Salameh Fleih Obeiah
EFL Supervisor, Ministry of Education–Jordan
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4522-9119
Using the Foreign Language Reading Anxiety Scale (FLRAS), this study explores the core determinants of reading anxiety among Jordanian EFL teachers. It investigates the correlation between anxiety factors and strategy utilization (i.e., metacognitive, cognitive, and support strategies) as well as reading orientation, which determines a reader's active participation while reading. It looks at the sub-factors of reading anxiety: anxiety felt throughout the reading process, reading self-assurance, and anxiety when reading English characters. The findings of the study showed that Self-assurance was more influential and a constructive contributor to Jordanian English language teachers' utilization of metacognitive methods and the degree of orientation to reading than anxiety felt during reading.
Keywords: Orientation to reading; Anxiety; Strategy use; Self-assurance
Cite this article as: Obeiah, S.F. (2024). The Effect of Foreign Language Reading Anxiety on Jordanian EFL Teachers’ Orientation and Strategy Use. Journal of Educational Sciences, Qatar University, 24(1), pp. 259-274. https://doi.org/10.29117/tis.2024.0165
© 2024, Obeiah, licensee, JES & QU Press. This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits non-commercial use of the material, appropriate credit, and indication if changes in the material were made. You can copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format as well as remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
سلامه أفليح العبيه
مشرف تربوي، وزارة التربية والتعليم–الأردن
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4522-9119
تهدف الدراسة إلى الكشف عن العوامل الرئيسة للتوتر القرائي بين معلمي اللغة الإنجليزية-لغة أجنبية في الأردن، وذلك باستخدام مقياس توتر قراءة اللغة الأجنبية (FLRAS). تستكشف الدراسة مدى ارتباط هذه العوامل باستخدام الاستراتيجيات أثناء القراءة، مثل؛ استراتيجيات ما فوق المعرفة، والاستراتيجيات المعرفية، واستراتيجيات الدعم. كما تستكشف اتجاهات معلمي اللغة الإنجليزية نحو القراءة، التي تؤسس بدورها للانخراط النشط للقارئ في أثناء القراءة. بالإضافة إلى ذلك، تستكشف العوامل الفرعية الثلاثة للتوتر القرائي، وهي: التوتر خلال قراءة اللغة الإنجليزية، والثقة أثناء القراءة، والتوتر أثناء قراءة حروف اللغة الإنجليزية. أظهرت نتائج الدراسة أن الثقة عاملٌ مسهمٌ بشكل فعال في استخدام معلمي اللغة الإنجليزية في الأردن لاستراتيجيات ما فوق المعرفة، واتجاهاتهم نحو القراءة أكثر من التوتر الذي يتعرضون له أثناء القراءة.
الكلمات المفتاحية: الاتجاهات نحو القراءة، التوتر، استخدام الاستراتيجيات، الثقة
للاقتباس: العبيه، سلامه أفليح. (2024). أثر التوتر القرائي للغة الأجنبية على الاتجاهات واستخدام الاستراتيجيات لدى معلمي اللغة الإنجليزية-لغة أجنبية في الأردن. مجلة العلوم التربوية، جامعة قطر، 24(1)، ص259-274. https://doi.org/10.29117/jes.2024.0165
© 2024، العبية، الجهة المرخص لها: مجلة العلوم التربوية، دار نشر جامعة قطر. نُشرت هذه المقالة البحثية وفقًا لشروط Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0). تسمح هذه الرخصة بالاستخدام غير التجاري، وينبغي نسبة العمل إلى صاحبه، مع بيان أي تعديلات عليه. كما تتيح حرية نسخ، وتوزيع، ونقل العمل بأي شكل من الأشكال، أو بأية وسيلة، ومزجه وتحويله والبناء عليه، طالما يُنسب العمل الأصلي إلى المؤلف. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
It is common for EFL students to feel anxious while studying a foreign language. For many students, learning a second language may be stressful, embarrassing, and distressing. Surprisingly, many EFL students describe experiencing loss, depression, and anguish as a result of learning a foreign language. According to Spielberger (1983), anxiety can be divided into three types: trait anxiety, situational anxiety, and state anxiety. "A distinct complex of self-perceptions, beliefs, feelings, and behaviors related to classroom language learning arising from the uniqueness of the language learning process" is defined as "a distinct complex of self-perceptions, beliefs, feelings, and behaviors related to classroom language learning" (Horwitz, Horwitz, & Cope, 1986, p. 128). According to Casado & Dereshiwsky (2001), anxiety is defined as "a collection of overt behavioural traits that may be explored systematically to assess sensations that are present." Another study conducted by Aida (1994) to ascertain the impact of anxiety in the classroom revealed that anxiety is prevalent among pupils. Additionally, foreign language proficiency as measured by students' self-reports, teachers' evaluations of their work, and final grades. The Foreign Language Class Anxiety Scale, which was modified for this study, proved to be an extremely reliable tool to investigate the anxiety levels among EFL students. Saito and Samimy (1996) examined the connection between students' language proficiency and anxiety as language learners. Their results showed that anxiety becomes more significant as instructional levels rise.
Numerous scholars have investigated the possibility of anxiousness when reading a foreign language. The findings demonstrate that FL reading anxiety is a real condition that changes depending on the target language and is distinct from general FL anxiety (Saito et al., 1999; Kuru- Gonen, 2007; Guimba & Alico, 2014). The term "foreign language reading anxiety" (FLRA) describes unease, nervousness, or tension experienced when reading a material in a foreign language (Capan & Pektas, 2013). Additionally, it appears that the perceived level of difficulty of reading materials and reading task types is associated with foreign language reading anxiety (Brantemeier, 2005; Mills, Pajares & Herron, 2006). Two factors have been identified by Saito et al. (1999) as having a significant potential to cause anxiety: (1) new writing systems and scripts; and (2) unacquainted cultural content. Additionally, it is said that children would experience less anxiety when reading when they are acquainted with the scripts, writing system, and cultural artifacts.
Zhang (2000) investigated the anxiety Chinese students enrolled in ESL reading courses faced to elicit the demographic attributes of the individuals. The results showed that a number of factors, including students' lack of L2 competency, cultural understanding, the altered learning environment, and their teacher's diversity effect, influence the anxiety of both male and female ESL readers. Sellers (2000) investigated the connection between reading in Spanish and language anxiety. The findings showed that students who reported anxious feeling had a tendency to remember less information from the passage than did individuals who reported feeling less apprehensive. Additionally, pupils who expressed greater concern about learning a foreign language in general also expressed greater anxiety about reading. Hsu (2004) explored the effect of FLRA on cadets of a military junior college. Remarkably, FLRA had no impact on students’ ability to understand challenging materials. High-anxiety readers remembered less passage information and low-anxiety readers remembered smaller idea units when the reading material was easy to read. It was found that inadequate English proficiency was linked to the FLRA rather than texts.
Sheorey and Mokhtari (2001) developed a survey to explore the variations in the reading strategies that native and ESL students reported using when reading academic literature. First, they concluded that nearly all of the strategies included in the survey were known to both native speakers and ESL students and both groups reported employing supportive, metacognitive, and cognitive strategies, independent of reading proficiency. They also compared less able students to advanced others in receptive groups, both native speaking and ESL students reported employing more cognitive and metacognitive strategies. Furthermore, according to Mokhtari and Sheorey (2002), students' comprehension of reading will increase if they are aware of reading strategies. In order to help students become more practically active readers, teachers may evaluate students' awareness of their reading strategies, and students can have greater developmental awareness of their techniques. In a follow-up study, Kitano (2001) examined two possible causes of the anxiety that EF learners experience during oral practice: the student's own self-perceived speaking skill and fear of receiving a poor grade. The findings demonstrated that a student's anxiety increased in proportion to how strongly they feared receiving a poor grade. In his research, Levine (2003) investigated the connection between students' anxiety and the use of target language itself. Although the study's findings did not corroborate his assumption, he predicted that students' anxiety levels would positively correspond with the amount of target language used overall. The findings revealed a negative correlation between anxiety and the amount of target language use.
According to Gregersen and Horwitz (2002), some students' language anxiety may be caused by their perfectionist tendencies. They claim that anxious students and perfectionists share similar explanations, and that these parallels have the potential to make language learning a depressing experience for them. They also discovered that nervous students were less satisfied with their accomplishments and were more fearful of making mistakes than non-anxious students who enjoyed modest victories. Similarly, Chao (2003) state that there is a link between foreign language fear and emotional intelligence skills. Many studies have looked at the anxiety-inducing factors and the learning strategies students use to cope with their anxiety while reading (Hu & Wang, 2014; Lu & Liu, 2011; Hashemi & Abbasi, 2013; Tanveer, 2007; Wu, 2010), while others have focused on the effects of foreign language anxiety on students' performance (Hu & Wang, 2014; Lu & Liu, 2011; Hashemi & Abbasi, 2013; Tanveer, 2007; Wu, 2010 (Azizifar, Faryadian, & Gowhary, 2014; Budin, 2014; Chen & Chang, 2004; Hashemi & Abbasi, 2013; Hu & Wang, 2014). According to Tanveer (2007), there are a variety of factors that influence learners' foreign language anxiety, which can be internal or external. Internal elements usually have to do with a learner's sense of "self," which includes self-esteem, perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes. A bad attitude towards the target language might create a barrier between the learner and the language. The learning environment, instructor variables, classroom practices and teacher-learner interactions, and socio-cultural factors are all examples of external factors.
Another study on anxiety in Chinese undergraduates who did not major in English at three different competence levels was conducted by Liu (2006). The results showed that many students at all proficiency levels experienced anxiety when speaking English in class; more proficient students generally experienced less anxiety. Students experienced the greatest anxiety when responding to the teacher or when they were selected to speak English in class. In pairs, they had the least amount of anxiety.
Additionally, Martinez (2008) investigated students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. The findings showed that students reported using global reading strategies and problem solving more frequently. Additionally, females reported using strategies much more frequently than males did, and they also tended to employ support reading strategies more frequently.
Zhang and Wu (2009) assessed the level of metacognitive awareness and reading strategy use among Chinese EFL students. To value students' metacognitive awareness, they employed the Mokhtari and Sheorey (2002) Survey of Reading Strategies (SORS). Students were categorized into three competence categories (high, intermediate, and low) based on their average scores on an achievement test. The findings revealed global strategies helped more advanced learners of English than those less able students.
Another study was conducted by Jafari and Shokrpour (2012) to ascertain the reading strategies employed by Iranian EFL students to understand real expository English writings. The study's conclusions indicate for the creation of instructional implications. It seems appropriate that EFL instructors increase students' awareness of the vast array of reading strategies available to them, since the study's moderate overall mean of metacognitive reading strategies revealed that Iranian EFL students were not using the entire range of appropriate reading strategies and were unaware of all of them.
Al-Shboul et al. (2013) also provided a list of five underlying elements that contribute to anxiousness when reading. Text features and personal variables are the two categories into which the five underlying factors are separated. Text features are elements of the text itself that cause readers to become apprehensive, whereas personal variables are aspects of the reader's personality that cause anxiety when reading. Unknown terminology, strange topics, and unfamiliar cultures are the text aspects that contribute to reading anxiety; on the other hand, personal components include worry about reading consequences and fear of making mistakes.
Additionally, Dalili and Tavakoli (2013) conducted a comparative comparison of reading strategies among EFL students of engineering and EFL students of humanities. The findings showed that the two student groups reported comparable patterns of strategy awareness and acknowledged using practically all of the strategies when reading EFL materials. They reported students of engineering employed specific sorts of methods more frequently than students of the humanities. The study's conclusions dispel myths about the shortcomings of humanities students' strategy-based EFL reading comprehension in addition to explaining some of the distinctions and similarities between engineering and humanities students. Muchlis (2017) investigated the causes of reading anxiety in the setting of senior high school in Indonesia. He discovered that when students read loudly, they often experience anxiety more than when they read silently. Because they view reading aloud as a type of public speaking, students who are terrified of the reading effect prefer to concentrate on their performance over understanding the text's content. Fear of receiving a poor grade from professors and classmates is the main problem in this case.
Reading strategies are methods or deliberate acts used to increase comprehension and address challenges related to reading. Reading strategies include speaking aloud, paraphrasing, speculating, going back and rereading the material, picturing the content, posing queries to oneself, translating, and using a dictionary. The successful use of reading methods increases learners’ reading comprehension (Huang, Chern, & Lin, 2009). Furthermore, a number of researches have demonstrated a positive correlation between the usage of reading strategies and reading comprehension (AlNujaidi, 2003; Darabie, 2000; Song, 1999).
One alternative avenue for investigating students' involvement in the reading process is to look at their attentiveness while reading. After reviewing the literature, the researcher discovered that there are no studies in Jordanian EFL context that look into the link between reading anxiety, orientation, and strategy utilization. According to Tomlin and Villa's (1994) model, attention is divided into three processes:
1. Total readiness to respond into a received stimulus.
2. Orientation is a consciousness process that aims to focus different types of concentration on specific sets of sensory data while ignoring others.
3. Detection, which is the mental recording of sensory information.
They believe that the significance of attention in language learning increases from the first level (readiness to deal with stimuli) to the third level (detection). According to Tomlin and Villa (1994), the three circumstances may occur as isolated consciousness processes in learning. Essentially, this research is grounded on the idea that the word orientation, which comes from the above-mentioned model, is critical for monitoring students' consciousness processes. In this study, reading orientation refers to the condition in which students focus solely on reading in order to infer meaning from texts without being distracted by internal or external factors.
In a foreign language, the reading skill allows learners to interact with reading passages while attempting to infer meaning through the utilization of reading techniques to develop understanding. Metacognitive, cognitive, and support techniques are the three types of reading techniques (Malcolm, 2009; Phakiti, 2008; Sheorey & Mokhtari, 2001). Metacognitive methods, for instance; "taking an overall view of a text" and "critically evaluating the material," are focused and well-organized actions advocated to guide reading. Readers utilize cognitive strategies such as "changing reading speed" or "guessing the meaning of unexpected words" right away while reading a book. Finally, support techniques refer to reader behaviors such as "using a dictionary" or "taking notes" that aid comprehension (Mokhtari & Sheorey, 2001, p.436).
The hypothesis of a detrimental link between reading anxiety and reading ability was backed by research on reading anxiety (Saito et al., 1999; Sellers, 2000; Shi & Liu, 2006; Zhao et al., 2013). A variety of studies accessed show how reading strategy use has been linked to reading anxiety in English as a foreign language for readers with the goal of acquiring a better knowledge of the forms of EFL readers' reading techniques. According to Lien (2011), there is a link between reading anxiety and the usage of reading strategies. Additionally, he reported that EFL learners' reading anxiety had a negative impact on their metacognitive technique utilization in a later trial. Tsai and Lee (2018) found that students' use of reading techniques had a detrimental impact on their reading anxiety.
Following a review of the literature, it appears that there is a pressing need to establish a link between reading anxiety, strategy use, and orientation. As a result, the following questions will be addressed in this research:
a. According to the Foreign Language Reading Anxiety Scale (FLRAS), what are the different characteristics of reading anxiety?
b. Is there a link between reading anxiety and the adoption of reading strategies?
c. Is reading anxiety a factor in Jordanian EFL teachers' attitudes toward reading?
This research follows the quantitative descriptive design, in which, information is collected and analyzed to describe situations, events or existing phenomena. The aim of this method was to interpret the participants’ understanding of the current issue. Three Likert scales were adopted for the current study to collect data from participants with respect to their experiences with the reading skill.
335 male and female EFL teachers from the Northeastern Badia Directorate of Education/Jordan participated in the study, which began in the second semester of the academic year 2021-2022. The scales were filled out by 277 EFL teachers in total.
Because the data was gathered using surveys, there's a chance that the participants' responses to the questionnaire items reflected their peripheral expectations. Qualitative data may be used in future investigations.
The following instruments are used in this study:
a. Saito et al. (1999) developed the FLRAS: The students' anxiousness while reading English was measured using 20 items
b. Mokhtari and Sheorey's "Survey of Reading Strategies" (SORS) 6-point Likert scale (2002). To investigate strategy utilization, 30 items were employed. Global/metacognitive strategies, problem-solving/cognitive strategies, and support strategies are the three categories.
c. To determine their degree of orientation to reading, participants were asked to react to a 6-point Likert scale ranging from (unengaged) to (completely engaged).
Table 1: Means and Standard Deviations for the reading strategy and reading orientation categories (N = 277)
|
Categories |
Mean |
Std. |
|
Global metacognitive techniques |
3.96 |
0.71 |
|
Problem-solving cognitive techniques |
3.56 |
0.86 |
|
Support techniques |
3.22 |
0.66 |
|
Orientation to reading |
4.46 |
0.87 |
a. To study the FLRAS's aspects, 277 Jordanian EFL teachers completed the FLRAS's 20 items, which were then evaluated using exploratory factor analysis. A maximum probability extraction method was used, as well as a straight Oblimin rotation method. To extract the sum of factors, the eigenvalues of the factor solutions (used to simplify a linear operation to separate simpler problems) and a scree plot (used to identify the sum of factors in an exploratory factor analysis) were evaluated. The eigenvalues of the factors with eigenvalues bigger than 1.0 were maintained.
b. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses to investigate the link between reading anxiety and the usage of reading techniques, as well as the effect of reading anxiety on EFL teachers' reading orientation.
As part of an exploratory factor analysis, the following was done:
a. Experiment 1: A four-factor solution was found after 20 items, accounting for 48.00 percent of the total variance (=0.83).
b. Four items were loaded with a value less than 0.4. (items no. 9, 16,17, and 19).
c. Experiment 2: after deleting these components, a three-factor structure was discovered, accounting for 51.00 percent of the total. One piece (item no. 20) was loaded below the threshold of 0.4 and was detachable.
d. The ultimate solution of the 14-item three-factor structure (item no. 4 was excluded because it has a lower loading value than 0.4).
e. Factor one, "Nervousness experienced throughout the process of reading English," contains six components that correspond to EFL teachers' anxiety.
f. Factor two, "Reading Confidence," has four items and explains 13.86 percent of the variance (=0.85). 7. 2. Factor 3 "Anxiety when reading English characters," which has four items and explains 9.77 percent of the variance (=0.65), consists of four items.
Table 2: Factor analysis for foreign language reading anxiety
|
Factor |
|||
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
Factor one: Anxiety felt while reading |
|||
|
2.When I read English, I frequently recognize the words but am unable to comprehend the writer's purpose |
0.786 |
|
|
|
1. I become irritated when I'm unsure if I'm understanding what I'm reading in English |
0.775 |
|
|
|
5. I become nervous when I'm reading a text in English about a topic I'm unfamiliar with |
0.703 |
|
|
|
3. I get irritated when I can't remember what I'm reading in English |
0.693 |
|
|
|
6. When I read English, I become frustrated when I come across unfamiliar grammar |
0.658 |
|
|
|
7. I become scared and puzzled when I don't understand every word when I'm reading English |
0.633 |
|
|
|
Factor two: Reading self-assurance |
|||
|
18. I am content with my current level of English reading abilities |
|
0.844 |
|
|
14. Reading English is not difficult once you become used to it |
|
0.788 |
|
|
13. When I read in English, I feel secure |
|
0.733 |
|
|
12. I like to read English |
|
0.656 |
|
|
Factor three: Anxiety when reading characters written in English |
|||
|
15. Learning to read is the most hardest aspect of learning English |
|
|
0.642 |
|
8. When reading English, I find it inconvenient to come across words I can't pronounce |
|
|
0.561 |
|
10. It's difficult to remember what you're reading in English once you get beyond the amusing letters and symbols |
|
|
0.511 |
|
11. I'm afraid about the new symbols I'll have to learn to read English |
|
|
0.472 |
Table 3: Means and Standard Deviations for the three factors of the FLRAS (n = 277)
|
Variable |
M |
Std. |
|
Anxiety felt while reading (Factor 1) |
3.62 |
0.89 |
|
Reading self-assurance (Factor 2) |
2.89 |
0.96 |
|
Anxiety felt during reading characters written in English (Factor 3) |
3.82 |
0.92 |
Factor two, "Reading self-assurance" was used to explore the link between the 3 anxiety factors, and the way they influence metacognitive technique utilization, as shown in Table 4.
Table 4: Regression models that include the use of metacognitive strategies
|
Unstandardized coefficients |
Standardized coefficients |
||||||
|
|
β |
Std.error |
β |
t-value |
p-value |
R² |
|
|
|
Constant |
3.26 |
0.19 |
|
14.92 |
0.00 |
|
|
Model one |
Factor one |
0.18 |
0.05 |
0.23 |
3.81 |
0.00 |
0.07 |
|
|
Constant |
1.94 |
0.24 |
|
8.04 |
0.00 |
|
|
Model two |
Factor one |
0.22 |
0.03 |
0.36 |
4.83 |
0.00 |
|
|
|
Factor two |
0.37 |
0.06 |
0.42 |
9.36 |
0.00 |
0.19 |
|
|
Constant |
1.66 |
0.27 |
|
8.22 |
0.00 |
|
|
Model three |
Factor one |
0.22 |
0.05 |
0.28 |
4.54 |
0.00 |
|
|
|
Factor two |
0.27 |
0.06 |
0.36 |
9.38 |
0.00 |
0.19 |
|
|
Factor three |
0.04 |
0.05 |
0.05 |
0.86 |
0.49 |
|
Model two with Factor one and Factor two as independent variables (R =0.44, R² = 0.19) explain 16 percent of the total inconsistency, which is higher than Model one with Factor one as a single independent variable (R =0.26, R² =0.07), according to the hierarchical multiple regression analysis. The shift in the coefficient of determination (R²) from Model one to Model two was statistically significant (p =0.0001). Factor two (ß =0.42) is a more significant independent variable of "metacognitive strategy utilization" than Factor one (ß =0.36) among the two independent variables in Model two. Model three, on the other hand, which includes the predictor variables Factor one, Factor two, and Factor three, explained the same total inconsistency as Model two, and the coefficient of determination (R²) change from Model two to Model three was insignificant (p =0.49).
Table 5: Regression models that include the use of cognitive techniques
|
Unstandardized coefficients |
Standardized coefficients |
||||||
|
|
β |
Std.error |
β |
t-value |
p-value |
R² |
|
|
|
Constant |
4.22 |
0.22 |
|
17.66 |
0.00 |
|
|
Model four |
Factor one |
0.25 |
0.05 |
0.33 |
5.52 |
0.00 |
0.13 |
|
|
Constant |
1.28 |
0.25 |
|
9.19 |
0.00 |
|
|
Model five |
Factor one |
0.30 |
0.04 |
0.39 |
7.10 |
0.00 |
|
|
|
Factor two |
0.26 |
0.04 |
0.39 |
7.00 |
0.00 |
0.19 |
|
|
Constant |
3.39 |
0.26 |
|
9.34 |
0.00 |
|
|
Model six |
Factor one |
0.34 |
0.04 |
0.44 |
7.05 |
0.00 |
|
|
|
Factor two |
0.26 |
0.06 |
0.38 |
6.94 |
0.00 |
0.17 |
|
|
Factor three |
0.08 |
0.07 |
0.10 |
1.65 |
0.08 |
|
Model five with Factor one and Factor two as independent variables (R =0.44, R²=0.19) explains for 12 percent more total inconsistency than Model four with Factor one as a single independent variable (R =0.36, R²=0.13) according to the hierarchical multiple regression analysis. The difference in coefficient of determination (R²) from Model four to Model five was statistically significant (p =0.0001). Factor one (ß =0.39) was found to be as a significant independent variable of CSU as Factor two (ß =0.39) with the same values, as shown in Table 5. Model six, on the other hand, which contains Factor one, Factor two, and Factor three as independent variables, explains approximately 3% more total inconsistency than Model five, and the coefficient of determination (R²) difference between Model five and Model six is insignificant (p =0.08).
Table 6: Regression models of a support technique
|
Unstandardized coefficients |
Standardized coefficients |
||||||
|
|
β |
Std.error |
β |
t-value |
p-value |
R² |
|
|
|
Constant |
3.22 |
0.20 |
|
16.79 |
0.00 |
|
|
Model seven |
Factor one |
0.25 |
0.05 |
0.33 |
5.52 |
0.00 |
0.18 |
|
|
Constant |
1.28 |
0.25 |
|
9.19 |
0.00 |
|
|
Model eight |
Factor one |
0.30 |
0.04 |
0.39 |
7.10 |
0.00 |
|
|
|
Factor two |
0.26 |
0.04 |
0.39 |
7.00 |
0.00 |
0.22 |
|
|
Constant |
3.39 |
0.26 |
|
9.34 |
0.00 |
|
|
Model nine |
Factor one |
0.34 |
0.04 |
0.26 |
7.05 |
0.00 |
|
|
|
Factor two |
0.26 |
0.06 |
0.34 |
6.94 |
0.00 |
0.27 |
|
|
Factor three |
0.08 |
0.07 |
0.17 |
1.65 |
0.02 |
|
When comparing Model nine with the three anxiety factors as independent variables (R =0.52, R² =0.27) to Model eight with Factor one and Factor two as predictors (R =0.46, R² =0.22), a hierarchical multiple regression analysis of the factor "support technique use" of the three anxiety factors shows that Model nine with the three anxiety factors as predictors (R =0.52, R² =0.27) explains approximately 2% more of the total inconsistency. The difference in coefficient of determination (R²) from Model eight to Model nine was statistically significant (p =0.02). When compared to Model seven with a single factor of Factor one (R =0.42, R² =0.18), Model eight explains 4% more of the total inconsistency, indicating a significant correlation coefficient change from Model seven to Model eight (p =0.0001). Factor two was shown to be the most powerful contributor (ß =0.34) among the three anxiety components followed by Factor one (ß =0.26), and Factor three (ß =0.117).
Table 7: Regression of reading orientation
|
Unstandardized coefficients |
Standardized coefficients |
||||||
|
|
β |
Std.error |
β |
t-value |
p-value |
R² |
|
|
|
Constant |
3.87 |
0.24 |
|
11.68 |
0.00 |
|
|
Model ten |
Factor one |
0.22 |
0.08 |
-0.17 |
-1.87 |
0.052 |
0.03 |
|
|
Constant |
1.28 |
0.25 |
|
9.19 |
0.00 |
|
|
Model eleven |
Factor one |
0.30 |
0.04 |
0.39 |
7.10 |
0.00 |
|
|
|
Factor two |
0.26 |
0.04 |
0.39 |
7.00 |
0.00 |
0.21 |
|
|
Constant |
3.39 |
0.26 |
|
9.34 |
0.00 |
|
|
Model twelve |
Factor one |
0.46 |
0.06 |
0.50 |
7.05 |
0.00 |
|
|
|
Factor two |
0.26 |
0.06 |
0.34 |
6.94 |
0.00 |
0.23 |
|
|
Factor three |
0.12 |
0.06 |
-0.12 |
1.65 |
0.02 |
|
Model ten reveals that Factor one, which has only one component, approaches significance (p =0.052). The regression model became significant (p=0.0001) when Factor two was combined with Factor one as predictor variables, accounting for 24 percent of the total inconsistency. It's worth noting that when Factor one and Factor two are analyzed combined in Model eleven, the virtually significant value of Factor one turned into insignificant (p =0.52). Model twelve (R=0.48, R²=0.23) with the three anxiety factors as predicators explained around 2% more total inconsistency than Model eleven (R=0.46, R²=0.21), but there was a significant correlation coefficient change from Model eleven to Model twelve (p =0.02). When comparing the contributions of Factor two and Factor three in Model twelve, Factor one is a bigger contributor (ß =0.50) to the degree of orientation than Factor three (ß = -0.12).
It's commonly believed that effective learners are those who use a variety of learning techniques. Albeit, it stands to reason that the instruction of EFL reading strategies must improve students' learning, as the current study has shown. Giving students access to a variety of well created learning strategies may fall under the purview of teachers. Still, it seems that the suggested reading strategies in the literature are largely theoretical. No matter how challenging it is, if the educators can create workable solutions and deliver them to the students accompanied by the proper drills, as recommended in the present study, learners will have the chance to significantly increase their aptitude. It takes a lot of practice to teach a variety of useful strategies in a foreign language context.
Language anxiety is a common occurrence, especially in the context of learning a foreign language. It is critical to explore this psychological feeling from several viewpoints rather than accepting its general property as one form of anxiousness. Language anxiety is a significant emotional concept that has a significant impact on foreign language learning. Individual differences variables, such as emotion and motivation, are key parts in developing cognitive abilities, according to a true perspective in cognitive psychology (Smith, 2000). When it comes to English class, pupils are usually really nervous. The key anxiety factors in this study were determined based on FLRAS responses. The study's findings, however, show that anxiety has a primarily detrimental effect on EFL teachers' reading ability.
The current study's findings revealed that anxiety has a negative impact on EFL teachers' cognition, which could damage their capacity to collaborate and communicate. Some of the teachers indicated that they had had forgetfulness and inability to conduct the reading quickly as a result of their anxiousness. The outcomes of the study also revealed that when learners experience anxiety, there would be impaired comprehension of reading passages, generating a mental block. This confirms Krashen's Affective Filter Hypothesis (1981), which states that when a strong emotion, such as anxiety, is present, the brain filter closes, resulting in mental block or forgetting.
This study revealed that the Jordanian English teachers, despite years of exposure to English language in schools, still become nervous about reading texts because they can't decode letters and symbols. This may be due to the fact that Arabic language and English have different writing systems. This result goes with some prior studies which suggests that learners may encounter reading anxiety when there are changes in writing systems between their native language and a target language (Zhang, 2002; Zhao et al., 2013). Yet, a closer look of the students’ motivation maybe explains the strong prospect of their aim for learning the target language which plays an effective part in the degree of anxiety felt.
The FLRAS items 19 and 20, which refer to culture notions, support the premise that becoming acquainted with the target language culture can cause reading anxiety. As a result, it shows that acquaintance with the target language culture was a major source of worry for Jordanian EFL teachers.
The current study's findings also revealed that "anxiety experienced during the process of reading English" (Factor one), which yields destructive emotional responses such as confusion, nervousness, uneasiness, or getting upset that happen when a reader is engaged in the reading process', was a significant component of reading anxiety. According to the findings of this study, Jordanian EFL teachers are anxious due to a lack of self-assurance in reading English texts. The more worried instructors get while reading English texts, the more metacognitive techniques they employ; nevertheless, teachers who are confident in their reading abilities are more likely to employ metacognitive strategies, such as planning, monitoring, and evaluating, than when they are apprehensive.
Jordanian EFL teachers were unaffected by Factor three, "anxiety when reading English characters," in the same way as metacognitive and cognitive strategy used were not. This is because the two methods are unrelated to reading English symbols and letters. It appears that cognitive techniques that facilitate problem-solving when reading and anxiety generated by tension and confusion in reading processes may drive Jordanian EFL teachers to employ these cognitive methods more frequently than when they are confident in their reading abilities. The outcomes of this study also reveal that "support strategy utilization" is influenced by all three anxiety components. When EFL students become anxious when confronted with difficult English words or are unable to recall what they are reading due to unacquainted letters, they are more likely to use techniques such as highlighting or underlining words or sentences, using dictionaries, or translating from English to Arabic.
Finally, this research indicates how anxiety-inducing circumstances affect reading orientation. Despite the fact that anxiety felt during the reading process had no effect on reading orientation, the findings showed that the more self-assurance EFL teachers have in reading English texts, the more likely they are to demonstrate reading orientation, or not being diverted by stimuli which is unrelated to the reading text's goal. In other words, it appears plausible that reading orientation is one of the factors that contributes to the link between confidence and reading achievement.
Ahmad, I. S., Al-Shboul, M. M., Nordin, M. S., Rahman, Z. A., Burhan, M., & Madarsha, K. B. (2013). The Potential Sources of Foreign Language Reading Anxiety in a Jordanian EFL Context: A Theoretical Framework. English Language Teaching, 6 (11).
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, 155-168.
Al-Nujaidi, A. H. (2003). The relationship between vocabulary size, reading strategies, and reading comprehension of EFL learners in Saudi Arabia, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, USA.
Azizifar, A., Faryadian, E., & Gowhary, H. (2014). The effect of anxiety on Iranian EFL learners' speaking skill. International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences, 8(10), 1747-1754.
Budin, L. H. (2014). Investigating the relationship between English language anxiety and the achievement of school based oral English test among Malaysian form four students. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 2(1), 67-79.
Casado, M. A., & Dereshiwsky, M. I. (2001). Foreign language anxiety of university students. College Student Journal, 35(4), 539-551.
Chao, C. T. (2003). Foreign language anxiety and emotional intelligence: A study of EFL students in Taiwan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas University, Texas, United States.
Chen, T. Y., & Chang, G. B. Y. (2004). The relationship between foreign language anxiety and learning difficulties. Foreign Language Annals, 37(2), 279-287.
Dalili, V., & Tavakoli, M. (2013). A comparative analysis of reading strategies across ESP students of humanities and engineering. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 1-(5).
Darabie, M. Y. (2000). The relationship between college-level Jordanian students’ metacognitive awareness strategies and their reading comprehension achievement in English as a foreign language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio University, OH, USA.
Gregersen, T., & Horwitz, E. K. (2002). Language learning and perfectionism: Anxious and non-anxious. The Modern Language Journal, 86, 562-570.
Hashemi, M., & Abbasi, M. (2013). The role of the teacher in alleviating anxiety in language classes. International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences, 4(3), 640-646.
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70, 125-132.
Hsu, Y. C., (2004). A Study on Junior College Students’ Reading Anxiety in English as a Foreign Language. MSc. Thesis, National Chung Cheng University, Chiayi, Taiwan.
Hu, L., & Wang, N. (2014). Anxiety in foreign language learning. International Conference on Global Economy, Commerce and Service Science, 1, 122-124.
Huang, H. C., Chern, C. L., & Lin, C. C. (2009). EFL learners’ use of online reading strategies and comprehension of texts: An exploratory study. Computers & Education, 52(1), 13- 26.
Jafari, M., & Shokrpour, N. (2012), The Reading Strategies Used by Iranian ESP Students to Comprehend Authentic Expository Texts in English. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 1(4), 103-109.
Kitano, K. (2001). Anxiety in the college Japanese language classroom. Modern Language Journal, 85(4), 549-566.
Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Levince, G. (2003). Students and instructor beliefs and attitudes about target language use, firs language use and anxiety: Report of a questionnaire study. The Modern Language Journal, 87, 343-364.
Lien, H. (2011). EFL learners’ reading strategy use in relation to reading anxiety. Language Education in Asia, 2(2), 199-212.
Lien, H. (2016). Effects of EFL individual learner variables on foreign language reading anxiety and metacognitive reading strategy use. Psychological Reports, 119(1), 124-135.
Liu, M. (2006). Anxiety in Chinese EFL students at different proficiency levels. System. 34, 301-316.
Lu, Z., & Liu, M. (2011). Foreign language anxiety and strategy use: A study with Chinese undergraduate EFL learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(6), 1298-1305.
Malcolm, D. (2009). Reading strategy awareness of Arabic-speaking medical students studying in English. System, 37(4), 640-65.
Martinez, A. C. L. (2008). Analysis of ESP university students’ reading strategy awareness. IBERICA, 15, 165-176.
Mokhtari, K., & Sheorey, R. (2002). Measuring ESL students' awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Developmental Education, 25(3), 2-10.
Muchlis, A. (2017). Foreign Language Reading Anxiety Among Indonesian EFL Senior High School Students. English Franca, 1(1): 19-44.
Phakiti, A. (2008). Construct validation of Bachman and Paler’s (1996) strategic competence model over time in EFL reading tests. Language Testing, 25(5), 237-272.
Saito, Y., & Samimy, K. (1996). Foreign language anxiety and language performance: A study of learner anxiety in beginning, intermediate, and advanced-level college students of Japanese. Foreign Language Annals, 29, 239-251.
Saito, Y., Thomas J. G., & Horwitz, E. K. (1999). Foreign language reading anxiety. Modern Language Journal, 83(2), 202-218.
Sellers, V. D. (2000). Anxiety and reading comprehension in Spanish as a foreign language. Foreign Language Annals, 33(5), 512-521.
Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29(4), 431-449.
Shi, Y., & Liu, Z. (2006). Foreign language reading anxiety and its relationship to English achievement and gender. Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages, 29, 59-65.
Smith, E. R. (2000). Social cognition. In A. E. Kazdin (Ed.), Encyclopedia of psychology, 7, 324-329. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Song, M. J. (1999). Reading strategies and second language reading ability: The magnitude of the relationship. English Teaching, 54(3), 73-95.
Spielberger, C. D. (1983). Manual for the state-trait anxiety inventory (Form Y). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychological Press.
Tanveer, M. (2007). Investigation of the factors that cause language anxiety for ESL/EFL learners in learning speaking skills and the influence it casts on communication in the target language. Academia, 64, 1-92.
Tomlin, R. S., & Villa, V. (1994). Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16(2), 183-203.
Tsai, Y., & Lee, C. (2018). An exploration into factors associated with reading anxiety among Taiwanese EFL learners. TEFLIN Journal, 29(1), 129-148.
Wu, K. H. (2010).The relationship between language learners’ anxiety and learning strategy in the CLT classrooms. International Education Studies, 3(1), 174-191.
Zhang, L. (2000). Uncovering Chinese ESL students' reading anxiety in a study abroad context. Asian Pacific Journal of Language in Education, 3(2), 31-52.
–––. (2002). Anxiety of overseas students in Chinese reading. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4, 77-83.
Zhang, L. J., & Wu. A. (2009). Chinese senior high school EFL students’ metacognitive awareness and reading-strategy use. Reading in a Foreign Language, 21(1), 37- 59.
Zhao, A., Guo, Y., & Dynia. J. (2013). Foreign language reading anxiety: Chinese as a foreign language in the United States. Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 764-778.
Received: 04/03/2022
Peer-reviewed: 05/19/2022
Accepted: 07/19/2022