The relationship between EFL Learners’ Willingness to Communicate (WTC) and their teacher immediacy attributes: A structural equation modelling

This study was conducted to investigate the relationship between Iranian English Foreign Language (EFL) learners' Willingness to Communicate (WTC) and their teachers' immediacy attributes. The participants comprised 256 EFL learners from three private language institutes of Mashhad, Khorasan-e-Razavi, Iran. Their selection was based on random sampling, and the participation was entirely voluntary. The instruments used in this study consisted of 1) Willingness to Speak Questionnaire, and 2) Immediacy Questionnaire. Pearson's correlation coefficient and structural equation modeling (SEM) were run to analyze the relationships among learners' WTC and their teachers' immediacy attributes components. The results demonstrated that all the subscales of WTC are positively and significantly predicted by verbal and nonverbal immediacy. Verbal immediacy has the highest positive correlation with speaking WTC, and the lowest positive correlation with listening WTC. Moreover, nonverbal immediacy has the highest positive correlation with listening WTC, and the lowest positive correlation with writing WTC.

Keywords: WTC; immediacy attributes; learner; EFL teacher

PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

Willingness to communicate (WTC) is the individual's inclination into engaging in communication as they can choose everything. Teachers' immediacy attributes are teachers' impressive behaviors in teaching. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between Iranian EFL learners' WTC and their teachers' immediacy attributes. The results demonstrated that all the subscales of WTC are positively and significantly predicted by verbal and nonverbal immediacy. The findings prompt instructors to reflect on their learners' WTC in classroom communication. The specific factors contributing to learners" WTC in EFL classes, highlighted in the findings, yield important clues as to teachers" perceptions of learners' communication. Likewise, such findings can help EFL teachers, curriculum developers, and syllabus designers in developing a specific syllabus for EFL classrooms based on the identity of the learners as well as their weakness and strength in WTC.

How instructors interact and communicate to students can promote teaching effectiveness and the way this is noticed by students might influence on "their affective and cognitive learning" and their perceptions during the learning process (Ballester, [5]). It is presumed that recognizing and determining of learners' communication direction and requirements supply a basis for the second language (L2) instructors to outline syllabus, employ educational strategies, and enhance effective teaching (Hsu, [22]). Thus, the role of communication L2 learning has become prominent. Furthermore, the final aim of second and foreign language learning should be to bring about in L2 learners the willingness to seek communication situations and the willingness to communicate (WTC) in them (MacIntyre, Clément, Dörnyei, & Noels, [25]). Also, MacIntyre et al. ([25]) added that "to create willingness to communicate should be a proper objective for second language education" (p. 27). Thus, the concept of WTC should be of attention while the norm of Iranian EFL learners' communicative competence is not good enough to allow them to communicate efficiently in their English classes (Gol, Zand-Moghadam, & Karrabi, [15]).

Some studies have recognized teachers "as a key factor in making learning and communication effective, even more so in an English classroom where students' learning relies so much on teachers' teaching" (Wen & Clément, [51], cited in Gol et al., [15]). Also, Habash ([18]) argues that to enhance the teaching quality, instructors should use strategies to assist learners to become more interested and involved in interactive and communicative activities in the classroom. Thus, he regards the notion of teachers' immediacy attributes as an effective teaching component in promoting students' willingness to communicate. Teachers' immediacy attributes, verbal or nonverbal improve impressive and useful educational interaction and influence on the students' perspectives towards the instructor and their learning (Andersen, [4]; Gorham, [16]; Plax, Kearney, McCroskey, & Richmond, [38]; Christophel, [10]; McCroskey & Richmond, [31]; Richmond, Gorham, et al., [42]; Rodriguez, Plax, & Kearney, [47]). In an EFL context like Iran, this study attempt to examine how the teachers' immediacy attributes might be related to the students' willingness to communicate. A short examination of the literature reveals that even though there have implemented some researches to investigate variables influencing in Iranian EFL learners' willingness to communicate, there is little emphasis on teacher's immediacy as an important characteristic affecting learners' WTC (Barjesteh, Vaseghi, & Neissi, [6]; Gol et al., [15]; Riasati, [41]). Therefore, because of scarcity of studies in this respect, this study aims to examine the relationship between Iranian EFL learners' WTC and their teachers' immediacy attributes through a structural modeling approach.

Recent studies have identified teachers as a key factor in making learning and communication effective, even more so in an English classroom where students' learning relies so much on teachers' teaching (Wen & Clément, [51]). Among the many effects teachers can have on students' educational lives, some researchers have referred to the role of teachers in EFL learners' WTC (Cetinkaya, [8]; Hsu, [22]; Myers & Bryant, [37]; Yu, [54]). Habash ([18]) believes that in order to improve the quality of instruction, teachers need to develop strategies for helping students to become more enthusiastic about communicating in their classes. In this respect, he considers the concept of teacher immediacy as a powerful teaching tool in arising students' WTC.

Mehrabian ([35], [36]) was the first who proposed the immediacy notion in his interpersonal communication study. According to Richmond ([43]) immediacy is "the degree of perceived physical or psychological closeness between people" (p. 68). Immediacy is a communication demeanor and includes verbal and nonverbal components. Instructors transmit immediacy in their classes to provide interpersonal interest by closeness and support (Richmond & McCroksey, [44]). Immediacy behaviors like suitable "eye contact, the use of gestures, movement about the classroom, smiling, vocal varieties, and the use of humor", are regarded as impressive behaviors in teaching. Recent educational studies described these behaviors as "teacher enthusiasm" or "teacher expressiveness" (Abrami, Leventhal, & Perry, [1]; Coats & Smidchens, [12]), even though communication investigators have described them as "immediacy behaviors" (Andersen, [4]). Vice versa, non-immediacy behaviors do not transmit motivation and eloquence, including "low eye contact, a distal position, backward body lean, and the absence of smiling and touch, communicated greater detachment" (Sanders & Wiseman, [49], p. 342).

Mehrabian ([35]) argued that a significant number of studies have correlated it to teaching effectiveness and to a raise in motivation of students (See McCroskey, Richmond, & McCroskey, [34]). A teacher should establish a status in the classroom that improves students' involvement in learning and raise students' interest and motivation and enthusiasm to learn. As a result, students' cognitive learning will be improved by remembering, comprehending and combining newly learnt issues (Witt, Wheeless, & Allen, [52]). Christophel ([10]) emphasizes that by adopting immediacy behaviors in the classroom, teachers can establish a closer relationship with students, which motivates students to talk.

As mentioned above, teacher immediacy is both verbal and nonverbal. Ballester ([5]) argued that "verbal teacher immediacy refers to verbal messages that show empathy, openness, kindness, reward, praise, feelings of inclusiveness, humor, personal knowledge and willingness to engage students in communication, among others" (p.11). But, nonverbal teacher immediacy is nonverbal demeanors that promote "physical and emotional" proximity that raise students' attention towards their instructor, the study and the course content (Richmond & McCroskey, [46]).

Gorham and Zakahi ([17]) in their study explored the perspectives of teachers and students about teacher immediacy and learning with a focus on teacher monitoring the processes and products of learning. Their findings indicated that there was a significant correlation between student and teacher perceptions of teacher immediacy behaviors. In a similar study, Ballester ([5]) investigated the perspectives of three groups of university students on verbal and nonverbal teacher immediacy and its relationship with reducing foreign language anxiety. Their qualitative data revealed that teacher immediacy is actually a main element "to motivate students, ease their pressure and favor their willingness to learn and participate in class". Potee ([39]) carried out a study in Japan and examined the effect of verbal and non-verbal teacher immediacy behavior towards student motivation. According to their finding, students regarded their Japanese teachers as less immediate than their non-Japanese counterparts. Also, "students preferred more immediate behaviors, in this case, exhibited by non-Japanese teachers". Garrot ([14]) in an attempt examined the relationship between perceptions of students in second language college and perceptions of teacher non-verbal immediacy and learning in the Spanish classroom. Their result revealed that there was a positive relationship between teacher nonverbal immediacy and second language learning. Hsu ([22]) in his study examined teachers' nonverbal immediacy behaviors in relation to students' motivation for learning English. Their result showed that "five nonverbal behaviors are significant predictors to students' motivation for learning English". Their findings also revealed that "students' motivation for learning English is likely enhanced when the teacher utilizes the following behaviors: smile, gesture, has a relaxed body position, uses a variety of vocal expression, and uses a monotone voice while teaching" (p.1).

Recently by the growth in use of English by EFL learners, willingness to communicate has become under consideration. The concept of willingness to communicate (WTC) was firstly presented regarding first language (L1) communication, and it was regarded to be a "personality-based, trait-like predisposition" that stayed constant beyond various communication circumstances (McCroskey & Richmond, [30]). According to MacIntyre, Baker, Clement, and Donovan ([27]) WTC is "...the predisposition toward or away from communicating, given the choice" (p.538). WTC initially was considered as individual's inclination into engaging in communication as they can choose everything (McCroskey & Baer, [32]). Dörnyei ([13]) argues that L2 competence is not sufficient. L2 Learners should also have willing to communicate. Different studies have revealed that learner's WTC influence in their taking part in communication increasingly (Clement, Baker, & MacIntyre, [11]; Yashima & Zenuk-Nishide, [53]). Therefore, MacIntyre et al. ([25]) suggest that WTC should be considered as major aim in SLL. L2 WTC is supposed to improve SLL as higher WTC in learners raises opportunity for real L2 use (MacIntyre, Baker, Clément & Conrod, [28]), that is truly essential in promoting language (MacIntyre & Legatto, [26]).

Various studies have been done with the notion of WTC. For example, Matsuoka ([29]) examined the effect of individual difference variables on WTC of Japanese EFL university students. According to their finding, "communication apprehension, introversion, perceived competence, motivational intensity, and integrativeness were significant predictors of L2 WTC". Ahmadian and Shirvani ([2]) investigated "The Role of Gender and Academic Experience in EFL Students" Willingness to Communicate in English in Academic Context'. They examined the situation of the Willingness to Communicate (WTC) of the EFL students in Iran and the roles of gender and academic experience in the rate of the students' WTC. In another study, Yu ([54]) investigated EFL learners' WTC in the Chinese context. Their finding revealed that "all communication variables, including WTC, communication apprehension, and self-perceived communication competence" had a significant relationship with each other. Barjesteh et al. ([6]) in their study, investigated "Iranian EFL Learners" Willingness to Communicate across Different Context- and Receiver-Types'. Hashimoto ([20]) in an attempt investigated the relationship between the Japanese ESL learners WTC and their motivations to use English. Finally, Alemi, Tajeddin, and Mesbah ([3]) in their study examined the relationship between individual differences and WTC. Their result has shown that Iranian EFL learners' individual differences influence in their WTC.

Carrell and Menzel ([7]) surveyed 256 undergraduate students at a liberal arts university to seek the correlation between teachers" immediacy behaviors and learners' WTC. Although they observed a significant relationship between the teachers' verbal immediacy behavior and the students" WTC in class, no positive relationship was found between the instructors' nonverbal immediacy and students' predisposition to speak in class.

On the other hand, many researchers like Hsu ([22]), Saechou ([48]), and Harran ([19]) confirmed the notion that nonverbal immediacy behaviors increased liking in teacher–student relationships in the classroom. Therefore, in a situation where liking is essential for boosting communication, the use of nonverbal immediacy may work well for the participants (Hsu, [22]). Velez and Cano ([50]) also noted that the teachers' immediacy was related to both verbal and nonverbal constructs; it increased the students' good feeling toward the instructors and subject matter, and also decreased the students' apprehension.

In as much as the purposes of the study are to examine the relationship between Iranian EFL learners' willingness to communicate (WTC) and their immediacy attributes, this study addresses the following question:

RQ: Is there a significant relationship between EFL learners' willingness to communicate (WTC) and their teacher immediacy attributes?

A total number of 256 EFL learners participated in this study from three private language institutes of Mashhad, Khorasan-e-Razavi, Iran. They were selected based on random sampling. Their ages ranged between 15 and 40 (mean = 24.35, SD = 4.24). From among the 256 EFL learners, 150 (58.59%) were male and 106 (41.40%) were female EFL learners. All of them were advanced learners of English. So, their level of proficiency was controlled. They normally use English as the foreign language about 30 hours a week. To help the participants prevent wrong judgment about the immediacy behavior of their teachers, only those students who had been taught by the same instructor for at least two consecutive terms were selected.

The instrumentation in the present study consisted of two questionnaires: 1) Willingness to Speak Questionnaire, and 2) Immediacy Questionnaire.

In this study, the Willingness to Communicate (WTC) scale created by MacIntyre et al. (2001) will be utilized. This scale has 27 items testing communication inside the classroom setting. It is a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire comprising four skill areas of speaking (8 items), reading (6 items), writing (8 items) and listening comprehension (5 items). Regarding the reliability of the scale, previous internal (alpha) reliability estimates have been reported (McCroskey & Baer, [32]; McCroskey & McCroskey, [33]) at.95 and.91, respectively.

The Verbal and Nonverbal Immediacy scale (Gorham, [16]) was produced trying to fuse verbal immediacy items to the already validated and reliable Nonverbal Immediacy Measure created by Richmond, Gorham, and McCroskey ([42]). It is a 34-item tool that calculates the learners' view of their teacher's verbal and nonverbal immediate behaviors on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = never, 2 = rarely, 3 = occasionally, 4 = often, 5 = very often). It comprises 20 verbal items, for example, "Addresses students by name" and 14 nonverbal items, such as "Moves around the classroom while teaching". One of the first 14 nonverbal items was wiped out, to be specific "Touches students in the class" so as not to make conceivable mistaken assumptions amid the completion of the questionnaire. Other verbal and nonverbal items were marginally adjusted and adjusted to our specific circumstance, for example the consistent utilization of email was said rather than the utilization of the phone. The last form of the scale comprised 33 items (20 verbal items and 13 nonverbal items), some of which exemplified non-immediate behaviors and some others represented immediate behaviors. Reversed scores were given to non-immediate items so high scores constantly represented high levels of immediacy. The alpha coefficient for this scale with 33 items was assessed.79, suggesting that the items have relatively acceptable internal consistency.

The data collection of this study took place in October 2017. The present study was done among Iranian EFL learners. This study collected quantitative data through two questionnaires: 1) Willingness to Speak Questionnaire, and 2) Immediacy Questionnaire. The participants (students) answered the questionnaires in the presence of the researcher in one session in which participants were given instruction on how to answer the questions. The questionnaire took about 20–35 minutes. After a brief explanation of the purpose of the research, students were given the Questionnaires. To achieve reliable data, the researcher explained the purpose of completing the questionnaire and asked them not to write a name on them. They were required to provide demographic information such as gender and age. After they completed the questionnaires, the researchers gathered them. After gathering the questionnaires, data were analyzed by structural equation modeling approach (SEM).

Descriptive statistics of different components of willingness to communicate (WTC) (speaking, reading, writing and listening comprehension), and Teachers' immediacy (TI) (verbal and nonverbal), are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the variables

Table 2 summarizes the information obtained from Cronbach alpha analyses. As can be seen, the utilized questionnaires gained acceptable indices of Cronbach alpha.

Table 2. Results of Cronbach alpha

The alpha coefficient for total WTC with 27 items (.93), and for total TI with 33 items (.79), suggest that the items have relatively acceptable internal consistency.

To examine the research question, the proposed model was tested using the Amos 24 statistical package. To check the strengths of the causal relationships among the components, the standardized estimates were examined. A number of fit indices were examined to evaluate the model fit. As Table 3 shows the chi-square/df ratio (2.110), RMSEA (.051), GFI (.921), NFI (.911) and CFI (.913), all the fit indices lie within the acceptable fit thresholds. Hence, it can be concluded that the proposed model had a perfect fit with the empirical data.

Table 3. Goodness of fit indices

Figure 1 represents the schematic relationships between EFL Teachers' immediacy and their learners' WTC. The results demonstrated that all the subscales of WTC are positively and significantly predicted by verbal and nonverbal immediacy.

PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 1. The schematic relationships between EFL Teachers' immediacy and their learners' WTC.

The correlation coefficients between different components of willingness to communicate (WTC) (speaking, reading, writing and listening comprehension), and Teachers' immediacy (TI) (verbal and nonverbal) are presented in Table 4.

Table 4. The correlation coefficients between WTC and TI

1 **Correlation is significant at the level of 0.01

As can be seen, verbal immediacy has the highest positive correlation with speaking WTC (r =.55, p < 0.01), and the lowest positive correlation with listening WTC (r =.30, p < 0.05). Moreover, nonverbal immediacy has the highest positive correlation with listening WTC (r =.51, p < 0.01), and the lowest positive correlation with writing WTC (r =.25, p < 0.05).

As stated before, the present study sought to examine the relationship between Iranian EFL learners' WTC and their teachers' immediacy attributes. For this purpose, a question was posited: "Is there a significant relationship between EFL learners' willingness to communicate (WTC) and their teacher immediacy attributes?" To get a clear picture of the yield results, the research question was addressed by examining the proposed model with SEM and using Pearson correlation coefficient.

The results demonstrated that all the subscales of WTC are positively and significantly predicted by verbal and nonverbal immediacy. Verbal immediacy has the highest positive correlation with speaking WTC, and the lowest positive correlation with listening WTC. Moreover, nonverbal immediacy has the highest positive correlation with listening WTC, and the lowest positive correlation with writing WTC.

This result is in accordance with the findings of some previous studies (Carrell & Menzel, [7]; Christensen & Menzel, [9]; Gol et al., [15]; Lin, [24]; Rashidi & Mahmoudi Kia, [40]). This finding is in line with Christensen and Menzel ([9]) study in which teacher verbal immediacy is found to correlate positively with overall willingness to communicate. Carrell and Menzel ([7]) also surveyed students' perceived learning, willingness to talk in class, and teacher verbal and nonverbal immediacy with reference to both teacher and student gender. In their study, they found that teachers' verbal immediacy is positively related to WTC. In short, based on the results of the relevant studies, teachers' verbal immediacy behaviors have a significant impact on learners' WTC in the classroom. The same results are found by Lin ([24]) who believes that teachers' nonverbal immediacy is significantly correlated with students' WTC in the classroom. Rashidi and Mahmoudi Kia ([40]) also found that teacher immediacy may have an impact on students' WTC in the classroom. Therefore, to make students more willing to communicate in English, teachers need to be more concerned about the kind of the nonverbal behaviors they use in their language classrooms. This study also re-confirmed Gol et al.'s ([15]). They explored the relationship between Iranian EFL learners' perceived teacher immediacy and their willingness to communicate (WTC). Their findings revealed that there are seven factors underlying EFL learners' WTC, one of which is teacher immediacy. Further analyses showed that there is a positive relationship between both verbal and nonverbal teacher immediacy behaviors and EFL learners' WTC in EFL classes. It can be concluded that teacher immediacy is one of the constituents of EFL learners' WTC and that their WTC is likely to increase when teachers demonstrate immediacy behaviors while teaching.

Looking through the factors extracted, one can easily find L2 WTC as a function of situational and contextual factors, such as topic, teacher, classroom climate, and individual psychological traits. Therefore, being in the same line with MacIntyre et al. ([25]), this study also highlights that WTC is a dynamic situational concept that can change dynamically rather than a trait-like predisposition (Kang, [23]). The findings also prompt instructors to reflect on their learners' WTC in classroom communication. The specific factors contributing to learners" WTC in EFL classes, highlighted in the findings, yield important clues as to teachers" perceptions of learners' communication. Students will have a greater likelihood of emotionally and cognitively engaging in a course when the instructor demonstrates and cares in following the factors or motives which encourage communication in the classroom.

This study has some pedagogical implications. It gives the idea that both verbal and nonverbal practices of the teacher are identified with learners' WTC in the classroom. In spite of the fact that a huge number of different factors may influence the collaborations amongst learners and teachers, understanding into straightforward verbal and nonverbal correspondence, for example, grinning, "vocal expressiveness", and loose body position, enables teachers to give particular nitty gritty idea to their guideline. Once distinguished, instantaneousness factors can be straightforwardly educated to new educators to enhance learner–instructor relationship, learner inspiration, and psychological learning (Gorham, [16]).

Educators continually convey to learners through non-verbal communication, looks, signals, and outward appearances; in this manner, teachers need to practice care and consistency in furnishing learners with positive motions and articulations. By lauding learners' endeavors, utilizing silliness in the classroom, urging learners to talk, and being open and willing to associate with learners outside the class through email, informal organizations, and so on instructor educators can start to show practices to competitors which will empower them to build up the aptitudes of verbal and nonverbal promptness (Velez & Cano, [50]).

Moreover, the present study puts forward a number of implications for teachers and parents. Due to lack of L2 communication in Iran as an EFL context, and the increasing need for communicating with the global community, attempts to promote learners' WTC is an indispensable task of L2 educational scheme. Accordingly, language educators and parents play a key role in leading learners toward an awareness of their participation in the global community and the notion of ideal L2 selves. Likewise, such information can help EFL teachers, curriculum developers, and syllabus designers in developing a specific syllabus for EFL classrooms based on the identity of the learners as well as their weakness and strength in WTC.

Besides, the present investigation advances various ramifications for instructors and parents. Because of the absence of L2 correspondence in Iran as an EFL setting, and the expanding requirement for speaking with the worldwide group, endeavors to advance students' WTC is a fundamental errand of L2 instructive plan. Appropriately, dialect teachers and parents assume a key part in driving students toward a familiarity with their cooperation in the worldwide group and the thought of perfect L2 selves. In like manner, such data can help EFL educators, educational programs developers, and syllabus designers in building up a particular syllabus for EFL classrooms in view of the character of the students and in addition their shortcoming and quality in WTC.

Likewise, in view of the consequences of this investigation, it can be presumed that teaching communicative strategies can impact student's willingness to communicate. Furthermore, syllabus developers and materials designers need to give the substance of teaching material with intelligible and appropriate assignments and activities to acclimate students with communicative strategy idea and its highlights.

With respect to the limitations of this study, the participants were limited to EFL students from one educational context. Accordingly, it is smarter to complete an investigation with bigger examples from different educational context and different age bunches in further research about. Also, the number of male and female participants in this study may not be equal, so gender may act as intervening variable. In addition, demographic information of the participants such as their age, gender, and occupation was not controlled in this study.

Besides, replication of this investigation with other EFL populations at an elementary or advanced level from various nations' prompts approves the present findings and to uncover whether diverse investigation conditions or data gathering techniques yield comparative outcomes. At last, examining the relations amongst WTC and different factors, for example, educators' motivation and self-control is recommended. In spite of the fact that this investigation affirms the noteworthy positive connection between various factors and WTC among students, other affective variables, for example, students' cognitive style, learning attitudes, and anxiety may influence their WTC in a foreign language. All these are issues which future research could address.

Gender: □Male □Female

Age: ......

Proficiency Level: □Pre-intermediate □Intermediate □Upper-intermediate □Advanced

DIRECTIONS: Below are 28 situations in which a person might choose to communicate in an English class. For each item, circle the number 0–4 which indicates the extent to which you would be willing to communicate in the given situation. Thank you.

0 = Never; 1 = Rarely; 2 = Sometimes; 3 = Often; 4 = Almost always.

Note: In case there are other situations not mentioned here, please add them in the space provided.

I'm willing to talk in English when ........................................

Gender: □Male □Female

Age: ......

Proficiency Level: □Pre-intermediate □Intermediate □Upper-intermediate □Advanced

How many terms have you been studying English by this teacher?

DIRECTIONS: Below are a series of descriptions of the things some teachers have been observed saying in their classes. Please respond to each of the statements in terms of the way you perceive your current teacher communicating towards you or others in your class. For each item, circle the number 0–4 which indicates the behavior of your teacher. Your answers are confidential.

0 = Never; 1 = Rarely; 2 = Sometimes; 3 = Often; 4 = Almost always.

Gender: □Male □Female

Age: ......

Proficiency Level: □Pre-intermediate □Intermediate □Upper-intermediate □Advanced

How many terms have you been studying English by this teacher?

DIRECTIONS: Below are a series of descriptions of the things some teachers have been observed doing in their classes. Please respond to each of the statements in terms of the way you perceive your current teacher communicating towards you or others in your class. For each item, circle the number 0–4 which indicates the behavior of your teacher. Your answers are confidential.

0 = Never; 1 = Rarely; 2 = Sometimes; 3 = Often; 4 = Almost always.