The role of E F L teachers’ emotional

intelligence in their success

Afsaneh Ghanizadeh and Fatemeh Moafian

This study examines the relationship between E F L teachers’ emotional quotient

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universite Laval on July 14, 2014

(EQ) and their pedagogical success in language institutes. In addition, the role
played by their years of teaching experience in their EQ and the relationship
between their age and EQ were also studied. For this purpose, 89 EFL teachers
were chosen from different language institutes in Mashhad, a city in north-eastern
Iran. They were asked to complete Bar-On’s ‘EQ test’. Simultaneously,
a questionnaire entitled ‘Characteristics of successful E F L teachers’ was filled in by
the students taught by each teacher with the aim of evaluating the teachers’
performance. Subsequent data analysis revealed that there is a significant
relationship between teachers’ success and EQ. Furthermore, significant
correlations were found between teachers’ EQ, their teaching experience, and their
age. The implications of the study are discussed.

Introduction The history of emotional intelligence (EI) originated from the concept of
social intelligence. Thorndike, in 1920, viewed EI through the lens of
social intelligence which he suggested was the ability to empathize
with others and succeed in human relationships (Goleman 1995), but
his views were not taken seriously until years later. In fact, no serious
work was carried out in this field until the mid-1980s when Thorndike’s
view was revamped in the works of Howard Gardner (Goleman: ibid.).
Gardner (1983) introduced eight different types of intelligence one of
which, ‘personal intelligence’, gave rise to the extensive development of EI.
Finally, Salovey and Mayer (1990), basing themselves on Gardner’s view
with its emphasis on individual differences, introduced their complete
model of EI and defined EI as a form of social intelligence which included
the ability to perceive, understand, and manage one’s own emotions and
those of others. Later, Bar-On (1997) suggested that, as EI was such an
important element of one’s life (showing and predicting success), there was
an urgent need to measure, operationalize, and quantify this construct. To
meet this need, Bar-On (ibid.), using his psychological experience, created
his emotional quotient (EQ) questionnaire, which is designed as a test
for measuring EI. Bar-On coined the term ‘emotional quotient’ for his
measure and defined EI as ‘an array of non-cognitive capabilities,
competencies, and skills that influence one’s ability to succeed in coping
with environmental demands and pressures’ (ibid.: 16). He identified five
major scales and 15 subscales which contribute to the emotional energy and

424 E LT Journal Volume 64/4 October 2010; doi:10.1093/elt/ccp084

ª The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.
Advance Access publication November 3, 2009
 self-motivation required in coping with daily environmental demands and
difficulties as follows:
1 Intrapersonal (self-regard, emotional self-awareness, assertiveness,
independence, and self-actualization)
2 Interpersonal (empathy, social responsibility, and interpersonal
relationships)
3 Stress management (stress tolerance and impulse control)
4 Adaptability (reality testing, flexibility, and problem solving)
5 General mood (optimism and happiness).
Since the popularization of EI in 1995 by Goleman, this concept has
attracted the attention of many educationists and several studies
have been carried out in this area. Gil-Olarte, Palomera, and Brackett
(2006), for example, found a positive correlation between students’ EI
and their academic success and social competence. Brackett and Mayer
(2003) also found that teachers rated school children with higher EI as

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universite Laval on July 14, 2014

less aggressive and more pro-social and adaptable than their peers.
The major implication put forward by such studies has been the need
to integrate emotional literacy into the educational curriculum. In
the L2 context, it seems that attention to EI deserves additional
consideration due to the necessity for adequate group dynamics and
student interaction.
Despite this recent enthusiasm for EI, there are conceptual and
methodological problems associated with the research to date. Critics
of EQ argue that if it were to be taken as a form of intelligence, it would
be subsumed by general intelligence (Graves 2000). However, as can
easily be seen, the concept of EQ is a broad umbrella term that refers to inter-
and intrapersonal skills. Most of the authors on this topic note that in order
to function fully as a member of society, one has to possess both IQ
(intelligence quotient) and EQ (Goleman op.cit.; Mayer and Salovey 1997).
Other critics mention that the word ‘intelligence’ and the employment
of measurement tools and questionnaires may make EQ appear
measurable, fixed, and innate (Jarvis 2005), whereas, in fact, EQ is not
fixed but capable of change. However, it seems that without some
stabilization of the concepts and measurement instruments, not only
are meta-analyses difficult to perform, but the theory consistency is also
likely to be negatively impacted.

Measuring EI The established measures of EI have been formulated according to two

main models of EI (Mayer, Salovey, and Caruso 2008):
1 Ability approach: This approach is based on skills and considers EI as an
intelligence founded on emotions. According to this model, EI skills can
be taught and individuals can learn and improve their competence in
each of the four branches of EI (perceiving emotions in oneself and
others, using emotions to facilitate thinking, understanding emotions,
and managing emotions).
2 Mixed approach: In this model, abilities such as emotion and perception
are typically combined with non-cognitive competencies, skills, and
personality traits. According to this model, emotional competencies are
learnt capabilities that must be worked on and developed to achieve

The role of E FL teachers’ emotional intelligence in their success 425

 outstanding performance. The most popular measurement tools rooted
in mixed approach are by Goleman and Bar-On. Goleman’s model
consists of four main EI constructs: self-awareness, self-management,
social awareness, and relationship management, while, as mentioned
above, Bar-On’s model, which is more comprehensive in nature,
measures five broad factors and 15 subscales.

Purpose of the study Although the studies described above point to the contributing effect of EI
on students’ educational and social behaviour, there is a scarcity of such
research on teachers’ behaviour and achievements, especially in the L2
context. The dearth of investigation into the possible relationship between
teachers’ EI and their professional and educational effectiveness shows
a clear need to undertake identical studies in this area. Thus, the present
research focuses on the role of English teachers’ EQ in their success in
language teaching. More specifically, the study addresses the following
questions:

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universite Laval on July 14, 2014

n Is there any relationship between E F L teachers’ EQ and their success in
language teaching?
n Is there any relationship between EFL teachers’ EQ and years of teaching
experience?
n Is there any relationship between teachers’ EQ and their age?

Methods Teachers
Participants The first group of participants consisted of 89 E F L teachers aged between
20 and 45 years old (mean [M] ¼ 26.87, standard deviation [SD] ¼ 5.09)
with a range of between 1 and 20 years of teaching experience (M ¼ 5.53,
SD ¼ 3.5). They were 73 females and 16 males from different socioeconomic
backgrounds, the majority of whom had majored in the different
branches of English—English literature (20 BA, 1 MA), English teaching
(13 BA, 18 MA), and English translation (6 BA). Some, however, had
certificates in majors other than English but had the necessary
qualifications to teach it.

Students
The second group of participants comprised 826 EFL learners (students of
the above-mentioned teachers). They were 604 females and 222 males
whose age varied from 14 to 66 (M ¼ 22.15, SD ¼ 5.73) and came from
different socioeconomic backgrounds. Their language proficiency varied
from elementary to advanced level and their educational level varied from
high school to PhD.

Instruments EQ test
To evaluate teachers’ EI, Bar-On’s test was utilized. The self-report test
includes 133 items in the form of short sentences and takes nearly 40
minutes to complete. It employs a five-point response scale with a textual
response format ranging from ‘very seldom’ or ‘not true of me’ to ‘very often’
or ‘true of me’. Each item has a value in the range of 5 to 1. In this study,
the total reliability of the questionnaire, estimated via Cronbach’s alpha,
was 0.80.

426 Afsaneh Ghanizadeh and Fatemeh Moafian

 The rationale for utilizing this test is twofold: one lies in its inclusion of
a multifactorial array of interrelated emotional, personal, and social abilities,
the other is the inexpensive and undemanding administration of self-report
tests to large groups of respondents. However, self-report data rely on the
subject’s honesty and objectivity and, therefore, sometimes may lack
reliability. To overcome this drawback, the researchers clarified the purpose
of completing the questionnaires prior to taking the test and assured the
participants that confidentiality and anonymity considerations would be
observed.

Questionnaire
To evaluate language teachers’ performance and success in language
teaching, the researchers employed the ‘Characteristics of successful E F L
teachers’ questionnaire which has been designed by Moafian and
Pishghadam (in press) and consists of 47 items ranging from ‘strongly

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universite Laval on July 14, 2014

agree’ to ‘strongly disagree’. The results of reliability analysis show that the
total reliability of the questionnaire is very high (Cronbach’s alpha ¼ 0.94).
The results of factor analysis indicated that the questionnaire measures 12
constructs: teaching accountability, interpersonal relationships, attention to
all, examination, commitment, learning boosters, creating a sense of
competence, teaching boosters, physical and emotional acceptance,
empathy, class attendance, and dynamism (Moafian and Pishghadam
op.cit.). In this study, the total reliability of the questionnaire, estimated via
Cronbach’s alpha, was 0.95 (see Appendix).

Data collection The study was undertaken in several private language institutes
(Marefat, Kish, Kish Air, College, Jahad-e-daneshgahi, and the Iran
Language Institute) in Mashhad, a city in north-eastern Iran, between
May and September 2008. Their selection was based on credibility and
feasibility criteria with these particular institutes being among the most
creditable in Mashhad. Furthermore, since the researchers had already
taught or were teaching in them, they benefited from the voluntary and
warm participation and cooperation of their teachers. Near the end of the
term, the teachers were asked to complete the EQ test, which they took
home, filled in, and then, at the next session, delivered back to the
researchers. Simultaneously, the ‘Characteristics of successful EFL
teachers’ questionnaire was given to the teachers’ students. They also filled
in the questionnaires at home and, next session, returned them to the
researchers. To receive a reliable evaluation by the learners, the researchers
explained the purpose of completing the questionnaire and assured them
that their views would be confidential; moreover, both teachers’ and
learners’ questionnaires were coded numerically and participants were
asked not to write a name on them.

Data analysis To investigate the normality of the distribution, descriptive statistics was
employed. To determine the role of teachers’ EQ in their success, Pearson
product–moment correlation was applied to the data. To find out to what
extent EQ might have predictive power in teachers’ success, regression
analysis was run.

The role of E FL teachers’ emotional intelligence in their success 427

Results Table 1 summarizes the descriptive results of the two instruments—EQ test
and questionnaire—used in this study.

N Minimum Maximum M SD
table 1
EQ 89 349 572 470.16 53.68
Descriptive statistics of
Success 89 148 227 193.95 15.09
EQ and success

To examine whether there is any significant correlation between the

teachers’ EQ and their success in language teaching, Pearson product–
moment correlation was employed. The results revealed that there is
a significant correlation between E F L teachers’ success and their EQ
(r ¼ 0.392, p , 0.05) (see Table 2).

table 2

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universite Laval on July 14, 2014

The results of correlation Success
between teachers’ EQ
Total EQ 0.392*
and their success
*
Shows the existence of the significant relationship at the level of 0.05.

It was also found that, among the 15 components which compose the
total EQ test, 12 have positive correlation with teachers’ success as
follows: success and (1) self-regard (r ¼ 0.287, p , 0.05), (2) self-
actualization (r ¼ 0.301, p , 0.05), (3) independence (r ¼ 0.237, p , 0.05),
(4) empathy (r ¼ 0.258, p , 0.05), (5) interpersonal relationships (r ¼ 0.439,
p , 0.05), (6) social responsibility (r ¼ 0.258, p , 0.05), (7) reality testing
(r ¼ 0.290, p , 0 .05), (8) flexibility (r ¼ 0.299, p , 0.05), (9) stress
tolerance (r ¼ 0.304, p , 0.05), (10) impulse control (r ¼ 0.293, p , 0.05),
(11) happiness (r ¼ 0.356, p , 0.05), and (12) optimism (r ¼ 0.229, p , 0.05)
(see Table 3).

Success
Emotional self-awareness 0.189
Assertiveness 0.182
Self-regard 0.287*
Self-actualization 0.301*
Independence 0.237*
Empathy 0.258*
Interpersonal relationship 0.439*
Social responsibility 0.258*
Problem solving 0.192
Reality testing 0.290*
Flexibility 0.299*
Stress tolerance 0.304*
table 3
Impulse control 0.293*
The results of correlation
Happiness 0.356*
between components of
Optimism 0.299*
EQ and teachers’ success
*
Shows the existence of the significant relationship at the level of 0.05

428 Afsaneh Ghanizadeh and Fatemeh Moafian

 To analyse the data further, regression analysis was conducted. The
results indicated that teachers’ total score of EQ is a positive predictor of
the dependent variable (teachers’ success) (see Table 4).

Model Unstandardized coefficients Standardized t Significance

coefficient (b)
b Standard error
table 4
1 (Constant) 142.178 13.127 10.831 0.000
The results of regression
EQ 0.110 0.028 0.392 3.970 0.000
analysis for teachers’ EQ
Dependent variable: teachers’ success
and their success

Table 5 illustrates the model summary statistics. The results revealed that
the model containing the total scores of the EQ test can predict 15 per cent of
the teachers’ success. The R value is 0.39, which indicates the correlation

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universite Laval on July 14, 2014

coefficient between teachers’ EQ and success. The square is 0.15, and this
indicates that about 15 per cent of the variation in teachers’ success can be
explained by taking their EI into account (see Table 5).

Model R R2 Adjusted R2 Standard error of the estimate

table 5
R2 table for EQ as the 1 0.392 0.153 0.144 13.969
predictor of teachers’ Predictors: (constant), EQ
success

To determine the role of teaching experience in teachers’ EQ, Pearson

product–moment correlation was used. The findings indicated that there
are significant correlations between teachers’ years of teaching experience
and the total scores of EQ (r ¼ 0.226, p , 0.05) (see Table 6).
table 6
The results of correlation
between teachers’ Teaching experience
teaching experience and Total EQ 0. 226*
EQ
*
Shows the existence of the significant relationship at the level of 0.05.

To investigate the relationship between teachers’ EQ and their age, Pearson

product–moment correlation was used again. The results revealed that
there is a significant correlation between teachers’ age and total EQ
(r ¼ 0.317, p , 0.05) (see Table 7).

table 7
The results of correlation Teaching experience
between teachers’ age
Total EQ 0. 317*
and EQ
*
Shows the existence of the significant relationship at the level of 0.05

Discussion and As stated earlier, the present study sought to investigate, in the first place, if
conclusions there was any relationship between EFL teachers’ EQ and their success. The
results indicated that there was a significant positive relationship between
EI and teachers’ success. The size of this correlation indicates that the higher
the teachers’ EQ, the more likely they are to be successful in their profession.

The role of E FL teachers’ emotional intelligence in their success 429

 This is in accordance with previous theoretical and empirical studies on
success, though these are limited where teachers are concerned, and quite
sparse in the L2 context altogether. Bar-On (2006) hypothesized that those
individuals with higher than average EQ are in general more successful,
while a deficiency in EI can mean a lack of success and the endurance of
emotional problems. Researchers have also indicated that higher EQ is an
indication of one’s potential in academic and professional success
(Goleman op.cit.; Mayer and Salovey op.cit.).
In spite of the findings of the present study concerning the positive role of EI
in teachers’ success, this role should not be overestimated. According to the
regression analysis, it was suggested that about 15 per cent of the variation in
teachers’ success can be explained by taking EI into account. This is not
unexpected when we take into consideration the wide array of other teacher
instructional and affective behaviour that may shape students’ judgements
of a successful teacher. This is in line with Bar-On’s (2006) contention that

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universite Laval on July 14, 2014

mutual interaction of EI and cognitive intelligence contribute to a person’s
general intelligence, which then offers an indication of one’s potential to
succeed in life. Regarding the affective domain, other forces should be taken
into account including such factors as self-motivation, persistence, and
confidence, all of which contribute to EI but are not directly measured by an
IQ test. This helps explain the need for teachers and teacher educators to
devote time to the affective domain in addition to academics since they, too,
can contribute to the development of EQ.
As indicated earlier, among the EQ components, interpersonal
relationships and happiness were found to have the highest correlations
with success. This is hardly surprising due to the fact that current
approaches in education are enjoying a shift from traditional teacher-
fronted classes to humanistic and communicative settings. This is more
evident when it comes to E F L contexts in private institutes where pair and
group work and discussion are the norm, and the teacher’s support,
empathy, and cooperation are indispensable components. The bulk of
research on teacher effectiveness has pointed to the facilitative role of
a positive and warm classroom climate which is conducive to learning
(Williams and Burden 1997). Wubbels and Levy (1991) found that teacher
interpersonal behaviour plays an influential role in fostering learner
cognitive and affective achievements. Teachers who displayed more friendly
and understanding behaviour in their interactions in the classroom tended
to enhance not only learner achievement but also their attitudes towards the
subject matter (cited in Williams and Burden: ibid.). Mortiboys (2005)
argued that the way the teacher pays attention to the emotional dimension
of the classroom experience (including mutual interaction) will also
increase the chances of learners’ engagement, motivation, risk taking, and
positive attitudes, along with collaboration and creativity. He also noted that
the risk of learners’ dropping out from courses seems to decline once they
establish better relationships with teachers.
The same also goes for happiness; the dynamic and interactive nature of E F L
classes in private institutes, rooted in communicative and humanistic
approaches of teaching, entails creating a fun and enjoyable atmosphere.
That is to say, the more the teacher attempts to establish rapport and create

430 Afsaneh Ghanizadeh and Fatemeh Moafian

 a mutually satisfying atmosphere, the more successful she/he is from
students’ perspectives.
Regarding the other two research questions, the results indicated
a positive correlation between EFL teachers’ EQ and years of teaching
experience, as well as age. In other words, teachers’ emotional experience
tends to increase over time and with every year of teaching. This is
consistent with previous research that indicated EQ is acquired and
developed through learning and repeated experience, in contrast to IQ,
which is considered relatively to be stable and unchangeable (Goleman
op.cit.). Bar-On (op.cit.) also posited that EI develops over time and that it
can be improved through training and programming.
Besides the above-mentioned discussion, the present study has two main
features. The first one, which is a distinguishing feature of the study, is the
fact that it utilized a questionnaire on teachers’ success designed and

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universite Laval on July 14, 2014

constructed uniquely for EFL teachers and in accordance with the views of
three main elements in the process of teaching and learning, i.e. E F L
learners, EFL teachers, and T E F L experts. The second one lies in the use of
student judgements to evaluate teachers’ success on a scale. As Suwandee
(1995) stated, students appear to be the best source for providing a rich seam
of information concerning teacher performance. They are in a good position
to judge the quality of classroom teaching.

Implications The results of the present study lead to the conclusion that teacher EI is
critical in the process of teaching. Thus, if emotions and perceptions appear
to influence teaching practices, identifying and regulating the factors that
contribute to the development of teacher EQ deserve consideration. This, in
turn, necessitates exploiting and developing courses and preparation
programmes for E F L teachers focusing on skills associated with EI to help
them handle their emotions appropriately, shift undesirable emotional
states to more productive ones, understand the link between emotions,
thoughts, and actions, attract and sustain rewarding interpersonal
relationships in the classroom, and be sensitive to students’ emotions.
These programmes should be specifically targeted at less experienced and
younger teachers. The significance of such emotional literacy practices is
also manifested in Mortiboys’ (op.cit.: 3) recommendation that EI be part of
every teacher’s development, given the fact that some of the problems that
arise in teaching are rooted in the way teachers handle their own feelings as
well as those of their learners.

Suggestions for 1 In this study, teachers’ capabilities were assessed through questionnaires
further research only. In subsequent studies, researchers could make use of other kinds of
assessment tools such as observation, interviewing students, or
a combination of different assessment devices to assess teachers’
effectiveness in classroom settings.
2 In the current study, teachers’ gender was not considered. The
relationship between teachers’ success and EQ could be investigated in
terms of gender, in other words, the research could be carried out with
sufficient numbers of participants from each sex.
3 To the researchers’ knowledge, this is the first attempt to explore the
relationship between EFL teachers’ EQ and their success by means of

The role of E FL teachers’ emotional intelligence in their success 431

 a questionnaire specifically designed for E F L teachers. Thus, this study
should be replicated.
4 Since this study was conducted only in language institutes, further
research is needed in high schools in order to compare the results.
Final revised version received July 2009

References Mortiboys, A. 2005. Teaching with Emotional

Bar-On, R. 1997. The Emotional Quotient Inventory
(EQ-i): Technical Manual. Toronto: Multi-Health
Systems.
Bar-On, R. 2006. ‘The Bar-On model of emotional-
social intelligence (ES I)’. Psicothema 18(suppl):
13–25.
Brackett, M. A. and J. D. Mayer. 2003. ‘Convergent,
discriminant, and incremental validity of competing
Intelligence: A Step-by-Step Guide for Higher and
Further Education Professionals. London: Routledge.
Salovey, P. and J. D. Mayer. 1990. ‘Emotional
intelligence’. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality
9: 185–211.
Suwandee, A. 1995. ‘Students’ perceptions of
university instructors’ effective teaching
characteristics’. S LLT Journal 5: 6–22.

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universite Laval on July 14, 2014

measures of emotional intelligence’. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin 29/9: 1147–58.
Gardner, H. 1983. Frames of Mind: The Theory of
Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Gil-Olarte, P., R. Palomera, and M. A. Brackett. 2006.
‘Relating emotional intelligence to social
competence and academic achievement in high
school students’. Psicothema 18(suppl): 118–23.
Goleman, D. 1995. Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can
Matter More Than IQ. New York: Bantam Books.
Graves, M. L. M. 2000. ‘Emotional intelligence,
general intelligence, and personality: assessing the
construct validity of an emotional intelligence test
using structural equation modeling’. Digital
Dissertation 61/4: 2255B (Publication No. AAT
9968121).
Jarvis, M. 2005. The Psychology of Effective Learning
and Teaching. London: Nelson Thornes Ltd.
Mayer, J. D. and P. Salovey. 1997. ‘What is emotional
intelligence?’ in P. Salovey and D. J. Sluyter (eds.).
Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence:
Implications for Educators. New York: Basic Books.
Mayer, J. D., P. Salovey, and D. R. Caruso. 2008.
‘Emotional intelligence: new ability or eclectic
traits?’. American Psychologist 63/6: 503–17.
Moafian, F. and R. Pishghadam. In press. ‘Construct
validation of a questionnaire on characteristics of
successful EFL teachers’. Iranian EFL Journal.
Williams, M. and R. Burden. 1997. Psychology for
Language Teachers: A Social Constructivist Approach.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wubbels, T. and J. Levy. 1991. ‘A comparison of
interpersonal behaviour of Dutch and American
teachers’. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations 15: 1–18.
The authors
Afsaneh Ghanizadeh holds a MA degree in T E F L
from Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran. She is
an E F L instructor in Islamic Azad University,
Mashhad Branch, and has also taught English in
private institutes for about ten years. She has co-
authored several research articles and has presented
papers at several national and international
conferences. Her areas of research include language
assessment and psycholinguistics.
Email: ghanizadehafsaneh@yahoo.com
Fatemeh Moafian holds a MA degree in T EF L from
Mazandaran University, Iran. She is an E F L
instructor in Payam-e-Noor University, Iran. She has
co-authored several research articles in scientific
research journals. Her research interests are mostly
in the areas of psycholinguistic studies and
educational psychology.
Email: f_moafian@yahoo.com

432 Afsaneh Ghanizadeh and Fatemeh Moafian

Appendix Questionnaire
Characteristics of
(Accountability)
successful EFL
teachers
My teacher . . .
13. Is interested in the subject matter he/she is teaching.
22. Is well-prepared for the class.
24. Emphasizes important materials and points.
23. Is careful and precise in answering learners’ questions.
27. Is willing to help learners in and out of the classroom.
32. Presents materials at learners’ level of comprehension.
36. Accepts constructive criticisms.

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universite Laval on July 14, 2014

nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

(Interpersonal relationships)
My teacher . . .
7. Is good-tempered.
3. Is friendly towards learners.
9. Has a sense of humour.
8. Is patient.
4. Respects learners as individuals.
5. Understands learners well.
35. Respects all ideas.
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

(Attention to all)
My teacher . . .
40. Involves all students in learning.
42. Creates opportunities for discussion and asking questions.
41. Creates equal opportunities for learners’ participation in the classroom.
43. Avoids discriminating against learners.
26. Pays attention to all students.
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

(Examination)
My teacher . . .
20. Holds adequate number of tests.

The role of E FL teachers’ emotional intelligence in their success 433

 21. Is prompt in returning test results.
38. Is impartial in grading.
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

(Commitment)
My teacher . . .
1. Has a good knowledge of subject matter.
2. Has up to date information.
49. Emphasizes the presence of students in the classroom.
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

(Learning boosters)

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universite Laval on July 14, 2014

My teacher . . .
28. Encourages learners in different ways.
45. Divides class time appropriately for the different language skills
according to the purposes of the course.
44. Attends to the learners problems in learning.
48. Creates self-confidence in learners.
10. Is aware of new teaching methods and strategies.
37. Has the subject matter well-organized according to the number of
sessions and hours
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

(Creating a sense of competence)

My teacher . . .
16. Knows his/her learners well (talents, abilities, weaknesses).
15. Has the ability to stimulate learners in learning.
19. Gives sufficient number of assignments.
8. Uses good learners to help weaker ones.
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

(Teaching boosters)
My teacher . . .
6. Has the ability to manage the classroom well.
11. Uses extra instructional materials such as tapes, movies, etc.
12. Enjoys teaching.
14. Has self-confidence.
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

434 Afsaneh Ghanizadeh and Fatemeh Moafian

(Physical and emotional acceptance)
My teacher . . .
31. Has clean and tidy appearance.
30. Speaks clearly with a correct pronunciation.
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

(Empathy)
My teacher . . .
46. Avoids making fun of the learners.
47. Avoids being too strict.
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universite Laval on July 14, 2014

(Class attendance)
My teacher . . .
33. Enters the classroom on time.
34. Leaves the classroom on time.
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

(Dynamism)
My teacher . . .
25. Is a dynamic and energetic person.
39. Has creativity in teaching.
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

The role of E FL teachers’ emotional intelligence in their success 435