The main goal of educators of English as a second language (ESL) is to enhance the English language proficiency of non-native English speakers. The acquisition of the English language has been a necessity, taking into account that competent users of the language provide advantages, especially in education and employment particularly in the Philippines (Incirci, Turan & Öztürk, 2018). English in the country is used extensively in the daily lives of Filipinos, and it has already established new norms that were shaped by present sociocultural and sociolinguistic contexts of this generation (Alamis, 2008). But learning a second language (L2), English, may be inhibited by many factors, and one of the most emotive of these is ‘language learning anxiety’ (LLA) (Cao, 2011; Fergina, 2010; Gopang, Bughio, MacIntyre & Gardner, 1994 & Ohata, 2005). MacIntyre and Gardner (1989) defined language anxiety as the “feeling of tension” learners experience as they learn a second or foreign language. This tension is often felt in common linguistic activities such as listening and conversing with the use of the L2. Many local studies have presented the negative effects of this particular type of anxiety (eg. Gomari & Lucas, 2013; Lucas, Miraflores & Go, 2011; Macayan, Quinto, Otsuka, & Cueto, 2018; Orbeta & San Jose, 2013). The visible symptoms observed by these studies include “sweating, palpitations, trembling, apprehension, worry, fear, threat, difficult concentration, forgetfulness, freezing, going blank, and avoidance behavior (Kráľová, 2016, p. 19)”. These symptoms were induced mostly by public speaking in the classroom with the L2.
Although many would argue the underlying positive effects of LLA (eg. Chang et al., 2017; Incirci et al., 2018; Macayan et al., 2018; Trang, Moni & Baldauf Jr, 2013), most, if not all, of the studies about LLA have presented its debilitating nature, and many ESL learners are admittedly hindered by it. This paper aims to uncover and analyze the underlying causes and influencing factors that give rise to LLA among ESL learners. But in order to understand the various causes and contributing factors, we need to take into consideration that there are two approaches in viewing the concept of LLA which was introduced by Horwitz and Young (1991), as cited in Kráľová (2016) namely: 1) Transfer approach; 2) Unique Approach.
The first approach sees LLA as a manifestation of more general types of anxiety. Language anxiety may be manifested due to many situational factors (MacIntyre & Gardner, 1989). The second one views LLA as a distinctive form of anxiety correlated with language performance but not to other forms of anxiety. This sees LLA as a separate form of anxiety centered on language learning that was brought about by the combinations of external factors (Horwitz et al.,1986).
Causes and accompanying factors of LLA in learning ESL
A number of studies about LLA in the Philippines utilized Horwitz et al.’s (1986) Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS) (eg. Alico, 2015, Barabas, 2013; Cao, 2011; Gomari & Lucas, 2013; Lucas et al., 2011; Macayan et al., 2018; Orbeta & San Jose, 2013). It was designed to assess the level of LLA on a specific learning environment. Under this were three primary factors: 1) Communication apprehension; 2) Test Anxiety; 3) Fear of Negative Evaluation.
Communication apprehension is related to the fear of a person to orally communicate. It is usually connected with their perception of judgment from an audience and their perceived self-image (Cao, 2011; Lucas et al., 2011). The next factor which is test anxiety pertains to the impractical thoughts and demands learners put onto themselves during tests to avoid disappointment caused by failure (Lucas et al., 2011). Lastly, the fear of negative evaluation can be described as the tendency of backing out of evaluative situations because of their fear of criticisms. This anxiety can arise from any evaluative environments, most likely in a classroom where the teacher continuously monitors and evaluates the L2 learners (Cao, 2011).
Furthermore, Kráľová (2016) introduced the causal relationship of various lingual and extra-lingual variables with LLA. Lingual variables are related to the system of language while extra-lingual factors are more concerned with the language learning process itself.
Lingual factors
Lingual factors can be subdivided into intra-lingual and inter-lingual. Intra-lingual factors result from the system of a second or foreign language itself while inter-interlingual factors are from the convergence of two language systems, in this case between English and the various Filipino native languages (Kráľová, 2009).
Some studies have presented that the typological distance between the first language and English (L2) increases the tendency of anxiety (e.g. Kráľová, 2016; Alico, 2015). Participants have pointed out difficulties in certain language topics like verb use and subject-verb agreement (Alico, 2015) which are the examples of the intervention of intra-lingual factors that inhibits their ESL learning. There also exists an interference between English and their first language (one of the inter-lingual factors) this is because the structure, including lexis and syntax, of their native languages differs from the conventions followed in the English language (Alico & Guimba, 2015).
Extra-lingual Factors
Most of the studies believed that extra-lingual factors contribute more to the learner’s anxiety. Many studies from the past have iterated factors falling in this category as stated by Young (1991). She tried to classify these factors and came up with six general sources of language anxiety namely: 1) Personal and Interpersonal related anxiety; 2) Learner’s beliefs about language learning; 3) Instructor’s beliefs about language teaching; 4) Instructor-learner interaction; 5) Language testing.
First, Personal and interpersonal related issues are likely the most talked about, hence the most common source of anxiety as reported by most studies. These issues include competitiveness, low self-esteem, communication apprehension, social anxiety, and anxiety specifically arising from language learning (Ghodke, 2015). Respondents from a study conducted in Panabo City, Davao del Norte also presented apprehension contributed to the poor oral performance of ESL learners (Orbeta & San Jose, 2018). As reported in the study conducted by Alico (2015), participants and respondents from the Meranao tribe, a Muslim minority group in Marawi City, together with members of the Manobo and Subanen natives from Surigao and Agusan Provinces have shared their issue of short-term memory, mental block, and pessimism towards ESL learning. Additionally, they have attested their feelings of inferiority, how they would tend to sulk and undermine their capabilities, projecting their low self-esteem. This type of projection was also contributed by their personal beliefs that they are not good enough, and this self-perceived incompetence is part of the next source of anxiety.
Second, Learners’ beliefs about language learning pertain to the usual pessimistic concerns of ESL learners, like in the correctness of their utterances of the language, the belief of necessarily speaking in an excellent accent, and the belief that there are people who are more able in learning a new language than others (Young, 1991). These are to name some of the unrealistic beliefs of an ESL learner. These are ought to be simple thoughts or perceptions can incite frustrations, for example, if they believe that proper pronunciation is the most important, failure to attain that goal can build up stress that can accumulate over the course of the learner’s learning process. Participants in a study said that they naturally lack the intelligence to excel in English and doubt their capabilities to answer correctly to language-related questions (Alico, 2015; Alico & Guimba, 2015). When these beliefs and reality converge, more or less, anxiety will be the result.
Third, Instructor beliefs about language teaching, on the other hand, focus on the beliefs of the language teachers in teaching ESL (Young, 1991). For instance, if a teacher believes that authoritative and teacher-centered approach is the best way to teach ESL, that would be a further source of LLA. The idea that the learning of ESL students lies on the instructors themselves to set up an environment they see fit can cause potential complications for the learners. ESL teachers should also consider a bilingual teaching environment, utilizing the prominent mother tongue of the students to ease up their learning of the L2 (Bernardo & Gaerlan, 2011), this is to consider that not all students can catch up to a purely English approach.
Fourth, Instructor-learner interactions are more concerned with the manner the teacher corrects the students. Incorrect or harsh response from the instructors can be perceived negatively by the learners and can arise adverse consequences towards their outlook in learning ESL (Ghodke, 2015). A native speaker as a teacher can cause LLA, since the teacher may lack sensitivity towards the learning process of ESL learners. Additionally, the methods and teaching styles of instructors are potential sources of LLA. The tendency of ‘style wars’ or incompatibility of the teacher’s teaching and student’s learning styles may arise and pose more issues to the student’s anxiety (Lucas et al., 2011)¬¬.
Fifth, Classroom procedures can induce anxiety in the form of typical classroom activities especially speech related ones in front of a group (Ghodke, 2015; Young, 1991). Oral presentations have been the greatest enemy for those who are intensely affected by LLA. Anxiety also stems from writing activities, and participants have stated that they felt anxious during delayed feedback of their papers (Macayan et al., 2018). Motivation can be a great avenue for students to cope with classroom activities that cause anxiety. There should be an active engagement from teachers and counselors in the classroom procedures to promote intervention programs that can help boost the motivation of students especially in cases of the members of minority groups (Alico, 2015).
Anxiety can also stem from Language testing which is under the previously stated factor of test anxiety. This happens when anxious learners put too much pressure and impractical demands on themselves for a test (Lucas et al., 2011). Some test formats produce more anxiety than others especially if the students find it unfamiliar or ambiguous (Young, 1991), and considering also the time pressure. Furthermore, anxiety also arises when students study for hours just to find out that their tests assess different materials or the tests focus on experiences they can’t even relate. Additional causes under testing are the stress induced by the high expectations of the parents (Alico & Guimba, 2015). These high expectations of the parents seem to be salient in an Asian context, and it is observed in some Filipino families (Calaguas, 2013), and it is even a popular subject in memes across social media platforms by Filipino netizens.
So far, these identified factors are only limited in the context of the classroom or the educational system. Little research has been done to address anxiety stemming from non-classroom environments (Horwitz, 2010). A study by Guntzviller, Yale, & Jensen (2016) tried to address this issue and found out the variations in their results between different cultural and linguistic settings. This implies that the root of LLA goes in deep within its hosts’ cultural identity, making it more challenging to understand from one case to another.
Discussion and Conclusion
The causes and effects of LLA among language learners, including the information presented above are still matters for debate, due to the fact of conflicting studies done from the past few decades. Truly LLA is a multifaceted issue and a complex phenomenon that cannot be directly described or defined (Fergina, 2010; Kráľová, 2016). Even by narrowing down the scope, particularly focusing on the causes and accompanying factors of LLA to ESL learners, there still exists a degree of complication in understanding a focal point.
The dictionary defines a ‘cause’ as a condition that produces an effect, while a contributing ‘factor’ is a condition that influences the effect by increasing a phenomenon’s likelihood, accelerating the effect in time, affecting the severity of the consequences, etc. (cause, 2019; factor, 2019). The main difference between the two is that when a cause is taken away, it will also eliminate its effect. This is contrary when a factor is taken away. A dilemma emerges with these two distinct terms. According to Horwitz et al. (1986), the terms presented previously: communication apprehension, test anxiety, and fear of negative evaluation are ‘factors’ that affect LLA, but other more recent studies (eg. Berowa, (2018); Gomari & Lucas, 2013; Lucas et al., 2011) have presented it to be ‘causes’ of LLA. Moreover, others (eg. Macayan et al., 2018; Marcial, 2016) introduced them to be certain types of LLA because they perceived it with a unique approach. Even some (eg. Young, 1991, 1994) who view it in a transfer approach believed that Horwitz et al.’s ‘factors’ are also effects from other sources of anxiety. All of these studies have presented their own pieces of evidence for their chosen claim, and more recent studies have provided us with supplementary details including the present social context in relation to the situation-specific factors.
In relation to this, it can be said that the causes, factors and even the effects of LLA have this interchangeable relationship with each other. This multiplicity in nature can be the answer to this “chicken or the egg” dilemma, and can also exemplify how complex this matter really is. Orbeta and San Jose (2013) also share this belief and conducted their study with this concept in mind. Furthermore, this idea could be extended to the sources cited by Young (1991) which were more generalized in Young (1994) into three: LLA associated with the learner, the teacher, and the institution. Some of these sources have manifested the elements established by Horwitz et al. (1986) as consequences and causes of LLA. For example, Personal and interpersonal related issues cause communication apprehension to the participants coming from minority groups (Alico, 2015), and Language testing induces test anxiety among ESL learners (Alico & Guimba, 2015).
Looking at LLA with the transfer approach, test anxiety, unrelated to language, can also be a cause for LLA, especially during evaluations and language tests. Fear of negative evaluation, unrelated to language, inhibits the ESL learners to do good in oral presentations (Kráľová, 2016). This just proves that any element can be both a cause and a contributing factor, and even an effect in various cases of LLA.
In addition, this multiplicity approach would also mean that if one would act upon one of these elements because he believes it as a cause, this would not necessarily result to the elimination of the debilitating effects of LLA. There is still the tendency that the particular element he believed as a cause may just be a factor or just one of the many causes that induced the LLA. This would make every case somewhat unique, thus this does not guarantee a direct solution to address this multivariate issue.
K-12 program has been implemented in the country for quite some time now, and it has been very clear in promoting the importance of the development of English proficiency of young Filipinos to better prepare them for the global stage (Okabe, 2013). Since our bilingual educational system pushes students to believe that they need English to accomplish their scholastic endeavors, the system itself becomes a hotspot for LLA while they learn ESL. The implication of this study is that by understanding the roots of this phenomenon, new strategies can be formulated to fight off the problem which is needed because LLA greatly affects the agenda for the improvement of ESL in the Philippine education. In turn, further revisions accounting LLA on the country’s educational reform can provide future learners with a better system that allows them to acquire the necessary language skills with optimal proficiency.
Given the perplexing nature of LLA, one of the ways for students to cope against this issue is to remove the idea of total eradication of the anxiety from the table, instead, the focus should be on minimizing its effects and to devise innovative strategies against the effects of LLA. Since most of the studies are only focused on the factors inside the four corners of a classroom, further studies should be conducted to determine the playing factors outside the scope of a learning environment or the educational system so that these factors can also be addressed. One of the angles that can be explored is the involvement of family matters and local norms in the students’ anxiety since the formation of one’s ideals and beliefs are greatly influenced by socio-cultural norms and family ties (Marshall, 2001). The involvement of these factors in the Philippine context is not surprising since Filipinos are known to be family-oriented and the country has a diverse set of cultures from different regions (Morillo, Capuno & Mendoza, 2013).
Overcoming this problem would be a great feat for the future of our educational system, this would promote an efficient environment in the country for language learners, that would gradually allow the country to produce more competent and fluent English Speakers (Macayan et al., 2018).