This study examines how learners’ English proficiency and individual difference factors (international posture, willingness to communicate, motivation, social presence) change, and how a small community develops, through an English course designed using the Community of Inquiry framework. Conducted over eight sessions at a university in Japan, the study involved 26 students who provided complete data for analysis. The main activities included two in-class group presentations and one individual video presentation via Google Chat. Pre- and post-tests on speaking proficiency and surveys on individual differences were administered. Reflection sheets were also collected after each activity. A paired t-test was used for the former, and SCAT (Steps for Coding and Theorization) was employed for the latter, followed by coding. Results showed that both face-to-face and asynchronous activities via Google Chat contributed to improvements in English expression, particularly international posture, willingness to communicate, and active social presence. The findings suggest that intentional efforts by instructors to enhance individual difference factors in both settings can boost student participation and support the development of balanced communication skills, integrating both expression and receptivity. Additionally, the community development process was outlined in seven stages. Early self-introductions and exchanges established trust and mutual understanding, while role assignment and task management within groups promoted cooperation and efficiency. Sharing progress and exchanging feedback maintained communication, with informal interactions strengthening relationships and collaboration. Lastly, reflecting on tasks deepened learning and increased awareness for future improvements. In conclusion, this study highlights the effectiveness of combining face-to-face and asynchronous communication in improving language proficiency and building a strong learning community. It suggests that by intentionally enhancing individual difference factors, such as international posture, willingness to communicate, and social presence, instructors can increase student engagement and promote better learning outcomes.
AgawaT.TakeuchiO. (2016). A new questionnaire to assess Japanese EFL learners’ motivation: Development and validation. ARELE: Annual Review of English Language Education in Japan, 27, 1–16.
2.
AndersonT.RourkeL.GarrisonD.R.ArcherA. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Online Learning, 5, 1–17.
3.
ArbaughJ.B.Cleveland-InesM.DiazS.R, et al (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the Community of Inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. Internet and Higher Education, 11, 133–136.
4.
BorupJ.WestR.E.GrahamC.R. (2012). Improving online social presence through asynchronous video. The Internet and Higher Education, 15, 195–203.
5.
BukhariS.F.ChengX.KhanS.A. (2015). Willingness to communicate in English as a second language: A case study of Pakistani undergraduates. Journal of Education and Practice, 6, 39–44. Available at: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1081256.pdf (accessed August 2025).
6.
CollinsN.MillerL.C. (1994). Self-disclosure and liking: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 457–475.
7.
deNoyellesA.ZydneyJ.ChenB. (2014). Strategies for creating a community of inquiry through online asynchronous discussions. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10, 153–165. Available at: https://jolt.merlot.org/vol10no1/denoyelles_0314.pdf (accessed August 2025).
8.
DörnyeiZ. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Routledge.
9.
EllisR. (2004). Individual differences in second language learning. In DaviesA.ElderC. (Eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 525–551). Blackwell.
10.
FarrokhiF.ZohrabiM.AzarberisA.G. (2023). A sociocognitive account of willingness to communicate from the perspective of complex dynamic systems theory. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 36, 35–54.
11.
GarrisonD.R.AndersonT.ArcherW. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2, 87–105.
12.
GarrisonD.R.AndersonT.ArcherW. (2010). The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: A retrospective. The Internet and Higher Education, 13, 5–9.
13.
GunawardenaC.N.ZittleF.J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. The American Journal of Distance Education, 11, 8–26.
14.
Gutiérrez-SantiusteE.Rodríguez-SabioteC.Gallego-ArrufatM.-J. (2015). Cognitive presence through social and teaching presence in communities of inquiry: A correlational–predictive study. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31, 349–362. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1666
15.
HagaS.RappenekerJ. (2021). Developing social presence in online classes: A Japanese higher education context. Journal of Foreign Language Education and Research, 2, 174–183.
16.
HashimotoY. (2002). Motivation and willingness to communicate as predictors of reported L2 use: The Japanese ESL context. Second Language Studies, 20, 29–70.
17.
HenryA.ThorsenC.MacIntyreP.D. (2024). Willingness to communicate in a multilingual context: Part one, a time-serial study of developmental dynamics. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 45, 937–956.
18.
KatoY. (2016). What do we want small group activities for? Voices from EFL teachers in Japan. TESL-EJ, 19, 1–15.
19.
KhajavyG.H.GhonsoolyB.FatemiA.H.ChoiC.W. (2016). Willingness to communicate in English: A microsystem model in the Iranian EFL classroom context. TESOL Quarterly, 50, 154–180.
20.
Kiliç ÇakmakE.ÇebiA.KanA. (2014). Developing a ‘social presence scale’ for e-learning environments. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 14, 764–768.
21.
KimJ. (2011). Developing an instrument to measure social presence in distance higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42, 763–777.
22.
KirkpatrickR.VafadarH.MohebbiH. (2024). A scoping review of willingness to communicate in language education: Premises to doubt, lessons to learn, and future research questions to examine. Language Testing in Asia, 14, 1–31.
23.
KormosE.JulioL.MorganA. (2023). Preservice teacher perceptions of using video discussions to foster a community of inquiry: Does the learning environment matter?TechTrends, 67, 354–364.
24.
KosakaM.NakawaN. (2024). Life story analysis of the longer-term effects of Kenya’s strengthening of the mathematics and science in secondary education project on the attitudinal and behavioural changes of former secondary students. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 28, 1–12.
25.
KreijnsK.XuK.WeidlichJ. (2022). Social presence: Conceptualization and measurement. Educational Psychology Review, 34, 139–170.
26.
LeeJ.S.HsiehJ.C. (2019). Affective variables and willingness to communicate of EFL learners in in-class, out-of-class, and digital contexts. System, 82, 63–73.
27.
LeemingP.VittaJ.P.HiverP.HicksD.McLeanS. (2024). Willingness to communicate, speaking self-efficacy, and perceived communicative competence as predictors of second language spoken task production. Language Learning, 74, 917–949.
28.
Levine-OguraJ.Y. (2021). Advantages and disadvantages using Flipgrid in a communicative English class in times of COVID-19. Annual Report of Iwate Medical University Center for Liberal Arts and Sciences, 56, 29–35.
29.
LimF.P. (2017). An analysis of synchronous and asynchronous communication tools in e-learning. Advanced Science and Technology Letters, 143, 230–234.
30.
MacIntyreP.D. (2020). Expanding the theoretical base for the dynamics of willingness to communicate. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 10, 111–131.
31.
MacIntyreP.D.CharosC. (1996). Personality, attitudes, and affect as predictors of second language communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15, 3–26.
32.
MacIntyreP.D.ClémentR.DörnyeiZ.NoelsK. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. Modern Language Journal, 82, 545–562.
33.
MiyaharaS. (2020). Outcomes and problems of the librarian’s licensure examination in the Philippines: An analysis using steps for coding and theorization (SCAT). Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 61, 87–105.
34.
OlobiaL.P. (2023). Willingness to communicate in English as a second language: A research protocol for meta-analysis. Journal of Natural Language and Linguistics, 1, 8–12.
35.
OtaniT. (2008). ‘SCAT’: A qualitative data analysis method by four-step coding: Easy startable and small scale data-applicable process of theorization. Bulletin of the Graduate School of Education and Human Development (Educational Sciences), 54, 27–44.
36.
OtaniT. (2011). SCAT: Steps for coding and theorization. Journal of Japan Society of Kansei Engineering, 10, 155–160.
37.
ÖztokM.KehrwaldB.A. (2019). Social presence reconsidered: Moving beyond, going back, or killing social presence. In LowenthalP.R.DennenV.P. (Eds.), Social presence and identity in online learning (pp. 123–130). Routledge.
38.
PawlakM. (2022). Research into individual differences in SLA and CALL: Looking for intersections. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 31, 200–233.
39.
QinJ. (2022). A theoretical review on the role of English as a foreign language teachers’ self-disclosure in shaping classroom climate and immediacy. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1–8.
40.
RyanR.M.DeciE.L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.
41.
SadafA.OlesovaL. (2024). Strategies to promote cognitive presence in asynchronous online discussions. In Cleveland-InnesM.F.StenbomS.GarrisonD.R. (Eds.), The design of digital learning environments: Online and blended applications of the community of inquiry (pp. 234–255). Routledge.
42.
ShinozakiF. (2023). Social presence in asynchronous English presentations: Lesson practice and eye tracking. LET Kansai Chapter Collected Papers, 21, 117–140.
43.
ShinozakiF. (2024). Social presence and other individual differences in asynchronous English communication. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 35, 257–273.
44.
SuharnoS.SuherdiD.GunawanW. (2023). Implementation of a community of inquiry in teaching English as a foreign language in secondary schools: A literature review. Journal of Education and Learning, 17, 685–695.
45.
SungE.MayerR.E. (2012). Five facets of social presence in online distance education. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1738–1747.
46.
ToyamaM.YamazakiY. (2020). Examining the measurement model of international posture and how it relates to personality traits. Sage Open, 10, 1–12.
47.
TuC.H.McIsaacM. (2002). The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16, 131–150.
48.
UrbietaA.S. (2024). Asynchronous video discussions in online communities: A new perspective from multimodality in FL learning. In LimF.V.Querol-JuliánM. (Eds.), Designing learning with digital technologies: Perspectives from multimodality in education (pp. 167–184). Routledge.
49.
VaughanN.D. (2020). Blended learning and student engagement: What’s the connection?Education Superior, 30, 79–96.
50.
VaughanN.D.Cleveland-InnesM.GarrisonD.R. (2013). Teaching in blended learning environments: Creating and sustaining communities of inquiry. Athabasca University Press. Available at: http://www.aupress.ca/index.php/books/120229 (accessed August 2025).
51.
WatanabeM. (2017). Willingness to communicate by Japanese learners of English and what they communicate through speaking activities. Journal of the Chubu English Language Education Society, 46, 71–78.
52.
YashimaT. (n.d.). The Japanese version of the International Posture Instrument.
53.
YashimaT. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. Modern Language Journal, 86, 55–66.
54.
YashimaT. (2009). International posture and the ideal L2 self in the Japanese EFL Context. In
DörnyeiZ.UshiodaE. (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 144–163). Multilingual Matters.
55.
YashimaT.Zenuk-NishideL.ShimizuK. (2004). The influence of attitudes and affect on willingness to communicate and second language communication. Language Learning, 54, 119–152.
