In order to acquire a foreign language, particular conditions for learning must be fulfilled. According to Krashen (1982), second language (L2) learning occurs when a learner gets comprehensible input that consists of grammatical forms that are a little higher than the present state of the learner’s interlanguage. He proposes that the appropriate level of input is accomplished automatically when learners flourish in making themselves understood in communication. Swain (1985) also supports that learners must be encouraged to make comprehensible output, without which learning cannot be said to have taken place. (Şener, 2014)
Long (1985) indicates the practicality of ’interlanguage talk’, conversation between non-native speakers in which they negotiate meaning in groups, and supposes that interacting in the L2 is vital for language acquisition. To Lightbrown and Spada (1999), unless the language classroom environment permits for interaction, learners cannot be awaited to improve the oral skills required for fruitful communication (Şener, 2014). Vygotsky (1978) clarifies that interaction has an important role in second language acquisition and how zones of proximal development are established via interaction. Then it is accepted that learners need to communicate in order to acquire the language and improve their language skills.
Today, English is spoken by more than one and half billion native and nonnative speakers in the world as their first, second or foreign language (Strevens, 1992). Only one fourth of this population are native speakers whereas the others are non-native speakers who use English as a second or foreign language so as to interact with both native and nonnative speakers of English. This population increases every passing day because English is used for many reasons such as tourism, diplomacy, economy, technology, trade, media, etc. All of these reasons demonstrate that English is a language which is internationally used for interaction among various countries through the world. (Alptekin, 2002; Norton, 1997; Smith, 1992; Strevens, 1992)
With the appearance of communicative language teaching (CLT) in the 1970s and 1980s, there was a reduction in formal structure teaching and its supporters uttered that grammar might be learnt with practical improvement of communication skills throughout purposeful interaction. (Brumfit, 1979; Canale & Swain, 1980; Savignon, 1991). As communicational gadgets are progressing each day, even if that the objective of educating English was learning language structure for a long time, learning to communicate in English shows up to play a pivotal role in this period of innovation (Ketabdar, Yazdani, Yarahmadi, 2014). Therefore the goal of teaching this language altered from learning its grammar to improving skills to communicate better. As a consequence, the main purpose of language learning and teaching is described as ‘authentic communication between persons of different languages and cultural backgrounds.’’ (McIntyre,Clement, Dornyei, & Noels, 2002 p.559) Although CLT as an English teaching method has appeared, some people are more willing to communicate, while the others feel anxious for communication. Hence, there is a need to explore the reasons which affect the willingness to communicate of learners.
LITERATURE VIEW
1. Willingness to communicate
The notion of willingness to communicate arises firstly in one’s L1 in terms of individual differences and personal characteristics an it is an complicated construct which is conceptualized firstly in L1. (McCroskey & Baer, 1985; McCroskey & Richmond, 1987, 1990). On the other hand, L1 and L2 WTC are most probably to be autonomous with respect to L2 communication (MacIntyre et al., 2003); that is to say, it is not plausible that WTC may be easily transmitted from L1 to L2. Both variations in communicative competence and social aspects in regard to practice are the basic reasons for this absence of transferability. (MacIntyre et al., 1998). Depending upon the fundamental aim of second language teaching, which is to make learners communicatively competent in L2 or in other words to make learners have both the tacit knowledge of L2 and the ability to use it effectively, this notion becomes a paramount issue of L2. MacIntyre and Doucette (2010, p.162) describes WTC as a readiness to get into discourse in the second language at a particular time with a specific person and as such, is the final psychological step to the initiation of L2 communication. (MacIntryre et al., 1998, p.547) WTC is seen as the main introduction towards communication. It is easier to answer a directly asked question than going on or initiating interaction for anyone. WTC is also seen as a circumstantial variable with both temporal and continuing impacts. Kang’s emphasis (2005) is also about on the dynamic nature of WTC, and puts forward a WTC definition within the L2. It is determined that this status to get together with L2 communication may differ in accordance with speakers, point, context, and the other possible situational variables (p.291). House (2004) also proposes some factors can influence WTC in variable contexts. Additionally, a few precedents have been proposed such as inner-directedness, self-esteem, communicative competence, communication apprehension and cultural variety. To exemplify, a relative study on WTC in the USA, Sweden, Australia, Micronesia and Puerto Rico was carried out by McCroskey and Richmond (1990). The countries may be similar in terms of Western context.Thus, it can be supposed that WTC is culture dependant. (Bursalı & Öz, 2017)
In terms of L2 WTC, numerous aspects such as “a particular mode of the learner, deeply rooted uneasiness, unattractiveness of the subject, his or her thoughts of competence, fear of making mistakes or inadequate time to answer” should be considered (Williams, Mercer & Ryan, 2016, p.140). There have been many researches in terms of L2 WTC; however, Macintyre, Forbearing, Dörnyei, and Noels (1998) offer the pyramid-shaped model which is the most effective one.
Figure 1
Heuristic Model of Variables Influencing WTC
(Source: Macintyre et al., 1998, p.547)
In this model, as demonstrated in Figure 1, the aspects that contribute to WTC are separated into two groups: permanent influences and situational influences. Hypothesized to have situational impacts on and to be the foremost proximal elements of L2 communication, Communication Behaviour, Behaviour Intention, and Situated Antecedents are the three layers closest to the top of the pyramid. These first three layers stand for situational impacts on WTC. Motivation Propensities, Affective-Cognitive Context, and Social and Individual Context are the bottom three layers. These last mentioned three layers indicates moderately steady and permanent impacts on the method of L2 communication. Hence, from the head to the feet, the layers stand for a move from the foremost quick, situation-based settings to the more consistent, permanent impacts of specific aspects on L2 communication situations.
This model clarifies the L2 use complexity and justifies WTC as cognitive affective aspects that interact with social factors. In general, the cognitive affective aspects included in the model are personality, attitudes, motivation, L2 competence, and self-confidence (Xie, Qiuxuan, 2011). In accordance with this model, whereas affective variables e.g. personality, L2 competence have an indirect impact on WTC, motivation and self-confidence affects WTC directly. In answer to the socio-educational model by Gardner (1985), this model illustrates the way that attitudes have indirect effects on WTC across motivation, and the way that motivation affects WTC in order to achieve success in SLA.
2. Emotional Intelligence
A definition of emotion in a dictionary describes it as a feeling such as happiness, love, fear, anger, or hatred, which can be caused by the situation that you are in or the people you are with. The psychologists and sociologists have examined emotions against their importance to the human being and society. On the other hand, the natural scientists like physiologists are adhere to the beginning, advancement and capacities of emotions.
Human beings are a complex species of emotion and reason. While reasoning let them to evaluate things with mathematical accuracy, emotions give them an opportunity to comprehend and empathize which make them ‘’human‟. Traditionally it was accepted and acknowledged that individuals with high thinking aptitudes and a sound consistent bend of mind were more intelligent. The IQ tests were created to find out an individual’s intelligence and competency and they just questioned the reasoning snf the logical aptitude of the individual. As Woodworth (1940) suggested, IQ tests could be thought impressive in testing an individual who was not afraid or angry or inquisitive over things which awakened emotions.
The emotions are themselves a higher order of intelligence (Mowrer, 1960). Focusing on emotions was considered as disruptive to where it was considered as assisting cognition. Emotion and cognition have a positive relationship which was established by the cognitive theorists. They assumed that emotions were contingent upon personal interpretation and assessment of a specific event. Each event or an occurrence has a specific meaning for each individual and he reacts according to this meaning and his assessment of that event depending on his individual well-being. Others like Stanley, Schachter and Jerome Singer suggested that emotion involved both physiological awakening and the cognitive appraisal of this awaking. When individual experienced a situation of physiological arousal such as anger, happiness or others, they tried to assess and found out what these arousals meant for them (Dursun et. al., 2010). The process of emotion has five steps. These are identifying the objects or events, appraisal, physiological changes, action or expression and finally regulation. Firstly the appraisal occurs and then the emotions and therefore there is not any question of emotion disrupting cognition. While Researchers believed that emotions are disruptive, they changed their mind and started to consider that emotion and reason are directly connected each other and the most of the times cognition and reasoning go ahead of emotions. The intelligence and emotion that were considered as separate areas is now integrated into the new domain: 'Cognition and affect' (Mayer, 2001). The point of view about emotions is changing. Due to having a subjective nature, emotions cannot be defined exactly.
2.1. Emotion or Feeling
Feelings and emotions are the terms that are generally used reciprocally, and as Wierzbicka (1999) observes some languages (French, German, Russian) do not have an equivalent term for the English word ‘‘emotion’’ However, there are some important differences between "emotions" and "feelings". A "feeling" can be a physical sense which gives an experience like a flushed face, or a knot in our stomach or a general feeling of unease that could be due to an emotion (Caruso, 2008). An individual can mention about a feeling of hunger but not emotions of hunger. When list of emotions are considered; happiness, sadness, guilt etc. can be the some subtypes of emotions. Hence, it may reveal the idea that feeling are more bodily or physical while emotions are more mentally. In this issue what does an individual when he tries to express a feeling of loneliness? Is it a mental process or a physical experience? So the word ‘emotion’ in English contains a reference to ‘feeling, thinking, and human body’ in its meaning (Wierzbicka, 1999). If 'intelligence' is to think and rationalize, and if emotions unite together the character of the thinking with feeling, Can emotions be analyzed and evaluated like any other intelligence then? This is the forerunner of emotional intelligence theory, which points out the significance of emotional intelligence and emotional management in the individual's life.
Emotional Intelligence can be defined as ‘the ability to understand and manage emotions’ (Barchard & Hakstian, 2004, p. 438). Salovey and Mayer (1990) thinks EI is a range to make a contribution to correct appraisal and expression of emotion in oneself and in others, the efficient regulation of emotions in self and others, the use of feelings to motivate, plan, and achieve in one's life (p.185).To be able to perceive one’s feelings construct interpersonal relationship and social responsibility includes interpersonal skills. The one's ability to be aware and comprehend their own motivations and emotions feeds on their individual skills (Katyal & Awasthi, 2005). Advocates of EI's ability models have suggested that EI measurements should be performance tests which are restrained a range of emotional skills.
A mixed set of perceived abilities, skills and personality traits are the other conceptualized definitions and models of EI. Goleman (1998), a pioneer in his field, defines EI as "to comprehend our own feelings and the feelings of others, to motivate ourselves and to manage emotions well in ourselves and in our relationship with the others"(p. 317). The mixed model used self-report measures comprising an a cluster of perceived abilities and traits in order to evaluate EI from this respect. While Thorndike and Gardner's ideas hypothesize EI as an ability or mixed model, mixed models unite mental ability with personality traits such as optimism and prosperity (Mayer, 1999). Bar-On proposed another model based within the context of personality theory, Bar-On suggested a different model which depends on the context of personality theory, highlighting the interconnection of the ability components of EI with personality traits and their utilization to individual well-being. Also, Goleman (2001) proposed a mixed model which is related to performance, integrating an individual's abilities and personality and applying their corresponding effects on performance in the workplace.
2.2 Emotional Intelligence Models
2.2.1 Ability Model of Emotional Intelligence
In 1990, Peter Salovey and John Mayer suggested the ability model of EI emphasizing intelligence and emotion in which intelligence theory projects the ability to carry out abstract reasoning and emotions transmit regular and noticeable meanings about relationships (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2002). Mayer, Salovey, Caruso & Sitarenios (2003) dispute that EI contains two areas: experiential (i.e. ability to perceive, responds, and operate emotional information without necessarily understanding it) and strategic (i.e. ability to comprehend and manage emotions without necessarily perceiving feelings well or experiencing them). They created a Multi-branch Emotional Intelligence Scale (MEIS) which had 12 subscale and 402 items. Then they also created another scale the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) consisting of 141 items. It tests every ability; perception, facilitation of thought, comprehension and regulation.
2.2.2 Bar-On’s Model- Emotion Quotient
Emotion Quotient is a term which was created by Reuven Bar-On to be able to test EI in terms of the ‘potential’ for performance and success instead of performance or success itself (Bar-On, 2002). Thereby this model focuses on being process-oriented and emotional and social abilities (Bar-On, 1997). He drew attention to five elements of emotional intelligence: intrapersonal, interpersonal, adaptability, stress management, and general good. Bar-On designed Emotion Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) which contains five main elements of his model: Intrapersonal EQ, Interpersonal EQ, Adaptability EQ, Stress Management EQ, and General good EQ. EQ-i measures emotional and social competent behaviour. It measures one’s ability to be successful in dealing with environmental demands and pressures (Bar-On, 2002; Dawda & Hart, 2000).
Figure 2
Five Areas of Bar-On’s Emotional Intelligence
2.2.3 A Mixed Model of EI
Self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and relationship management are four basic elements of EI proposed by Daniel Goleman (Goleman, 1998). Emotional Competency Inventory (ECI; Boyatzis, 1994), the Emotional Intelligence Appraisal (EIA); (Bradberry, et al., 2003), and the Work Profile Questionnaire – Emotional Intelligence Version (WPQei; Performance Assessment Network, 2000) are several measurement tools based on Goleman’s EI model. Emotional Competency Inventory (ECI) measures 20 competencies organized into four constructs by Goleman’s model on a scale from 1 (the behaviour is only slightly characteristic of the individual) to 7 (the behaviour is very characteristic of the individual) for each item (Boyatzis, Goleman & Rhee, 1999). Emotional Intelligence Appraisal (EIA) has 28 items to measure the four main components on a scale of 1 (never) to 6 (always). Work Profile Questionnaire – EI version has 84 item questionnaire focuses on measuring of competencies essential for effective work performance (Performance Assessment Network, 2000).
All these models try to comprehend and measure elements of one’s emotion and the emotions of others. The main elements of these models are common basically: the awareness and the management of emotions (Goleman, 2001)
Emotional Intelligence and LAnguage Skills in ELT
A study by Pishghadam (2009) indicates that emotional intelligence has an impact on learning productive skills. The effect of EI on written and oral skills of the language is obvious in terms of amount of communication, the number of errors, and writing ability. Karimi’s study (2012)also advocates Pishghadam’s. He found out that comprehending and managing students’ own feelings and figuring out and being reactive to others’ emotions make contribution to L2 productive skills.
Afshar and Rahimi (2013) have a study on the EI and speaking skill. They researched the relationship between critical thinking, emotional intelligence, and speaking abilities of Iranian EFL learners. the Bar-On emotional intelligence questionnaire, took the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) form B were filled out by the learners, and they had an interview.
The results of the study demonstrated that emotional intelligence, followed by critical thinking, is related to speaking skill. Critical thinking and emotional intelligence had a significant positive correlation in terms of speaking skill (Genç & Kuluşaklı & Aydın, 2016).
The correlation between Emotional Intelligence and students’ perception towards speaking classes is also another study which was implemented by Bora (2012). Two questionnaires were given to the learners sa as to find out their EQ level and their opinions about brain-based speaking activities. The result was that the learners with higher EQ were more volunteer to attend speaking classes and brain-based activities while the learners with low level of EQ did not have a positive relation with society or confess themselves and therefore, they were remote from the classroom atmosphere.
3. Gender Differences in relation to WTC and EI
It is obvious that gender has a great impact on communication and it is also proposed that gender has an effect on WTC. Gardner’s studies which indicate more positive attitudes towards language learning among girls compared to boys. Wright (1999) also advocates that girl incline more to language learning than boys. It is argued that it was due to the fact that girls reach maturity earlier than boys. That’s why they devote themselves to schoolwork. Boys and girls have different developmental stages in adolescence. Thus, their interest in learning and WTC is a continuous process and it is affected by emotional intelligence.
Gender has also an effect in terms of EI. According to Goleman, gender difference makes no change in EI, however, he accepted that even if their overall levels of EI are equivalent, men and women have different profiles of strengths and weaknesses in different areas of EI.
Dağlı (2006) has a study on the relationship between EI and academic success on 285 students at Bahriye Primary School in Turkey. He used two scales: Schutte Emotional Quotient Inventory. The results demonstrated that EI was positively related to academic success and EI level of the female students was higher than male students (Al Asmari, 2014).
Research Questions
1. Is there any relationship between Turkish EFL students’ willingness to communicate and their emotional intelligence?
2. Does gender have any effect on the relationship between emotional intelligence and willingness to communicate?
Aims of Study
The current study is an investigation into WTC in terms of EI and gender among preparatory school students at a private university in Turkey. This study aims to determine whether the level of Emotional Intelligence and gender influence Willingness to Communicate in EFL classrooms in Turkey.
Methodology
Participants and Setting
15 female and 15 male Turkish Students in EFL classroom.
Instrument
The first one is a WTC questionnaire (out of 100 points) developed by Weaver (2005). The second one is The Schutte Self-Report Emotional Intelligence Test (SSEIT) (out of 200 points) is a method of measuring general Emotional Intelligence (EI). The student was also asked to write down their gender.
Data Analysis
In order to analyze the collected data Microsoft Excel was utilized.
Variable N Correlation Coefficient
WTC / EI 30 0,43
Table 1: Correlation between WTC and EI
The first question found out the relationship between Turkish EFL students’ WTC and EI. Correlation coefficient (Table 1) demonstrates that there is a significance relationship between WTC and EI. It means that students’ Willingness to Communicate has an increasing change in their emotional intelligence.
WTC N Mean Std. Deviation
male 15 74,5 14,8
female 15 87 8,5
Table 2: Independent Samples t-test on difference between WTC in Males and Females
The second research question found out whether gender has an effect on willingness to communicate or not. As it is seen in Table 2 WTC mean in Females group (87) is higher than the mean in Males’ group (74,5) and it is an evidence of the difference between males and females in WTC.
EI N Mean Std. Deviation
male 15 150,7 6,7
female 15 162,8 14,7
Table 3: Independent Samples t-test on difference between EI in Males and Females
The second research question also found out whether gender has an effect on emotional intelligence. Table 3 shows that EI mean in Females group (162,8) is greater than the mean in Males’ group (150,7) and it is an indicatory of the difference between males and females in EI.
Discussion and Conclusion
The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between WTC and EI in terms of gender in Turkish EFL classrooms. The result of the current study showed that there is an important relationship between WTC and EI as the preceding studies demonstrated. It is found out that students with high level of emotional intelligence have higher willingness to communicate. With the second research question, it is explored that WTC and EI differ according to gender and Females have higher levels of EI and higher WTC. They are more eager to initiate a conversation than males. In order to improve student’s language proficiency, especially their willingness to communicate, it is of vital importance that students should be aware of their emotional intelligence and its importance. Lastly gender is a variable which brought about some differences in respect to EI and WTC. That’s why foreign language teacher can expect different learning outcomes from their students.