CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction

Language is one of the most useful tools we have as humans. Without it we could not

think thoughts expressible to others, nor could we engage in the activities that commonly take

place in the society we build ourselves (Di Pietro,1994). Language is very important in

education. For instance, Roy - Campbell and Quoro (1997) asserted that education is carried out

largely through the medium of language, thus, language is very significant in the education

process. Additionally, ADEA (2015) pointed out that language is not everything in education,

but without language, everything is nothing in education. Language plays a crucial role in

learning, and if the learning is handicapped in the language of instruction, then learning may not

take place at all as the instructor or teacher and the learner will not be communicating.

English has come to be the international language and the language of global

communication, due to various reasons which are political, economical and technical.

Globalization has made English a compulsory ingredient of a successful personality as it is an

important tool widely used in international communication all over the world.

In the globalized context, there is economic competition among the countries in the world

irrespective of being developed or underdeveloped. Employers in the present global market need

people who have international experience as well as good qualifications accepted and recognized

all over the world. But high proficiency in spoken and written English is regarded as the

principal prerequisite qualification. So, English is still the number one language in the entire
world. It is not only for the employment but also for the students wishing for higher studies

especially in the countries where English is a native/official language. It is well known that the

role of English skills/proficiency is significant to play in driving export economies, attracting

foreign investment, boosting service exports, and enabling international business and cultural

links.

Proficiency is the state or quality of being proficient; skill; competence. Being profi-

cient is being competent to a specific field. English language has been the lingua franca and is

widely used up to now. Doors of opportunity and success are widely open to those who are

proficient in speaking the language. In fact, some people even enroll themselves to a special

class to improve their English proficiency. With this, we must make reforms and adjustments

on how the English language will be prioritized in schools, as part of our drive for global com-

petitiveness.

Hopkins International Partners said, Filipinos are ranked only third or fourth among the

ASEAN countries in terms of English proficiency and that the Philippines’ proficiency is on the

decline while others are on the rise. Rex Wallen Tan, General Manager of Hopkins International

Partners, said that the average English proficiency score of a Philippine college graduate was

631.4 based on the metrics of the Test of English for International Communication.

A study on the English proficiency skills of Filipino graduates showed that their level

was lower than the target for high school students in Thailand and for cab drivers in Dubai. The

English proficiency level of college graduates in the Philippines is lower than the proficiency

target set for high school students in Thailand and the competency requirement for taxi drivers in

Dubai.
 Accordingly, there’s a recent government study that shows only seven (7) percent of high

school graduates can properly read, speak or understand English, and poorly trained teachers are

partly blame. The Department of Education, together with all the passionate English teachers in

our country must make an immediate action to resolve the decline of English proficiency and

make our country to be on top. In this world’s competition, being proficient in English language

is now an obligation.

Previous researchers found out that there are some determinants which affect to the

English Language Proficiency of students. The following literature and studies showed the

determinants that affect to the English Language Proficiency of the students.

Campbell (1967) & Likert (1932), stated that perception is a process where one will form

an impression about something or someone. The perception then affects their attitude towards

certain matters or objects of attitudes. They pointed out that if the student’s perception towards

English is positive it’s attitude to learn English will also be positive and the student’s will be

highly motivated to learn English.

Spolsky (1969) & Holmes (1992), stated that attitude is considered as one of the

determinants that contribute to L2 learning achievement. According to them, there are two types

of attitude towards learning English; positive and negative. Students’ attitudes positively

correlate with their achievement in English.

 Holmes (1992) believes that when people feel positive towards target language users,

they will be highly motivated and consequently more successful in acquiring the target language.

In contrast, many views indicate the disadvantages of having negative attitudes towards L2

learning.

Racha (2003) conducted a study on four Sarawak secondary schools to examine students’

readiness to learn Mathematics in English. Her findings indicated that majority of the students

were highly motivated and had positive attitudes to learn the subject in English as they found that

challenging. However, less proficient students were less comfortable and lack confidence in

learning Liu’s (2007) study on Chinese university students’ attitudes and motivation to learn

English and the correlations of both variables with the students’ English proficiency also

revealed similar findings. The third-year undergraduates had positive attitudes and high level of

motivation towards learning English.

Kazazoğlu, (2013) points out that student’s attitude and their academic success with respect

to English courses has an important relationship to each other. Based on the study of Yang and

Lao’s (2002) all the students passed all of their English course, with that attitude is considered as

a determinants of successful learning process. Another study from Kazazoğlu, it showed that if

students had a positive attitude, it was more likely for them to attain success in their English

courses in 8th and 9th grade.

Brown, Gardner & Karahan (2007) claimed that the positive attitude toward self, the native

language group, and the target language group enhance proficiency and also positive language

attitudes let learner have positive orientation towards learning English. As such, attitudes may
play a very crucial role in language learning as they would appear to influence students’ success

or failure in their learning.

Brown (2000) & Gardner (2006), states that it is easy in second language learning to claim

that a learner will be successful with the proper motivation. Students with higher levels of

motivation will do better than students with lower levels. They further adds that if one is

motivated, he/she has reasons (motives) for engaging in the relevant activities, expends effort,

persists in the activities, attends to the tasks, shows desire to achieve the goal, enjoys the

activities, etc.

Gardner and Lambert (as cited Liu, 2008) stated the motivation to learn second language is

grounded in positive attitude toward the second language and the proficieny in the English

language is determines by the learner’s motivation and attitude in learning the language.

McDonough, 1983; Ellis, 1994 showed that there are many factors that might cause the

students’ low proficiency in English. One might be attributed to petroleum engineering students’

motivation towards the English language. This is because learners’ motivation has been widely

accepted as a key factor which influences the rate and success of second/foreign language

learning.

McDonough (1983) states that “motivation of the students is one of the most important

factors influencing their success or failure in learning the language". Another factor is learners’

attitudes. This is because an ESL/EFL learner's motivation in language learning is affected by

his/her attitudes towards learning the language. The relation between motivation and attitudes

has been considered a prime concern in language learning research.

 Gardner and Lambert (1972, p.3) state that “his [the learner] motivation to learn is thought to

be determined by his attitudes towards the other group in particular and by his orientation

towards the learning task itself”.

One of the determinants affecting the level of proficiency in English language among

university students is language anxiety. Language anxiety can be defined as the feeling of

anxiety towards second language acquisition (Gardner & MacIntyre, 1994). Students who faced

language anxiety often fear of negative evaluation by their educators or native speakers.

Humphries R. stated in her paper that fear of negative evaluation greatly affected students when

they tried to practice their target language.

A study conducted by Crookall & Oxford (1991) ; Hashimah (2007) as cited in Humphries,

R.(2011), a little anxiety can be motivating and gives benefit for the students, however if it

passes a certain limit, it will affect students’ focus towards language learning which resulting in

poorer performance.

The researcher found out that anxiety was experienced by many students while speaking

English in class especially when making presentations at the front. Their anxiety was a result of

the lack of vocabulary, low English proficiency, and memory disassociation.

For many learners, language class can be anxiety-provoking than other courses. Mostly,

university students are seen to have language anxiety especially in their second language

learning. They tend to be nervous when using English language in the formal situation like in

classroom.
 Other determinants such as language anxiety might affect the impact that recasts have on

learners’ responses(i.e.,onuptake) and on L2 learning. Language anxiety has been shown to be

significantly related to various L2 criterion measures (Horwitz, 2001).

Horwitz (2001) pointed out that language anxiety is considered one of the most important

affective factors influencing the success of language learning. Horwitz & Young, 1991

Questionnaire studies have found a significant negative relationship between anxiety and various

L2 achievement measures such as final grades and oral proficiency tests.

Based on the related literature and studies mentioned above, number of researchers said that

there are some determinants that affect to the English Language Proficiency of the students.

Other researchers said that, language anxiety can determine the English Language Proficiency,

some said that the effect of attitude and motivation towards learning English could determine the

English language Proficiency. But there’s no studies or researches asserts that motivation

mediates the effects of English Language Proficiency to language anxiety and perception. And

there’s no studies claiming that attitude and motivation mediate the effects of perception to

English Language Proficiency.

The researcher identified a methodological gap in the prior research. There is a lack of

structural equation modelling research designs in the English Language Proficiency. This

prompted the researchers of this present study to conduct an investigation about the determinants

of English Language Proficiency of Teacher Education of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart College

of Guimba, Inc.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

This study shows the variety of determinants concerning the English Language

Proficiency of Teacher Education Students. The purpose of the study is to propose a

structural model that will depict the determinants that influence the English Language

Proficiency of Teacher Education Students. Specifically, it shall seek to answer the following

questions:

1. How may the respondents be described in terms of

a. Perception towards learning English

b. Attitude towards learning English

c. Motivation towards learning English

d. Language Anxiety

e. English Language Proficiency

2. Does language anxiety determine English Language Proficiency?

3. Does attitude determine English Language Proficiency

4. Does motivation mediate the effects of the following variables to English

Language Proficiency?

a. Language Anxiety

b. Perception

5. Do attitude and motivation mediate the effects of perception to English

Language Proficiency?
HYPOTHESES

H1a: Perception has direct effect on students’ attitude towards learning English

H1b: Perception has direct effect on students’ motivation towards learning English

H1c: Attitude has direct effect on students’ motivation towards learning English

H1d: Attitude has direct effect on students’ English Language Proficiency

H1e: Motivation has direct effect on students’ English Language Proficiency

H1f: Language anxiety has direct effect on students’ motivation towards learning English

H1g: Language anxiety has direct effect on students’ English Language Proficiency

H2: Motivation mediates the effect of perception to English Language Proficiency

H3: Motivation mediates the effect of language anxiety to English Language Proficiency

H4: Attitude mediates the effect of perception to English Language Proficiency

 SCOPE AND DELIMITATION

Initially, this study focuses on the given variables as determinants that can affect the

English Language Proficiency. This study was composed of 351 Teacher Education Students of

OLSHCO, 112 Bachelor of Elementary Education and 239 Bachelor of Secondary Education.

Conceptual Framework:

Language
Anxiety
Perception
towards learning English
English Language
Proficiency

Attitude Motivation towards

towards learning learning English
English

Figure 1. Determinants of English Language Proficiency of Teacher Education Students

Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework of the study. The variables under consideration

are perception towards learning English, attitude towards learning English, motivation towards

learning English, language anxiety and English Language Proficiency of Teacher Education

Students of OLSHCO.
 As can be seen, the framework suggests that the perception towards learning English,

attitude towards learning English, motivation towards learning English and language anxiety can

determine the English Language Proficiency of the students. It can also be noted that motivation

mediates the effect of language anxiety and perception. It also showed that attitude and

motivation mediate the effects of perception to English Language Proficiency.

According to Campbell (1967) Perception is defined as something that is being observed and

what is said about. The researcher also mentioned that perception is a process where one will

form an impression about something or someone.

According to the studies if the student’s perception towards English is positive it’s attitude

to learn English will also be positive and the student’s will be highly motivated to learn English.

Likert (1932, p.9), cited in Gardner (1980, p.267), defines the term attitude as "an inference

which is made on the basis of a complex of beliefs about the attitude object". Gardner (1980,

p.267) elaborates on Likert's definition by defining attitude as "the sum total of a man's

instinctions and feelings, prejudice or bias, preconceived notions, fears, threats, and convictions

about any specified topic". Gardner (1985) considers attitudes as components of motivation in

language learning.

According to Spolsky,(1969), Attitude is considered as one of the key factors that contribute

to L2 learning achievement. Actually, the active participation of students in a language learning

process is also determined by their attitudes.

 Holmes (1992) believes that when people feel positive towards target language users, they

will be highly motivated and consequently more successful in acquiring the target language.

Proficiency in the English language is determines by the learner’s motivation and attitude in

learning the language.

Gardner,(2006) states that if one is motivated, he/she has reasons (motives) for engaging in

the relevant activities, expends effort, persists in the activities, attends to the tasks, shows desire

to achieve the goal, enjoys the activities, etc. If the students is highly motivated in learning

English this will affects the English Proficiency of the students. If they are motivated to learn

this will leads them to be proficient in English. Gardner and Lambert (as cited Liu, 2008) stated

the motivation to learn second language is grounded in positive attitude toward the second

language.

Language Anxiety can be defined as feeling of tension and apprehension specifically to the

associated with the second language context, including speaking, listening and learning. The

researcher found out that anxiety was experienced by many students while speaking English in

class especially when making presentations at the front. Their anxiety was a result of the lack of

vocabulary, low English proficiency, and memory disassociation.

Language anxiety has been shown to be significantly related to various L2 criterion

measures (Horwitz, 2001). One of the factors affecting the level of proficiency in English

language among university students is language anxiety. Language anxiety can be defined as the
feeling of anxiety towards second language acquisition (Gardner & MacIntyre, 1994). Students

who faced language anxiety often fear of negative evaluation by their educators or native

speakers. Humphries R. stated in her paper that fear of negative evaluation greatly affected

students when they tried to practice their target language.

Significance of the Study

This study will benefit the following:

 Administration of the School. This study will benefit the administration of the school to

provide an intervening program to improve the English Proficiency of the Teacher

Education Students. The administrator will engage the students in activities that will

enhance their perception, attitude and motivation towards learning English. This will also

improve the school in developing teachers’ education proficiency in English.

 Teacher of the School. This study will benefit the teachers to do some strategies in a

way that the students will increase their proficiency in English. This will also help the

teachers to prepare the students to be globally competitive.

 Teacher Education students. This study will benefit teacher education students to be

able to understand the determinants that affect their English Language Proficiency. With

this, they will be able to improve and strengthen the factors that affect in their English

Proficiency.
  Future Researchers. This study will help the future researcher by using the findings of

the study for further research specifically related to the determinants that affect to the

English Language Proficiency of the students.

Definition of Terms

In this study, the researchers used these terms to clarify the unfamiliar words for the readers.

 Perception is defined as something that is being observed and what is said about. The

researchers also mentioned that perception is a process where one will form an impression

about something or someone. It is the state of being or process of becoming aware of

something through the senses. It is the way of regarding, understanding, or interpreting

something, a mental impression.

 Perception is one of the variables under consideration in determining the English Language

Proficiency of Students. Perception affects the motivation of the students towards learning

English.

 Attitude is a settled way of thinking or feeling about someone or something, typically one

that is reflected in a person’s behavior. It is something is the way you think and feel about it,

especially when this shows in the way you behave. It is a position of the body indicating

mood or emotion.

 Attitude is one of the variables under consideration in determining the English Language

Proficiency of the students. It mediates the effects of perception to English Language

Proficiency.
 Motivation is derived from the word ‘motive’ which means needs, desires, wants or drives

within the individuals. It is the process of stimulating people to actions to accomplish the

goals. It is the reason for people’s actions, willingness and goals.

 Motivation is one of the variables under consideration in determining the English Language

Proficiency of the students. Motivation mediates the effects of language anxiety and

perception to English Language Proficiency.

 Language anxiety or xenoglossophobia, is the feeling of unease, worry, nervousness and

apprehension experienced in learning or using a second or foreign language.

 Language anxiety is one of the variables under consideration. Language anxiety determines

the English Language Proficiency.

 English Language Proficiency. A person who can use reading, listening, writing, and

speaking skills and understand the language in context is proficient in language. Language

proficiency is a “person’s skill in using a language for specific purpose… referring to the

degree of skill with which a person can use a language. Richard et al, (2004)

English Language Proficiency is the ability of students to use the English language to make

and communicate meaning in spoken and written contexts while completing their program

of study.

 English Language Proficiency is a dependent variable in this study. A person who is

proficient in English should be good in the following domain: Vocabulary, Correct Usage,

Sentence Improvement, Verbal Ability, Analogy, Grammar and Reading Comprehension.

 Chapter II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

INTRODUCTION

Proficiency is the state or quality of being proficient; skill; competence. Being proficient is

being competent to a specific field. English language has been the lingua franca and is widely

used up now. Doors of opportunity and success are widely open to those who are proficient in

speaking the language. In fact, according to Jimenez (2018) some people even enroll themselves

to a special class to improve their English proficiency. With this, the Philippine Educational

System must make reforms and adjustments on how the English language will be prioritized in

schools, as part of its drive for global competitiveness.

The reason stated above is the main rational motive of the researches why they decided to

dwell in the study pertaining to the determinants of English Language Proficiency of Teacher

Education students in Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, College of Guimba Inc. (OLSHCO).

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Previous researchers found out that there are determinants which affect the English

Language Proficiency of the students. According to (Rahman & Bekdas 2016) language anxiety

and attitude towards learning English affects the English Language Proficiency of the students.

Attitude, motivation and perception towards learning English are also determinants that affects to

the English Language Proficiency of the students (Ellis, 1997; Gardner, 2001). Gardner (1985)
believes that students with positive attitudes and high level of motivation will be more successful

compared to those with negative attitudes and no motivation. Based on the related literature and

studies, the researchers decided to study if the determinants mentioned above exist and have

relationship to each other.

LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY

Richard & Schmidt(2002), claims that a person who can use reading, listening, writing, and

speaking skills and understand the language in context is proficient in language. Llurda (2000)

define language proficiency as using the language by transforming the knowledge of the skills

needed into practice.

Language proficiency is a “person’s skill in using a language for specific purpose…

referring to the degree of skill with which a person can use a language” (Richards et al, p. 204),

whereas language achievement is a learner’s proficiency …as the result of what has been taught

or learned after a period of instruction,”. (p. 197)

PERCEPTION TOWARDS LEARNING ENGLISH

According to Campbell (1967) perception is defined as something that is being observed and

what is said about. The researcher also mentioned that perception is a process where one will

form an impression about something or someone. The perception then affects their attitude

towards certain matters or objects of attitudes.

ATTITUDE TOWARDS LEARNING ENGLISH

According to Spolsky (1969) attitude is considered as one of the determinants that contribute

to L2 learning achievement. Actually, the active participation of students in a language learning

process is also determined by their attitudes. There are two types of attitude change towards

language learning; positive and negative.

Students’ attitudes positively correlate with their achievement in English. For instance,

Holmes (1992) believes that when people feel positive towards target language users, they will

be highly motivated and consequently more successful in acquiring the target language. In

contrast, many views indicate the disadvantages of having negative attitudes towards L2

learning. Gardner and Lambert (1972) argue that students who have negative attitudes towards

L2 learning are those who do not expend the effort of speaking to acquire L2 aspects, and they

are also unfriendly and ethnocentric. The assumption that these students do not put in the effort

to learn is also supported by Littlewood (1983). He further claims that they will lose interest

towards learning since such attitudes produce an obstacle in the learning process and prevent

them from obtaining new L2 knowledge.

Racha (2003) conducted a study on four Sarawak secondary schools to examine students’

readiness to learn Mathematics in English. Her findings indicated that majority of the students

were highly motivated and had positive attitudes to learn the subject in English as they found that

challenging. However, less proficient students were less comfortable and lack confidence in

learning Liu’s (2007) study on Chinese university students’ attitudes and motivation to learn

English and the correlations of both variables with the students’ English proficiency also

revealed similar findings. The third-year undergraduates had positive attitudes and high level of
motivation towards learning English. Liu suggested that this may be due to the rapid demand for

university graduates to be highly proficient in English. In addition, correlation analysis showed

that students who had more positive attitudes towards learning English tend to score higher in the

proficiency test. However, Liu suggested that more positive attitudes and higher instrumental and

travel orientations might also be the result of students’ higher English proficiency.

Likert (1932, p.9), as cited by Gardner (1980, p.267), defines the term attitude as "an

inference which is made on the basis of a complex of beliefs about the attitude object". Gardner

(1980, p.267) elaborates on Likert's definition by defining attitude as "the sum total of a man's

instinctions and feelings, prejudice or bias, preconceived notions, fears, threats, and convictions

about any specified topic".

Ajzan (1988, p.4) considers attitudes as “a disposition to respond favorably or unfavorably

to an object, person, institution, or event”. Baker (1992, p.10) defines attitudes as “a hypothetical

construct used to explain the direction and persistence of human behaviour”.

Gardner (1985) considers attitudes as components of motivation in language learning.

According to him, “motivation ... refers to the combination of effort plus desire to achieve the

goal of learning the language plus favourable attitudes toward learning the language” (p. 10).

Learning a language is closely related to the attitudes towards the languages (Starks & Paltridge,

1996). Karahan (2007, p.84) avers that “positive language attitudes let learner have positive

orientation towards learning English”. As such, attitudes may play a very crucial role in language

learning as they would appear to influence students’ success or failure in their learning.
 Kazazoğlu, (2013) points out that student’s attitude and their academic success with respect

to English courses has an important relationship to each other. Based on the study of Yang and

Lao’s (2002) all the students passed all of their English course, with that attitude is considered as

a predictor of successful learning process. Another study from Kazazoğlu, it showed that if

students had a positive attitude, it was more likely for them to attain success in their English

courses in 8th and 9th grade.

Attitude is seen as one’s beliefs of determinants affecting language learning such as the

culture of a second language and one’s culture (Lopez, 1997 cited in Awad Mohammed, 2012).

Attitude is a very important concept in second language learning. People might have positive

attitude towards a second language because they want to succeed in the community which helps

to strengthen the motivation to learn the second language (Awad Mohammed, 2012).

Chalak and Kassaian (2010) added that a successful second language learner is a person who

possesses a positive attitude towards the language, the culture and the people.

According to Gardner (1983), students’ attitudes towards second language and learning a

second language is determined by their level of motivation while Reeve (1996) views motivation

as essential to succeed academically.

John Oller and his colleagues (as cited in Brown, 1994, p. 168) from their studies identified

that the positive attitude toward self, the native language group, and the target language group

enhance proficiency.

Gardner (1958) stated that attitude is an evaluative reaction to some referent or attitude

objects, inferred on the basis of the individual’s beliefs or opinions about the referent.

Nevertheless the positive or negative attitude is rooted from perception of an individual.

 MOTIVATION TOWARDS LEARNING ENGLISH

Motivation is very hard to define. As Gardner (2006, p.242) states “motivation is a very

complex phenomenon with many facets…Thus, it is not possible to give a simple definition”.

This is because the term motivation has been viewed differently by different schools of thought.

Brown (2000, p.160) states that "it is easy in second language learning to claim that a learner

will be successful with the proper motivation". With similar views, Gardner (2006, p. 241) posits

that “students with higher levels of motivation will do better than students with lower levels”. He

further adds that “if one is motivated, he/she has reasons (motives) for engaging in the relevant

activities, expends effort, persists in the activities, attends to the tasks, shows desire to achieve

the goal, enjoys the activities, etc” (Gardner, 2006, p. 243).

Brown (2000) asserts that studies of motivation of second/foreign language learners often

refer to a distinction between two types of motivation namely, instrumental versus integrative

motivation. Gardner (1983, p. 203) defines instrumental motivation as "learning a language

because of someone or less clearly perceived utility it might have for the learner". More

specifically, a learner is instrumentally motivated when he/she wants to learn a language "to pass

an examination, to use it in one's job, to use it in holiday in the country, as a change from

watching television, because the educational system requires it" (Wilkins, 1972, p.184).

On the other hand, integrative motivation was defined as "learning a language because the

learner wishes to identify himself with or become integrated into the society” of the target

language (Gardner, 1983, p.203). Therefore, a learner is integratively motivated when he/she
learns a language because he/she wants to "know more of the culture and values of the foreign

language group… to make contact with the speakers of the languages… to live in the country

concerned" (Wilkins, 1972, p.184).

Besides Gardner’s integrative and instrumental constructs, Cooper and Fishman (1977)

mentioned a third type of motivation which they termed "developmental". Developmental or

personal motivation, according to them, refers to motivation relating to “personal development or

personal satisfaction” (Cooper & Fishman, 1977, p. 243). This includes such activities as

watching movies and reading books in English (ibid).

The researchers concur with Spolsky (1989, p. 160) in that “a language may be learned for

any one or any collection of practical reasons”. As such, identifying the petroleum engineering

students’ motivation will be related to the reasons for which they learn the English language. In

other words, instrumental, integrative and personal reasons will be considered as far as the

students’ motivation is concerned. This view is also supported by Crookes and Schmidt (1991)

who consider motivation in learning a second/foreign language as “the learner’s orientation with

regard to the goal of learning a second language” (p. 10).

Proficiency in the English language is determines by the learner’s motivation and attitude

in learning the language. Gardner and Lambert (as cited Liu, 2008) stated the motivation to learn

second language is grounded in positive attitude toward the second language.

LANGUAGE ANXIETY

Language Anxiety can be defined as feeling of tension and apprehension specifically to the

associated with the second language context, including speaking, listening and learning.

As a complex psychological term, Davu and Palladino (cited in Kelly, 2002) have defined

anxiety as “a general feeling of apprehension including hyper-vigilance, increased sympathetic

nervous system activity, and difficulty concentrating” (p. 54). Also, E. -K. Horwitz, M. -B.

Horwitz, and Cope (1986), Rachman (1998), Brown (2000), and Horwitz (2009) associated

anxiety with tension, fear, frustration, apprehension, uneasiness, insecurity uneasiness,

insecurity, and nervousness.

Furthermore, MacIntyre (1995) referred anxiety to a sentimental situation which may have

positive and negative effects and that enhances and assists or distresses and hinders language

learning. Moreover, Oxford (1999a) showed that anxiety has a negative type “debilitating

anxiety” and a positive one. Debilitating anxiety harms learners’ performance like hindering

them from taking part in the activities or not applying the language in general social direct

positions while positive anxiety may be considered as useful in enhancing students’ level of

attention.

The researcher found out that anxiety was experienced by many students while speaking

English in class especially when making presentations at the front. Their anxiety was a result of

the lack of vocabulary, low English proficiency, and memory disassociation.

For many learners, language class can be anxiety-provoking than other courses. Mostly,

university students are seen to have language anxiety especially in their second language
learning. They tend to be nervous when using English language in the formal situation like in

classroom.

One of the determinants affecting the level of proficiency in English language among

university students is language anxiety. Language anxiety can be defined as the feeling of

anxiety towards second language acquisition (Gardner & MacIntyre, 1994). Students who faced

language anxiety often fear of negative evaluation by their educators or native speakers.

Humphries R. stated in her paper that fear of negative evaluation greatly affected students when

they tried to practice their target language.

A study conducted by Crookall & Oxford (1991) as cited in Humphries, R.(2011), a little

anxiety can be motivating and gives benefit for the students, however if it passes a certain li .

Furthermore, the study done by Humphries R. reveals that it would be less intimidating if the

instructor was more friendly and encouraging rather than be an authority figure. This is because

students feel more comfortable to interact using the target language with their friends rather than

their instructor.

According to a research conducted by Nur Afiqah binti Ab. Latif (2014), language anxiety

among adult learners in Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) reveals that there is no

relationship between language anxiety and gender or age. The study also reveals that there is no

significance difference between male and female because both genders experiencing a similar

amount of anxiety in their second language class. Furthermore, language anxiety also has no

significance difference between old and young learners. However, the duration of learning

English do affect the level of language anxiety experienced by the learners as the longer the

years of learning, the lower level of language anxiety facing by them. Apart from that, fear of
negative evaluation caused by language anxiety could clearly be seen in a study conducted on a

group of Malaysian university students where they claimed that the impediment they experienced

to communicate in English makes them passive in the classroom (Noor Hashimah, 2007).

Language anxiety, as Horwitz, Horwitz and Cope (1986) suggest, is a distinct complex of

self-perceptions, beliefs, feelings and behaviors related to classroom language learning which

arise from the uniqueness of the language learning process. On the other hand, Gardner and

MacIntyre (1993) describe the concept as apprehension experienced when a specific situation

requires the use of a second language in which the individual is not fully proficient.

Consequently, language anxiety falls under the category of situation-specific anxiety, and is

three kinds: communication apprehension, fear of negative evaluation, and test anxiety.

Communication apprehension refers to the fear of getting into real communication with others.

In other words, it occurs in cases where learners lack mature communication skills although they

enjoy mature ideas and thoughts. Secondly, fear of negative evaluation is observed when foreign

language learners feel incapable of making the proper social impression. It is an apprehension

towards evaluations by others and avoidance of evaluative situations. Finally, test anxiety is an

apprehension towards academic evaluation, and is described as a fear of failing in tests and an

unpleasant experience held either consciously or unconsciously by learners in various situations.

As a result, the concept concerns apprehension towards academic evaluation which is based on

the fear of failure (Horwitz and Young, 1991).

 Other determinants such as language anxiety might affect the impact that recasts have on

learners’ responses(i.e.,onuptake) and on L2 learning. Language anxiety has been shown to be

significantly related to various L2 criterion measures (Horwitz, 2001). The bulk of the research,

however, has been correlational in nature and has not examined whether or in what way language

anxiety affects students’ ability to utilize instruction for learning. We do not know, for example,

whether language anxiety impedes learners’ ability to attend to form (in terms of “noticing” and

“noticing the gap”) while engaged in communication.

MacIntyre (1999) defined language anxiety as follows:

The apprehension experienced when a situation requires the use of a second language

with which the individual is not fully proficient...the propensity for an individual to react in a

nervous manner when speaking, listening, reading, or writing in the second language. (p. 5).

In contrast to trait anxiety (stable disposition) or state anxiety (transient, “moment-by-

moment “experience),language anxiety constitutes a specific kind of anxiety, aroused by

situational factors such as tests, speaking in front of class, and being called on by the teacher

(Horwitz & Cope, 1986; MacIntyre & Gardner, 1989, 1991).

In the 1970s and 1980s, language anxiety was examined through studying learner diaries

(e.g., Bailey, 1983). Later research made use of specially designed questionnaires. Language

anxiety is considered one of the most important affective factors influencing the success of

language learning (Horwitz, 2001). Questionnaire studies have found a significant negative
relationship between anxiety and various L2 achievement measures such as final grades and oral

proficiency tests (Horwitz & Young, 1991).

Nevertheless, there is disagreement about the role played by language anxiety in learning.

Language anxiety has been claimed to have a facilitating effect, a debilitating effect, and no

effect at all on learners’ performance and L2 achievement (D¨ornyei, 2005). Horwitz (2001) and

her co-researchers have consistently argued that anxiety is debilitative; that is, she argues that it

contributes directly to learners’ poor linguistic performance. Debilitative anxiety can be triggered

by a wide range of sources (e.g., a lack of self-confidence/self esteem, demanding tasks

involving oral production, and unfriendly lockstep teaching environments; Cheng, Horwitz, &

Schallert, 1999; Horwitz, 1987, 2000; Horwitz et al., 1986).

Krashen (1982, 1985) also viewed anxiety as debilitative. His position is of special

interest because he is one of the few researchers to have considered anxiety in relation to

corrective feedback. He argued that corrective feedback is potentially harmful for learners

because it is likely to increase their level of anxiety and thereby raise their affective filters, in

turn inhibiting the learner’s ability to process input and thereby limiting their ability to acquire

the L2. Krashen (1998) noted that the most anxiety-provoking classroom activity for learners is

speaking/talking in front of the class and argued that “pushed output”’ (i.e., encouraging learners

to produce the target language correctly) inhibits acquisition because it arouses anxiety in the

learner and thus raises the affective filter.

 The “no effect” position has been advanced by Sparks and Ganschow (1991). According

to their “Linguistic Coding Deficit1 Hypothesis (LCDH),” anxiety does not affect learners’

success in learning a foreign language because L2 achievement is dependent solely on the

learner’s aptitude and underlying cognitive abilities.They argued that students’ anxiety is not a

primary causative variable but rather is caused by learners’first language disabilities and

cognitive deficiencies, which impede their capacity to process input and produce output in the

classroom. According to this position, therefore, an affective variable like language anxiety does

not directly influence language learning. Finally, some researchers have argued that anxiety can

facilitate language learning. Early research demonstrated that anxiety results in higher motivation

and more effort and, hence, better learning outcomes (Chastain, 1975, cited in Ellis, 1994;

Kleinmann, 1978).

Irrespective of the different positions regarding the effect of language anxiety on

learning, little is known about the relationship between language anxiety and the learning

processes that account for L2 acquisition. A study by MacIntyre and Gardner (1994) is

pioneering in this respect. They demonstrated that learner anxiety affected negatively both the

ability to perform a language learning task and ultimate L2 achievement. Using a video camera

to arouse learners’ language anxiety, they compared learners’ performances on a computer-based

vocabulary learning task. Their findings showed that the learners’ exposure to the video camera

resulted in heightened state anxiety with subsequent poor performance in vocabulary learning.

MacIntyre and Gardner’s (1994) study is particularly relevant to the study reported in this article,

as it attempted to relate anxiety to a processing model of language acquisition instead of simply

examining the relationship between anxiety and achievement.

 CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, it is clearly defining the research methods used to conduct the study. The

research design, research locale, sources of data sampling technique, data gathering tools, and

data gathering procedures are presented.

Research Locale

The study will be conducted at Our Lady of the Sacred Heart College of Guimba, Inc.

Formerly known as Our Lady of the Sacred Heart Academy (OLSHA), Our Lady of the Sacred

Heart College (OLSHCO) is a private Catholic educational institution located at Afan Salvador

Street within the compound of the Catholic Church of Guimba, Nueva Ecija. Currently, it offers

pre-school, elementary, secondary (Junior and Senior High School) and tertiary education which

includes Bachelor of Elementary Education, Bachelor of Secondary Education, Bachelor of

Hospitality and Management, Bachelor of Hotel Restaurant and Management, Bachelor of

Science in Information Technology and Bachelor of Science in Office Administration. It also

offers Teaching Certificate Program and Associate in Computer Technology.

Research Design

Structural equation modelling (SEM) was used to analyze the structural relationships

between measured variables. For the analysis of the model, instead of covariance-based

structural equation modelling, a variance-based or component based Partial Least Square (PLS)

approach was adopted in this study. PLS-based SEM has several key advantages over

covariance-based SEM, including the following:

1. It always yields a solution even in complex models.

2. It is used for theory development and prediction.

3. It does not require variables to meet parametric analysis criteria, such as

multivariate normality and large sample sizes.

WarpPLS 6.0 was used for analysis of relationships among the variables. The main

features of warpPLS 6.0 are:

1. It estimates p-values for path coefficients automatically and hence significance

can be easily established.

2. It estimates model fit indices to assess if the data is well presented by the model.

3. It enables evaluation of measurement model as well as structural model.

4. It calculates variance inflation factor (VIF) coefficients which affect the p-values.

5. It pre-processes the data before SEM analysis and hence makes it easy to correct

problems with the data.

Respondents/Participants

The target population included for this research are the Teacher Education Students year

2019– 2020 of OLSCHO.

Sample Size

One of the requirements in PLS – SEM is to measure the sufficiency of the sample size.

The sample size used in the present is 120. There are two (2) ways to estimate the sufficiency of

the sample size: inverse-square root and Gamma- exponential methods (Kock & Hadaya, 2018).

Using WarpPLS version 6.0 (Kock, 2017), a statistical software, with a minimum absolute

significant path coefficient of 0.13, significance level of 0.05, and power level of 0.95, the

inverse – square root method suggested 641 samples while Gamma – exponential method

suggested 623 samples (see figure **). Therefore, the sample size of the PLS – SEM model must

be between 623 - 641. The sample size used in the study is 120, and it is not sufficient to explain

the results of the structural model.

 Figure 2. Results of the inverse square root and gamma – exponential method

Sources of Data

In this study, 120 teacher education students in Our Lady of the Sacred Heart College of

Guimba, Inc. were respondents. Their information and answers on the survey were essential in

this study.

Data Gathering Tools

In the preparation of the instrument, the requirements in designing a good data collection

must be consider. To provide and gather information, the researchers adapted questionnaires

comprising of five parts. It includes perception, attitude, motivation, language anxiety and

English Proficiency Test. The survey questionnaire prepared by the researchers was based on the

idea of the other studies from the reliable sources.

Validity and reliability of the instrument had been tested and administered among

selected Teacher Education students at Our Lady of the Sacred Heart College of Guimba, Inc.

researchers. A referral letter was endorsed to the language expert to validate the questionnaires

prepared by the researchers

For the survey questionnaire of students’ perception, attitude and motivation towards

learning English was based on the standardized questionnaire tool of RC. Gardner in his

Attitude and Motivation Test Battery (AMTB). It is a Likert 5- point scale ranging from

“strongly agree” (5) through “agree” (4), “neither agree nor disagree” (3) , “disagree” (2) and

“strongly disagree” (1).

 For the language anxiety and English Language Proficiency Test, the researchers adopted

the questionnaires in the study of (Cruz et al., 2017). The language anxiety questionnaire was

also a Likert 5- point scale ranging from “strongly agree” (5) through “agree” (4), “neither agree

nor disagree” (3) , “disagree” (2) and “strongly disagree” (1). On the other hand, the adopted

English Proficiency Test from (Cruz et al., 2017) was composed of 70 items.

Interpreting Each Scale

Perception

If the respondent scored high then he/she has a positive perception towards

learning English. If students scored low he/she tends to be unwilling or uninterested in learning

English.

Attitude

If the respondent scored high on attitude then he/she has a positive attitude towards

learning English. If students scored low he/she tends to be unwilling or uninterested in learning

English.

Motivation

If the respondent scored high on this scale, the respondent probably has a strong desire to

learn English and is willing to devote the time and energy needed to achieve his/her goals.

Students with a strong motivation usually earn the highest grades they are capable of earning.

Students with scores on the low end of this scale tend to be unwilling or unable to put a great

deal of effort into schoolwork and may receive grades well below their capabilities.
Language Anxiety

It is categorized as; strongly agree which means one is strongly favourable to the concept,

agree refers to somewhat favourable to the concept, neither agree nor disagree means cannot

decide for the concept, disagree refers to somewhat unfavourable to the concept, and strongly

disagree means strongly unfavourablse to the concept (William, 2008).

The Likert Scale that will be used is as follows:

SCALE RANGE VERBAL INTERPRETATION

5 4.3 to 5.0 Very High

4 3.5 to 4.2 High

3 2.7 to 3.4 Average

2 1.9 to 2.6 Low

1 1.0 to 1.8 Very Low

Table 1. Likert - Scale of the following variables: Perception, Attitude, Motivation, and

Language Anxiety

English Language Proficiency

Using the response mode by William (2008), the researchers used a rating scale from 0-

90 in assessing the proficiency level of the Senior High School Students in English.
SCALE VERBAL INTERPRETATION
61-70 Very High
51-60 High
41-50 Average
31-40 Low
30-below Very Low
Table 2. Rating Scale of English Language Proficiency

Data Gathering Procedures

To conduct the study, the researchers adopted a standardized survey from RC.Gardner for

attitude and motivation. For the language anxiety and English Language Proficiency, the

researchers adopted the questionnaires in the study of (Cruz et al.) The researchers created an

approval letter for the Dean of the college as for conducting research and a letter for the

respondents from secondary college department student. Upon the approval of the letters, the

copies were distributed to the 40 teacher education students from OLSHCO. The results of the

survey were used as a basis for the given determinants and if the variable influences the English

Language Proficiency of the students. The responses to the questionnaire by the teacher

education students of the Our Lady of the Sacred Heart College of Guimba Inc. were statistically

analysed with the data requirement of the study.

Scale Cronbach’s Alpha No. of Items

Entire Scale .85 65
Table 3. Reliability Analysis of Perception, Attitude, Motivation and Language Anxiety

The table shows the reliability analysis of questions measured on Likert scale gave a

Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.850 for the entire scale which is greater than 0.70, showing a high

internal consistency reliability. Reliability refers to the consistency of the results when

conducting a research. Therefore, in order for research to be reliable, it should produce the same

or similar results if repeated.

 CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

In this chapter, it presents the analysis and results based on the data gathered by

the researchers.
Descriptives

Table 4.1 Student’s Level of Perception, Attitude, Motivation, and Language Anxiety

N Mean Std. Deviation Interpretation

Perception 120 3.804 0.880 HIGH

Attitude 120 3.336 0.915 AVERAGE

Motivation 120 3.719 0.877 HIGH

Language Anxiety 120 3.308 0.866 AVERAGE

Table 4.1 indicates the descriptive measures of students’ level of perception,

attitude, motivation and language anxiety. The mean of all respondents’ level of perception is

3.804 implying that respondents have a positive perception towards learning English that will

lead them to have also a positive attitude towards English. Meanwhile, the overall mean of

students’ attitude is 3.336 implying that respondents have a positive attitude to learn English. On

the other hand, the mean of all respondents’ level of motivation is 3.719 revealed that the

respondents have a strong desire learn English and willing to devote his /her time needed to

achieve his/her goals. Lastly, the mean of all respondents’ level of language anxiety is 0.866

implying that respondents don’t have much anxiety in English and they could handle the

difficulties of learning English.

Table 4.2 English Language Proficiency

N Mean Std. Deviation Interpretation

Perception 120 3.804 0.880 HIGH

Attitude 120 3.336 0.915 AVERAGE

Motivation 120 3.719 0.877 HIGH

Language Anxiety 120 3.308 0.866 AVERAGE

Structural Model Assessment

To test our hypotheses, PLS-SEM was used to determine the influence of our

hypothesized causal factors perception, attitude, motivation, language anxiety towards English

Language Proficient of Teacher Education Students.

Figure 3. Determinants of English Language Proficiency of Teacher Education Students

Model Fit and Quality Indices

WarpPLS is unique among software that implement PLS-SEM algorithms in that it

provides users with a number of model-wide fit indices. Three of the main model fit indices

calculated by WarpPLS are the following: Average path coefficient (APC) and Average R –

squared (ARS) and Average block VIF (AVIF).

 The P values for APC and ARS are calculated through re – sampling. A correction is

made to know if these indices are calculated based on other parameters, which leads to a biasing

effect – a variance reduction effect associated with the central limit theorem.

Normally, the addition of new latent variable into a model will increase the ARS, even if

those latent variables are weakly associated with the existing latent variables in the model.

However the APC will decrease since the path coefficients associated with the new latent

variables will be low. Therefore, the APC and ARS will counterbalance each other, and will only

increase together if the latent variables that are added to the model enhance the overall predictive

and explanatory quality of the model. Along with these two, the AFVIF brings in a new

dimension that adds to a comprehensive assessment of a model’s overall predictive and

explanatory quality.

Table 4.3 Model Fit and Quality Indices

Indices Coefficients

APC 0.306, p<0.001

ARS 0.264, p<0.001

AARS 0.256,p<0.001

AVIF 1.075

AFVIF 1.633

Tenenhaus GoF 0.399

APC = average path coefficients; ARS = average r-squared; AARS= average adjusted r-

squared; AVIF = average block variance inflation factor; AFVIF = average full collinearity VIF

According to (Kock, 2017) the coefficients of average path coefficient (APC), average r-

squared (ARS), and average adjusted r-squared (AARS) must have p-values equal to or lower

than 0.005 to prove that the structural model fits.

As can be seen in the Table 4.3 the p-value of APC, ARS, AARS are below 0.05 which

strongly suggest that the model fits the data.

Aside from APC, ARS and AARS, the average block variance inflation factor (AVIF)

and average full collinearity VIF (AFVIF) are also considered to assess wether the indices are

within acceptable ranges. Based on (Kock & Lynn, 2012), the coefficients are ideally if it is

equal to or lower than 3.3. A more acceptable criterion is AVIF and AFVIF must be equal to or

lower than 5.0.

Since the average block variance inflation factor (AVIF) is 1.075 and the average full

collinearity VIF (AFVIF) is 1.633 which are less than 3.3 and 5.0, both indices are within the

acceptable ranges.

The table also shows the Tenenhaus good of fit (GoF) which was developed as an

overall measure of model fit for PLS-SEM. The following criteria are used to explain the power
of the structural model (Wetzels, Odekerhen-Schroder, & Van Oppen, 2009): small if the value

is greater than or equal to 0.1; medium if it is greater than or equal to 0.25; and large if the value

is greater than or equal to 0.36. In the table shown, the Tenenhaus GoF = 0.399 indicates that the

explanatory power of the structural model is large.

Reliability and Validity Measurements

To examine the strength of the measurement model, both reliability and validity tests

were conducted. Reliability is a measure of the stability or consistency of the test score while

validity simply means a test or instrument is accurately measuring what it’s supposed to.

According to (Kock, 2017), an instrument is said to be reliable if the measures or items

for each latent variable are understood in the same way by different participants. In the present

study, both Cronbach’s Alpha (CA) and Composite Reliability (CR) were tested. (Fornell &

Larcker, 1981; Nunally, 1978; Nunally &Bernstein, 1994; Kock and Lynn, 2012) believed that

the acceptable coefficient for bth CA and Cris 0.070 and above. Furthermore, Kock & Lynn

(2012) said that one of the two reliability measures should be equal or greater than to 0.070.

Table 4.4 Convergent Validity and Reliability Measures

Construct No. of Items Factor AVE CR CA

Loading
Perception 20 0.679 – 0.760 0.470 0.876 0.838

Attitude 20 0.664 – 0.784 0.515 0.881 0.842

Motivation 20 0.595 – 0.804 0.517 0.905 0.881

Language Anxiety 20 0.652 – 0.784 0.509 0.919 0.919

English Language Proficiency 70 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

AVE =average variance extracted; CR = composite reliability; CA = Cronbach Alpha

As can be seen in the Table 4.4, the coefficient of CA and CR of the latent variables,

perception, attitude, motivation, language anxiety and English language proficiency are highly

reliable and the latent variables are within the acceptable thresholds for convergent validity. It

can also be noted in the table that the coefficients of AVE for all latent variables satisfied the

accept able validity.

With regard to validity measurement, the convergent and discriminant validitywere

conducted. The p- value for each loading must be equal to or greater than 0.05 (Black, Babin, &

Anderson., 2009).

Also, the values of the AVEs must be equal to or greater than 0.05 (Fornerr & Larcker,

1981; Kock & Lynn, 2012). As seen in the table 4.4 the coefficient of AVE all the latent

variables are valid except to perception.

To make all the latent variables be valid, the researchers remove some items. From 20

items of Language Anxiety, the researchers removed items 1, 4, 6, 7, 15, 17 and 18. And for the

Motivation, the research removed 11 items; 1, 3, 5, 6,11,14, 15, 16, 17, 18,20. For Attitude, the

resaerchers remove 13 items; 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,7,8,10,14,17, 18, 19, 20 and for motivation items 1, 4,

5 , 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 were removed.

Table 4.5 Discriminant Validity

 PER ATT MOT LA ELP
PER 0.686 0.659 0.579 0.086 0.145

ATT 0.659 0.718 0.614 -0.041 -0.065

MOT 0.579 0.614 0.719 0.012 0.073

LA 0.086 -0.041 0.012 0.714 -0.005

ELP 0.145 -0.065 0.073 -0.005 1.00

PER= Perception towards learning English; ATT= Attitude towards learning English;

MOT= motivation towards learning English; LA= language anxiety; ELP= English language

proficiency

Aside from convergent validity, discriminant validity is another measure of a quality of a

research instrument. An instrument is said to have discriminant validity when the items or

measures of each latent variable are not confusing with regard to their meaning and it is well -

understood by the respondents. On the other hand, the instrument is said have a convergent

validity when the respondents and the designer/s of the instrument have the same understanding

with the item measures of each latent variable under scrutiny (Kock, 2017).

The table shows the discriminant validity. The diagonal values must be greater than any

of the values to their left in the same row (Kock, 2017). Thus, the results indicate that the

measures used in the study have discriminant validity. The discriminant validity assesses the

correlations among variables with square roots of AVE coefficient (Kock, 2017; Lacap, 2019). In

order to indicate whether measures used in the study have discriminant validity the diagonal

values must be greater than any of the values to their left in the same row (Kock, 2017). As can

be seen in the table the diagonal values are greater than any of the values to their left. Thus, the

measure used in this study have discriminant validity.

 Model Result

Figure 4 PLS-SEM Output for the Direct Influence of Perception, Attitude and Language

Anxiety Towards Motivation and Indirect Effects of the Determinants Towards English

Language Proficiency mediated by Motivation and Attitude

The figure illustrates the direct and inidirect effects of the PLS path model. The

standardized regression coefficients or also known as beta coefficients or beta weights, are the

estimates resulting from a regression analysis that have been standardized so that the variances of

dependent and independent variables are 1. Therefore, it refers to how many standard deviations

as dependent variable will change, per standard deviation increase in the determinanat variable.

As can be seen in the figure above, the beta coefficient between motivation and english language

proficiency is insignificant (β=−¿0.168, p=0.008 ¿ as well as language anxiety towards

motivation ¿0.128, p=0.032 ¿, also language anxiety towards english language proficiency

( β=0.105 , p=0.065).

However, there is a significant and positive relationship between perception and attitude

( β=0.651 , p=¿ 0.001). Additionally, perception towards learning english is positively and

significantly different towards students’ motivation ( β=0.263 , p=¿ 0.001) as well as attitude

and motivation ( β=0.431 , p=¿ 0.001). Also, attitude has significant and positive relationship

towards english language proficiency ( β=−0.184 , p=0.004). As can be seen, the path

coefficient is negative. However,the result imples that a positive relationship exists among

variables.

The coefficient of determination or simply the r-squared (R 2) was also shown in the PLS

path model (see figure 4). The R2 coefficients are the variance percentage in the latent variable

that is explained by the latent variables that are hypothesized to affect it (Kock, 2017). It explains

the variation of the output or determinant variable.

Direct and Indirect Effects

Table 4.6 Direct and Indirect Effects

 β SE p-value f2
Direct Effects

PER→ATT 0.651 0.062 <0.001 0.424

PER→MOT 0.263 0.067 <0.001 0.146

ATT→MOT 0.431 0.065 <0.001 0.268

ATT→ELP -0.184 0.068 0.004 0.026

MOT→ELP 0.168 0.068 0.008 0.015

LA→MOT 0.128 0.069 0.032 0.032

LA→ELP 0.105 0.069 0.065 0.009

Indirect Effects

PER→MOT→ELP -0.076 0.070 0.140 0.011

PER→ATT→ELP 0.072 0.049 0.072 0.010

LA→MOT→ELP 0.021 0.050 0.333 0.002

Direct Effects

As can be seen in the table, students’ perception towards learning english significantly

and positively determines the students’ attitude towards learning english ( β=0.651 , p=¿ 0.001)

and the effect size is large (Cohen’s f2 =0.424). Thus, H1a is supported. Moreover perception has

significant relationship towards the student’s motivation towards learning english ¿ with the

effect size of small (Cohen’s f2 = 0.146). Therefore, findings supported H1b. It also revealed that

attitude towards learning english significantly determines the student’s motivation towards

learning english ( β=−0.076 , p<0.140 )with the effect size of medium (Cohen’s f2 = 0.268).
Thus, H1c is supported. It can also be seen in the table that attitude towards learning english is

significantly determines the students’english language proficiency ( β=−0.184 , p=0.004) with

the effect size of small (Cohen’s f2 = 0.026). Therefore, H1d is supported. However, motivation

towards learning english and students’ english laguage proficiency ( β=−0.168 , p=0.008) do

not have significant relationship. Also, language anxiety and motivation towards learning english

( β=0.128 , p=0.032) do not have significant relationship. Same with language anxiety and

english language proficiency ( β=0.105 , p=0.065) it is also do not have a significant

relatonship. For that reason, H1e, H1f, H1g, are not supported in the present study.

Indirect Effects

The table also shows the indirect effects of the model. The findings indicated that

motivation does not mediate the relationship between students’s perception towards learning

english and students’ english language proficiency ( β=0.098 , p=0.213). It also revealed that

attitude does not mediate the relationship of students’s perception towards learning english and

students’english language proficiency ( β=0.072 , p=0.072). It can also be noted that students’

motivation towards learning english does not mediate the relationship of language anxiety and

english language proficiency. As a result, H2 , H3, H4 is not supported in the present study.

Final Path Model

 After conducting a series of path analyses, both significant and insignificant coefficient

values of the exogenous and endogenous variables were observed. Variables with insignificant

values were considered non-causal variables on English Language Proficiency of Teacher

Education Students , which means that no link or connection had been observed between those

independent variables. Hence, the non-causal variables were removed from the final path model

of this study.

Figure 5 Final Path Model of the Determinants of English Language Proficiency of

Teacher Education Students

Note: Sir, I can’t draw the final path model. Hahahuhu!

Figure 4.3 illustrates the result of PLS of the path model. As can be seen, the beta coefficient

between motivation and study habits is significant ( β=0.53 , p<0.001) as well as motivation
towards study attitudes ( β=0.34 , p=0.017). It was also revealed that the beta coefficient

between study habits towards academic performance is significantly positive ( β=0.37 , p<0.001)

. Additionally, there is a significant and relationship between study attitudes towards Board

Licensure Examination for Professional Teachers (β=-0.032, p=0.02) as well as the academic

performance towards Board Licensure Examination for Professional Teachers

( β=−0.82, p<0.001) and study habits as mediated by academic performance towards Board

Licensure Examination for Professional Teachers ( β=−0.307 , p=0.004)

The R2 of the final path model is equal to 0.28, 0.11, 0.14, and 0.75 which reflect the

predictive accuracy of the exogenous variables on the endogenous variables. This indicates that

28% of the variance in study habits can be explained by motivation; 11% of the variation in

study attitudes can be explained by motivation as well. 14% of the variation in academic

performance can be exaplained by motivation, stuyd habits and study attitudes. Overall,

predictors have been able to explain for 75% of the variance in Board Licensure Examination for

Professional Teachers.

CHAPTER V
 FINDINGS, DISCUSSION, AND RECOMMENDATION

In this chapter, it presents the findings, conclusions and recommendations based on the

data investigated in the previous chapter.

Findings:

The study shows the variety of determinants in English Language Proficiency of Teacher

Education Students. The purpose of the study is to propose a structural model that will portray

the determinants that influence the English Language Proficiency of Teacher Education Students

Year 2019-2020 of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart College of Guimba, Inc.

Actually, the Teacher Education Students of OLSHCO revealed a high level of

perception (mean = 3.804), as well as motivation (mean = 3.719). On the other hand, it also

revealed that their level of attitude (mean = 3.336) and language anxiety (mean = 3.308) is

average. But their level of proficiency is (mean=).

In terms of direct effects among the determinants presented, it was revealed that students’

perception towards learning english significantly and positively determines the students’ attitude

towards learning english and the effect size is large (Cohen’s f2 =0.424). Moreover perception

has significant and positive relationship towards the student’s motivation towards learning

english with the effect size of small (Cohen’s f2 = 0.146). It was also revealed that attitude

towards learning english significantly and positively determines the student’s motivation towards

learning englishwith the effect size of medium (Cohen’s f2 = 0.268). It can also be seen in the
table that attitude towards learning english is significantly and positively determines the

students’english language proficiency with the effect size of small (Cohen’s f2 = 0.026).

However, motivation towards learning english and students’ english laguage proficiency do not

have significant relationship. As well as language anxiety and motivation towards learning

english do not have significant relationship. Same result with language anxiety and english

language proficiency.

For indirect effects, the findings indicated that motivation does not mediate the

relationship between students’s perception towards learning english and students’ english

language proficiency ( β=0.098 , p=0.213). It also revealed that attitude does not mediate the

relationship of students’s perception towards learning english and students’english language

proficiency ( β=0.072 , p=0.072). It can also be noted that students’ motivation towards learning

english does not mediate the relationship of language anxiety and english language proficiency.

Discussion:
 The result revealed that students’ perception in English have a direct effect on students’

attitude towards learming english. Perception is a process where one will form an impression

about something or someone. The perception then affects their attitude towards certain matters or

objects of attitudes (Campbell, 1996).

The result also revealed that students’ perception in Englsh have a direct effect on

students’ motivation. Simply means that if a student has a positive perception towards english

he/ she could be more motivated to learn english.

It can also be seen that students’ attitude in English have a direct effect on students’

motivation. Proficiency in the English language is determines by the learner’s motivation and

attitude in learning the language. Gardner and Lambert (as cited Liu, 2008) stated that the

motivation to learn second language is grounded in positive attitude toward the second language.

Gardner (1985) considers attitudes as components of motivation in language learning. According

to him, “motivation is the combination of effort plus desire to achieve the goal of learning the

language plus favorable attitudes toward learning the language” (p. 10).

Moreover, the students’ attitude towards learning English have a direct effect on

students’ English Language Proficiency, thus attitude is considered as one of the determinants

that contribute to L2 learning achievement. Actually, the active participation of students in a

language learning process is also determined by their attitudes, (Spolsky, 1987). Students’

attitudes positively correlate with their achievement in English. For instance, Holmes (1992)

believes that when people feel positive towards target language users, they will be highly

motivated and consequently more successful in acquiring the target language.

 However, recent findings contradict the notion that students’ motivation in English

determines the students’ English Language Proficiency. Proficiency in the English language is

determines by the learner’s motivation and attitude in learning the language. Gardner and

Lambert (as cited Liu, 2008) stated the motivation to learn second language is grounded in

positive attitude toward the second language. The present study revealed that motivation does not

significantly determine the English Language Proficiency of students.

Additionally, the result revealed that language anxiety does not significantly determine

the motivation of students to learn English. Also it was revealed that language anxiety does not

significantly determine the students’ English Language Proficiency. It was contrary to the notion

that language anxiety directly affects the students’ English Language Proficiency. One of the

determinants affecting the level of proficiency in English language among university students is

language anxiety. Language anxiety can be defined as the feeling of anxiety towards second

language acquisition (Gardner & MacIntyre, 1994). Students who faced language anxiety often

fear of negative evaluation by their educators or native speakers. Humphries R. stated in her

paper that fear of negative evaluation greatly affected students when they tried to practice their

target language.

The present study also explores mediating factors that determines the English Language

Proficiency of Teacher Education Students. Findings of the study revealed tthat motivation does

not mediate the relationship between students’s perception towards learning english and

students’ english language proficiency. It also revealed that attitude does not mediate the

relationship of students’s perception towards learning english and students’english language

proficiency. It can also be noted that students’ motivation towards learning english does not

mediate the relationship of language anxiety and english language proficiency.

Recommendation:

After a thorough analysis of data, the following recommendations are hereby made:

To provide a compelling argument as to the reasons behind proficiency in the English

language is determines by the learner’s motivation and attitude in learning the language, this

study recommends for further research in the in the field of teaching through the use of the actor-

network theory (ANT) perspective. Diffusion theory approach is more of the cause and effect of

innovation while Actor-Network Theory traces the maneuvers, compromises, twists and turns of

a negotiation as it is translated during the process of language learning. The scope of an actor-

network theory (ANT) analysis is to yield a broader understanding relative to the english

proficiency development of the pre-service teachers concerned or attributed to in this study. In

context, diffusion theory ought to be adopted to be able to be diffused through a system

(secondary education), while an actor-network theory approach will be primarily concerned with

tracing the complex and contingent factors involved in the overall innovation process and the

contributory influence to the education sector.

The researchers also suggests to pursue similar study that consist a large number of

respondents or additional hyphotesized causal factors and hopefully even more comprehensive

studies about determinants that influence english proficiency of students. also, future researcher

may seek for more determinants that can affect the English Language Proficiency of Teacher

Education Students.