MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4250822745 · doi:10.37546/jaltjj25.2-4

大学生を対象とした英語授業不安尺度の作成とその検討 – The English Language Classroom Anxiety Scale: Test Construction, Reliability, and Validity

2003· article· en· W4250822745 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJALT Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForeign language anxietyPsychologyAnxietyLikert scaleForeign languageReading (process)Language assessmentScale (ratio)Active listeningTest anxietyMathematics educationTest (biology)Extant taxonConstruct validityRating scaleSet (abstract data type)Construct (python library)Developmental psychologyPsychometricsLinguisticsComputer scienceCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Foreign language anxiety is becoming an important area of research in our profession. Debilitating language anxiety can have profound consequences on the language learning process. The purpose of the present study is to construct a scale to measure the anxiety that Japanese students experience in English language classrooms. First, a pilot test was developed from open-ended questionnaires administered to 148 university students describing specific situations that had made them anxious in English language classrooms, and from five extant scales of foreign language anxiety developed in the U.S. and Canada (Ely, 1986; Gardner, 1985; Horwitz, Horwitz, & Cope, 1986; MacIntyre & Gardner, 1994; Young, 1990). A total of 317 anxiety-producing situations were initially identified from the students’ reports and 90 items from the extant scales. Elimination of duplicate situations reduced the set of items to the following 12 dimensions: listening, speaking, reading, writing, being asked questions, mistakes, information processing, classroom activities, other classmates, teachers, language skills, and course work. Thirty-eight pilot test items, representing the 12 dimensions, were constructed and administered to 213 university students in first year and second year English classes. Each item was followed by a six-point Likert response scale. Results of factor analysis revealed that English language classroom anxiety was composed of three factors: anxiety about (a) low proficiency in English (e.g., I am anxious about whether I will be able to keep up with the classes), (b) evaluation from classmates (e.g., I am anxious that other students might think I am poor at English), and (c) speaking activities (e.g., I feel nervous when I speak English in class). The test-retest reliability for an interval of eight weeks was .85 for the general scale, and .85, .77, and .71 for the three subscales respectively. The internal consistency, using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, was .92 for the general scale, and .89, .84, and .82 for the subscales respectively. The present scale was determined to be highly reliable. The validity of the scale was assessed by its correlations with Leary’s (1983) Interaction Anxiousness Scale and with Shioya’s (1995) scale of cognitive appraisals of English learning skills and costs. It was posited that those who have high English language classroom anxiety tend to feel anxious in social situations and to consider English language learning troublesome. The general scale and the three subscales were all significantly and positively correlated with both Leary’s and Shioya’s scales, verifying the validity of the present scale. Limitations of the present study and implications for future research were discussed. 本研究は、日本人学生の英語学習に関わる不安の実証的研究の端緒として、英語授業不安尺度を作成し、その信頼性と妥当性を検討したものである。まず予備調査において、既存の外国語不安尺度の項目(全90項目)と日本人英語学習者の自由記述(全317項目)から、本調査に用いる38の質問項目を選定した。213名の大学生に対し6件法で回答を求め、因子分析を行った結果、英語授業不安は、英語力に対する不安、他の学生からの評価に対する不安、および発話活動に対する不安から構成されていることが示された。尺度の信頼性は、アルファ係数と再検査法により十分に高いことが示された。また、「対人不安」および「英語学習におけるスキル・コストの認知」との有意な正の相関関係から、尺度の妥当性が概ね確認された。

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJALT JournalSame topicEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningFrench-language works237,207