degree of readiness
to communicate in English of hospital staff nurses and what
affects their readiness.
The research study aims to answer these specific questions:
The Problem
50
1. What are the hospital staff nurses’ perceptions of
their:
a. readiness to communicate
b. level of motivation
c. linguistic self-confidence
d. attitude toward the international community
e. personality
H1: Hospital staff nurses are:
a. always ready to communicate in English
b. highly motivated to learn
c. have a moderate degree of linguistic
self-confidence
d. have a highly positive attitude towards the
international community
e. and are moderately extroverted
2. What is the level of oral communicative competence in
English of the hospital staff nurses?
H2: Hospital staff nurses have “good” oral
communicative competence in English.
The Problem
51
3. What is the relationship between oral communicative
competence of the nurses and the following variables?
a. readiness to communicate in English
b. level of motivation
c. linguistic self-confidence
d. attitude towards the international community
e. personality
H2: Oral communicative competence is significantly
correlated with:
a. readiness to communicate in English
b. level of motivation
c. linguistic self-confidence
d. positive attitude towards the international
community
e. extrovert personality
4. What training program(s) may be developed to improve
the nurses’ English language learning in the areas of
readiness to communicate in English, motivation,
linguistic self-confidence, attitude towards the
international community and personality?
The Problem
53
Figure 2
Paradigm of the Study
Independent Variables Dependent Variable Output Expected Outcome
a. Willingness to communicate
b. Linguistic self-confidence
c. Motivation
d. Attitude towards international community
e. Personality
Oral Communicative Competence
Relationship between oral communicative competence and:a. Willingness to communicateb. Linguistic self-confidencec. Motivationd. Attitude towards international communitye. Personality
Training program(s) to address nurses’ needs in the areas of:a. Willingness to communicateb. Linguistic self-confidencec. Motivationd. Attitude towards international communitye. Personality
Design and Methodology
54
CHAPTER 2
DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
This study examined hospital staff nurses’ perceptions
of their readiness to communicate in English as a second
language, their motivation, communication anxiety, perceived
communication competence, attitude towards the international
community, personality, and how these variables correlate to
the nurses’ oral communicative competence.
Research Design and Methodology
The study employed the descriptive-survey design to
gather data and the correlational approach to determine the
direction and degree of relationship between oral
communicative competence and the variables readiness to
communicate, linguistic self-confidence, motivation,
attitude towards international community and personality.
Correlational analysis was applied to identify and clarify
relationships of these variables with the independent
variable (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2006)- oral communicative
competence. This study can be described as explanatory
because it investigated a number of variables that are
believed to be related to a more complex variable. Further
research may drop variables that are found not to be related
Design and Methodology
55
or only slightly related from further consideration, while
those that are highly related may be studied using for
instance the experimental design, to see whether causal
relationships occur (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2006).
Population and Locale of the Study
There were 32 respondents in the study, eight staff nurses
from each of the four main hospitals in the city of Baguio,
namely Saint Louis Hospital of the Sacred Heart, Baguio
General Hospital and Medical Center, Notre Dame de Chartres
Hospital, and Pines City Doctor’s Hospital. These four main
hospitals were chosen because they employ more nurses
compared to the other, smaller hospitals, therefore, there
is a better chance of finding nurses who have already
completed their IELTS examinations in these bigger
hospitals. Baguio is considered a melting pot, and as such,
the residents of the city hail from different parts of the
country, mostly from the different ethnic groups who live
closest to Baguio. The distribution of the 32 participants
is as follows:
Kankana-ey – 46.15%
Ilocano – 30.80%
Design and Methodology
56
Tagalog – 15.40%
Ibaloi – 3.40%
Kalinga – 3.40%
The respondents were composed of 12 males and 20 females
ranging in age from 21 years to 38 years old with an average
age of 25.5 years. Since all of the respondents are nurses,
all of them completed basic and secondary education and went
on to study in a university or college. Each respondent
studied for a total of no less than 14 years. The average
number of years the respondents have been studying English
came out to 13 years.
Gay and Diehl (1992) suggest as a rule of thumb a
sample size of 30 to 500; correlational research using non-
parametric sampling techniques requiring a minimum of 30
respondents to establish a relationship. The study,
therefore, will use a sample size of 32, for equal
distribution of participants among the four hospitals.
Convenience sampling will be the technique employed because
it is not feasible to know the total population of nurses
who have already completed their IELTS examinations due to
the privacy clause enforced by IELTS regarding exam results.
These nurses should have completed their exams within the
past two years, from January 2008 to January 2010. This
particular criterion will be added in the choosing of
Design and Methodology
57
participants to ensure that their IELTS results are
acceptable under international immigration and work
requirements. According to the IELTS handbook, results are
only valid for two years. In addition, nurses who have
already completed their IELTS examinations will make the
findings more relevant because they are more likely to go on
to work and live in an English speaking country in the next
few years. The researcher will choose respondents according
to their availability from a list of IELTS candidates who
booked their exams with Noah’s Ark Training and Review
Center, an official booking agent for IELTS examinations. An
underlying objective of this study is to see whether these
Filipino nurses are ready to communicate in English not only
while they are here in the Philippines, but more importantly
once they reach their country of choice. The results will
clarify areas where these nurses need additional attention,
as they are addressed more specifically in short-term
enhancement and review programs that they take advantage of
before leaving the country as overseas workers.
Data Gathering Tools
Quantitative data was collected using questionnaires.
These instruments are in English, and were adapted from
Design and Methodology
58
several studies that have already been conducted. The
questionnaires measured nurses’ readiness to communicate,
their linguistic self-confidence, motivation, attitude
towards the international community, personality, and their
brief background.
a. Readiness to Communicate
A questionnaire prepared by McCroskey (1992, as cited
in Cetinkaya) was adapted composed of twelve questions
to assess this variable in terms of “communication
context (public speaking, talking in large meetings,
group discussions, and interpersonal conversations) and
types of receivers” (Cetinkaya, 2005, p. 47). The
questionnaire was adapted to the hospital work setting
of the nurse respondents, and receivers used were
patients, other clients, colleagues and supervisors.
The adapted questionnaire was pretested on 10
respondents, prior to the survey, and the result was a
Cronbach’s Alpha of .87, which shows a high
reliability.
b. Motivation
This variable is defined by three indicator variables:
b.1 Desire to Learn English
Six items were used from Gardner (1985, as
adapted by Cetinkaya, 2005). The original format
Design and Methodology
59
used multiple-choice questions, however
Cetinkaya’s utilized a 7-point scale, where the
respondents rated the degree with which they
agreed with each statement from (1) strongly
disagree to (7) strongly agree.
The questionnaire was adapted in this research and
the 7-point scale was revised to a 4-point scale
with the choices (1) strongly disagree,
(2) disagree, (3) agree, (4) strongly agree.
b.2 Motivational Intensity
This variable was measured using a 4-point
scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree as
adapted from Cetinkaya (2005) and from Gardner
(1985). Again, the respondents rated the
degree to which they agreed with six statements.
b.3 Attitudes Toward Learning English
Five items from Gardner (1985, as adapted by
Cetinkaya, 2005) was used to measure this
component. The same 4-point adapted scale was
used; the respondents choosing from a range of
(1) strongly disagree to (4) strongly agree.
The results of these three markers were collated
to show the respondents’ overall perceptions of
their motivation to learn English.
Design and Methodology
60
c. Linguistic Self-confidence
This variable is defined in terms of:
c.1 (Lack of) Communication Anxiety
This component was measured by twelve items
used by Yashima (2002, as cited in Cetinkaya,
2005). The respondents assessed their
anxiety when communicating in English by
indicating on a 4-point scale whether they (1)
never feel anxious, (2) sometimes feel anxious,
(3) often feel anxious, and (4) always feel
anxious. The items covered the same communication
contexts and types of receivers as the WTC and
Perceived Communication Competence scales.
c.2 Perceived Communication Competence
Twelve items used by Yashima (2002, as adapted by
Cetinkaya, 2005) and MacIntyre and Charos (1996,
as adapted by Cetinkaya, 2005) were utilized to
examine the extent to which the respondents feel
confident communicating in English. They self-
evaluated their English competence on a scale from
1 (not competent) to 4 (very competent).
The questionnaire for Linguistic Self-confidence
was revised and pretested with 10 respondents,
prior to the survey, with a Cronbach’s Alpha
Design and Methodology
61
of .97, which shows a very high degree of
reliability. The results for the two components
for this variable will be collated to come up with
the nurses’ perceptions of their linguistic self-
confidence in English.
d. Attitude toward the international community
Four indicators were used to define this variable-
(1)integrative orientation, (2)approach-avoidance
tendency, (3)interest in international activities,
(4)interest in foreign affairs.
d.1 Integrative Orientation
Cetinkaya (2005) adapted four items from Yashima
(2002) and Gardner (1985) in her study to assess
the respondents in terms of whether they agree
with each of the four statements in relation to
their reasons for studying English. A 4-point
scale was used (1) meaning strongly disagree to
(4) meaning strongly agree.
d.2 Approach-Avoidance Tendency
Seven items form Yashima (2002, as adapted by
Cetinkaya, 2005) were used to measure the
respondents’ tendency to approach or avoid
speaking to foreigners they meet. The 4-point
scale was again used to rate how strongly they
Design and Methodology
62
agree or disagree with the statements given.
d.3 Interest in International Activities
Five items from Yashima (2002, as adapted by
Cetinkaya, 2005) were used to assess the degree
of interest that respondents show in having an
international career or living abroad. The 4-point
scale was again employed-(1) strongly disagree to
(4) strongly agree).
d.4 Interest in Foreign Affairs
Two items prepared by Yashima were used (2002,
as adapted by Cetinkaya, 2005), which measure
the respondents’ interest in international
matters.
e. Personality
Goldberg’s (1992, as cited in Cetinkaya, 2005) ten item
test of extraversion-introversion was used to measure
this variable. An 8-point scale was utilized. An
example of an item is silent__________talkative. The
respondents selected a number from 1 (silent) to 8
(talkative) to indicate the degree to which they are
silent or talkative.
f. The participants’ level of oral English proficiency was
measured using the IELTS Speaking examinations, a
standardized test administered by either the British
Design and Methodology
63
Council or IDP Education Australia. After the test,
each candidate received a Band Score from 0-9 with a
corresponding description of proficiency.
g. Brief Background
Respondents indicated their age, gender, ethnic
affiliation, and the number of years they have been
studying English.
Data Gathering Procedure
The data was gathered from January 21 to February 26 of
2010 from the 32 nurse participants from Saint Louis
Hospital of the Sacred Heart, Baguio General Hospital and
Medical Center, Notre Dame de Chartres Hospital, and Pines
City Doctor’s Hospital, in the city of Baguio. The
researcher first obtained a list of possible respondents
affiliated with the above mentioned hospitals from the
roster of IELTS test takers of Noah’s Ark Training and
Review Center, of which the researcher is the Administrator.
Then the researcher contacted each possible respondent,
and when the respondent answered favorably, he/she was
invited to Noah’s Ark Review Center and was asked to answer
the questionnaires with the researcher present, to clarify
or explain questions. The respondents were not approached in
their work settings to avoid disturbing them which may cause
Design and Methodology
64
haphazard or rush answering of the questionnaires;
therefore, there was no need to obtain permission from the
hospitals.
The researcher also obtained from these respondents
their IELTS Band Scores on the Speaking portion of the test.
These data were used to determine each respondent’s oral
communicative competence to arrive at the average
communicative competence of the group.
Treatment of Data
The quantitative analysis of the data was conducted
using both the statistical equation for the mean and the
Pearson product-moment coefficient.
Mean. This was utilized to determine the degree of the
respondents’ perception of their readiness to communicate,
motivation, linguistic self-confidence, attitude towards the
international community, extraversion/introversion, and
their actual communicative competence.
For the questionnaire on readiness to communicate, a mean
score ranging from 1.0–1.75 is interpreted as never ready to
communicate; a mean from 1.76-2.50 is interpreted as
sometimes ready to communicate; 2.51-3.25 means often ready
to communicate; and 3.26-4 means always ready to
communicate.
Design and Methodology
65
The scale for the questionnaire on motivation follows
this interpretation: 1-1.75 (poorly motivated); 1.76-2.5
(somewhat motivated); 2.51-3.25 (moderately motivated); and
3.26-4 (highly motivated). Negative items 14 and 15 follow
the reverse of this scale.
The scale to interpret the questionnaire on linguistic
self-confidence is as follows: 1.0-1.75 (low linguistic
confidence); 1.76-2.5 (fair linguistic confidence); 2.51-
3.25 (moderate linguistic confidence); 3.26-4.0 (high
linguistic confidence). Specifically, the scale for the
questionnaire on the component anxiety is interpreted as
follows: 1-1.75 (highly anxious); 1.76-2.5 (moderately
anxious); 2.51-3.25 (fairly anxious); and 3.26-4 (not
anxious at all). The questionnaire on the component
perceived communication competence is interpreted as: a mean
score from 1.0-1.75 (not competent); 1.76-2.5 (fairly
competent); 2.51-3.25 (moderately competent); and 3.26-
4(very competent).
For the questionnaire on attitude towards the
international community, a mean score ranging from 1.0–1.75
is interpreted as a negative attitude towards the
international community; a mean from 1.76-2.50 is
interpreted as a somewhat positive attitude towards the
international community; 2.51-3.25 means a moderately
Design and Methodology
66
positive attitude towards the international community; and
3.26-4 means a highly positive attitude towards the
international community. Negative items 19, 23, 25, 28, and
29 will follow the reverse of this scale.
The questionnaire on personality is interpreted
according to an 8-point scale. A mean score from 1-4.50 for
each item is interpreted as introverted, unenergetic,
silent, unenthusiastic, timid, inactive, inhibited,
unassertive, unadventurous, and unsociable. A mean from
4.51-8.0 is interpreted for each item as extroverted,
energetic, talkative, enthusiastic, bold, active,
spontaneous, assertive, adventurous, and sociable. In
general, a mean score of 1-2.75 is interpreted as highly
introverted, 2.76-4.50 as moderately introverted; 4.51-6.25
is interpreted as moderately extroverted, 6.26-8.0 as highly
extroverted.
The results answered the first problem:
1. What are the hospital staff nurses’ perceptions of
their:
a. readiness to communicate
b. level of motivation
c. linguistic self-confidence
d. attitude toward the international community
e. personality
Design and Methodology
67
On the basis of these results, the null hypothesis was
accepted or rejected:
1. Hospital staff nurses:
a. are never ready to communicate
b. are poorly motivated
c. have low linguistic self-confidence
d. have a negative attitude towards the international
community
e. and are introverted
The mean of the respondents’ communicative competence was
interpreted according to the IELTS Band Scale (Appendix E)
and answered the second problem:
2. What is the level of oral communicative competence in
English of the hospital staff nurses?
And either rejected or accepted the null hypothesis:
2. Hospital staff nurses have “limited” oral communicative
competence.
Pearson-r. This is a correlation coefficient that was
used to determine the degree and direction of relationship
(Fraenkel & Wallen, 2006) of the independent variables-
readiness to communicate, motivation, linguistic self-
confidence, and personality, with the dependent variable-
communicative competence. The data from these were used to
either accept or reject the null hypotheses:
Design and Methodology
68
3. There is no significant relationship between oral
communicative competence and:
a. readiness to communicate in English
b. level of motivation
c. linguistic self-confidence
d. positive attitude towards the international
community
e. extrovert personality
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
69
CHAPTER 3
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
This chapter presents, analyzes and interprets the
findings of the study based on statistical analysis of the
data collected from the questionnaires of the nurse
participants. These were used to answer the primary question
on whether or not hospital staff nurses are ready to
communicate in English as a second language.
Readiness to Communicate in English
The quantitative data gathered from the nurse
participants was used to establish their readiness to
communicate. The mean, minimum and maximum scores and
standard deviation were observed for each item in the
Readiness to Communicate questionnaire. The scale used to
interpret the mean scores is as follows:
1.0 - 1.75--------never ready to communicate
1.76 – 2.50-------sometimes ready to communicate
2.51 – 3.25-------often ready to communicate
3.26 – 4.0--------always ready to communicate
As can be seen in Table 1, overall, hospital staff nurses
were sometimes willing to communicate in English
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
70
Table 1 Nurses’ Readiness to Communicate in English
Situations N Min Max Mean SD
1. Presents a talk to a group 32 1 4 2.22 .55of coworkers in English.
2. Talk to an English speaking 32 1 4 2.72 .92patient while doing a generalsurvey of him/her.
3. Talk in a large meeting of 32 1 4 2.06 .88patients in English.
4. Talk to a small group of 32 1 4 2.28 .73superiors in English.
5. Talk with a colleague in 32 1 4 2.19 .74English while at work.
6. Talk in a large meeting 32 1 4 2 .67of colleagues in English.
7. Talk to a patient’s 32 1 4 2.13 .66English-speaking relative while explaining the patient’s status.
8. Present a talk to a group 32 1 4 2.31 .97of English-speaking patients.
9. Talk in a small group of 32 1 4 1.97 .74hospital personnel in English.
10. Talk in a large meeting of 32 1 4 1.88 .91hospital personnel in English.
11. Talk in a small group of 32 1 4 2.44 .98English-speaking patients.
12. Present a talk to a small 32 1 4 2.28 .85group of English-speaking patients’ relatives.
_X: 2.21
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
71
(Mean=2.21). The null hypothesis, hospital staff nurses are
never ready to communicate, is rejected.
The nurses preferred to communicate the most with their
patients in the context of a conversation (item #2=often
ready to communicate in English). They were least ready to
communicate to hospital personnel in a large group. These
results are consistent with Centinkaya’s (2005) findings in
her study on willingness to communicate conducted among
Turkish university students. She found the respondents to
express more willingness to communicate with friends in a
conversation or small group rather than in a large meeting.
Similarly, nurses felt readier to speak with their patients
rather than with their co-workers, in a conversation rather
than in a large meeting. This can be explained by the
concept of control as proposed by McIntyre et. al. (1998).
People often communicate with those around them for a
specific purpose. Control is thus often achieved via
powerful speech. Nurses prefer communicating in English with
their patients because in this situation they are in
control, supposedly being the more knowledgeable speaker. A
conversation as a context, compared to a large meeting, is
also less threatening for the speaker and is therefore the
preferred context. In addition, research in social
psychology reveals that people are more open to communicate
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
72
with others they encounter frequently-a concept called
affiliation. While these nurses encounter co-workers daily,
the better part of their work is spent with their patients,
and therefore, they feel a stronger affiliation towards
patients as receivers.
In summary, nurses preferred speaking in English with
their patients and relatives of these patients compared to
speaking with colleagues, other hospital personnel and
superiors. In terms of context, overall, nurses would rather
speak in English in a conversation and in a group
discussion, rather than in a large meeting or in a
presentation.
Motivation to Learn English
This variable was measured using three components:
motivational intensity to learn English, desire to learn
English, and attitude towards learning English. The mean
scores for these three components were collated to come up
with the overall mean establishing the participants’ degree
of motivation when it comes to studying English. The scale
used to interpret the scores is as follows:
1.0 – 1.75---------------poorly motivated
1.76 – 2.50---------------somewhat motivated
2.51 – 3.25---------------moderately motivated
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
73
3.26 – 4.00---------------highly motivated
In total, Table 2 shows that hospital staff nurses are
moderately motivated to learn English (Mean=3.13). The null
hypothesis, hospital staff nurses are poorly motivated is
therefore, rejected.
Items 1 to 6 show their motivational intensity. The
results suggest that nurses intend to study on their own,
aside from structured English training courses. They feel,
however, that they are only somewhat motivated when it comes
to the length of time they spend studying. These findings
were not surprising considering that the nurse participants
are working people. Self-study of English becomes necessary
because of lack of time for longer, more structured courses.
Likewise, they feel only somewhat motivated to learn for
longer periods of time.
Even stronger than the participants’ intensity to
learn, is their desire to learn English (Items 7-12). They
show a strong belief that English should be taught in
schools, and they also believe that English training courses
should be increased outside of formal education.
Since the participants all went through the Philippine
educational system, using English as its medium of
instruction, it was expected that these nurses value English
being taught in schools. Furthermore, their desire
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
74
Table 2
Nurses’ Degree of Motivation in Learning English
Situations N Min Max Mean SD
1. Compared to my colleagues, 32 1 4 2.53 .67I think I study English relatively hard.
2. I often think about the words and 32 2 4 3.09 .47ideas which I learn about in my English enhancement classes.
3. If English were not taught in 32 2 4 3.31 .54training centers, I would study on my own.
4. I think I spend fairly long 32 1 4 2.38 .66hours studying English.
5. I really try to learn English. 32 2 4 3.19 .64
6. After my English training courses, 32 2 4 3.28 .46I will continue to study English and try to improve.
7. When I have assignments to do in 32 2 4 2.91 .53English, I try to do them immediately.
8. I would read English newspapers 32 2 4 3.47 .57and/or magazines.
9. During English training classes, 32 2 4 3.09 .47I’m absorbed in what is taught and concentrate on studying.
10. I would like the number of 32 2 4 3.41 .67English classes in training centers increased.
11. I believe absolutely that 32 2 4 3.78 .49English should be taught in school.
12. I find learning English more 32 2 4 2.88 .71interesting than other subjects.
13. Learning English is really 32 2 4 3.31 .54great.
14. I would rather spend my time 32 1 4 2.75 .62on other subjects other than English.
15. Learning English is a waste 32 2 4 3.53 .67of time.
16. I plan to learn as much English 32 2 4 3.28 .46as possible.
17. I love learning English. 32 2 4 3.09 .64_X: 3.13
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
75
to see additional training courses in English outside of
schools shows that they feel the need to improve in the
use of the language, especially as they look forward to
living and working in English speaking countries.
When it comes to nurses’ attitude towards learning
English (Items 13-17), they express a positive outlook
towards this. They feel learning English is great and that
it is not a waste of time. These results are consistent
with McKay (1992) and Gramley and Patzold’s (1992) research
findings that Filipinos consider English to be their key to
success in their professions and in society, and therefore
feel the need to learn it.
Linguistic Self-confidence in English
This variable was measured using two components:
communication anxiety and perceived communication
competence. The mean scores for both variables were collated
(Mean 1=2.34 + Mean 2 = 2.76/2=2.55) showing that the nurse
participants, overall, have moderate self-confidence when
using English as a language. The null hypothesis, hospital
staff nurses have low linguistic self-confidence in English,
is therefore rejected. This
interpretation is based on the following scale:
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
76
1.00 – 1.75-----low linguistic confidence
1.76 – 2.50-----fair linguistic confidence
2.51 – 3.25-----moderate linguistic confidence
3.26 – 4.00-----high linguistic confidence
For the component on anxiety, the scores were interpreted as
follows:
1.00 – 1.75-----highly anxious
1.76 – 2.50-----moderately anxious
2.51 – 3.25-----fairly anxious
3.26 – 4.00-----not anxious at all
Table 3 suggests that in general, the nurse participants
were moderately anxious when speaking in English
(Mean=2.34). Brown (1994) distinguished between trait
anxiety and state anxiety, the former defined as a permanent
predisposition to be anxious, while the latter, anxiety
experienced in relation to a particular situation. The
questionnaire in this study aimed to determine the
participants’ state anxiety. Many studies, including that of
MacIntyre and Gardner (1991, as cited in de Andres, 2003)
include state anxiety as an influential factor affecting the
foreign language learner/user.
The nurse participants can be considered advanced
learners considering they have been studying English for an
average of 13 years and they were found to exhibit moderate
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
77
Table 3
Nurses’ Communication Anxiety in English
Situations N Min Max Mean SD
1. Presents a talk to a group 32 1 4 2.38 .79of coworkers in English.
2. Talk to an English speaking 32 2 4 2.97 .69patient while doing a generalsurvey of him/her.
3. Talk in a large meeting of 32 1 4 1.91 .82patients in English.
4. Talk to a small group of 32 1 4 2.22 .91superiors in English.
5. Talk with a colleague in 32 1 4 3.00 .98English while at work.
6. Talk in a large meeting 32 1 4 2.06 .84of colleagues in English.
7. Talk to a patient’s 32 1 4 2.59 .98English-speaking relative while explaining the patient’s status.
8. Present a talk to a group 32 1 4 2.25 .95of English-speaking patients.
9. Talk in a small group of 32 1 4 2.28 .85hospital personnel in English.
10. Talk in a large meeting of 32 1 4 1.91 .78hospital personnel in English.
11. Talk in a small group of 32 1 4 2.28 .85English-speaking patients.
12. Present a talk to a small 32 1 4 2.28 .85group of English-speaking patients’ relatives.
_X 2.34
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
78
anxiety in their use of English. This can be explained by
MacIntyre and Gardner who proposed that foreign language
anxiety develops due to negative experiences of the foreign
language learner/user. Beginning learners, like those in
Cetinkaya’s (2005) study, have not had as much chance to
experience the foreign language learning process and
therefore, showed lower levels of anxiety, compared to the
more experienced nurse participants.
Communicating in a large meeting (items 3, 6, and 10)
was the most anxiety-provoking context for the participants
followed by speaking in a group. They felt the least anxious
in an interpersonal conversation. The only situation when
none of the nurses responded they were highly anxious was
when speaking to a patient in a conversation. There did not
seem to be pronounced differences in the anxiety levels of
nurses in terms of receivers compared to that of context.
John Shumann (1986, as cited in Dornyei, 2003) explored the
concept of the foreign language learner’s/user’s self-social
image. L2 learners fear looking comical or appearing like a
fool when attempting to use the target language. His
findings suggest that the learner/user avoids “narcissistic
injury,” fears criticism and activates his/her social
inhibitions to protect him/herself. The possibility of
criticism is so much higher when communicating in the
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
79
context of a large meeting or in a group considering the
number of receivers, therefore, anxiety on the part of the
speaker in these situations is increased. In total, the
participants did not seem to experience high anxiety in any
of the situations.
The table on perceived communication competence (Table
4) shows that hospital staff nurses, overall, see themselves
as moderately competent when communicating in English
(Mean=2.76). The interpretation of scores is based on the
following scale:
1.00 – 1.75-----not competent
1.76 – 2.50-----fairly competent
2.51 – 3.25-----moderately competent
3.26 – 4.00-----very competent
The nurses felt the most competent when speaking to a
patient, patient’s relatives, and to colleagues in a
conversation or a group discussion. They felt the least
competent speaking in English with their superiors. In
total, it was only with their superiors when they felt
fairly competent, while, in all other situations, they
seemed to feel moderately competent communicating in
English.
These findings may be explained by a study authored by
Lailawati (2006) among Malaysians showing that culture
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
80
Table 4 Nurses’ Perceived Communication Competence in English
Situations N Min Max Mean SD
1. Presents a talk to a group 32 2 4 2.72 .77of coworkers in English.
2. Talk to an English speaking 32 2 4 2.70 .73patient while doing a generalsurvey of him/her.
3. Talk in a large meeting of 32 2 4 2.64 .71patients in English.
4. Talk to a small group of 32 2 4 2.97 .73superiors in English.
5. Talk with a colleague in 32 2 4 2.64 .72English while at work.
6. Talk in a large meeting 32 2 4 2.94 .82of colleagues in English.
7. Talk to a patient’s 32 2 4 2.94 .82English-speaking relative while explaining the patient’s status.
8. Present a talk to a group 32 1 4 2.70 .76of English-speaking patients.
9. Talk in a small group of 32 2 4 2.76 .76hospital personnel in English.
10. Talk in a large meeting of 32 1 4 2.55 .64hospital personnel in English.
11. Talk in a small group of 32 2 4 2.91 .70English-speaking patients.
12. Present a talk to a small 32 2 4 23.09 .74group of English-speaking patients’ relatives.
_X: 2.76
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
81
plays a role in a person’s perceived communication
competence. A common denominator among Asians is their deep-
seated values. A speaker who is a subordinate may feel less
competent when communicating in a relationship that is
highly affected by respect, such as subordinate-superior
relations, but on the other hand, feel more competent when
he is in the “superior” position.
Attitude Towards the International Community
Four components were used to measure this variable:
integrative orientation, approach-avoidance tendency,
interest in international activities, and interest in
foreign affairs. The mean scores for these four were
collated to come up with the nurse participants’ attitude
towards the international community. The scale used to
interpret the scores is as follows:
1.00 – 1.75----negative attitude towards the
international community
1.76 – 2.50----somewhat positive attitude towards
the international community
3.51 – 3.25----moderately positive attitude towards
the international community
3.26 – 4.00----highly positive attitude towards the
international community
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
82
Based on the four markers, in total, the results
showed (Table 5) that hospital staff nurses have a highly
positive attitude towards the international community
(Mean=3.30). The null hypothesis, hospital staff nurses have
a negative attitude towards the international community, is
rejected.
More specifically, hospital staff nurses have a highly
positive attitude towards the English-speaking community
(Table 5: Items 15-18). They strongly believe English will
allow them to meet more people and get to know different
kinds of cultures. They also are open to making friends with
foreigners.
In terms of nurses’ approach-avoidance tendency towards
foreigners (Items 1-7), they are the most willing to make
friends with international nurses and to speak to one if
they ever meet. They are only moderately positive in
attitude when it comes to sharing an apartment with a
foreigner and volunteering to be involved with them in the
community. Overall, nurses show that they are willing to
approach foreigners, particularly nurses from other
countries, and communicate with them.
Nurses likewise show an interest in international
affairs and activities (Items 8-14). While they have a
highly positive attitude towards working with an
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
83
Table 5
Nurses’ Attitude Towards the International Community
Situations N Min Max Mean SD
1. I want to make friends with 32 1 4 3.38 .66 international nurses.
2. I try to avoid talking with 32 1 4 3.19 .74foreigners if I can.
3. I would talk to an international 32 1 4 3.25 .51nurse if I ever meet one.
4. I wouldn’t mind sharing an 32 1 4 2.78 .71apartment or room with a foreigner.
5. I want to participate in a 32 2 4 3.06 .56volunteer activity to help foreigners living in the neighboring community.
6. I would feel somewhat uncomfortable 32 2 4 3.03 .65if a foreigner moved next door.
7. I would help a foreigner who 32 2 4 3.16 .57is in trouble.
8. I would rather stay in my 32 2 4 2.88 .71hometown.
9. I want to live in a foreign 32 2 4 3.22 .61country.
10. I want to work in an 32 2 4 3.28 .63international organization like the United Nations.
11. I don’t think what’s happening 32 2 4 3.03 .82overseas has anything to do with my daily life.
12. I’d rather avoid the kind of 32 1 4 3.00 .84work that sends me overseas frequently.
13. I often read and watch news 32 2 4 2.94 .50about foreign countries.
14. I often talk about events 32 1 4 2.75 .62and situations in foreign countries with my friends and family.
15. I study English because it 32 2 4 3.53 .51will allow me to meet and converse more with varied people.
16. I study English because it 32 2 4 3.44 .50will allow me to get to know various cultures and people.
17. I study English because I 32 2 4 3.34 .55will be able to participate more freely in the activities of other cultural groups.
18. I study English because I’d 32 2 4 3.13 .49like to make friends with foreigners.
_X: 3.30
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
84
international body like the United Nations, they showed a
moderately positive interest in leaving one’s hometown and
working overseas. This is the same when it comes to nurses’
attitudes towards what is happening currently in the
international community and their interest in discussing
these with friends and family.
These results are not surprising considering the fact
that the nurse participants intend to immigrate to an
English-speaking country where they know they will need to
make friends and adapt to a whole new culture. For many of
these nurses, the vast opportunities for employment abroad
are what led them to pursue nursing in the first place. The
85 percent of the total nursing workforce employed in
hospitals and institutions overseas is proof enough that
Filipino nurses desire to leave their home country in search
of work. This desire is consistent with their attitude of
openness towards the international community.
Personality
Results for this variable (Table 6) suggest that
hospital staff nurses are moderately extroverted
(Mean=6.19). The scale used to interpret this score is as
follows:
1.00 – 2.75-----highly introverted
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
85
2.76 – 4.50-----moderately introverted
4.51 – 6.25-----moderately extroverted
6.26 – 8.00-----highly extroverted
They perceive themselves to be extroverted, energetic,
talkative, enthusiastic, bold, active, spontaneous,
assertive, adventurous, and sociable. There was no item
where they perceived themselves to lean towards the pole for
introversion. The null hypothesis, hospital staff nurses are
introverted is therefore, rejected.
Table 6Nurses’ Degree of Extroversion
Personality Poles N Min Max Mean SD
1. Introverted-Extroverted 32 2 8 5.41 1.36
2. Unenergetic-Energetic 32 4 8 6.44 1.16
3. Silent-Talkative 32 2 8 5.34 1.72
4. Unenthusiastic-Enthusiastic 32 2 8 6.59 1.39
5. Timid-Bold 32 1 8 5.53 1.48
6. Inactive-Active 32 1 8 6.41 1.56
7. Inhibited-Spontaneous 32 1 8 6.06 1.52
8. Unassertive-Assertive 32 1 8 6.47 1.46
9. Unadventurous-Adventurous 32 5 8 6.91 1.12
10. Unsociable-Sociable 32 5 8 6.75 1.02_X: 6.19
A possible explanation for this could be that these nurses
are in a line of work that requires them to be highly
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
86
sociable. Before these participants entered university
studies, most of them underwent the general career guidance
services offered in secondary institutions. It is generally
suggested that students who intend to pursue nursing exhibit
traits of being sociable and enthusiastic because a major
part of their job will be dealing with patients and their
relatives, and working within an organization composed of
superiors, colleagues and subordinates. The implication is
that before these nurses entered their profession, they
perceived themselves to possess the general qualities of
extroversion, hence the results of the study.
Oral Communication Competence in English
All of the nurse participants already completed their
IELTS examination within the past two years. They awarded
band scores that describe their proficiency in the four
language macroskills – Listening, Reading, Writing and
Speaking. For this study, each of the nurses presented their
band score for speaking, and these scores became the basis
for the computations for the group’s oral communicative
competence. Table 7 shows that the participants are “good”
in their oral use of the English language. According to the
descriptions for band scores provided by the International
English Language Testing System (Appendix E), hospital staff
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
87
nurses have “operational command of the language, though
with occasional inaccuracies, inappropriacies and
misunderstandings in some situations. Generally handles
complex language well and understands detailed reasoning.”
The null hypothesis, hospital staff nurses have “limited”
oral communicative competence, is rejected.
Table 7 Nurses’ Oral Communicative Competence
Participant IELTS Speaking Band Score
1 72 73 74 75 76 77 88 89 810 811 712 713 7.514 7.515 716 817 7.518 719 720 721 722 723 6.524 725 626 827 6.528 729 830 731 732 7
_X: 7.23
These results suggest that in general, the nurse
participants meet the minimum requirements of most English
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
88
speaking countries for immigration purposes and of
institutions for employment purposes. While there is much
discussion in academic and professional circles regarding
the decline of English proficiency among Filipinos, the
results of the study are hopeful, revealing that future
OFWs, nurses in particular, are “good” in oral English
communication.
Correlations Between Oral Communicative Competence and the
Variables Readiness to Communicate, Motivation, Linguistic
Self-confidence, Attitude Towards the International
Community, and Personality
Table 8 shows the summary of the computed correlation
coefficients among the different variables. The statistical
formula used was the Pearson r which shows a linear
relationship between two sets of scores. The coefficients
may fall anywhere between +1 to a -1 and the associations
may vary in strength from strong to weak.
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
89
Table 8
Correlations Among Variables
Attitude Towards
Variables Communicative Readiness to Motivation Linguistic International Personality Competence Communicate Self-confidence Community
Comm. Perceived
Anxiety Comm. Comp.
Communication - 0.22 NS 0.01 NS 0.24 NS 0.18 NS 0.03 NSCompetence -0.13 NS 0.27 NS
Readiness to 0.22 NS - 0.09 NS 0.65 Sig 0.03 NS 0.03 NSCommunicate -0.55 Sig 0.60 Sig
Motivation 0.01 NS - - 0.13 NS 0.51 Sig -0.19 NS-0.16 NS 0.08 NS
Linguistic 0.24 NS - - - 0.11 NS 0.46 SigSelf-confidence
Comm. Anxiety 0.16 NS - - - -0.55 Sig 0.20 NS -0.42 Sig
Perceived 0.27 NS - - - - -0.01 NS 0.44 Sig Comm. Competence
Attitude Towards - - - - - - -0.06 NSInternationalCommunity
Formula: Pearson’s r; degrees of freedom (N-2:32-2=30) NS = Not significant
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
90
at α .05=0.35 (tabular value) Sig = Significant
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
91
Oral Communicative Competence and Readiness to
Communicate. The correlation coefficient for oral
communicative competence (OCC) and readiness to communicate
(RTC) came out to be +0.22. This is smaller than the tabular
value of 0.35, therefore, the coefficient does not show a
significant association between the two variables. This
means that a linear relationship does not exist between OCC
and RTC. The null hypothesis, there is no significant
relationship between oral communicative competence and
readiness to communicate, is therefore, accepted.
These results can be explained by the phenomenon: a
speaker with excellent communicative competence who avoids
second language (L2) communication or the opposite, a
speaker with poor competence in the L2 who seeks out
opportunities for communication. It was this observation
that spurred researchers such as MacIntyre et. al. (1998) to
examine other more influential antecedents that affect a L2
learner’s readiness to communicate aside from his competence
in the target language, hence the Willingness to Communicate
(WTC) model. In the WTC model, the construct communication
competence falls under Layer V (Affective-Cognitive
context), closer to the base of the pyramid and several
layers away from RTC. MacIntyre et. al. have proposed that
constructs closer towards the tip of the pyramid and
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
92
therefore closer to RTC, such as those under the layer
Situated Antecedents, will show more direct relationships
with RTC compared to those that are farther away. It cannot
be denied that communicative competence affects RTC and
eventually L2 communication behavior, but the relationship
may be indirect.
This can be supported by studies (Lui, 2001; Khanna,
Verma, Sinha, Agnihotri, 1998) among Asians showing L2
learners with a high level of oral proficiency, as evidenced
by their grades, who are unwilling to participate in class,
while there were those students who had average or even poor
oral proficiency who were enthusiastic in participating in
recitations and group discussions. These studies concluded
that OCC and RTC do not share a significant association.
The implications of this mean that for nurses,
competence in spoken English is not an assurance that they
feel ready to use the language. More generally, in L2
education, this means that while it is necessary to improve
the competence if the learners in the L2, there are other
factors that need to be addressed so that in line with the
development of the learners’ competence is the progress in
their openness to take initiative to use the language.
Oral Communicative Competence and Motivation. Tested at
α.05, the correlation coefficient for OCC and motivation
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
93
(+0.01) turned out to be not significant. This means that
there is no association between OCC and motivation. The null
hypothesis, there is no significant relationship between
oral communicative competence and motivation, is therefore,
accepted.
In a 1972 study by Gardner and Lambert (as cited in
Khanna et. al., 1998), they found Filipinos to exhibit both
integrative and instrumental motivation towards learning
English. The findings of their earlier studies suggested
integrative motivation exerted a stronger influence on L2
acquisition, however, they were proven wrong in the
Philippine context. Filipinos showed they were driven to
learn English, mainly to gain professional advancement while
at the same time recognizing the language’s significance in
the countries they intend to immigrate to. This made it hard
for the researchers to isolate which type of motivation was
more influential when it came to language learning. Al-
Ansari (1993) who conducted a study among 155 students in
their 1st year level of an English language course concluded
that there did not seem to be a significant relationship
between integrative motivation and English proficiency. The
same held true for instrumental motivation, however, there
was an exception with low achievers. This group of students’
proficiency showed a correlation with their instrumental
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
94
motivation, possibly because they had more pressure to get
better grades in English compared to their classmates.
For the nurse participants, it is true that they may
have their motivational reasons to learn English but as long
as their motivation is not yet fulfilled, such as
immigration or employment in an English-speaking country,
its influence on proficiency is weak. The desire to use
English for integrating into a group becomes less intense
because opportunities to become communicatively engaged are
hard to come by, especially in the participants’ work
settings, where communication can be achieved via the
vernacular language and this obviously inhibits nurses from
manipulating English in its contextual functions.
Oral Communicative Competence and Linguistic Self-
confidence. The two components of linguistic self-confidence
(LCC), language anxiety (LA) and perceived communication
competence (PCC), showed no significant relationship with
oral communicative competence (OCC). The null hypothesis,
there is no significant relationship between oral
communicative competence and linguistic self-confidence, is
therefore, accepted.
The correlation coefficient for OCC and LA was +0.13,
lower than the tabular value (0.35). This means that the
nurse participants’ speaking competence is not related to
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
95
the anxiety they feel when using English. This is consistent
with a study conducted by Rojo-Laurilla (2007) among 24
maritime students enrolled with the Maritime Academy of Asia
and the Pacific (MAAP) here in the Philippines. One
important finding of the study shows that language anxiety
has no significant relationship with communicative
competence. The study was replicated by Feroz (2008) among
32 electrical engineering undergraduates in Malaysia and her
findings are consistent with those of Rojo-Laurilla. These
results imply that foreign language anxiety does not predict
how high or low a second language learner’s proficiency will
be. Particularly for the nurse participants, there are those
who exhibit high oral communicative competence who may still
feel very anxious when speaking in English. According to
MacIntyre and Gardner as cited previously, this may be due
to unpleasant experiences they encountered during the
language learning process that are independent of their
competence in spoken English. For those nurses who are less
competent, some may feel very little anxiety owing to
positive experiences while learning English.
Actual competence and perceived competence showed no
significant relationship with each other (+0.27). Nurses’
spoken competence in English is not associated with their
cognitive judgment of their degree of mastery achieved in
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
96
the same language. Likewise, Rojo-Laurilla found her
respondents’ PCC and OCC not to share any significant
relationship, particularly in debate and persuasive tasks
given during the study. On the other hand, for argumentation
tasks, PCC of the respondents significantly correlated with
their OCC. In the replicated study by Feroz, PCC
significantly correlated with OCC under all of the oral
tasks. This is inconsistent with the findings for nurses
whose perception of their competence in English is not based
on their actual competence in the language. In addition,
these nurses generally have a lower perception of their
competence than their actual competence in English. The
explanation may be that these nurse participants were
generally unaware of their actual communicative competence,
prior to their IELTS exams, because it has been some time
since they were assessed through a standardized test or
through a teacher. After graduating from academic studies
and several years into work, they only receive limited
feedback with regards to their oral competence.
Oral Communicative Competence and Attitude Towards the
International Community. Correlation analyses showed that
OCC and attitude towards the international community (ATIC)
do not share a significant relationship (+0.18). The null
hypothesis, there is no significant relationship between
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
97
oral communicative competence and attitude towards the
international community, is therefore, accepted. The nurse
participants showed a highly positive attitude and desire to
affiliate with other peoples and cultures. Their
integrativeness, however, had no influence on their
competence in spoken English. This means that the way an L2
learner fells towards foreigners and their culture, whether
positively or negatively, has no bearing on his/her mastery
of the target language. A related study by Clement (1986)
found both attitudes and motivation to not have an important
influence on language proficiency. The study also showed
that integrativeness is more highly related to increased
frequency and quality of contact with the L2 community. In
other words, the formation of an L2 learner’s ATIC may very
well be influenced by stronger factors such as exposure and
his/her level of ethnocentrism rather than by the target
language itself. Furthermore, Gardner and Lambert as cited
previously found that instrumental motivation could be
enough to spur a learner to master the target language, even
if his/her integrativeness is weak.
Oral Communicative Competence and Personality. Tested
at α.05 (tabular value - 0.35), the correlation coefficient
+0.03 was not significant for OCC and personality. The null
hypothesis, there is no significant correlation between oral
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
98
communicative competence and extroversion, is accepted. This
means that the nurses’ level of extroversion did not
influence their competence in spoken English. This is
consistent with a study by Pimsleur (1964, as cited in
Khanna, et.al., 1998) who failed to find a significant
association between extroversion and L2 proficiency. Bartz
(1974, as cited in Khanna, et.al., 1998) confirmed these
findings but showed that unlike extroversion, introversion
significantly, albeit negatively, correlated with L2
proficiency. The nurse participants leaned heavily towards
the extroversion pole on all of the characteristics
presented in the questionnaire. This may be one implication
for the failed association between OCC and personality.
These findings dispel the common notion that an outgoing,
sociable person has better language skills compared to one
who is reticent. On the other hand, it is still an open
question whether introversion negatively associates with L2
competence. Additionally, MacIntyre et. al. propose that
personality is not conceptualized as a direct influence on
L2 proficiency and learning because the role of individual
differences in personality is affected by a broader social
climate.
Significant Correlations Between the Independent Variables
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
99
Although none of the variables readiness to
communicate, motivation, linguistic self-confidence,
attitude towards the international community, and
personality significantly correlated with communicative
competence, significant relationships were established
between some of these independent variables.
Readiness to Communicate and Linguistic Self-
confidence. Although RTC did not show a significant
relationship with OCC, this was not the case with linguistic
self-confidence (LSC), specifically with this variable’s
components of language anxiety (LA) and perceived
communication competence (PCC). RTC and LA showed a moderate
negative correlation (Table 8). The computed value -0.55 is
greater than the tabular value of + 0.35. This means that as
the nurse participants’ anxiety increased, their readiness
to speak in English decreased, however, as anxiety is eased,
they feel more ready to engage in communication. Numerous
studies (Yashima, 2002, as cited in Cetinkaya, 2005;
Cetinkaya, 2005; Kim, 2004; MacIntyre, Baker, Clement,
Donovan, 2002) show L2 learners’ communication anxiety to
correlate with their RTC. Furthermore, MacIntyre et. al.
propose that state anxiety (a transient emotional reaction
towards specific situations, as was the case in this study)
increases, self-confidence decreases along with RTC. L2
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
100
anxiety may also be increased due to different factors,
mainly negative experiences and unpleasant feedback. Saito
and Samimy (1996, as cited in Cetinkaya, 2005) showed that
language anxiety affects language performance of
intermediate and advanced level learners but it does not
predict the language performance of beginners. The nurse
participants may be considered as intermediate or advanced
learners who have had enough time to gather experiences in
the language learning process, therefore, they have already
formed attitudes which consequently contribute to their RTC.
Readiness to communicate likewise showed a significant
relationship with perceived communication competence. Tested
at α.05, the computed correlation coefficient of +0.60 was
greater than the tabular value of 0.35. This shows a
moderate positive correlation and suggests that nurses who
have higher PCC are more ready to communicate in English,
compared to nurses whose perception of their competence is
low. Studies conducted by MacIntyre and associates, as
previously cited, have found PCC to correlated strongly with
RTC. These researchers also concluded that PCC was more
influential in less advanced learners’ RTC and anxiety a
stronger influence among advanced learners. Among nurses,
who are advanced learners, the results are partly
inconsistent with the above studies, while PCC correlated
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
101
with RTC, PCC showed a stronger correlation (0.60) compared
to anxiety (-0.55). Since the nurses did not show high
anxiety in any of the situations in the questionnaire, this
may be one explanation why their perceived competence
correlated more highly than their level of anxiety with RTC.
Additionally, MacIntyre et. al. claim that it is perceived
communication competence that influences readiness to
communicate and not necessarily actual competence. This
supports the findings of this study where a significant
relationship was established between PCC and RTC while none
was found for RTC and oral communicative competence.
In general, self-confidence in English significantly
relates with a learner’s readiness to communicate in the
language. MacIntyre et.al. predict that a learner’s desire
to communicate with a specific person and his/her linguistic
self-confidence will be the most immediate determinants of
RTC. These two constructs will show high correlation with
RTC because both represent the cumulative influence of the
layers in the Willingness to Communicate model.
Language Anxiety and Perceived Communication
Competence. As components of linguistic confidence, it was
expected that language anxiety and perceived competence were
to share a significant correlation. The computed value of -
0.55 is bigger than the tabular value of 0.35 showing a
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
102
significant relationship. The relationship is negative,
meaning, the higher the anxiety of the nurse participants,
the lower the perception of their competence. This is
supported by Feroz, as cited previously, whose study among
engineering students revealed that PCC and language anxiety
share a negative correlation. These findings are consistent
with other studies by MacInyre cited previously showing a
direct relationship between anxiety and perceived
competence. Furthermore, MacIntyre et.al. suggest that
anxiety may be increased as a learner encounters more and
more negative experiences. These unpleasant experiences also
become the basis for the learner’s perception of his
competence. For instance, constant low grades in language
classes lead the learner to perceive his language competence
as low which in turn increases his anxiety in the target
language.
Motivation and Attitude Towards the International
Community. These two variables show a moderate correlation
with a coefficient of 0.51. This is higher than the tabular
value of 0.35 and is therefore considered significant.
Studies in this field were pioneered by Gardner, as cited
previously, and his findings suggest that learning a second
language is unlike learning other subjects because this
requires the learner to familiarize himself with the
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
103
characteristics of the L2 culture and eventually, the
learner’s success, to some extent, depends on his attitude
towards the L2 culture. Gardner maintains that attitudes
towards ethnic groups and the language learning context are
the foundations of motivation. According to Gardner, the
learner’s motivation initially originates from his general
attitudes from home and society; then the language learning
experience further develops his attitudes. The attitudinal
constructs of integrativeness and attitude towards the
learning situation have the most direct influence on
motivation to learn a second language. These propositions
suggest that for nurses, their positive attitude towards
other people and cultures is what motivates them to learn
English.
Linguistic Self-confidence and Personality. The
correlation coefficient of 0.46 shows a moderate correlation
between these two variables. Specifically, personality and
language anxiety share a low negative correlation (-0.42),
but still significant, while personality shares a stronger
correlation with perceived communication competence (0.44).
This means that the nurse participants’ personality had a
direct influence on their confidence in the use of spoken
English. MacIntyre et. al. suggest that personality is
indirectly related to readiness to communicate but is more
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
104
directly channeled through linguistic self-confidence and
intergroup attitudes. A study by Schaefer, Williams, Goodie
and Campbell (2004) in the Journal of Research in
Personality found their participants’ extraversion to
significantly predict overconfidence in cognitive linguistic
tasks. Additional support for the significant relationship
between personality and linguistic confidence can be found
in examples from people’s daily lives. Extroverts are
usually bold and will take the chance to speak up in classes
or meetings. They do not experience much anxiety in these
situations and may very well perceive themselves to be
competent, allowing them to be more open to speaking up,
compared to introverts who would rather keep silent.
Sample Program to Develop Linguistic Self-confidence and
Readiness to Communicate
Background: Based on the findings of this study, nurses show
that they are sometimes ready to communicate and that they
have moderate self-confidence in their use of English. Also,
these two constructs proved to be significantly correlated.
Readiness to communicate in English is the most crucial
antecedent to actual communication behavior in this
language. More than improving communicative competence, the
goal of second language learning must be seeing the L2
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
105
learner actually using the language for meaningful
communication, for instance, in everyday activities and at
work. In order to develop a learner’s readiness to use the
L2, his confidence in the target language must first be
developed by reducing his language anxiety and establishing
a healthy perception of his communicative competence.
Aims:
1. To increase awareness of spoken English used in a
variety of contexts.
2. To decrease anxiety in spoken English through
familiarization of a variety of contexts.
3. To develop a realistic perception of one’s spoken
proficiency in English through constructive
feedback.
4. To extend knowledge of current English vocabulary
and idioms.
Conceptual Framework: Jim Cummins (1986) developed the
reciprocal interaction model of education primarily to
address the needs of minority students in the US to help
them succeed educationally. The main tenets of the model,
however, can be very aptly applied in the Philippine
setting, among adult L2 learners who desire to improve in
their English skills mainly because the model turns the
control in the learning experience over from the teacher to
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
106
the learner. The reciprocal interaction model uses
meaningful oral (and written) communication among students
and teachers as the matrix of language learning. Language
tasks, presentations, projects and classroom discussions are
student-directed and the majority of the course is task-
based learning, supplemented by brief lectures based on the
needs of the class. A novel component of this model that
cannot be easily found in others, even in contemporary
frameworks, is its validation of the learners’ L1 language
and culture. Classroom activities value and promote the
development of the students’ first language and culture
parallel to the development of English. The teacher’s role
is to guide and facilitate discussions, and to encourage
collaborative student-to-student talk in the learning
context. While the learning environment in this model seems
more relaxed and less intense than the traditional models,
it is the teacher’s main responsibility to prepare and put
forward tasks that develop students’ higher level cognitive
skills. Language inside the classroom must be meaningful and
relevant, for both the learner and the teacher.
The way the learning environment is structured using
the reciprocal interaction model is intended to address
anxiety the learner might feel in the areas identified in
Toth’s (2008) study. The 117 students in the study
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
107
identified the following as major areas that may be possible
causes for L2 anxiety:
1. The nature of L2 communication – L2 learners
reported that the “strangeness” of the L2 may cause
anxiety. Making the speaking tasks meaningful and
useful in simulated daily activities will help make
the L2 more familiar and with constant practice, the
learner compiles an array of speech acts he can
appropriately use in different contexts.
2. Personality of the learner – While personality is an
enduring characteristic, and therefore, cannot be
changed overnight, the class size can help prevent
situations where the reticent learners are not given
enough attention and time to speak. Since the
maximum number of participants in the workshop will
total six (6), each student will be allowed more or
less the same amount of time for speaking and
listening.
3. Interpersonal factors – Students reported that the
overall atmosphere inside the classroom, the teacher
and their classmates may be causes for anxiety.
Because the workshop will allow for collaborative
learning among students and teacher, it is hoped
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
108
that the learning atmosphere will be cooperative
rather than competitive.
4. L2 competence – L2 learners identified lack of
vocabulary and poor grammar as primary linguistic
reasons for anxiety. Meeting one of the workshop’s
aims of extending the students’ knowledge of current
words and idioms will allow them to improve in this
area. Constructive feedback from the teacher will
also help students become aware of systematic errors
they make so that they can be more focused on
improving in grammar.
5. Instructional practices – Students said they felt
uncomfortable with teachers who were rule-focused
and whose goals were mainly grammatical accuracy.
Grammar will comprise only a small part of the
workshop’s program. As explained earlier, the
teacher will act as facilitator instead of
transmitter of knowledge.
6. Lack of practice in authentic target language
communication – Respondents felt they lacked
practice in the L2 outside of the classroom and so
experienced anxiety when confronted with actual
social communication. In the foreign language
setting, students may not always find opportunities
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
109
to exercise their skills in the target language. The
workshop will attempt to bring the outside world
inside the classroom by using role play and
simulations where students will practice their oral
English skills.
Program:
Maximum number of participants: 6
Program length: 9 hours (1 ½ days)
Schedule of activities:
Each of the activities can be treated as tasks or workshops
in themselves. The main topics and activities can be
expanded and lengthened, thus making it into a workshop,
until the group is satisfied that they have accomplished the
task in full. The activities can also be treated as tasks if
the group aims to complete the entire program in a specified
time-frame. This program, which specifically focuses on
making English familiar to the learner in real-life contexts
to ease language anxiety, is meant to be part of a larger
language enhancement program which is intended to be a
preparatory course for the IELTS examinations, or for
English enhancement in general.
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
110
I. Preparatory activities
The six participants are each scheduled for a 10
minute one-on-one interview and orientation with
the teacher. This will allow the teacher to get to
know the students’ background and will make the
student more familiar with the teacher and the
program.
After the interview, students will be asked to
answer the original questionnaires (adapted from
Cetinkaya (2005)) on language anxiety and
perceived communication competence (see Appendix
H). The data from these will form the base for the
teacher’s ‘needs analysis’ survey for preparation
of materials and brief lectures.
II. Program Proper
The teacher welcomes the students to the workshop
and gives them a brief overview of the schedule of
activities as well as the aims of the program.
The classroom set-up will be chairs in a circle to
allow for eye contact among all of the
participants as well as with the teacher.
III. Individual Speaking Workshop
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
111
Students are then given about ten minutes to
prepare for their self-introductions following a
guide prepared by the teacher (see Appendix I).
Students can present themselves to the group in
any language they feel the most comfortable using.
Students then introduce themselves to the class.
IV. Listening Workshop
After the introductions, the teacher shares the
basics of effective communication (see Appendix
J). This will lay the foundation for communication
the students will engage in throughout the course
of the workshop. This will help them to focus on
the more important components of communication
such as diction and body language, rather than
worrying about grammar.
V. Visual and Listening Workshop
Students watch a 20 minute clip of a famous
American sit-com. After, they identify and discuss
among themselves models of “good” communication
and “bad” communication as observed from the clip.
Students then identify contexts as observed from
the clip in which they will most likely engage in
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
112
communication if they were to live in a native
English setting, example, speaking to a fellow
customer at the laundromat. The group then
brainstorms vocabulary connected to these
contexts.
VI. Paired Speaking Workshop
Students are then asked to pair up and face each
other, the three pairs forming two parallel lines.
The teacher explains that the activity will
require them to role play and imagine themselves
in the situations they will be given. The first
line of students will each be given a card with a
situation written on it and with a communication
task they need to accomplish. Example:
You have lived with your roommatesFor six months now but you’ve decided to move out because they haven’t taken care of the place…pizza boxes everywhere, dirty socks on the couch, etc. Tell your partner about your current situation, and then explain what kind of place you are looking for.
The students sit apart far enough to avoid
distracting each other. In each pair, the person
who holds the card executes the communication task
assigned. Students are allowed several tries at
accomplishing the task. The partner who was not
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
113
assigned the task listens and gives feedback after
each attempt. The pairs raise their cards once
they feel they have exhausted possible
communication dialogues. This is a signal for the
teacher to assign the pair a new card with a new
communication context and task. This time, the
students reverse roles. The same procedures will
be followed for every task. Each student will be
given at least three tasks to accomplish.
VII. Feedback and Evaluation
After the activity, the students and the teacher
resume their circle formation and discuss and
evaluate the difficulties they encountered during
the activity. The teacher allows for flexibility
of time, depending on the questions and issues
raised. Some groups may feel no need to dissect
the situations given, while other groups may want
to pursue more in-depth discussions on the
contexts presented.
N.B. During this point, the group may want to take
a break. Pauses and breaks in the program will be
at the discretion of the group.
VIII. Visual and Listening Workshop
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
114
The students watch two 20-minute video clips of an
American sit-com. After each clip, they identify
as a group current vocabulary and idioms they hear
that they may or may not know the meaning of. The
teacher should be prepared to supplement meanings
for the latter.
IX. Individual Speaking Workshop
Each student makes a list of the words and idioms
the group collected. They pair up, this time with
a different partner. They keep their list of words
and idioms in front of them and their task is to
execute the role play activity they did earlier,
but this time, students are required to
incorporate words and idioms from their list in
their communication. It is not expected that they
use the words and idioms in the exact order as
they appear on their list, but they use these when
they feel it is appropriate, and put a check mark
after each word or idiom after they have used each
correctly.
N.B. The succeeding activities may be done the
following day to allow time for students to
prepare for their presentations.
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
115
X. Preparation and Speaking Workshop
Students go back and recall the video clips of the
sit-coms they previously watched. They identify
differences and similarities they observed between
the American culture, as portrayed in the sit-
coms, and their own culture. The teacher may give
one or two examples to help the students be more
specific in their identification of cultural
differences.
Each student is then tasked to make an outline in
the form of a web or map of his presentation of
the cultural differences he observed.
N.B. This part may be given as homework.
XI. Public Speaking Workshop
Each student presents to the class specifics of
his culture that are different or similar with the
American culture, as they observed from the sit-
coms. Students may have similarities in their
reports and these can be used as points for
discussion. After the individual presentations,
the group discusses possible ways they can deal
with these cultural differences, especially once
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
116
they migrate to the English-speaking country of
their choice. The teacher aids the students during
the discussion and offers ways of dealing with
cultural differences.
XII. Speaking and Evaluation Workshop
Each student will be interviewed by the teacher
for about 15 minutes. The questions in the
interview will be thematically related to the
previous activities of the students, such as role
playing possible situations to be encountered in
an English-speaking country and dealing with
cultural differences.
The teacher assesses the student on the basis of
eight main criteria: Fluency, Coherence, Lexical
Resource, Grammatical Range, Grammatical Accuracy,
Pronunciation, Non-verbal Communication Skills,
Comprehension (see Appendix K for the complete
Speaking Checklist). After the interview, the
teacher explains the assessment to the student,
reviews the Language Anxiety and Perceived
Communication Competence Questionnaires the
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
117
student completed earlier, and gives the student
constructive feedback.
XIII. Follow-up
The students will be encouraged to take the
workshop as just a first step in developing
confidence in the authentic use of the English
language. Students will be advised to take time to
go through the entire preparatory course for
IELTS, basically, to arm them for the examinations
they will need to take, but more generally to help
them continue to use English so that the language
and culture become more and more familiar. With
this, it is hoped that the students’ anxiety in
the use of English will decrease, that they form a
healthy perception of their competence in the
language, and that they develop the readiness to
use English in any situation and context.
Conclusions and Recommendation
119
CHAPTER 4
Conclusions and Recommendation
This chapter presents the conclusions and
recommendation based on the findings of the study.
Conclusions
Based on the results of the study, the following
can be concluded:
1. Hospital staff nurses are ready to communicate in
English, preferably with their patients in an
interpersonal conversation.
2. Hospital staff nurses are motivated to learn English
on their own and through short structured
enhancement programs.
3. Hospital staff nurses are not highly anxious when
using English and they perceive themselves to be
competent in speaking the language. Their anxiety
increases when speaking in a large group, and their
perception of their competence decreases when
speaking to their superiors.
4. Hospital staff nurses have a positive attitude
towards other peoples and cultures.
5. Hospital staff nurses are generally extroverted.
Conclusions and Recommendation
120
6. Hospital staff nurses have “good” proficiency in
oral English and meet the requirements in this area
for immigration and employment overseas.
7. The nurses’ readiness to speak in English, their
motivation to learn, their confidence in the
language, their attitude towards other people and
cultures, and their being extroverted do not
directly influence their competence in spoken
English.
8. Hospital staff nurses’ readiness to communicate in
English is affected by their confidence in the use
of the language. When they have low anxiety and
perceive themselves to be competent in speaking,
nurses are more ready to engage in communication in
English.
9. The nurses’ motivation to learn English is
influenced by their attitude towards other peoples
and cultures in the international realm.
10. The nurses’ perception of their English competence
influences their levels of anxiety in the use of the
language.
11. The nurses’ degree of extroversion affects their
confidence in the use of English.
Conclusions and Recommendation
121
12. The proposed program to develop linguistic self-
confidence in the English learner is appropriate to
decrease the learners’ language anxiety and to
develop readiness to use the language.
Recommendations
Based on the findings, the following are
recommended:
1. Hospitals should develop and implement staff
training programs to help their nurses develop the
readiness to use English in presentations and
meetings with their colleagues and superiors.
Because these nurses are motivated to learn, the
programs can be given on a regular basis to ease the
nurses’ anxiety in public speaking. This will allow
the nurses to grow professionally and to make them
locally and globally more competitive in their
field.
2. Universities and non-academic training institutions
should continuously promote the enhancement of
English competence in their students and
professionals. This can be achieved through
integrating English in all aspects of the
curriculum, as well as through workshops and short
Conclusions and Recommendation
122
programs that allow for meaningful and authentic use
of English in real-life contexts.
3. English language education especially for adults,
whether in the academe or otherwise, should focus on
decreasing the learners’ anxiety in the use of the
language though familiarization and constant use.
This will in turn develop their readiness to speak
in English, allowing them to initiate communication
in actual situations. In addition, encouraging the
use of English will help students form improved
judgments of their language competence and will in
turn ease their language anxiety.
4. As part of English language education, learners
should be made aware of the culture in which the
English language is used. Media can be utilized to
bring to the students English in its actual context.
Students can watch shows and movies, after which
discussion and feedback takes place. Learners should
also be encouraged to keep abreast of current events
happening in and outside of their country. A healthy
attitude towards other people and their culture will
keep learners motivated to learn about them and
their language.
Conclusions and Recommendation
123
5. Language classes should be kept small. While this
is extremely difficult and unrealistic to pursue in
many academic institutions, this is possible in
centers that provide language enhancement workshops
and programs. A smaller learning group allows for
even the most reticent student to speak up. Teachers
should expertly facilitate each student’s talking
time so that the more talkative student does not
take up all of the time, at the expense of the
quieter ones.
Other recommendations in relation to the study are as
follows:
1. Since the study failed to establish connections between
communicative competence and readiness to communicate,
motivation, linguistic confidence, attitude towards the
international community, and personality, further
research may be conducted to investigate the more
immediate antecedents of language competence.
2. The study was conducted exclusively among a limited
number of nurses, therefore, it is safe to say that the
results are applicable to this particular group. Future
studies can use a bigger number of participants coming
from a variety of professions to allow for more
generalized findings and conclusions.
Conclusions and Recommendation
124
3. According to the Willingness to Communicate model
(MacIntyre et.al., 1998) there are both enduring and
situational variables that affect one’s readiness to
communicate in a foreign or second language. The
current study, however, examined only the enduring
variables such as confidence and personality. Further
research is needed to examine the effect of situation-
specific variables, such as a person’s desire to
communicate with specific people. This will require a
longitudinal qualitative study in various situations
both inside and outside the classroom.
4. The current study focused solely on the speaking mode
of the English language. Future research needs to
consider the readiness to communicate of L2 learners in
the other language modes – writing, reading and
listening.
REFERENCES
Al-Ansari, S. (1993). Integrative and instrumental
Conclusions and Recommendation
125
Motivation as factors influencing attained levels of proficiency in English. J. King Saud University Journal, 5(2), 71-83.
Australian Nursing and Midwifery Council. (2008). English language proficiency for internationally educated nurses and midwives. Sydney: Author.
Brown, H.D. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents.
Cambridge ESOL Department. (2007). IELTS Handbook. Cambridge: Author.
Cetinkaya, Y.B. (2005). Turkish college students’ willingness to communicate in English as a foreign language (Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 2005). Retrieved from http://etd.ohiolink.edu/view.cgi?acc_num=osu1133287531.
Clement, R. (1986). Second language proficiency and acculturation: an investigation of the effects of language status and individual characteristics. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 5(4), 271-290.
Cummins, J. (1986). Empowering minority students: a framework for intervention. In O. Garcia and C. Baker (Ed.), Policy and practice in bilingual education: extending the foundations (pp. 103-117). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
De Andres, V. (2003). The influence of affective variables on EFL/ESL learning and teaching. The Journal of the Imagination in Language Learning and Teaching, Vol.1. Retrieved from http://www.njcu.edu/cill/vol7.Andres.html.
Dornyei, Z. (1996). Moving language learning motivation to a larger platform for theory and practice [Electronic version]. In R. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning motivation: Pathways to the new century (pp. 71-80). Honolulu: University of Hawai’i.
Dornyei, Z. (2003). Attitudes, orientations, and motivations in language learning [Electronic version]. The Best of Language Learning Series. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Conclusions and Recommendation
126
Dornyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in L2 acquisition [Electronic version]. New Jersey: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, Inc.
Feroz, F. (2008). Oral communication apprehension and communicative competence among electrical engineering undergraduates in UTeM. Journal of Human Capital Development, 1(1).
Gardner, R.C., Tremblay, P.F., Masgoret, A. (1997). Towards a full model of second language learning: an empirical investigation [Electronic version]. Modern Language Journal, 81, 344-362.
Gay, L.R. & Diehl, P.L. (1992). Research methods for business and management. New York: MacMillan.
Gramley, S. & Patzold, K.M. (1992). A survey of modern English. London: Routledge.
Hashimoto, Y. (2002). Motivation and willingness to communicate as predictors of reported L2 use: The Japanese ESL context (Doctoral dissertation, University of Hawai’i, 2002). Retrieved from http://www.hawaii.edu/sls/uhwpesl/20(2)/Hashimoto.pdf.
Hellquist, K. & Wend, A. (2008). Language proficiency: setting regulatory policy to assure public protection. USA: National Council of State Boards of Nursing.
Kachru, B. (1991). Variations of English. Retrieved November 30, 2008, from http://isg.urv.es/sociolinguistics/varieties/standardenglishnotes.html.
Khanna, A., Verma, M., Sinha S.K., Agnihotri, R.K. (1998). Adult ESOL learners in Great Britain: A cross-cultural study. Clevedon: Cromwell Press Ltd.
Kim, S.J. (2004). Exploring willingness to communicate (WTC) in English among Korean EFL (English as a Foreign Language) students in Korea: WTC as a predictor of success in second language acquisition (Doctoral
Conclusions and Recommendation
127
dissertation, Ohio State University, 2004). Retrieved from http://etd.ohiolink.edu/view.cgi?acc_num=osu1101267838.
Lailawati, M.S. (2006). Characteristics of high/low communication: The Malaysian Malay culture [Electronic version]. Journal of Intergroup Relations, 32(4), 40-55.
Liu, J. (2001). Asian Students’ Classroom Communication Patterns. Westport: Ablex Publishing.
Mair, C. (2003). The politics of English as a Second Language. Retrieved December 1, 2008, from www.asian- efl-journal.com.
MacIntyre, P. (2002). Motivation, anxiety, and emotion in SLA [Electronic version]. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 45-68). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Corp.
MacIntyre, P., Clement, R., Dornyei, Z. & Noels, K. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situated model of L2 confidence and affiliation. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 545-562.
MacIntyre,P., Baker, S.C., Clement,, R., & Conrod, S. (2001). Willingness to communicate, social support, and language learning orientation of immersion students [Electronic version]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 369-388.
MacIntyre, P., MacMaster, K., & Baker, S.C. (2001). The convergence of multiple models of motivation for L2 learning: Gardner, Pintrich, Kuhl, McCroskey. Technical Report, 461-492.
MacIntyre, P., Baker, S.C., Clement, R., Donovan, L. (2002). Sex and age effects on willingness to communicate, anxiety, perceived competence, and L2 motivation among junior high school French immersion
Conclusions and Recommendation
128
students [Electronic version]. Language Learning, 52 (3), 537-564.
McKay, S.L. (1992). Teaching English overseas: an introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Melencio, G. Philippines debates use of Filipino as instruction medium. Arab News. Retrieved December 1, 2008 fromhttp://arabnews.com/?page=4§ion=0&article =86121&d=20&m=8&y=2006.
Nagy, B. & Nikolov, M. (2007). A qualitative inquiry into Hungarian English majors’ willingness to communicate in English: Classroom perspectives. UPTR 2007: Empirical Studies in English Applied Linguistics, 149-168.
Nunan, D. (2009). Second language teaching and learning. Pasig City, Philippines: Cengage Learning Asia Pte Ltd.
Nussbaum, F., Pecchioni, L., Baringer, D.K. & Kundrat, A.L. (2002). Lifespan communication. In W. Gudykunst (Ed.) Communication yearbook 26. New Jersey: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, Inc.
Palatino, M. (2006). Philippines: exporting nurses to the world. Retrieved November 6, 2009, from http://globalvoicesonline.org/2006/07/22/philippines-exporting-nurses-to-the-world/.
Rojo-Laurilla, M. (2007). English for maritime purposes:communication apprehension and communicative competence among maritime students in the Philippines. Reflections on English Language Teaching, 6(2), 39-58.
Saville-Troike, M. (2006). Introducing second language acquisition [Electronic version]. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Shaefer, P., Williams, C., Goodie, A., and Campbell, K. (2004). Overconfidence and the big five. Journal of Research in Personality, 38(5), 473-480.
Toth, Zs. (2008). Foreign language anxiety: For beginners only? In R. Largossy, J. Horvath & M.N. Nikolov (Eds.) UPRT 2008: Empirical studies in English applied linguistics, (pp. 225-246). Pecs: Lingua Franca Csoport.
Appendices
130
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
LETTER TO RESPONDENTS
January 06, 2010
Dear Respondent,
I am a graduate student at the University of the Cordilleras and as part of the requirements for graduation, I am completing my thesis entitled “Hospital Staff Nurses’ Readiness to Communicate in English as a Second Language”.
As part of my research, I would very much appreciate it if you could take the time to visit Noah’s Ark Training & Review Center located in Benitez Compound, Magsaysay Ave. You will be answering a simple questionnaire regarding your use of English in your workplace.
If you have any questions or clarifications, please do not hesitate to contact me at (074) 442-6856 or 09277975175.
Thank you so much for your help!
Yours Faithfully,
Leah Angiwan-Salayao
Researcher
Appendices
131
APPENDIX B
Questionnaire on READINESS TO COMMUNICATE
DIRECTIONS: Below are 12 situations in which a person might choose to communicate OR not to communicate in English.
Presume you have completely free choice. Indicate the percentage of frequency you would choose to communicate in each type of situation.
NEVER I never communicateSOMETIMES I sometimes communicateOFTEN I often communicateALWAYS I always communicate
SITUATION NEVER SOMETIMES OFTEN ALWAYS1. Present a talk to a group
of coworkers in English.2. Talk to an English
speaking patient while doing a general survey of him/her.
3. Talk in a large meeting of patients in English.
4. Talk to a small group of superiors in English.
5. Talk with a colleague in English while at work.
6. Talk in a large meeting of colleagues in English.
7. Talk to a patient’s relative in English while explaining the patient’s status.
8. Present a talk to a group of English-speaking patients.
9. Talk in a small group of hospital personnel in English.
10. Talk in a large meeting of hospital personnel in English.
11. Talk in a small group of English-speaking patients.
Appendices
132
SITUATION NEVER SOMETIMES OFTEN ALWAYS12. Present a talk to a
small group of English-speaking patients’ relatives.
Appendices
133
APPENDIX C
Questionnaire on MOTIVATION
DIRECTIONS: Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following statements by putting an “X” in the box that best describes the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement.
STRONGLY DISAGREE
DISAGREE AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
1-Compared to my colleagues, I think I study English relatively hard2-I often think about the words and ideas which I learn about in my English enhancement classes3-If English were not taught in training centers, I would study on my own4-I think I spend fairly long hours studying English5-I really try to learn English6-After my English training courses, I will continue to study English and try to improve7-When I have assignments to do in English, I try to do them immediately8-I would read English newspapers and/or magazines 9-During English training classes, I’m absorbed in what is taught and concentrate on studying10-I would like the
Appendices
134
STRONGLY DISAGREE
DISAGREE AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
number of English classes in training centers increased11-I believe absolutely that English should be taught in school12-I find learning English more interesting than other subjects13-Learning English is really great14-I would rather spend my time on other subjects other than English15-Learning English is a waste of time16-I plan to learn as much English as possible17-I love learning English
Appendices
135
APPENDIX D
Questionnaire on LINGUISTIC SELF-CONFIDENCE
A. DIRECTIONS: Below are 12 situations in which a person may feel different degrees of ANXIETY. Please indicate in the space below what degree of anxiety you might feel in the following situations.
The following situations may occur in your country or abroad. If you have not had the experience, try to imagine how you might feel.
SITUATION NOT ANXIOUS AT ALL
FAIRLY ANXIOUS
MODERATELYANXIOUS
VERY ANXIOUS
1. Present a talk to a group of coworkers in English.
2. Talk to an English speaking patient while doing a general survey of him/her.
3. Talk in a large meeting of patients in English.
4. Talk to a small group of superiors in English.
5. Talk with a colleague in English while at work.
6. Talk in a large meeting of colleagues in English.
7. Talk to a patient’s relative in English while explaining the patient’s status.
8. Present a talk to a group of English-speaking patients.
9. Talk in a small
Appendices
136
SITUATION NOT ANXIOUS AT ALL
FAIRLY ANXIOUS
MODERATELYANXIOUS
VERY ANXIOUS
group of hospital personnel in English.
10. Talk in a large meeting of hospital personnel in English.
11. Talk in a small group of English-speaking patients.
12. Present a talk to a small group of English-speaking patients’ relatives.
B. DIRECTIONS: Below are 12 situations in which a person may feel different degrees of COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE. Please indicate in the space below what degree of competence you might feel in the following situations.
The following situations may occur in your country or abroad. If you have not had the experience, try to imagine how you might feel.
SITUATION NOT COMPETENT
FAIRLY COMPETENT
MODERATELY COMPETENT
VERY COMPETENT
1. Present a talk to a group of coworkers in English.
2. Talk to an English speaking patient while doing a general survey of him/her.
3. Talk in a large meeting of patients in English.
4. Talk to a small group of superiors in English.
5. Talk with a colleague in English
Appendices
137
SITUATION NOT COMPETENT
FAIRLY COMPETENT
MODERATELY COMPETENT
VERY COMPETENT
while at work.6. Talk in a large
meeting of colleagues in English.
7. Talk to a patient’s relative in English while explaining the patient’s status.
8. Present a talk to a group of English-speaking patients.
9. Talk in a small group of hospital personnel in English.
10. Talk in a large meeting of hospital personnel in English.
11. Talk in a small group of English-speaking patients.
12. Present a talk to a small group of English-speaking patients’ relatives.
Appendices
138
APPENDIX E
Questionnaire on ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY
DIRECTIONS: Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following statements by putting an “X” in the box that best describes the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement.
STRONGLY DISAGREE
DISAGREE AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
1-I want to make friends with international nurses2-I try to avoid talking with foreigners if I can3-I would talk to an international nurse if I ever meet one4-I wouldn’t mind sharing an apartment or room with5-I want to participate in a volunteer activity to help foreigners living in the neighboring community6-I would feel somewhat uncomfortable is a foreigner moved in next door7-I would help a foreigner who is in trouble8-I would rather stay in my hometown9-I want to live in a foreign country10-I want to work in an international organization like the United Nations11-I don’t think what’s happening overseas has anything to do with my
Appendices
139
daily life12-I’d rather avoid the kind of work that sends me overseas frequently13-I often read and watch news about foreign countries14-I often talk about events and situations in foreign countries with my family and/or friends
I study English because…
STRONGLY DISAGREE
DISAGREE AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
15-It will allow me to meet and converse more with varied people16-It will allow me to get to know various cultures and people17-I will be able to participate more freely in the activities of other cultural groups18-I’d like to make friends with foreigners
Appendices
140
APPENDIX F
Questionnaire on PERSONALITY
DIRECTIONS: Please use this list of common human traits to describe yourself as accurately as possible. Describe yourself as you see yourself at the present time, not as you wish to be in the future. Describe yourself as you are generally or typically, as compared to other persons you know of the same sex and roughly the same age.
Please CIRCLE ONE number that applies to you.
1. Intraverted 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Extraverted
2. Unenergetic 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Energetic
3. Silent 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Talkative
4. Unenthusiastic 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Enthusiastic
5. Timid 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Bold
6. Inactive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Active
7. Inhibited 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Spontaneous
8. Unassertive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Assertive
9. Unadventurous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Adventurous
10. Unsociable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Sociable
Personal Information
Gender: ____________
Age:________________
Ethnic Affiliation: _____________________________
Hospital Affiliation: ___________________________
How long have you been studying English: _______________________
Appendices
141
Please provide the results of your latest IELTS examination. This information will be kept strictly confidential. Thank you very much for your cooperation.
DATE OF EXAM: ____________________________________________
RESULTS
LISTENING BAND SCORE: _____
READING BAND SCORE: _____
WRITING BAND SCORE: _____
SPEAKING BAND SCORE: _____……………………………………………………………………………
OVERALL BAND SCORE: _____
Appendices
142
APPENDIX G
IELTS BAND SCORE INTERPRETATIONS
9 Expert User Has fully operational command of the language: appropriate, accurate and fluent with complete understanding.
8 Very Good User Has fully operational command of the Language with only occasional unsystematic inaccuracies and inappropriacies. Misunderstandings may occur in unfamiliar situations. Handles complex detailed argumentation well.
7 Good User Has operational command of the language, though with occasional inaccuracies, inappropriacies and misunderstandings in some situations. Generally handles complex language well and understands detailed reasoning.
6 Competent User Has generally effective command of the language despite some inaccuracies, inappropriacies and misunderstandings. Can use and understand fairly complex language, particularly in familiar situations.
5 Modest User Has partial command of the language, Coping with overall meaning in most Situations, though is likely to make many mistakes. Should be able to handle basic communication in own field.
4 Limited User Basic competence is limited to familiar situations. Has frequent problems in understanding and expression, is not able to use complex language.
3 ExtremelyLimited User Conveys and understands only general
meaning in very familiar situations. Frequent breakdowns in communication occur.
Appendices
143
IELTS BAND SCORE INTERPRETATIONS continued
2 IntermittentUser No real communication is possible except
for the most basic information using isolated words or short formulae in familiar situations and to meet immediate needs. Has great difficulty understanding spoken and written English.
1 Non User Essentially has no ability to use the language beyond possibly a few isolated words.
0 Did Not Attempt the Test
Source: Cambridge ESOL Department. (2007). IELTS Handbook. Cambridge: Author.
Appendices
144
APPENDIX H
Questionnaire on LANGUAGE ANXIETY
DIRECTIONS: Below are 12 situations in which a person may feel different degrees of ANXIETY. Please indicate in the space below what degree of anxiety you might feel in the following sitations.
Examples:
__0%_ 1. Talk to a stranger.- 0% means in this situation you don’t feel any anxiety at all.
_75%_ 2. Talk to a stranger.-75% means in this situation you often feel anxiety.
0%-----------25%-----------50%-----------75%-----------100%
I don’t I rarely I sometimes I often I alwaysfeel anxiety feel anxiety feel anxiety feel anxiety feel anxiety at all
The following situations may occur in your country or abroad. If you have not had the experience, try to imagine how you might feel.
_____ 1. Have a small-group conversation in English with acquaintances.
_____ 2. Give a presentation in English to a group of strangers.
_____ 3. Give a presentation in English to a group of friends.
_____ 4. Talk in English in a large meeting among strangers.
_____ 5. Have a small-group conversation in English with strangers.
Appendices
145
_____ 6. Talk in English in a large meeting among friends.
_____ 7. Talk in English to friends.
_____ 8. Talk in English in a large meeting with acquaintances.
_____ 9. Talk in English to acquaintances.
_____ 10. Give a presentation in English to a group of acquaintances.
_____ 11. Talk in English to a stranger.
_____ 12. Talk in English to a small group of friends.
Questionnaire on PERCEIVED COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE
DIRECTIONS: Below are 12 situations in which a person may feel different degrees of COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE. Please indicate in the space below what degree of competence you might feel in the following situations.
0%-------------------------50%-------------------------100%
Entirely Somewhat Entirelyincompetent competent competent(I can’t (I could do it) (I could do it well)do it at all)
The following situations may occur in your country or abroad. If you have not had the experience, try to imagine how you might feel.
_____ 1. Have a small-group conversation in English with acquaintances.
_____ 2. Give a presentation in English to a group of strangers.
Appendices
146
_____ 3. Give a presentation in English to a group of friends.
_____ 4. Talk in English in a large meeting among strangers.
_____ 5. Have a small-group conversation in English with strangers.
_____ 6. Talk in English in a large meeting among friends.
_____ 7. Talk in English to friends.
_____ 8. Talk in English in a large meeting with acquaintances.
_____ 9. Talk in English to acquaintances.
_____ 10. Give a presentation in English to a group of acquaintances.
_____ 11. Talk in English to a stranger.
_____ 12. Talk in English to a small group of friends.
Appendices
147
APPENDIX I
12 Sample Self Introduction Topics
Look at the sample self introduction speech topics and pick out the aspects of your personal life you want to share with the audience. Approach the list below with the who, what, where, why, how and when questions. That's an effective way to outline your first thoughts.
1. What activity has played or plays an important part in your life? Tell the story and distract the message.
2. What is your main personal goal?
3. What do you like very much?
4. What do you hate or dislike?
5. Have you developed a very special skill?
6. What is your lifestyle?
7. Can you come up with a turning point or milestone in you life?
8. What is your hobby or interest in your spare time?
9. What is a pet peeve or another very familiar topic you like to talk about, to do or to discuss?
10. Where are you from? Do your roots reveal something about yourself that's new for the audience?
11. Is there an object or prop that means a lot to you?
12. What distinguishes you from other individuals in class?
Appendices
148
APPENDIX J
BASICS OF EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION
SHARE your ideas
S – tate the main point of your message
H – ighlight other important points
A – ssure the receiver’s understanding
R – eact to hoe the receiver responds
E – mphasize/summarize your main ideas
LISTEN Actively
1. Prepare to listen by focusing on the speaker.
2. Control and eliminate distractions.
3. Establish appropriate eye contact.
4. See listening as an opportunity.
Appendices
149
APPENDIX K
IELTS SPEAKING CHECKLIST E-Excellent 4
Student’s NAME: ______________ VS-Very Satisfactory 3S-Satisfactory 2NI-Needs Improvement 1
MARKERS E VS S NIFLUENCY
Has the ability to talk with normal levels of continuityNormal speech rate (not too fast, not too slow)Does not appear to exert too much effort in producing spoken outputCOHERENCEHas the ability to link ideas together in a logical mannerLanguage is understandable and speech connectedLEXICAL RESOURCEUses a wide range of vocabularyVocabulary clearly shows meanings and attitudes that are expressedHas the ability to get around a vocabulary gap by expressing the idea in a different way (ability to circumlocute)GRAMMATICAL RANGE Uses a wide range of grammatical structuresGives lengthy and complex utterancesGRAMMATICAL ACCURACYMakes minimal grammatical errorsErrors do not greatly negatively affect
Appendices
150
communicationPRONUNCIATIONProduces comprehensible utterances and uses a wide range of phonological features to convey meaningCauses minimal, if none at all, strain to the listenerMinimal, if none at all, noticeability of L1 or mother languageOptimal voice volumeNON-VERBAL COMMUNICATION SKILLSUses appropriate body language to express ideas and attitudesUses appropriate facial expressions to express ideas and attitudesCOMPREHENSIONUnderstands tasks and questions and responds to them appropriatelyUses relevant related ideas and examples to expound on topics
Summary: ____ ____ ____ ____Overall Score: ____ Ave: ____Band Score: ____________________
Comments:_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________