VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY

END OF COURSE ASSIGNMENT

Lecturer: Tạ Thị Thanh Hoa, PhD.

Student: La Thị Hoàng Lan
Student code: 19045223
Group: QH2019.D2.E3

Hanoi, March - 2021

Educational psychology – End-of-course assignment La Thi Hoang Lan – QH2019.D2.E3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION …………...…………………………………………3

II. ARTICLE REVIEW …………...………………………………………6

III. ACTION PLAN……………………………….………………………..8

References………………………………………………….…........................11

2
Educational psychology – End-of-course assignment La Thi Hoang Lan – QH2019.D2.E3

I. Introduction:

Being a teacher of English, I have gotten used to the situations when my students
remain a complete silence after I raise a question towards them. Despite my desperate
efforts to elicit the answers, the students seem to care less or even refuse to react. This
occurs so frequently that sometimes I become impatient and lose my temper in front of
the class. Upon reflecting on the lessons, I usually lay the blame on the students and
attribute their being inactive to their laziness. However, no matter how much I lecture
them, the aforementioned situation is hardly ameliorated. Knowing my struggle, some of
my colleagues also confess that they are in the same boat and suggest me just simply let
things lie since that is common students’ behavior.

Although it seems to be true that students’ showing no response is not a rare

circumstance, I believe that teachers should not take it for granted and take no actions to
overcome the problem. Studies have shown that students’ willingness to communicate
(WTC) plays an important role in classrooms of English as a second language. According
to MacIntyre et al. in 1998, students’ willingness to communicate can be defined as a
“readiness to enter into the discourse at a particular time with a specific person or
persons, using second language” (p. 547). In this sense, willingness to communicate is
perceived as a distinctive personal variable which is different from person to person since
each individual may have their own degree of readiness. From a slightly different
perspective, McCroskey and Richmond (in 1987, 1990) define willingness to
communicate as “the tendency of an individual to initiate communication when free to do
so” (as cited in Kamdideh & Barjesteh, 2019, p. 184). This definition seems to put more
emphasis on students’ taking an active role in the communication process. From the
aforementioned interpretations of the term, it can be deduced that students may have
willingness to communicate when they are both prepared and intrigued enough to eagerly
participate in a second language conversation with others.

Understanding the definition of willingness to communicate in mind, we learn that

this is an essential component of the classroom. Indeed, the importance of WTC is

3
Educational psychology – End-of-course assignment La Thi Hoang Lan – QH2019.D2.E3

emphasized by MacIntyre and his colleagues (1998) when they claimed that the
promotion of WTC is the “ultimate and fundamental goal of language instruction” (as
cited in Kamdideh & Barjesteh, 2019, p. 184). In 2002, MacIntyre, Baker, Clément, and
Donovan one more time reaffirmed the role of WTC by suggesting that greater WTC
increases the frequency of L2 communication in classroom, thereby benefiting students’
language development. However, it is common knowledge that increasing students’ WTC
is not always a simple task. In contrast, many studies reveal that WTC in L2 is a
complicated variable which is affected by various layers.

Figure 1. Pyramid model of WTC ( MacIntyre, Clément, Dörnyei & Noels, 1998, p. 547)

From this pyramid model by MacIntyre et al., we can see that WTC is influenced
by social and individual context, affective cognitive context, motivational propensities,
situated antecedents and behavioral intention. These layers influence each other, hence

4
Educational psychology – End-of-course assignment La Thi Hoang Lan – QH2019.D2.E3

the impacts on WTC. Although many people believe that personality decides a person’s
tendency to engage in a conversation, this model by MacIntyre et al., opposes to this
viewpoint when personality has the weakest influence on WTC. This explains why WTC
in L1 communication is a stable and consistent trait-like variable but WTC in L2 may not
necessarily be so. It also points out that students’ WTC is mostly affected by their
situated antecedents which include self-perceived communicative competence and desire
to talk to a specific person. As a teacher, I think that this is a crucial implication for us in
planning to encourage students’ participation.

Despite the fact that the word “teachers” is nowhere to be found in the model, they
actually contribute greatly to making the students willing or unwilling to communicate.
To be specific, WTC is strongly influenced by students’ state of communicative self-
confidence, which is among various elements that teacher can have impacts on. By
lowering the students’ language anxiety, teachers can assist them in recognizing their
ability and thereby enhancing their self-confidence. This is reinforced in a study by
Clément, Baker and MacIntyre (2003) when they revealed that students’ WTC is
increased when they have positive self-assessment of their L2 proficiency along with low
communication anxiety (as cited in Kamdideh & Barjesteh, 2019, p. 184). However,
language or communication anxiety is also a highly complicated problem for teachers to
tackle with. How can teachers help students feel less anxious in classroom and foster
their engagement? I have tried to find out the answers and even examine their
effectiveness in my own classroom: using games, giving gifts, etc. Despite my efforts,
these strategies only influence a few students who are energetic and active in class. This
was not only due to my lack of knowledge about WTC but it was also simply because I
was too impatient and did not give my students enough “time”. In the following section, I
will make a review of an article titled The Effect of Extended Wait-Time on Promoting
Iranian EFL Learners' Willingness to Communicate (Kamdideh & Barjesteh, 2019)
and reflect on how teachers’ wait-time can make students more willing to communicate
as well as draw some implications for my own teaching.

5
Educational psychology – End-of-course assignment La Thi Hoang Lan – QH2019.D2.E3

II. Article review:

The Effect of Extended Wait-Time on Promoting Iranian EFL Learners'

Willingness to Communicate by Kamdideh & Barjesteh (2019) is a quasi-experimental
study on 60 EFL adult learners who are university students in Iran. The objective of the
study is to find out whether the students will be more or less willing to communicate
when the teacher extends the wait-time. The participants were divided into two groups:
the control group and the experimental group. In the treatment phase, the control group
studied with teacher who gave limited wait-time (less than 3 seconds) while in the
experimental group, the teacher allowed a longer wait-time (3-5 seconds). The
participants were also requested to complete the Willingness to Communicate
Questionnaire by McIntyre, Baker, Clément & Conrod (2001) both before and after the
treatment. The results of the study showed that the WTC scores of the students in the
experimental group were higher than those of the students in the control group.
Therefore, the study concluded that extended wait-time has a positive influence on EFL
learners’ willingness to communicate.

To be honest, the topic of the research almost captivated me immediately not just
because of the WTC relevance, but mainly because of the phrase “wait-time”. At that
moment, I wondered “What is wait-time and why is it related to WTC?” After reading the
literature review of the article, I realize how important this is and how inconsiderate I
have been to my students. Wait-time is a variable used in pedagogical practice which was
invented by Mary Budd Rowe. It is “the periods of silence that followed teacher
questions and students' completed responses--rarely lasted more than 1.5 seconds in
typical classrooms” (Stahl, 1994). She classified two types of wait-time: wait-time I is the
length of the pause following teacher’s talk while wait-time II is the length of the pause
following students’ talk. The criterion duration of wait-time I and II is an average of
between 3 and 5 seconds. Rowe also defined another wait-time which is the post-
response wait-time – relating to the number of pauses students make and come to an end
when teacher speaks” (as cited in Kamdideh & Barjesteh, 2019, p. 186). Fowler (1975)

6
Educational psychology – End-of-course assignment La Thi Hoang Lan – QH2019.D2.E3

later broadened the term by presenting four types of wait-time based on “the person
having primary control over the length of silent pause”: teacher
reaction wait time, student reaction wait time, teacher initiated wait time, and student-
initiated wait time. In the reviewed study by Kamdideh & Barjesteh (2019), Rowe’s
model was utilized to better identify they type as well as specify the duration of the wait-
time.

Although this was the first time I learned about the term “wait-time”, it still occurs
frequently in my classrooms. However, the problem is that I do not pay much attention to
this issue and consider the questioning process to be “a waste of time” which brings
about no effects. As a result, the type of question that I often use the most is rhetorical
questions or yes-no question so that I do not have to wait for students’ answers. This is
repeated again and again for so long that both my students and I become reluctant in
interacting with each other. In retrospect, I think that the students could sense my
impatience and irritation, which results in their unwillingness to respond to me. Wait-
time might not be a new term in language instruction but it might be true that it has not
received significant attention from teachers themselves. Despite this uncomfortable truth,
many researchers have proved that extended wait-time is highly advantageous for both
students and teachers. In 2009, Tsiplakides and Keramida found out that offering
extended wait-time is an effective icebreaker as well as potential contributor to reducing
communication anxiety (as cited in Kamdideh & Barjesteh, 2019). Also studying about
WTC, Zarrinabadi (2014) drew a conclusion that teacher’s wait-time is one of the factors
which have impacts on students’ WTC (as cited in Kamdideh & Barjesteh, 2019).

The results of the study have proved that a simple action of the teacher can create a
remarkable influence on students. To me, this result also indicates that a little bit of
patience is extremely precious and indispensible in any situation. Indeed, the more we
push the students or force them to give the answers that we want them to say, the less
willing they become in communicating. WTC should be initiated by the students when
they feel ready and motivated by the lesson, not because of the teacher’s pressure.

7
Educational psychology – End-of-course assignment La Thi Hoang Lan – QH2019.D2.E3

III. My own action plan:

Currently I am working as an English teacher at HUS High School for Gifted

Students. I am in charge of teaching English for three classes: Math 10A1, Chemistry
10A1 and 10A2.

After approximately one year teaching them, I notice that generally they are
extremely smart and well-behaved in class and rarely show any misconduct. However,
some of the students in each class are relatively quiet or even unresponsive no matter
what kind of activities I organize. They are also among the students who have lower level
of proficiency than others in class. I once tried to interact with them more intimately and
personally but they were somehow reluctant to open themselves to me. Now, after
reading the article on the effect of wait-time on students’ WTC by Kamdideh &
Barjesteh, I think I need to change my approach. Below is my detailed action plan with a
view to fostering my students’ WTC through wait-time.

8
 ACTION PLAN

Resources needed Outcome or indication

Steps needed to achieve my
Objectives to achieve my Timeline of success of my
objectives
objectives objective
 Before lesson: write down what
 Foster students’  Notebook  From March 29th,  Students volunteer to
questions to ask and when to ask;
willingness to 2021 to April 1st: speak up and answer
 Plans
prioritize short-answer questions/
communicate by first trial with all 3 teacher’s questions
listing questions instead of yes-no
extending wait-time classes
 Students are less
questions; make meaningful and
 Improve  From April 2 tond
anxious or worried of
relatable questions th
questioning 4 : reflection and teacher’s calling
 During lesson: ask questions
technique modification names
with proper speed and tone; after
 From April 5 : th

asking, give students at least 5  Students are more

next trial
seconds to answer; keep gentle enjoyable and relaxed
eye contacts with the whole class; in class
try not to urge/ demand the
students to be quick
 After lesson: write reflections on
how students respond and make
modifications if necessary

 Notes: In case the students are still unresponsive, ask yourself the following questions:
Educational psychology – End-of-course assignment La Thi Hoang Lan – QH2019.D2.E3

? Did you give them enough time?

? Did you express any sign of impatience or frustration?
? Were your questions: boring/ lengthy/ complicated/ inappropriate?
? Did you speak clearly enough?
? Were the students paying attention when you asked?

10
 REFERENCES

1. Kamdideh, Z., & Barjesteh, H. (2019). The Effect of Extended Wait-Time on

Promoting Iranian EFL Learners' Willingness to Communicate. International
Journal of Instruction, 12(3), 183-200.
2. Macintyre, P. D., Clément, R., Dornyei, Z., & Noels, K. A. (1998).
Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2
confidence and affiliation. The Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 545-562.
3. Stahl, R. J. (1994). Using" Think-Time" and" Wait-Time" Skillfully in the
Classroom. ERIC Digest.