INTRODUCTION 

The classroom is a formal setting where most educational processes occur. For effective learning to take place, participation in classroom activities is important (Tsui 1996). This corresponds with Tatar (2005) that none can deny that active classroom participation played an important role in the success of language learning. Students who are actively involved, reported higher satisfaction and higher persistence rates (Tsui 1996:146). Moreover, students’ participation is important in providing the setting in which they can construct and shape identities as members of the classroom (Jackson, 2002). 

Active participation in an ESL classroom involves the students’ use of the target language. Verbal responses given by the students to the teachers, coupled with feedback from the latter will facilitate the learning process. Tsui (1998) notes that when students listen to the teacher’s instruction, express their opinions, answer questions and carry out tasks or activities, they are not only learning about the language, but also using the language, which is the ultimate aim of learning a second language. When students are involved in verbal participation in the classroom with their teachers or peers, they have the opportunity to practice speaking the language, as they will be involved in the “negotiation of meaning”, that is to express and clarify their intentions, thoughts and opinions (Lightbown & Spada, 2006). In turn, the students’ “communicative competence” or what they need to know to communicate, can be developed in the classrooms (Hymes, 1972; Larsen-Freeman, 2000; Chang & Goswami, 2011). Therefore, students’ oral contribution is of great importance when talking about classroom participation. 

However, the ESL classroom can be a frustrating place when most students remain silent in class, and only a small proportion of them actually participate (Fritschner, 2000). Despite teachers’ expectations and most students’ awareness regarding the importance of speaking in the target language, it is disheartening to note that ESL students still remain passive in the language classroom. In the ESL classroom, this situation is termed as ‘reticence’. In this essay, I intend to discuss the issue of reticence among ESL learners, causes, effects and some suggestions to alleviate this classroom issue.

RETICENCE IN THE ESL CLASSROOM 

Research in reticence originally started in the field of speech communication with the publication of Gerald M. Phillips’ 1965 article with the notion that some individuals had difficulties with communication in various situations (Keaten & Kelly, 2000). Originally, Phillips’ construct viewed reticence as a personality and anxiety disorder. However, he refined this concept and added the behavioural dimension. This shifted the focus away from personality-based reticence towards a description of reticent behavior caused by problems of inadequate communication skills (Phillips 1984). A major characteristic of reticent individuals was social withdrawal or avoidance due to their feelings of ineptitude towards social communicate events and public performance. “When people avoid communication because they believe they will lose more by talking than by remaining silent, we refer to it as reticence” (Phillips, 1984:52).

Based on Phillips’ works, Keaten and Kelly (2000) reconceptualised reticence. Their proposed theoretical model includes a modified behavioural and cognitive dimension with an additional affective component. Reticence is defined as a “communication problem” and it is “due to the belief that one is better off remaining silent than risking appearing foolish” (Keaten & Kelly, 2000). People who are considered as reticent often experience a “fear of the unknown” and become nervous to utter a word, fearing that what they say is incorrect.

In recent decades, the issue of students’ reticence in the ESL classroom has been receiving increasing attention (Jackson, 2002; Liu and Jackson, 2009; Tsui, 1996). The most common allegations about reticent students are they participated hesitantly in classroom activities; reluctant to do voluntary replies, reticent to answer let alone initiate questions, and even if they answer, they give brief replies; they seldom speak up about their opinions even if they have one; and they hold back from expressing their views (Braddock et. al., 1995; Cortazzi & Jin, 1996; Tsui, 1996). 

It has also been found that many second language students, especially Asian learners, are passive in language classrooms and choose not to use the target language most of the time, especially when responding to teachers (Cortazzi & Jin 1996; Tsui, 1996). Years of being in primary and secondary schools where teacher-centred learning took the main focus had institutionalized the students to being receptive students when they enter tertiary education. Students are used to “sitting in class and listening quietly to teachers…until requested by teachers to speak in class” (Liu, 2005). After many years of studying in this “rigid format” and “solemn atmosphere” (Cheng, 2000), students are accustomed to a quiet classroom and they are somewhat conditioned to learn in this way. 

Cheng (2000) added that “situation-specific factors such as teaching methodologies and language proficiency level” (2000) contribute to students’ reticence. Liu and Jackson’s (2009) study found that students who have a higher proficiency level were more willing to speak in class. Meanwhile, students who have paid too much attention to the development of receptive skills and too little attention to productive skills, such as oral communicative ability will become reticent (Cheng, 2000). Students’ failure to use the target language in the classroom will “engender in the instructor false assumptions regarding the ability of the learner, particularly if the instructor is a native speaker of the target language” (Cheng, 2000). Because of these assumptions, these low-proficiency students might have less opportunities and uneven allocation of turns to participate verbally in the ESL classrooms and this may lead to students’ beliefs that their contributions in the classroom are insignificant. Hence, students’ reticence is amplified.

Another factor that is often cited as the cause of students’ reticence is anxiety or fear of making mistakes, partly due to the desire to be right and perfect and fear of losing face (Cheng, 2000). Similarly, Tsui (1996) found that one of the factors of reticence is students’ lack of confidence and fear of making mistakes and being laughed at. These affective factors are likely debilitating to an ESL student’s language learning. 

The implications of reticence in the language classroom are many, such as inhibiting student’s academic performance, confidence, self-esteem and level of participation in the ESL classroom (Li & Liu 2011). Reticent students also frequently suffer from mental block during spontaneous speaking activities and anxiety makes them forget previously learned material. Li and Liu (2011) also believe that these effects could extend to outside the ESL classroom, where a high level of reticence might correspond with communication apprehension, causing the students to be quieter and less willing to communicate in public situations. People who display this kind of communication reticence are highly likely to be viewed as “less trustworthy, less competent, less socially and physically attractive, tenser, less composed and less dominant than their less reticent counterparts” (Li & Liu 2011).

Other than language students, reticence in the ESL classroom also impacts the teacher. Teachers may face a range of negative feelings such as anxiety, depression, inferiority and a loss of confidence associated with low level of participation from the silent students, and this often makes the teacher feel upset and frustrated (Ping, 2010).

CONCLUSION

Students’ reticence in the language classroom are caused by a multitude of factors and these affect their verbal participation in the classroom. As Jackson (2003) claims, reticence is a complex phenomenon in language classrooms, since it is provoked by a set of linguistic, psychological, cultural and social factors. This phenomenon does not only deny these silent students of the benefits that classroom participation offer, but their classmates are also deprived of the opportunities to gain from their insights, thinking and knowledge. Marchand (2011) posits that in order to improve students’ reluctance to speak, the classroom culture that operates in the traditional “ritual” domain, should be changed to one that encourages open communication in the “interactional” domain. In this domain, there are three aspects that are looked into namely affective, discoursal and linguistic. Among the measures are preparing interesting and engaging tasks, giving learners interactional time and space, and modifying teacher-talk with simplified speech, respectively.

In addition, the problem of students’ reticence can be alleviated by getting them to write down their English answers and check the answers with their peers before offering them to the whole class (Chang 2011). By doing this, the students will not feel very intimidated by the evaluation of their peers and teacher, compared to when giving their answers orally in front of the whole class in their first attempt. This is a low-risk situation that helps to decrease students’ speaking inhibitions. In addition, language teachers can encourage students to speak by helping them establish positive attitudes towards speaking errors (Hsu, 2001). Teachers should explain to students that everyone makes mistakes and mistakes are an inevitable part of language learning. 

By employing these measures, students’ reticence in the ESL classroom can be reduced and their oral participation in the classroom can be improved.

REFERENCES

Braddock, R., Roberts, P., Zheng, C., Guzman, T. (1995) Survey on skill development in intercultural teaching of international students. Macquarie University Asia Pacific Research Institute, Sydney.

Chang, F. (2011) The causes of learners’ reticence and passivity in English classrooms in Taiwan. The Journal of Asia TEFL (8), 1, 1-22.

Chang, M. & Goswami, J. S. (2011) Factors affecting the implementation of communicative language teaching in Taiwanese college English classes. English Language Teaching, 4 (2), 3-12.

Cheng, X. (2000) Asian students’ reticence revisited. System, 28, 435- 446.

Cortazzi, M. & Jin, L. (1996) Cultures of learning: language classrooms in China. In Coleman, H. (ed.) Society and the Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fritschner, L. M. (2000) Inside the undergraduate college classroom: Faculty and student differ on the meaning of student participation. The Journal of Higher Education, 71 (3), 342-362.

Hsu, W. (2001) How classroom questioning influences second language acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Illinois.

Hymes, D. H. (1972) On Communicative Competence. In Brumfit, C. J. & Johnson, K. (eds.) The Communicative Approach to Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Jackson, J. (2002). Reticence in second language case discussion: Anxiety and aspirations. System, 30, 65-84. 

Jackson, J. (2003). Case-based learning and reticence in a bilingual context: Perceptions of business students in Hong Kong. System, 31, 457-469.

Keaten, J. A. & Kelly, L. (2000) Reticence: An affirmation and revision. Communication Education, 49 (2), 165-177.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000) Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Li, H. & Liu, Y. (2011) A brief study of reticence in ESL class. Theory and Practice in Language Studies (1), 8, 961-965.

Lightbown, P. M. & Spada, N. (2006) How Languages Are Learned (3^rd ed). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Liu, M. (2005) Reticence in oral English language classrooms: A case study in China. TESL Reporter 38 (1), 1-16.

Liu, M. & Jackson, J. (2009) Reticence in Chinese EFL students at varied proficiency levels. TESL Canada Journal, 26 (2), 65-81.

Marchand, T. (2011) Reticence in the classroom: Examples, causes and suggestions for improvement. Obirin Today.

Philips, G. M. (1984) Reticence: A perspective on social withdrawal. In Daly, J. A. & McCroskey, J. C. (eds) Avoiding Communication: Shyness, Reticence and Communication Apprehension. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Ping, W. (2010) A Case Study of an in class Silent Postgraduate Chinese Student in London Metropolitan. TESOL Journal, 2, 207-214.

Tatar, S. (2005) “Why Keep Silent? The Classroom Participation Experiences of Non-native English-Speaking Students”. Language and Intercultural Communication, 5, 284-293.

Tsui, A.B.M. (1996) Reticence and Anxiety in second language learning. In Bailey, K. M. & Nunan, D. (eds.) Voices from the language classroom (pp. 145-167) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Written by Immaculata Demetra Dionysius Asai

*This piece is solely the personal opinion of the author and does not necessarily reflect HIVE Educator’s stance.