HOSPITAL STAFF NURSES’READINESS TO COMMUNICATE IN ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE

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 Type of Publication: Unpublished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

LIST OF FIGURE

Figure Page

1 Paradigm of the Study........................ 53

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



d. attitude towards the international community

e. personality

H2: Oral communicative competence is significantly

correlated with:




d. positive attitude towards the international

community


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

52

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


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%


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


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


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


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.


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


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


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


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


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.


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


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



d. attitude toward the international community

e. personality


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:


68

3. There is no significant relationship between oral

communicative competence and:




d. positive attitude towards the international

community


Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data

69

CHAPTER 3


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


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


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


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


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


74

Table 2

Nurses’ Degree of Motivation in Learning English


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


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:


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


77

Table 3

Nurses’ Communication Anxiety in English







6. Talk in a large meeting 32 1 4 2.06 .84of colleagues in English.







_X 2.34


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


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


80

Table 4 Nurses’ Perceived Communication Competence in English







6. Talk in a large meeting 32 2 4 2.94 .82of colleagues in English.







_X: 2.76


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


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



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


83

Table 5

Nurses’ Attitude Towards the International Community


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


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


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


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


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


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.


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


90

at α .05=0.35 (tabular value) Sig = Significant


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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.


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


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


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


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


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.


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


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


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.


118

Conclusions and Recommendation

119

CHAPTER 4


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.


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.


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


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.


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.


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


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.

http://www.njcu.edu/cill/vol7.Andres

http://etd.ohiolink/


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

http://isg.urv.es/sociolinguistics/varieties/standardenglishnotes.html

http://isg.urv.es/sociolinguistics/varieties/standardenglishnotes.html

http://www.hawaii.edu/sls/uhwpesl/20(2)/Hashimoto.pdf


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

http://www.asian-

http://etd.ohiolink.edu/view.cgi?acc


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&section=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.

http://globalvoicesonline.org/2006/07/22/philippines-exporting-nurses-to-the-world/

http://globalvoicesonline.org/2006/07/22/philippines-exporting-nurses-to-the-world/


129

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


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.



5. Talk with a colleague in English while at work.

6. Talk in a large meeting of colleagues in English.



9. Talk in a small

Appendices

136

SITUATION NOT ANXIOUS AT ALL

FAIRLY ANXIOUS

MODERATELYANXIOUS

VERY ANXIOUS

group of hospital personnel in English.



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.


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.



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.



9. Talk in a small group of hospital personnel in English.



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


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


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


_____ 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)


_____ 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:_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

HOSPITAL STAFF NURSES’READINESS TO COMMUNICATE IN ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE

Documents

Transcript of HOSPITAL STAFF NURSES’READINESS TO COMMUNICATE IN ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE