101

English Teaching, Vol. 66, No. 2, Summer 2011

Validating the English Learning Anxiety Scale

for Primary School Students in Korea

Su Yon Yim (Nanyang Technological University)

Ye-Lim Yu (Seoul National University) *

Yim, Su Yon & Yu, Ye-Lim. (2011). Validating the English learning anxiety
scale for primary school students in Korea. English Teaching, 66(2), 101-121.

This study aims to validate the English learning anxiety scale for Korean primary
school students. At the initial stage, 16 items of the Foreign Language Classroom
Anxiety Scale (Horwitz, Horwitz, & Cope, 1986) were drawn from the literature
reviews for the preliminary test. Then, 177 primary school students were sampled
for the preliminary test. After the exploratory factor analysis was undertaken, the
English Learning Anxiety Scale (ELAS) was reduced to 14 items, which consisted
of two dimensions (oral English classroom anxiety, and low self-confidence in
English). The main test was given to 573 primary school students from fourth
grades to sixth grades in eight different schools in order to confirm validity and
reliability of the ELAS. The results of the confirmatory factor analysis using
structural equation modeling demonstrated that the ELAS is a valid (TLI, AGFI,
CFI>.94, RMSEA=.049) and reliable (Cronbach’s α = 0.891) instrument.

I. INTRODUCTION

Anxiety is considered to be one of the important affective factors in learning a

second/foreign language (e.g., Bailey, 1983; Kim, 2000; MacIntyre & Gardner, 1989;
Phillips, 1992; Yan, 2010; Young, 1991). Horwitz et al. (1986) have noted that language
learners have inherent anxiety, regardless of their diverse learning contexts. Researchers
have identified a variety of sources of anxiety such as expectation of negative evaluation
from others (Aydin, 2008; Kitano, 2001; Liu, 2006; Mak & White, 1996), low self-
perception (Matsuda & Gobel, 2004; Price, 1991; Williams & Andrade, 2008), and
language testing (Liu & Jackson, 2008; Worde, 2003; Young, 1991, 1992). For example,
Mak and White (1996) reported the anxiety of Chinese students living in New Zealand,

*
Su Yon Yim: first Author; Ye-Lim Yu: corresponding author (dream81@snu.ac.kr)
102 Su Yon Yim and Ye-Lim Yu

and made clear that the fear of making mistakes in front of other people was the most
prominent factor in that context. Kitano (2001) found that advanced Japanese learners of
English were more concerned about the evaluation they may receive from other people.
Two kinds of methodological limitation have been identified in previous anxiety studies.
The first limitation can be located in the characteristics of the subjects of anxiety studies.
Most anxiety studies have dealt with university students and there are very few studies that
report on the anxieties of young foreign learners. However, anxiety at this stage may be
considered very important, since young learners are taking the first step in the long journey
of learning a foreign language and anxieties that develop at this stage are likely to affect
their progress for a long time. Because of the scarcity of research on English learning
anxiety among primary school students in Korea, we have little evidence of whether these
students feel anxious in learning English as a foreign language.
The second limitation refers to shortcomings in the approach to analysis of data.
Although a number of anxiety studies have adopted a quantitative method of research,
using the Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS) developed by Horwitz et
al. (1986), there has been remarkably little research investigating the factors of anxiety in
learning English, using statistical methods such as factor analysis. Some studies employing
factor analysis limited data analysis to exploratory factor analysis (EFA) without using
confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). According to Stevens (2002), CFA is generally based
on a strong theoretical and empirical foundation that allows the researcher to specify an
exact factor model in advance.
Due to the limited anxiety studies on young learners and the scarcity of anxiety studies
establishing the validity of factor model, this study aims to validate the English learning
anxiety scale (ELAS) for Korean primary school students learning English as a foreign
language. To do this, EFA was conducted to indentify basic conceptual dimensions of the
English learning anxiety that represent the literature reviews. Then, we set a two-factor
model of the English learning anxiety which included ① oral English classroom anxiety,
and ② low self-confidence in English. Finally, the two-factor model was tested by CFA
using structural equation modeling.

II. LITERLATURE REVIEW

Anxiety is a complex concept which involves negative emotional states such as

apprehension, fear, frustration, or low confidence. Three types of anxiety have been
identified in the literature: trait anxiety, state anxiety, and situation-specific anxiety. Trait
anxiety is considered permanent (Scovel, 1978) whereas state anxiety fluctuates over time,
 Validating the English Learning Anxiety Scale for Primary School Students in Korea 103

depending on the situation (MacIntyre, 1999). Situation-specific anxiety is aroused at a

particular time in a specific anxiety-provoking situation (Spielberger, 1983). The
difference between state and situation-specific anxiety is that the latter is specific to a
particular context (Noro, 2009).
Foreign language anxiety is considered as one form of situation-specific anxiety (Aydin,
2008; Bailey, Daley, & Onwuegbuzie, 1999; Horwitz, 1986; MacIntyre, 1995). That is,
foreign language anxiety is aroused in a specific situation where language learning occurs.
Horwitz et al. (1986) argue for this view and define anxiety as “a distinct complex of self-
perceptions, beliefs, feelings, and behaviors related to classroom language learning arising
from the uniqueness of the language learning process” (p. 128). They provide a theoretical
framework by developing the foreign language classroom anxiety scale (FLCAS) and
identify three related factors in anxiety: 1) communication apprehension, 2) test anxiety,
and 3) fear of negative evaluation. According to them, communication apprehension refers
to ‘a type of shyness characterized by fear or anxiety about communicating with people’
whereas test anxiety is defined as ‘a type of performance anxiety stemming from a fear of
failure’ (p. 127). They explain fear of negative evaluation as ‘apprehension about others’
evaluations, avoidance of evaluative situation, and the expectation that others would
evaluate oneself negatively’ (p. 128).
Although the authors provided detailed analysis, using descriptive statistics, of the
responses of participants to each anxiety statement, they did not identify any one of the
three factors of anxiety as being the most influential. Later researchers have used
exploratory factor analysis to identify the construct of anxiety, using the same
questionnaire, FLCAS. However, such work has yielded different results with regard to the
factors of foreign language learning anxiety. Table 1 summarizes several studies which
identified the factors of this anxiety in diverse contexts. With the exception of the study
conducted by Horwitz et al. (1986), all of the studies have been conducted in Asian context.
The last three studies in the shaded rows have been conducted with Korean students.
Interestingly, three-factor model proposed by Horwitz et al. (1986) have been
challenged by later researchers. Aida (1994) conducted a factor analysis with 96 university
students learning Japanese in the USA. She found that anxiety related to tests was
connected to learning in general and not foreign language learning in particular and argued
that this ‘test factor’ should be eliminated from the analysis. She suggested a four factor
model of anxiety: 1) speech anxiety and fear of negative evaluation, 2) fear of failing the
class, 3) comfortableness in speaking with native speakers, and 4) negative attitudes
toward the class. Among these four factors, she suggested ‘speech anxiety and fear of
negative evaluation’ as the most important factor in foreign language anxiety.
104 Su Yon Yim and Ye-Lim Yu

TABLE 1
Comparison of the Factors of Foreign Language Learning Anxiety from Several Studies
Study N Subjects Factors
- Communication apprehension
Horwitz et al. University
108 - Test anxiety
(1986) Students
- Fear of negative evaluation
- Speech anxiety and fear of negative evaluation
University - Fear of failing the class
Aida (1994) 96
Students - Comfortableness in speaking with native speakers
- Negative attitudes toward the class
Cheng, Horwitz, University - Low self-confidence in English speaking
433
& Schallert (1999) Students - General English classroom performance anxiety
Matsuda & University - Low self-confidence in English speaking
252
Gobel (2004) Students - General English classroom performance anxiety
Koul, Roy,
- Fear of failing English class
Kaewkuekool, & University
1,387 - Fear of negative evaluation
Ploisawaschai Students
- English speech anxiety
(2009)
- Anxiety about speech, evaluation and class
Kim University
193 - Instructor-induced anxiety
(2004) Students
- Comparative anxiety
- Communication anxiety
Primary
Maeng - Fear of failing class and test
167 School
(2007) - Negative attitude
Students
- Fear of negative evaluation
Kang University - Low self-confidence in English speaking
96
(2009) Students - General English classroom performance anxiety

However, later anxiety studies conducted by other researchers presented factors that
differed from the four that Aida mentioned. For example, Cheng et al. (1999), in their
study with 433 Taiwanese university students learning English, emphasized two factors: 1)
low self-confidence in English speaking, and 2) general English classroom performance
anxiety. Matsuda and Gobel (2004), in their study with 252 university students in Japan,
supported the conclusions of Cheng et al. (1999) by rating the same two factors as most
important. But, intriguingly, although the studies emphasized the same two factors, the
value of factor loadings in the two studies is very different. In Cheng et al.’s study, ‘low
self-confidence in English speaking’ was regarded as the first factor (accounting for 38.1%
of the total variance) whereas in Matsuda and Gobel’s study, the same factor is only held
to explain 6.1% of the total variance in their data. In Matsuda and Gobel’s study, the first
factor was ‘general English classroom performance anxiety’ (accounting for 31.1% of the
total variance), which accounted for 5.4% of the total variance in Cheng et al.’s study.
In the local journals, there have been three articles (Kang, 2009; Kim, 2004; Maeng,
 Validating the English Learning Anxiety Scale for Primary School Students in Korea 105

2007) that have conducted factor analysis of the FLCAS. Kim (2004), in his study with
193 university students, argued that there are three factors of foreign language learning
anxiety: 1) anxiety about speech, evaluation and class, 2) instruction-induced anxiety, and
3) comparative anxiety. He identified ‘anxiety about speech, evaluation and class’ as the
first factor, which included 18 items and accounted for 29.7% of the total variance. The
second factor (‘instructor-induced anxiety’) included five items from the scale and
accounted for 5.8% of the total variance. The third factor (‘comparative anxiety’) included
two items and accounted for 5.4% of the variance. Kang (2009), in a study with 95
university students, did not use factor analysis to identify the anxiety constructs. Rather, he
used two underlying constructs, suggested by Cheng et al. (1999). However, he did not
provide any valid reason why he adopted Cheng’s two factor model of anxiety in his study.
Considering that the foreign language anxiety scale deals with a situation-specific
anxiety, it is not surprising that different factors of anxiety were identified depending on
diverse language learning situations. However, there seem to be some common concepts
which occur in several studies. The first concept concerns speaking and listening skills.
Some researchers have noted that anxiety is provoked in communication situation. For
example, Horwitz et al. (1986) categorized communication apprehension as an underlying
construct of anxiety. Maeng (2007) also identified communication anxiety in her study
with 167 primary school students. Although communication does not confine only to oral
skills, communication situations reflected in the FLACS is more likely to demand oral
skills. Other researchers highlighted ‘speech anxiety’ from oral skills (Aida, 1994; Kim,
2004; Koul et al., 2009). In literature, there is ample evidence that speaking is associated
with students’ anxiety in learning a foreign language (Elkahafi, 2005; Liu, 2006; Phillips,
1992; Price, 1991; Worde, 2003; Young, 1990).
The second concept is related to classroom situation. Different researchers used
different labels to refer to anxiety-provoking situations in classroom. ‘Fear of negative
evaluation’ and ‘fear of failing the class’ identified by Aida (1994) fall into this category.
There were some researchers who explicitly identify classroom anxiety by labeling it
‘general English classroom performance anxiety’ (Cheng et al., 1999; Matsuda & Gobel,
2004). Kim (2004) isolated teacher-related anxiety and labeled it as ‘instructor-induced
anxiety’.
The third concept which has been frequently identified in the literature is ‘low self-
confidence’. This concept has been identified explicitly by some researchers (Cheng et al.,
1999; Kitano, 2001; Matsuda & Gobel, 2004; Tuan, 1995). For example, Tuan (1995)
demonstrated the negative correlation between self-confidence and anxiety. According to
him, people with low self-confidence are more likely to demonstrate anxiety. Kitano
(2001) argued that foreign language learners feel inferior to native speakers and that this
generates anxiety.
106 Su Yon Yim and Ye-Lim Yu

In this article, we propose a two-factor model consisting of ‘oral English classroom

anxiety’ and ‘low self-confidence in English.’ The first factor embraces two concepts
which are interdependent: oral language anxiety and classroom related anxiety. Although
these two concepts may seem to contain different anxiety constructs, all the anxiety-
provoking situations reflected in the FLCAS occur in classroom situations such as other
student’s evaluations or teachers’ corrections of errors. In fact, the same item was
sometimes categorized as a different type of anxiety construct by different researchers. For
example, item 4 on the FLCAS (“It frightens me when I don’t understand what the teacher
is saying in English”) was considered as communication anxiety by Maeng (2007),
whereas Cheng et al. (1999) considered it to reflect ‘general English classroom anxiety.’
Kym (2004) gave the item the rather different label, ‘teacher-induced anxiety.’ In our study,
we combined anxiety constructs that were often labeled differently into one factor, which
we called ‘oral English classroom anxiety.’
Although a number of studies have used the FLCAS to identify the anxiety constructs,
the application of the FLCAS has been mainly conducted with university students, using
exploratory factor analysis. The implication of this limited use of the FLCAS is that the
factors of anxiety identified in the previous studies may not be applicable to young EFL
learners such as Korean primary school students. After all, the context in which young
learners learn English as a foreign language may be different from that in which adults
learn.

III. METHOD

1. Subjects

Subjects for the preliminary test were 177 fourth-grade students 1 from two different
primary schools. 46.9% of this sample was male (n=83) and 53.1% (n=94) was female.
Also, subjects for the main test were 573 students2 (295 males and 278 females) from eight
different primary schools. Eight schools were selected from five different educational
districts in order to ensure diversity of the subjects in terms of educational background.
They ranged in grades from fourth to sixth studying English as a foreign language at
school (See Table 2). English is taught as a school subject from the third grade onward in

1
Out of 199 students (100 males and 99 females) who originally participated in the preliminary
test, 22 students had to be eliminated because they failed to complete the questionnaire.
2
Out of 636 (329 males and 307 females) students who originally participated in the main test, 63
students had to be eliminated because they failed to complete the questionnaire or they gave effo
rtless responses such as choosing the same points on the five-point scale.
 Validating the English Learning Anxiety Scale for Primary School Students in Korea 107

Korea. However, this study includes primary school students from the fourth to sixth grade
who have been learning English for more than one year, so as to examine their anxiety
after a significant time spent studying the subject. For this reason, those in the third grade
were excluded from the study, since they had been learning English for only six months at
the time of survey.

TABLE 2
Characteristics of the Subjects for the Main Test
Categories # of students %
Male 295 51.5
Gender
Female 278 48.5
4th 183 31.9
Grade 5th 191 33.3
th
6 199 34.7
A 79 13.8
B 76 13.3
C 74 12.9
D 64 11.2
School code
E 71 12.4
F 65 11.3
G 74 12.9
H 70 12.2
Total 573 100.0

2. Instrument

In this study, a modified FLCAS, which is called the English Learning Anxiety Scale
(ELAS), was used as a research instrument. Horwitz et al.’s (1986) FLCAS has been
widely used to investigate emotional attitudes among foreign language learners (for the
full version of the FLCAS, see Appendix A). However, some modifications were needed
to adapt the specific needs of young learners in Korea.
First, the FLCAS, which was originally constructed in English, needs to be translated
into Korean, so that Korean young learners have no difficulty understanding the statements
on the scale. Dörnyei (2010) remarked that special attention should be given to the
translation of the original scale, to enhance its usefulness as a research tool. It is difficult to
make an exact translation from English into Korean; there are 15 different English words
used (12 verbs and 3 adjectives) to refer to anxiety on the scale, but when translating into
Korean, there are no perfect matches for the degree of anxiety each word denotes. Among
the studies using the Korean version of the FLCAS (Hwang, 2002; Kang, 2009; Kim,
2004; Kym, 2004; Maeng, 2007; Oh, 2002), three studies addressed primary school
108 Su Yon Yim and Ye-Lim Yu

students. Maeng (2007) used all the items on the FLCAS, whereas the other two studies
used them selectively; Oh (2002) included 25 items, whereas Kym (2004) used 10 items.
In this study, Maeng’s Korean version of the FLCAS was used with some modifications
for the preliminary test.
Before the preliminary test, three Korean primary school students checked whether
there were any words that might cause confusion. The statements that students found
difficult to understand were changed. Sometimes, the students’ difficulties were with
conceptual meaning, as well as translation. Young learners are developing conceptual
meanings of words (Cameron, 2001). There were certain words that some students did not
understand conceptually; for example, some students understood the word ‘hon-dong’
(meaning ‘confused’ in Korean) to mean ‘something moving’. In this case, we
reformulated the concept in different words- we used ‘do not understand’ rather than ‘be
confused’. Furthermore, two co-raters, who are primary school teachers, were asked to
check our translated version of the ELAS.
Secondly, 33 items of the FLCAS have been reduced to 16 items for the preliminary test
based on an examination of previous anxiety studies. In the literature, certain items have
been repeatedly excluded in the final analysis because of low factor loadings. For example,
11 items (2, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 16, 17, 21, 22, and 30) have been unloaded or excluded in
previous studies (Aida, 1994; Kang, 2009; Kim, 2004; Matsuda & Gobel, 2009). Among
the remaining 22 items, 6 items (1, 3, 7, 13, 19, and 20) have been deleted for several
reasons. Firstly, omission of certain items was needed to avoid the repetitive statements on
the scale. Secondly, some items included more than one construct and, as a result, lead to
diverse interpretation of them. This trend can be noticed in the item 1 (“I never feel quite
sure of myself when I am speaking in my English class.”). For some students, this
statement refers to anxiety in speaking English whereas other students may associate this
statement with academic ability. Detailed explanation of the underlying constructs of
anxiety has already been provided in the literature section.
Finally, the ELAS for the preliminary test consists of 16 items (4, 8, 9, 14, 15, 18, 23, 24,
25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33) using a 5-point Likert type scale as follows; ① strongly
disagree, ② disagree, ③ neutral, ④ agree, and ⑤ strongly agree. Most of the items in the
ELAS ask questions related to the anxiety level of the subjects. However, there are also
several items that ask whether the respondent was less anxious when learning English. For
these items, the coding was reversed, so that a higher score on the questionnaire indicated
a higher level of anxiety (See Table 3).
 Validating the English Learning Anxiety Scale for Primary School Students in Korea 109

3. Data Analysis

Data analysis proceeded as follows in order to validate the English Learning Anxiety
Scale (ELAS) for Korean primary school students. Firstly, the preliminary test of ELAS
was submitted to exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using SAS 9.1 to explore an alternative
factor structure for Korean primary school students. PROMAX (oblique) was selected as
the method of extraction because the factors were expected to correlate to some degree.
Then, a maximum-likelihood confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using
AMOS 7.0 to test whether our two-factor model of anxiety in learning English provides
the best fit to observed data. In this analysis, there are one Heywood cases which include
negative variance estimates. To solve a Heywood case, the variance of the error term (e16)
was constrained to 0.005 (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988).

IV. RESULTS

1. Preliminary Test Results

16 items for preliminary test of the ELAS were submitted to an exploratory factor
analysis with PROMAX rotation. The Kaiser’s measure of sampling adequacy was
acceptable (0.93) suggesting the appropriateness of factor analysis on these data. The
Kaiser rule (minimum eigen value = 1) suggested a two-factor solution (the first 3 eigen
values were 7.85, 1.86, and 0.83): ‘oral English classroom anxiety’ and ‘low self-
confidence in English’. Two factors accounted for 60.7% of the variance of the measures,
and the factors showed a correlation of r = .488. PROMAX-rotated factor loadings from
the pattern matrix are presented in Table 3.
Factor 1 accounted for 49.1% of the variance. Ten of the 16 items retained in this
analysis loaded on the Factor 1, with most of the items reflecting oral English classroom
anxiety. Thus, Factor 1 was labeled ‘oral English classroom anxiety’. Factor 2 accounted
for 11.6% of the variance. Six of the 16 items retained in this analysis loaded on the Factor
2, with most of the items reflecting students’ self-confidence. Thus, Factor 2 was labeled
‘low self-confidence in English’. However, item 4 (Factor 1) and item 15 (Factor 2) were
eliminated for the main test of the ELAS (see Appendix B). In examining the individual
items, removal of item 4 would lead to a small improvement (from .934 to .935) in
Cronbach’s alpha (α) coefficients. And item 15 was removed because there were low
communality and complex factor loadings for Factor 1 and Factor 2.
110 Su Yon Yim and Ye-Lim Yu

TABLE 3
EFA Loadings for the Preliminary Test of English Learning Anxiety Scale (ELAS)
No.* Item Factor 1 Factor 2 h2
11 I am afraid that the other students will laugh at me
0.892 -0.032 0.769
(31) when I speak English.
13 I get nervous when the English teacher asks
0.877 -0.064 0.718
(33) questions which I haven’t prepared in advance.
9 I get nervous and confused when I am speaking in
0.807 0.108 0.749
(27) my English class.
2 I start to panic when I have to speak without
0.776 -0.007 0.597
(9) preparation in English class.
1 It frightens me when I don’t understand what the
0.763 -0.024 0.565
(4) teacher is saying in English.
4 I get upset when I don’t understand what the teacher
0.750 -0.184 0.462
(15) is correcting.
6 I feel very self-conscious about speaking English in
0.747 0.111 0.651
(24) front of other students.
10 I get nervous when I don’t understand every word the
0.741 0.131 0.660
(29) English teacher says.
8 I feel more tense and nervous in my English class
0.727 0.133 0.641
(26) than in my other classes.
7 English class moves so quickly I worry about getting
0.712 0.167 0.652
(25) left behind.
12 I would probably feel comfortable around native
-0.210 0.847 0.588
(32) speakers of English. (r)
14 I am usually at ease during tests in my English class.
-0.068 0.804 0.598
(8) (r)
5
I feel confident when I speak in English class. (r) 0.120 0.735 0.640
(18)
16 When I’m on my way to English class, I feel very
0.167 0.694 0.623
(28) sure and relaxed. (r)
3 I would not be nervous speaking English with native
0.095 0.617 0.447
(14) speakers. (r)
15 I always feel that the other students speak English
0.247 0.433 0.353
(23) better than I do.
Eigen Value 7.852 1.860
Explained Variance (%)*** 49.08 11.62
Cumulative Variance (%)*** 49.08 60.70
* ( ): Number of items in the FLCAS
** (r): The coding was reversed.
*** With PROMAX, percent variance explained in the observed variables by a given factor is
necessarily quite complex because the factors are correlated. So, we used the VARIMAX solution
given that it is most often so close to PROMAX.
 Validating the English Learning Anxiety Scale for Primary School Students in Korea 111

2. Psychometric Properties of the ELAS for the Main Test

Descriptive statistics of the English learning anxiety scale (ELAS) for the main test are
presented in Table 4. The anxiety in learning English as a foreign language of primary
school students was rather low (mean score of 2.47 in the 1 to 5 point scale). To be specific,
the mean scores, rated from highest to lowest, were ‘low self-confidence in English’ (3.01),
and ‘oral English classroom anxiety’ (2.17). In particular, students gave high scores (3.20)
for item 14 (“I would probably feel comfortable around native speakers of English”). This
item is reversely coded so a high score on this item indicates the degree of discomfort
expressed by students. On the other hand, Item 8 garnered the lowest score (1.93) (“The
English class moves so quickly I worry about getting left behind”).

TABLE 4
Descriptive Statistics of the English Learning Anxiety Scale (ELAS) for the Main Test
No. of
Factor Mean (SD) Skewness Kurtosis
items
1 2.16 (1.20) 0.82 -0.23
2 2.43 (1.28) 0.48 -0.87
3 2.17 (1.23) 0.69 -0.61
Oral English 4 2.26 (1.29) 0.68 -0.66
2.17
classroom 5 2.34 (1.20) 0.44 -0.78
(0.93)
anxiety 6 2.03 (1.15) 0.93 -0.04
7 2.10 (1.18) 0.84 -0.24
8 1.93 (1.15) 1.11 0.35
9 2.09 (1.14) 0.77 -0.33
10 3.09 (1.35) -0.11 -1.07
Low 11 3.00 (1.42) -0.01 -1.24
self- 3.01
12 2.95 (1.31) 0.04 -0.96
confidence (0.99)
in English 13 2.79 (1.41) 0.22 -1.22
14 3.20 (1.34) -0.15 -1.07
Total 2.47 (0.81) 0.35 -0.17

Before performing CFA, Cronbach’s α for the main test of the ELAS was calculated in
order to test reliability of ELAS. Cronbach’s α is the most popular coefficient for reporting
test reliability or internal consistency (Osterlind, 2006). The ELAS had high reliability
(Cronbach’s α = 0.891). To be specific, reliabilities for the each factor were acceptable
(Cronbach’s α = 0.917, and 0.775 for oral English classroom anxiety, and low self-
confidence in English) (See Table 5).
112 Su Yon Yim and Ye-Lim Yu

TABLE 5
Cronbach’s α for the Main Test of English Learning Anxiety Scale (ELAS)
Factor No. of items Cronbach’s α
Oral English classroom anxiety 1~9 .917
Low self-confidence in English 10~14 .775
Total 1~14 .891

To assess the fit of two-factor model, five types of fit statistics were used: model χ2, the
normed chi-square (NC), TLI, AGFI, CFI, and RMSEA. The most well-known measure of
overall model fit is the χ2 . To reduce the sensitivity of χ2 to sample size, some researchers
suggested the NC (= χ2/df). For example, Kline (2005) noted that values of the NC as high
as 3.0 have been recommended as indicating reasonable fit. A rule of thumb for the TLI,
AGFI, and CFI is that values greater than roughly .90. Also, RMSEA values of .05 or less
indicate a close approximate fit.
The results showed that the proposed two-factor model mostly fit the data well (χ2 (76)
= 182.072, p<.001, NC = 2.40, TLI = .965, AGFI = .941, CFI = .971, RMSEA = .049). It
indicated that the anxiety in learning English of primary school students consisted of two
factors: 1) oral English classroom anxiety, and 2) low self-confidence in English. The
estimated standardized factor loadings are provided in Figure 1. The standardized factor
loadings are structure coefficients that estimate item-factor correlation.
The standardized factor loadings are greater than .50, which suggest that items are all
reliable measures of underlying factor reflecting the anxiety in learning English: The
estimates range in value from (0.56)2 to (0.80)2. What it also means is that the ELAS
satisfied convergent validity. In addition to the convergent validity, the evidence for
discriminant validity is strong. This is because the estimated factor correlation, 0.416
(p<.01), is moderate enough to suggest that it is possible to distinguish between two of the
anxiety factors, ‘oral English classroom anxiety’ and ‘low self-confidence’. Finally, the
loading for the ‘oral English classroom anxiety’ (.998) are much higher than ‘low self-
confidence in English’ (.526). It indicates that oral English classroom anxiety has a higher
contribution in explaining the anxiety of learning English than low self-confidence in
English.
 Validating the English Learning Anxiety Scale for Primary School Students in Korea 113

FIGURE 1
Results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the English Learning Anxiety Scale
(Standardized Coefficients)

V. DISCUSSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

This study attempted to validate the English Learning Anxiety Scale (ELAS) for
primary school students in Korea. The results of this study proved that the ELAS has a
good validity and reliability. The two-factor model has been verified based on the results
of confirmatory factor analysis: ‘oral English classroom anxiety’ and ‘low self-confidence
in English’. This finding provides strong support to the two-factor anxiety model
suggested by other researchers (Cheng et al., 1999; Matsuda & Gobel, 2004). In particular,
‘oral English classroom anxiety’ is the most important factor explaining the large amount
of variance in the level of anxiety experienced in learning English. This finding is
consistent with previous anxiety studies that have identified speech anxiety as the first
factor (e.g., Aida, 1994; Kim, 2004).
114 Su Yon Yim and Ye-Lim Yu

Meanwhile, the descriptive statistics of the data shows that the level of anxiety is less
than moderate (2.47) for primary school students. It is encouraging that primary school
students did not show high level of anxiety in learning English as a foreign language.
According to MacIntyre and Gardner (1989), language learning anxiety tends to decrease
as students become more proficient in the target language. Following their argument,
primary school students would show the highest anxiety in learning English since adult
learners are more likely to have a better command of English than primary school students.
However, previous studies performed on older learners (rather than primary school
students) have reported higher levels of anxiety than 2.47. For example, Kang (2009)
reported 2.96 as the mean score of anxiety among 95 university students. Liu and Jackson
(2008), in their study with 547 university students, presented a mean score of 2.80 as the
level of anxiety in English language classrooms. Of course, it would be difficult to
compare the mean score of anxiety in different studies since there are several different
conditions such as number of items or number of subjects. However, it is noteworthy that
young learners show relatively low level anxiety than adult learners in other studies.
To find out why primary school students feel less anxious in learning English than older
learners, we need more qualitative data such as information on the instructional practices
where students are situated in. With the data in this study, we can only assume two
possible reasons for less than moderate levels of anxiety. First, primary school students
may be learning English in less anxiety-provoking situations, compared with older
students in middle schools, high schools or universities. In fact, the national primary
English education curriculum in Korea encourages low anxiety situations so that students
feel motivated to learn English. Examinations on the national English textbooks indicate
that English class typically consists of games and activities rather than anxiety-provoking
tests. A second possible reason would be that young learners may cope with anxiety-
provoking situations better than adults.
Although the overall level of anxiety was less than moderate, two factors of anxiety
show different levels of anxiety. The first factor (oral English classroom anxiety)
demonstrates less than moderate levels of anxiety, whereas the second factor, low self-
confidence in English, displays more than a moderate level of anxiety. The relative high
level of anxiety caused by low self-confidence indicates that teachers need to consider
teaching methods that will boost self-confidence among primary school students. To
provide more favorable environment to enhance self-confidence of students, we need more
information on how low-confidence is generated and developed in the classroom. For that,
we need in-depth information on this issue through qualitative methods such as interviews
or observations.
 Validating the English Learning Anxiety Scale for Primary School Students in Korea 115

VI. CONCLUSION

This study has sought to validate the ELAS for Korean primary school students. Two
anxiety factors (oral English classroom anxiety and low self-confidence in English) have
been identified from the examination on the anxiety literature and proved by EFA and CFA.
This study is fruitful in three ways. First, it creates a theoretical framework to examine
anxiety, by providing a two-factor model which demonstrated validity as well as reliability.
Detailed explanation of how the two-factor anxiety model was created has been fully
provided in the study, so that later researchers may replicate it more easily. Second, it is the
first attempt to investigate the anxiety of learning English among primary school students
from several different schools. Most of the previous studies that have been conducted with
Korean students include students from only one school and have a rather small number of
participants. In comparison, the subjects in this study are eight schools in Seoul. However,
it would be worth including students from provinces other than Seoul, so as to examine
whether the same anxiety constructs are identified and the findings of this study are also
applicable to students living in other provinces. Third, the ELAS is a kind of shorten form
of the FLCAS. So, it can reduce the average administration time of measuring the English
learning anxiety, and it is more accessible for primary school students rather than a full
version of the FLCAS.
Further studies are needed to explain to what extent anxiety is related to background
variables such as private tutoring, motivation for learning English, and experience of
studying abroad. The possible relationship between anxiety and language proficiency
(actual as well as perceived) could also be worth investigating. Moreover, it would be
interesting to conduct a longitudinal study so that we can examine whether the same
factors of anxiety occur in the same group of students over a period of several years. This
longitudinal study would be useful in terms of having more information on how the level
of anxiety has changed throughout the language learning experience and how instructional
practices are related to the changes in the level of anxiety. Considering that foreign
language anxiety is situation specific, it would also be worthwhile to include subjects from
other countries with similar systems of education.
It has been more than 10 years since English was included as a school subject at Korean
primary schools in 1997. Throughout the years, a number of studies on young learners
learning English have been conducted in various areas such as teacher education, learning
strategies, and teaching methods. However, most of the studies have focused primarily on
the cognitive rather than the affective side of learning. This study shed light on an area,
which, until now, has been unexplored: English learning anxiety in primary school
students. More studies need to be conducted to better understand the affective dimensions
of young learners who are learning English as a foreign language.
116 Su Yon Yim and Ye-Lim Yu

REFERENCES

Aida, Y. (1994). Examination of Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope's construct of foreign

language anxiety: The case of students of Japanese. The Modern Language Journal,
78(2), 155-168.
Aydin, S. (2008). An investigation on the language anxiety and fear of negative evaluation
among Turkish EFL learners. Asian EFL Journal, 31, 421-444.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 76-94.
Bailey, K. M. (1983). Competitiveness and anxiety in adult second language learning:
Look at and through the diary studies. In H. W. Seliger & M. H. Long (Eds.),
Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition (pp. 67-102). Rowley,
MA: Newbury House.
Bailey, P., Daley, C. E., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (1999). Foreign language anxiety and
learning style. Foreign Language Annals, 32, 63-76.
Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Cheng, Y. S., Horwitz, E., & Schallert, L. (1999). Language anxiety: Differentiating
writing and speaking components. Language Learning, 49, 417-466.
Dörnyei, Z. (2010). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction,
administration, and processing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Elkahafi, H. (2005). Listening comprehension anxiety in the Arabic language classroom.
The Modern Language Journal, 89(2), 206−220.
Horwitz, E. K. (1986). Preliminary evidence for the reliability and validity of a Foreign
Language Anxiety Scale. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 559-562.
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety.
Modern Language Journal, 70, 125-132.
Hwang, J.-B. (2002). The role of anxiety and motivation in Korean EFL learners’
acquisition of content knowledge. Foreign Languages Education, 9(3), 1-22.
Kang, D.-M. (2009). The cross-modality anxiety profiles of Korean EFL learners. English
Language & Literature Teaching, 15(1), 27-47.
Kim, S.-Y. (2000). Contextual factors associated with anxiety and motivation. English
Teaching, 55(3), 91-110.
Kim, Y. (2004). A factor analytic study of English language anxiety: The case of Korean
university EFL learners. English Teaching, 59(4), 239-256.
Kitano, K. (2001). Anxiety in the college Japanese language classroom. The Modern
Language Journal, 85, 549-566.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.).
NY: The Guilford Press.
 Validating the English Learning Anxiety Scale for Primary School Students in Korea 117

Koul, R., Roy. L., Kaewkuekool, S., & Ploisawaschai, S. (2009). Multiple goal
orientations and foreign language anxiety. System, 37(4), 676-688.
Kym, I. (2004). English preference tendencies and English learning anxiety in primary
school children. English Teaching, 59(3), 215-245.
Liu, M. (2006). Anxiety in Chinese EFL students at different proficiency levels. System, 34,
301-316.
Liu, M., & Jackson, J. (2008). An exploration of Chinese EFL learners' unwillingness to
communicate and foreign language anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 92(1),
71-86.
MacIntyre, P. D. (1995). How does anxiety affect second language learning?: A reply to
Sparks and Ganschow. The Modern Language Journal, 79(1), 90-99.
MacIntyre, P. D. (1999). Language anxiety: A review of the research for language teachers.
In D. J. Young (Ed.), Affect in foreign language and second language learning: A
practical guild to creating a low-anxiety classroom atmosphere (pp. 24-45).
Boston: McGraw-Hill.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1989). Anxiety and second language learning: Toward
a theoretical clarification. Language Learning, 32, 251-275.
Maeng, U. (2007). Learning anxiety, listening strategies, and the proficiency of elementary
school learners. English Language and Linguistics, 24, 259-284.
Mak, B., & White, C. (1996). Communication apprehension of Chinese ESL students.
Hong Kong Journals of Applied Linguistics, 2(1), 81-95.
Matsuda, S., & Gobel, P. (2004). Anxiety and predictors of performance in the foreign
language classroom. System, 32, 21-36.
Noro, T. (2009). “Listening stress” and its debilitative effects: Understanding the circular
mechanism. Bulletin of the Faculty of Education, 101, 157-167.
Oh, M.-K. (2002). A correlation study on English learning anxiety at elementary school
settings. Primary English Education, 8(1), 265-292.
Osterlind, S. J. (2006). Modern measurement: Theory, principles, and applications of
mental appraisal. New Jersey: Pearson Education.
Phillips, E. M. (1992). The effects of language anxiety on students' oral test performance
and attitudes. The Modern Language Journal, 76(1), 15-26.
Price, M. L. (1991). The subjective experience of foreign language anxiety: Interview with
highly anxious students. In E. K. Horwitz, & Young D.J. (Eds.), Language anxiety:
From theory and research to classroom implications (pp. 101-108). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Scovel, T. (1978). The effect of affect on foreign language learning: A review of the
anxiety research. Language Learning, 28, 129-142.
Spielberger, C. D. (1983). Manual for the state-trait anxiety inventory (Form Y). Palo Alto,
CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
118 Su Yon Yim and Ye-Lim Yu

Stevens, J. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (4th ed.). Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Tuan, H. J. (1995). The effects of language anxiety on language proficiency: A study of
Chinese ESL students. Paper presented at the proceedings of the fourth
international symposium on English teaching.
Williams, K. E., & Andrade, M. R. (2008). Foreign language anxiety in Japanese EFL
univeristy classes: Causes, coping, and locus of control. Electronic Journal of
Foreign Language Teaching, 5(2), 181-191.
Worde, R. V. (2003). Students’ perspectives on foreign language anxiety. Inquiry, 8(1), 1-
16.
Yan, G. (2010). The stability of general foreign language classroom anxiety across
languages among Chinese undergraduate foreign language learners. The Journal of
Asia TEFL, 7(2), 69-89.
Young, D. (1990). An investigation of students’ perspectives on anxiety and speaking.
Foreign Language Annals, 23, 539-553.
Young, D. (1991). Creating a low-anxiety classroom environment: What does language
anxiety research suggest?. The Modern Language Journal, 75, 426-439.
Young, D. (1992). Language anxiety from the foreign language specialist’s perspective:
Interviews with Krashen, Omaggio Hadley, Terrell, and Rardin. Foreign Language
Annals, 25, 157-172.
 Validating the English Learning Anxiety Scale for Primary School Students in Korea 119

APPENDIX A
FLCAS (Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale)

1. I never feel quite sure of myself when I am speaking in my English class.

2. I don’t worry about making mistakes in English class.
3. I tremble when I know that I’m going to be called on in English class.
4. It frightens me when I don’t understand what the teacher is saying in English.
5. It wouldn’t bother me at all to take more English classes.
6. During English class, I find myself thinking about things that have nothing to do
with the course.
7. I keep thinking that the other students are better at English than I am.
8. I am usually at ease during tests in my English class.
9. I start to panic when I have to speak without preparation in English class.
10. I worry about the consequences of failing my English class.
11. I don’t understand why some people get so upset over English classes.
12. In English class, I can get so nervous I forget things I know.
13. It embarrasses me to volunteer answers in my English class.
14. I would not be nervous speaking English with native speakers.
15. I get upset when I don’t understand what the teacher is correcting.
16. Even if I am well prepared for English class, I feel anxious about it.
17. I often feel like not going to my English class.
18. I feel confident when I speak in English class.
19. I am afraid that my English teacher is ready to correct every mistake I make.
20. I can feel my heart pounding when I’m going to be called on in English class.
21. The more I study for a English test, the more confused I get.
22. I don’t feel pressure to prepare very well for English class.
23. I always feel that the other students speak English better than I do.
24. I feel very self-conscious about speaking English in front of other students.
25. The English class moves so quickly I worry about getting left behind.
26. I feel more tense and nervous in my English class than in my other classes.
27. I get nervous and confused when I am speaking in my English class.
28. When I’m on my way to English class, I feel very sure and relaxed.
29. I get nervous when I don’t understand every word the English teacher says.
30. I feel overwhelmed by the number of rules you have to learn to speak English.
31. I am afraid that the other students will laugh at me when I speak English.
32. I would probably feel comfortable around native speakers of English.
33. I get nervous when the English teacher asks questions which I haven’t prepared
in advance.
120 Su Yon Yim and Ye-Lim Yu

APPENDIX B
ELAS (English Learning Anxiety Scale)

☞ 다음은 학교 영어 수업에서 학생이 느끼는 자신감에 대한 질문입니다.

학생의 생각과 같은 곳에 ✔표 해 주세요.

전혀
그렇지 보통 매우
항 목 그렇지 그렇다
않다 이다 그렇다
않다

나는 영어 수업 시간에…

1) 미리 공부하지 못한 것을 말해야 할 때 매
① ② ③ ④ ⑤
우 두렵다.
2) 친구들 앞에서 영어로 말하는 것이 굉장히
① ② ③ ④ ⑤
신경 쓰인다.
3) 영어로 말하려면 긴장되고 헷갈린다. ① ② ③ ④ ⑤
4) 영어로 말할 때 친구들이 웃을까봐 두렵다. ① ② ③ ④ ⑤
5) 내가 미리 공부하지 못한 것을 영어 선생님
① ② ③ ④ ⑤
께서 물어 보시면 긴장된다.
6) 선생님께서 영어로 말씀하시는 것을 알아듣
① ② ③ ④ ⑤
지 못하면 기가 죽는다.
7) 내가 실수할 때마다 선생님께서 지적하실까
① ② ③ ④ ⑤
봐 겁난다.
8) 수업 진도가 너무 빨라서 뒤처질까봐 두렵
① ② ③ ④ ⑤
다.
9) 선생님께서 말씀하시는 영어 낱말을 하나라
① ② ③ ④ ⑤
도 모르면 긴장된다.
10) 영어 시험을 봐도 부담 없이 편하다. ① ② ③ ④ ⑤
11) 원어민 선생님과 영어로 말하는 것이
① ② ③ ④ ⑤
긴장되지 않는다.
12) 영어로 말하는 것이 자신있다. ① ② ③ ④ ⑤
13) 친구들이 나보다 영어 말하기를 더
① ② ③ ④ ⑤
잘한다고 생각한다.
14) 영어 원어민 선생님과 같이 있어도
① ② ③ ④ ⑤
편안하다.
 Validating the English Learning Anxiety Scale for Primary School Students in Korea 121

Applicable levels: primary school

Key words: English learning anxiety, validation, factor analysis, primary school students, Foreign
Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS)

Su Yon Yim, Ph. D.

English Language & Literature
National Institute of Education
Nanyang Technological University
1 Nanyang Walk, Singapore 637616, Singapore
Email: suyon.yim@nie.edu.sg

Ye-Lim Yu, Ph. D. Candidate

Department of Education
College of Education
Seoul National University
1 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul 151-742, Korea
Email: dream81@snu.ac.kr

Received in December, 2010

Reviewed in February, 2011
Revised version received in June, 2011