This study was designed to explore patterns of student perceptions of second language (L2) classroom environments and the relationships between such perceptions and L2 willingness to communicate (WTC). A sample of 845 first-year undergraduate students of English as a foreign language (EFL) participated in the study and reported their perceptions of the L2 classroom environment and their WTC. Using cluster analysis, this study aggregated students’ perceptions of the classroom environment into four clusters: High support, Rapport, Input, and Low support classes. These four clusters of classes differed significantly in the student perceived support of interpersonal relationships and instructional input. A one-way ANOVA further showed that L2 WTC was positively related to student perceptions of interpersonal relationships and instructional input. More specifically, students’ positive perceptions of interpersonal relationships tended to facilitate WTC in meaning-focused activities, while students’ positive perceptions of instructional input tended to facilitate WTC in form-focused activities. This study finally proposed a model to depict perceived situation cues as antecedents (interpersonal relationship and instructional input) of L2 WTC. Implications for L2 instruction and learning were also discussed.
AlansariM.Rubie-DaviesC. (2020). What about the tertiary climate? Reflecting on five decades of class climate research. Learning Environments Research, 23, 1–25.
2.
AsmaliM.BilkiU.DubanC.A. (2015). A comparison of the Turkish and Romanian students’ willingness to communicate and its affecting factors in English. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 11, 59–74.
3.
BabadE. (2009). The social psychology of the classroom. Routledge.
4.
BarabadiE.BrauerK.ProyerR.T.TabarM.R. (2021). Examining the role of gelotophobia for willingness to communicate and second language achievement using self- and teacher ratings. Current Psychology. Epub ahead of print 21May2021. DOI: 10.1007/s12144-021-01846.
5.
BurnsR.P.BurnsR. (2008). Business research methods and statistics using SPSS. SAGE.
6.
CaoY.PhilpJ. (2006). Interactional context and willingness to communicate: A comparison of behavior in whole class, group and dyadic interaction. System, 34, 480–493.
7.
CaoY.K. (2014). A sociocognitive perspective on second language classroom willingness to communicate. TESOL Quarterly, 48, 789–814.
8.
ChenX.DewaeleJ.M.ZhangT. (2022). Sustainable development of EFL/ESL learners’ willingness to communicate: The effects of teachers and teaching styles. Sustainability, 14, 396.
9.
CollR.K.TaylorN.FisherD.L. (2002). An application of the questionnaire on teacher interaction and college and university classroom environment inventory in a multicultural tertiary context. Research in Science and Technological Education, 20, 165–183.
10.
CrowtherD.KimS.LeeJ.LimJ.LoewenS. (2021). Methodological synthesis of cluster analysis in second language research. Language Learning, 71, 99–130.
11.
DormanJ.P. (2012). Classroom psychosocial environment and course experiences in pre-service teacher education courses at an Australian university. Studies in Higher Education, 39, 34–47.
12.
Eddy-UM. (2015). Motivation for participation or non-participation in group tasks: A dynamic systems model of task-situated willingness to communicate. System, 50, 43–55.
13.
Fernández-GarcíaA.Fonseca-MoraM.C. (2022). EFL learners’ speaking proficiency and its connection to emotional understanding, willingness to communicate and musical experience. Language Teaching Research, 26, 124–140.
14.
FraserB.J. (1982). Differences between student and teacher perceptions of actual and preferred classroom learning environment. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 4, 511–519.
15.
FraserB.J. (1991). Two decades of classroom environment research. In FraserB.J.WalbergH.J. (Eds.), Educational environments: Evaluation, antecedents and consequences (pp. 3–27). Pergamon Press.
16.
FraserB.J.TreagustD.F. (1986). Validity and use of an instrument for assessing classroom psychosocial environment in higher-education. Higher Education, 15, 37–57.
17.
GunnV.FiskA. (2014). Considering teaching excellence in higher education 2007–2013: A literature review since the CHERI report 2007. H.E. Academy.
18.
HagenauerG.VoletS.E. (2014). Teacher–student relationship at university: An important yet under-researched field. Oxford Review of Education, 40, 370–388.
KangS.J. (2005). Dynamic emergence of situational willingness to communicate in a second language. System, 33, 277–292.
21.
KingR.S. (2015). Cluster analysis and data mining: An introduction. Mercury Learning and Information.
22.
KrukM. (2022). Dynamicity of perceived willingness to communicate, motivation, boredom and anxiety in Second Life: The case of two advanced learners of English. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35, 190–216.
23.
LanG.NikitinaL.WooW.S. (2021). Ideal L2 self and willingness to communicate: A moderated mediation model of shyness and grit. System, 99, 102503.
24.
LiZ. (2014). Validation of a learning environment instrument in tertiary foreign language classrooms in China. Review in Psychology Research, 3, 27–36.
25.
MacIntyreP.D.CharosC. (1996). Personality, attitudes, and affect as predictors of second language communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15, 3–26.
26.
MacintyreP.D.WangL. (2021). Willingness to communicate in the L2 about meaningful photos: Application of the pyramid model of WTC. Language Teaching Research, 25, 878–898.
27.
MacIntyreP.D.BakerS.C.ClémentR.DonovanL.A. (2002). Sex and age effects on willingness to communicate, anxiety, perceived competence, and L2 motivation among junior high school French immersion students. Language Learning, 52, 537–564.
28.
MacIntyreP.D.ClémentR.DörnyeiZ.NoelsK.A. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 545–562.
29.
McCroskeyJ.C.RichmondV.P. (1991). Willingness to communicate: A cognitive view. In Booth-ButterfieldM.E. (Ed.), Communication, cognition and anxiety (pp. 19–44). Sage.
MoosR.H. (1973). Conceptualizations of human environments. American Psychologist, 28(8), 652–665.
32.
NairC.FisherD.L. (2000). Transition from senior secondary to higher education: A learning environment perspective. Research in Science Education, 30, 435–450.
33.
PatrickB.C.StockbridgeS.RoosaH.V.EdelsonJ.S. (2019). Self-silencing in school: Failures in student autonomy and teacher–student relatedness. Social Psychology of Education, 22, 943–967.
34.
PawlakM.Mystkowska-WiertelakA. (2015). Investigating the dynamic nature of L2 willingness to communicate. System, 50, 1–9.
35.
PengJ.E. (2012). Towards an ecological understanding of willingness to communicate in EFL classrooms in China. System, 40, 203–213.
36.
PengJ.E.WoodrowL. (2010). Willingness to communicate in English: A model in the Chinese EFL classroom context. Language Learning, 60, 834–876.
37.
PengJ.E.ZhangL.ChenY. (2017). The Mediation of multimodal affordances on willingness to communicate in the English as a foreign language classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 51, 302–331.
38.
RauthmannJ.F.ShermanR.A. (2016). Situation change: Stability and change of situation variables between and within persons. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1069–1076.
39.
RauthmannJ.F.ShermanR.A.FunderD.C. (2015). Principles of situation research: Towards a better understanding of psychological situations. European Journal of Personality, 29, 363–381.
40.
SwensonL.M.NordstromA.HiesterM. (2008). The role of peer relationships in adjustment to college. Journal of College Student Development, 49, 551–567.
41.
WangH.PengA.PattersonM.M. (2021). The roles of class social climate, language mindset, and emotions in predicting willingness to communicate in a foreign language. System, 99, 102529.
42.
WeaverC. (2005). Using the Rasch model to develop a measure of second language learners’ willingness to communicate within a language classroom. Journal of Applied Measurement, 6, 396–415.
43.
ZhangJ.BeckmannN.BeckmannJ.F. (2018). To talk or not to talk: A review of situational antecedents of willingness to communicate in the second language classroom. System, 72, 226–239.
44.
ZhangJ.BeckmannN.BeckmannJ.F. (2020). More than meets the ear: Individual differences in trait and state willingness to communicate as predictors of language learning performance in a Chinese EFL context. Language Teaching Research. Epub ahead of print 16September2020. DOI: 10.1177/1362168820951931.
45.
ZhengS.T. (2008). New horizon college English online course. In [Measurement instrument]. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
