IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

Proficient Speakers of English as a Foreign Language:
A Focus-Group StudyAli Dincer
Erzincan Binali Yildirim University, Turkey
Tevfik Dariyemez
Ataturk University, Turkey

83

IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

Abstract
Although English is the de facto language of communication across nations in today’s world,a limited number of foreign language learners are able to communicate well in English andperceive themselves as competent speakers. Investigating traits of proficient speakers ofEnglish and understanding the reasons behind their speaking skills can guide language teachersin creating supportive language learning contexts for their students. This study explores what
proficient speakers of English do to gain success in speaking, and it sheds light on how to
improve speaking skills in language learning. The study examines what factors play animportant role in the language development of proficient speakers of English. Sixteen English
as a foreign language (EFL) students who had the highest scores on English speaking tests
volunteered for this study; four focus groups were created with four participants in each group.
Content analysis results indicate that contextual factors – including self-practice, teacher factor,
experience abroad, Turkish context, out-of-class technology use, and affective factors,
including motivation and anxiety – are important for speaking enhancement. Findings clearly
reveal that language learning should go beyond the confines of the school and be supportedwith technology-enhanced extracurricular exercises in EFL contexts. Moreover, what
motivates language learners to study English and how they feel while speaking should beconsidered while teaching or planning their speaking lessons.
Keywords: speaking skills, proficient speakers, contextual factors, motivation, anxiety

84

IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

With two billion-plus speakers, including native and non-native speakers with different
competencies, the English language has become a fundamental need for individuals in thisglobalizing world (Crystal, 2008; Ethnologue, 2019; Graddol, 2006). As a result, the number
of English as a foreign or second language speakers (L2) is growing (Crystal, 2008). Since
knowing a language is equated with speaking that language fluently, speaking English has
become a primary goal for most L2 learners. However, a limited number of English learners
can be categorized as competent speakers of the language. According to the recent EF English
Proficiency Index (English First, 2019), only 14 countries have a very high proficiency index
and many countries (30) fall into the shallow proficiency index among 100 non-English
speaking countries under investigation for adult English proficiency with standardized tests. It
is commonly accepted that many EFL instruction programs strive to provide appropriate
conditions for learners to gain high proficiency in English. However, despite the importance of
fluent spoken language, scant research attention has been given to strategies that can be
employed to enhance speaking (Pawlak, 2018). With its specific focus on the experiences of
proficient speakers in achieving success, this study used a qualitative approach to understandthe nature of those proficient speakers and aimed to provide rich data on the influential factors
about speaking enhancement.
Literature Review
Mastery of speaking in another language is a complex process: the speaker must learn a variety
of skills including both linguistic and non-linguistic elements, and should be able to conduct afree-flowing conversation (Dincer, 2017; Richards, 2008; Shumin, 2002; Tarone, 2005; Zhang& Head, 2009). A number of factors affecting speakers’ oral performance, including
maturation constraints (i.e., age), aural medium factors (i.e., listening skills), sociocultural
factors (i.e., cultural elements), and affective factors (i.e., L2 anxiety, L2 motivation, selfesteem, confidence) can be listed in addition to linguistic, sociolinguistic, and discourse
competence (Kawai, 2008; Shumin, 2002). With its complex nature hindering proficiency,
spoken English is arduous; language learners must spend significant time and effort on mastery(Dincer, 2017; Kawai, 2008). Spoken English is also a skill in high demand, as knowing alanguage is frequently equated with speaking a language at a communication level (Pawlak,2018). Most learners in today’s globalized world study English to obtain speaking proficiency;
it is considered the most demanding among the four main language skills: reading, listening,writing and speaking (Dincer, 2017; Zhang & Head, 2009). Although speaking is the mostchallenging skill, most English language learners have limited opportunities to practice thelanguage outside the classroom, despite today’s technological advances (Dincer & Yesilyurt,
2013; Kawai, 2008; Pawlak, 2014, 2018; Ruixue, Zejun, & Yijing, 2012). Teaching the spoken
language has long been a challenge for EFL teachers because some national exams neglectcommunicative competence (Ruixue et al., 2012). As limited numbers of students can conduct
a conversation in English at the desired level, a proficient speaker may be perceived as a
privileged person in society (Dincer, 2017). Additionally, success in oral communication has
always been the ultimate goal for language learners (Dincer, 2017; Pawlak, 2018).
How one successfully learns a language has been of great interest in the L2 research domain,
and a list of shared traits of these learners can be found in the literature (Brown, 2001; Griffiths,
2015; Reiss, 1985; Rubin, 1975; Takeuchi, 2003). Among those shared features, linguistic
mastery of English and oral communication skills is listed. However, specific details regarding
the characteristics of advanced speakers of English have gained little attention (Pawlak, 2018).
In this limited research, Takeuchi (2003) ascertained the strategies of successful language
learners in terms of language sub-skills by investigating the experiences of Japanese EFL

85

IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

learners. According to Takeuchi (2003), proficient language learners develop their speaking
skills by memorizing some basic sentences and reciting them repeatedly. They also emphasize
accuracy more than fluency. In another study (Takeuchi, 2003, cited in Kawai, 2008), Takeuchi
investigated language learning development of proficient English speakers from different
vocations, including professors and simultaneous interpreters, and listed some strategies formastery of speaking. Similar to his previous research, he found that memorizing formulaic
expressions, practicing listening using dictation, engaging in read-aloud activities, utilizing
context and multimedia for vocabulary enhancement, conducting intensive self-study, andfinding opportunities to talk with native speakers are commonly employed strategies for theselearners.
In her two-step action-research, Kawai (2008) first investigated the role of task-based strategy
instruction with an electronic chat program in students’ speaking performance with the ideathat it might ease intimidation in face-to-face interaction. Later, she gathered the viewpoints of
two proficient speakers of English about the class discussion activities. She found that the useof electronic chat programs can be useful for reserved learners to let them practice English
without fear of making mistakes and appearing foolish. The proficient speakers also suggested
that reading aloud, singing songs, making comments while watching TV, speaking withnatives, and simulating conversation with peers are helpful for reducing anxiety and building
confidence in their speaking skills. They also pointed to precautionary measures incommunication breakdowns and learning from their failures as speaking-enhancement
strategies.
Marzec-Stawiarska (2015) investigated the relationship between anxiety and speaking
proficiency in advanced learners of English as the literature on this relationship is notunanimous. She found that although language learners may have an adequate level of English
proficiency, they experience stress and worry in a speaking context. They are anxious about
their fluency, vocabulary, pronunciation, and the content of their oral performances and are
afraid of talking with native speakers. In another study, Pawlak (2015) investigated thecommunication strategies of advanced learners and found that students use non-verbal
strategies, negotiation for meaning, social affective strategies, accuracy-oriented strategies, andfluency-oriented strategies in their communication. These learners attempt to make eye contact
when they talk, provide examples if the listener does not understand what they say, enjoy theconversation, correct themselves when they notice that they make a mistake, and attempt tospeak clearly and loudly to make themselves understood. He also found that learners’ answers
are quite varied; for example, “I give up when I can’t make myself understood,” “I think firstof what I want to say in my native language and then construct the English sentence,” and “I
ask other people to help when I can’t communicate well.”
In a more recent study, Lee and Heinz (2016) grouped the effective and ineffective strategiesof advanced learners for speaking with unstructured essays. In parallel to Takeuchi’s findings(2003), they discovered that memorization and repetition activities are effective for thedevelopment of speaking skills. Students repeatedly practice language, memorize English
expressions and collocations and incorporate them into their conversation, read aloud, listen to
English, practice creative writing, increase their exposure to English, and mimic native
speakers. They also said passive activities such as simply listening to native speakers, watching
them, or reading books without studying them and placing emphasis on grammar are noteffective for them. In his follow-up study, Pawlak (2018) investigated the speaking strategies
that advanced learners of English used before, during, and after the performance of two
communication-based tasks in pairs. According to the written responses of students, learners

86

IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

most frequently used metacognitive strategies in all stages of task performance. Specifically,
they engaged in planning their contribution in terms of searching for details for content, finding
appropriate vocabulary, monitoring their performance concerning language-related issues, andpaying attention to their partner’s speech. They also used social strategies such as cooperation,
asking for clarification, or verification in all stages of task performance.
Although relevant literature is somewhat overlapping in terms of speaking enhancement
activities, it offers various strategies based on individual success stories and teacher-assigned,task-based communication activities. The literature also includes semi-structured, questionbased written answers of learners with a limited focus on out-of-class experience. Focus-groupinterviews are advised in literature for a more thorough understanding of strategies employed
by a specific group of students (Chamot, 2004). Additionally, in today’s digital era, it isundeniable that successful language learning is not limited to in-class activities; out-of-classactivities have a significant impact on language learning (Lai, 2017). However, many questions
about how proficient language learners develop their speaking skills remain to be unanswered,and there is a call for more research with successful learners to uncover experience-based
working suggestions for enhancement of speaking skills (Dincer, 2017; Kawai, 2008; Lee &Heinz, 2016; Marcos-Llinas & Garau, 2009; Pawlak, 2018). To this end, gaining an
understanding of proficient learners’ successful journeys might shed light on the improvementof speaking skills in language learning for learners and provide pedagogical insights forlanguage teachers.
Aim of the study
Given the limitations of literature and the scarcity of research on this subject, this study aims
to explore how high achievers succeeded in their speaking proficiency and which factors
played a role in their achievement with a qualitative focus-study approach. The study answers
the following research question: What are the factors that contribute to the success of proficient
speakers of English as a foreign language?
MethodResearch Design
This study was conducted as a qualitative case-study approach for an in-depth systematic
examination of a case, subject, or study group within its real-life context (Cohen, Manion, &Morrison, 2018). Different designs of case studies can be found in the literature (Merriam,
1998; Stake, 2005; Yin, 2009). For a holistic understanding of the study phenomenon, thisstudy adopted Yin’s (2009) single-case design, which focuses on an extreme group (i.e.,advanced learners’ speaking English) that was relatively under-researched in L2 literature.
Therefore, a focus-group discussion data-collection strategy was employed for an in-depth
understanding of proficient speakers’ viewpoints.
Study Group
Sixteen advanced learners of English (including 10 males) participated in the study. They are
the freshman students in the English Language and Literature Department. Their proficiency
is expected to be somewhere between B2 and C1, according to the Common European
Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). In their first year, they enroll in skill-based
language courses – such as advanced writing skills, reading skills, speaking skills, and listening
skills – as well as some courses in their native tongue. They were recruited with a purposive
sample strategy, extreme case sampling. According to Cohen et al. (2018), with this strategy,
participants are selected because of their extreme characteristics within the group to provide a87

IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

clear understanding of the central phenomenon. The students are high achievers in fouradvanced learners’ speaking classes (with a total enrollment of 120 students) and were chosen
for the study group based on their speaking exam scores (ranging from 90 to 96 out of 100)and the personal opinion of the course instructor. A total of 20 students were invited toparticipate in the study and 16 of them volunteered to do so. Their ages ranged from 18 to 22
years of age (M = 19.31; SD = 1.25). According to self-reports, they had more than seven yearsof experience in English (M = 7.38; SD = 2.16). Three students had traveled to Englishspeaking countries for a few months. Only six students know a foreign language other thanEnglish but at a beginner level.
Data Collection and Analysis Procedure
As a data-collection methodology, a focus-group interview was chosen for an in-depth
investigation of learners. According to Lew, Yang, and Harklau (2018), this data-collection
strategy is one of the least-used approaches and limited research exists on qualitative focusgroup interviews in L2. In this method, participants discuss a topic that is determined by themoderator, and reliance is given to the interaction within the group (Cohen et al., 2018). In
focus groups, participants interact with each other and work together on the topic at hand. A
focus group differs from a straightforward interview, which relies heavily on the researcher’s
agenda and provides more data than individual interviews (Morgan, 1996). As the interaction
within the group is crucial for data and outcomes, the researcher should put much importanceon the creation of the groups and the role of the facilitator or moderator of the discussion(Cohen et al., 2018). According to Morgan (1996), group size and the moderator’s involvement
depend on the goals of the research.
In this study, the primary goal was to generate significant data on the characteristics ofproficient speakers within an anxiety-free context. Four focus groups with four students in eachwere created so as to provide adequate speaking time for students and moderators involved in
the lightly structured discussion. The participants were first informed about the study, theiranonymity, and their right to withdraw anytime during the interview. After their consent was
secured, each participant completed a short questionnaire about their demographic details andEnglish learning experience. Then, they were invited to a focus-group session at theirconvenience. The second researcher of the study served as the moderator of the sessions,following an interview protocol and taking some field notes. Each session began with an
introduction of the participants, continued with discussion of some semi-structured questions,and concluded with a summary of key issues by the researcher. In discussions, students were
free to enter and add their remarks after others had spoken. Additionally, they were asked
whether they wanted to add any information to the concluding remarks. The sessions were in
English and audio-recorded. The average interview session lasted 18 minutes.
For trustworthiness of the study, four commonly cited approaches – credibility, transferability,
dependability, and confirmability – were considered in the data-collection analysis process(Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Merriam, 1998). Audio-recorded data was transcribed first for analysis
and was verified by the researchers. Qualitative content analysis was conducted to identify
patterns that emerged and to build relations among the patterns by the researchers. In thisprocess, researchers first independently worked on creating initial codes in the raw data
analysis, step by step, following the procedure of the general inductive approach (Thomas,
2006). They later worked together to group the codes after discussions. After finalizing thecreation of groups and deciding the main themes, a third researcher’s opinion about the groups
was taken concerning the final themes with a diagram of relationships. For the member check,the diagram of relationships was sent to the participants for verification; all students agreed on

88

IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

the findings without adding any major changes. In the presentation of the analysis, the maincategories were illustrated with figures. The categories with sub-themes were supported withsample student excerpts. In this manner, numbers indicate interview sessions and letters wereused to distinguish participants (i.e., 1-A = first interview, first participant; 4-D = fourthinterview, fourth participant).
Findings
Two main categories emerged from the focus-group interview sessions. Both contextual andaffective factors are important in enhancing speaking skills and gaining proficiency. These
factors and their sub-themes are presented, respectively.
Contextual Factors
The first category, named “contextual factors,” has five themes: self, school, abroad, country,
and technology. These themes also have sub-sub-categories and codes. The details are provided
in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Contextual factors to superiority in speaking English
Self as the first theme in the figure expresses students’ self-initiated strategies for speaking
enhancement. Students stated that they attempt to improve their speaking skills with selfpractice techniques. For instance, they watch themselves while speaking in the mirror andimitate the speech of some well-known native speakers. They also said they use English a greatdeal, even if they have limited opportunity to practice with someone. They also love English
songs and recite those songs as well. They summarize aloud in English what they have listened89

IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

to or watched, and they imagine a situation and talk to themselves in that situation in English
when they are alone. Emphasizing these issues, student 4-A said: “There are not enoughchances to practice English with natives, so I talk to myself and summarize the videos I watch
aloud.” Other students agreed with this statement and shared their own similar learning
experiences via self-talking.
The second theme, school, included language teacher feedback and the importance of a nativespeaker teacher. The theme demonstrated that the teacher’s being a native speaker of English
has a positive impact on students and that teacher feedback is important in the development of
speaking skills. Since the students have a limited opportunity to practice English with native
speakers in daily life, to speak with a native-speaker teacher and be understood by the teacher
gave students additional motivation. Moreover, the students highlighted the teacher’s role inlanguage learning and said that positive feedback about their speaking skills plays a significant
role in their willingness to practice speaking. Emphasizing the role of teacher feedback inlanguage development, student 1-B said: “Teachers’ feedback motivates me to develop myskills. Actually, it is the most motivating thing. I can tell every student gives a lot of importanceto teachers’ comments.” The constructive feedback given by teachers seems to constitute an
essential part of teaching strategies.
The third theme is related to experience abroad. One of the learners said she traveled to England
to take English language courses. However, this type of learning activity is quite expensive andis not common among students who enroll in state universities. Instead, most students gain
experience in a foreign country through exchange programs such as Erasmus, Grundtvig, andthe European Voluntary Service (EVS). In fact, the number of students who participate inexchanges has grown exponentially in recent years. One of the former exchange students, 2-D,shared his experiences as, “In my hometown, you cannot see tourists, so I went to Europe witha Comenius project and I made friends there. I occasionally talk to them on the internet.”
The fourth theme, country, signifies home country experience and is directly linked to theEnglish-speaking context in Turkey. Some learners are fortunate to have native speakers in theneighborhood, such as brides from England or retired English neighbors. They also seize theopportunity to attend English clubs and participate in discussions in English-speaking cafés.
Some learners also become volunteers at international organizations such as the European
Youth Olympic Festival (EYOF). They take advantage of significant speaking practice time
during the competitions and communicate on the Internet with the friends they have madeduring these events. Some learners, especially those who live near tourist attractions, havetaken jobs that involve speaking practice. Student 2-A said, “I worked as a tour guide in Bursa(a historical Turkish city); I made many foreign friends, I speak to them on Skype whenever I
get the chance.”
The fifth and last theme, technology, has a relatively strong influence on speaking
development. To meet their need for practice, learners said they utilize audio and audio-visualmaterials, make use of chat apps, and play video games. Downloadable podcasts on languagelearning websites, radio programs, and foreign music are popular audio files for listening
practice. Online television series and English television channels are two popular audio-visualsources for language development. Student 3-C argued that watching television not only
develops one’s language skills but also one’s general knowledge: “By watching TV series, you
do not only learn a language but also their culture, social life, and movements (bodylanguage).” Indeed, communication is both verbal and non-verbal. The role of video games in
improving speaking skills is arguably one of the most-discussed issues in the L2 domain. Some90

IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

learners said they developed their speaking skills by playing online games in which they speakwith players around the world and single-player games that require English competency tounderstand the tasks assigned in the game. Student 2-B highlighted the contributions of playing
computer games by saying, “I began to play computer games not for fun but for language. I
owe a lot to games in which you need to talk just like in real life.” Some video games enable
players to create their own characters or avatars and to live and speak in a simulated world.
Chat apps such as Skype and Facebook Messenger are used for chat and video calls. Cambly,
an app for practicing English with native English speakers over video chat, and similar
applications that enable learners to have a video call for speaking practice are becoming
popular. Social networking sites such as Facebook and Instagram make it possible for users to makefriends around the globe. Thanks to these social networking sites, learners are able to keep in touchwith people they meet in real-life settings such as tourism.
Affective Factors
The second category addressed “affective factors” in speaking enhancement. It examines what
motivates students to improve their speaking skills and how they feel when they begin
communicating with others in English.

Figure 2: Affective factors to superiority in speaking English
Codes relating to the students’ motivation to speak English were collected under two subthemes: intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation. The first sub-theme, intrinsic motivation,
is a driving force for many learners to develop their speaking skills. Intrinsic motivation reveals
itself in various ways. Some learners say they have fun while talking in English. Those students
use mirror techniques, or they talk to themselves when they are unable to find native speakers
with whom to practice. Other learners enjoy listening to songs or podcasts and watching
television series or movies in English. One student described the fun he has when watching
and understanding television without any subtitles. Understanding native speakers in real-life91

IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

conversations and forming good conversations provide a significant motivational boost. Other
learners become motivated when they understand native speakers well and are able to express
themselves in English. Emphasizing the connection between the joy of accomplishment andintrinsic motivation, student 3-D said, “I didn’t understand native speakers in the past, now I
can; that motivates me.”The second sub-theme explores extrinsic motivation, which pushes students to develop theirspeaking skills. Although students have reached an acceptable level of spoken skill, they
continue to develop their skills so they can pursue a career in English teaching. Some learners
say they want to be just like their idol teachers, who have native-like proficiency in speaking.
Such learners became more motivated when they spoke to their teachers and earned praise.
Their motivation was fueled by teacher feedback. Positive teacher feedback is highly valued
by most language learners, as it makes them feel more confident. To express that feeling of
motivation and self-confidence, learner 4-C said, “I get motivated when my teacher states that
I am in the right direction. Once, one of my teachers said, ‘I hope one day we will work
together’.” Emphasizing the importance of native-speaker praise, student 2-D said, “Whenforeigners say, ‘Your English is good,’ I feel motivated.” The last reason why learners are
motivated stems from the role of English in the world as a lingua franca. Learners know they
will be able to communicate with people around the globe thanks to the role of English as aninternational language.
Students also elaborated on their feelings when they speak English. The first sub-theme wasanxiety. Learners feel anxious while talking due to self-driven behaviors and classroom-related
factors. Some students state that self-related factors such as low proficiency, lack of proper
pronunciation, and lack of practice hold them back. Others attribute their anxiety to the
proficiency level of native speakers and the fact that they are strangers. Talking to native
speakers of English may have a demotivating effect on learners. Emphasizing the native
speakers’ effect on L2 anxiety, student 2-C said, “Some natives are not eager to talk; that
demotivates me. Some of them speak very fast and use slang terms.” Another factor resulting
in anxiety is the language classroom itself. In classrooms, some learners may not find aconvenient atmosphere to speak with ease. Immediate error corrections by the teacher are notwelcomed by many students. Some learners refrain from speaking in the classroom since they
believe their friends will ridicule their mistakes. Focusing on the negative behaviors of thestudents in the class, student 4-D said, “I have always felt nervous talking in the classroom. I
thought before I spoke since others may laugh at my mistakes.” Oral exams are another factor
that increases anxiety. Some learners said they feel the highest level of anxiety during an exam,
which hinders their speaking performance.
Another sub-theme reveals why and how learners feel relaxed while talking in English. Relaxed
speakers are generally composed of confident and sociable learners. To gain confidence in thetarget language, one essential requirement is competency. Competent learners are usually lessanxious. Emphasizing the role of competence in dealing with anxiety, learner 1-C said, “I thinkmost people feel anxious about talking to native speakers since they don’t know the language
well, but I don’t. I, in fact, feel confident. I have never been to your country but I know yourlanguage, so that makes me feel confident.” Besides competency, personal traits such as
extroversion are highly valued by learners. One learner argues that if one is of a sociable type,he or she is likely to be more relaxed while speaking than a reserved learner. Learners also feel
relaxed when they are in a friendly atmosphere or when they are talking to someone they know.
Even in their mother tongue, some people may be hesitant to talk to those they do not know
well. Emphasizing the importance of the communication partner in the speaking context,92

IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

learner 3-B said, “I feel relaxed talking to my acquaintances but anxious while I am talking inan exam or with a stranger.”
Discussion
This study explored how proficient speakers of English become so and used a qualitative focusstudy approach to investigate what factors play a role in these learners’ success. In parallel withvarious studies, the findings indicated that both contextual factors related to students’ self,school or out-of-school settings, and affective factors such as motivation and anxiety contributeto these learners’ success, and these factors are important for the enhancement of speaking
skills.
Findings regarding the contextual factors revealed that advanced learners adopt several selfpractice strategies and use various contextual factors to improve their speaking skills. It has
been proved that the school factor is only a piece of the puzzle and that learners use every
opportunity to practice English both in and out-of-class. Consistent with the extensive use ofcognitive and metacognitive strategies by advanced learners in the literature (Kawai, 2008;
Pawlak, 2018) and studying coping strategies for speaking enhancement in non-nativespeaking contexts (Abrar et al., 2018), the students monitored themselves with mirror
techniques, imitation techniques, and self-talk. They focused on fluency and accuracy while
speaking in terms of vocabulary selection and pronunciation. These types of strategies areuseful not only for speaking proficiency engagement but also in creating confidence in learners(Forbes & Fishes, 2018). Although both native and non-native English-speaking teachers havespecific advantages and there is no convincing evidence of one group’s superiority overanother, English native speakers are highly preferred by the institutions and students in EFL
settings (Levis, Sonsaat, Link, & Barriuso, 2016). Supporting this belief, the learners in thisstudy mentioned having a native speaker teacher as a privileged and supportive factor of theirspeaking proficiency and pronunciation, which parallels the relevant research (Lasagabaster &Sierra, 2006). Additionally, positive teacher feedback is a motivator for speaking confidence
and proficiency (Forbes & Fishes, 2018).
In connection with the research about studying a target language abroad on learner beliefs (e.g.,
Amuzie & Winke, 2009; Kaypak & Ortaçtepe, 2014; Surtees, 2016), the learners in this study
expressed that experience gained with student exchange programs and language courses in anative English-speaking country are influential in belief systems and English proficiency. In
addition to self-practice efforts, teacher support, and foreign country experiences, the students
benefited from any opportunity they could find in their home country and attended several
events. This finding was expected, as proficient learners are autonomous learners who know
their strengths and weaknesses well and make decisions to improve themselves at every
opportunity (Cotterall, 2008; Kawai, 2008). Proficient language learners also make significant
use of technology and find positive connections with language learning outcomes (Lai, Zhu, &Gong, 2015; Reinders & White, 2011; Sylvén & Sundqvist, 2012). Supporting these thoughts,
the learners in the study used various technological tools to improve their speaking skills, suchas playing video games online and offline, participating in chat apps to connect with native
speakers, and watching television series or listening to radio to enhance their pronunciation
and understanding. All of these findings reveal that proficient English speakers are actively
engaged in the language learning process both in class and outside of class, engage in selfdirected strategies to improve their proficiency, and create significant opportunities forpracticing their English.

93

IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

Affective factors, including motivation and anxiety, also emerged in the focus-group
discussions. These two themes correspond to psychological factors that take place while
studying English and starting a conversation in English. Motivation is one of the strongest
predictors of L2 learning success (Dörnyei & Csizér, 1998). Within the framework of selfdetermination theory (SDT), (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2017), L2 motivation ranged
from the least self-determined to the most self-determined orientation. Consequently, both
intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations are significant for boosting motivation to speak
English. Connected with previous research (Dincer & Yesilyurt, 2017), intrinsic motivators
include the joy and pleasure of language, and extrinsic motivators include pursuing careergoals, praise, reward, and English being a lingua franca. Regarding the second affective factor,
anxiety, it seems that although language learners are high achievers and enjoy a relatively highlevel of mastery in speaking English, they feel anxious when doing so. Consequently, anadvanced level of language learning does not guarantee anxiety-free or stress-freeconversations. Corroborating the results of a number of research studies (Abrar et al., 2018;
Gan, 2013; Kitano, 2001; Marcos-Llinas & Garau, 2009), the main stressors even forcompetent English speakers are self-imposed and school-related factors such as linguisticcompetence, lack of opportunities to speak English, underestimation of their own capacity,
comparisons with classmates, oral proficiency exams, and negative teacher behaviors. It is
known that affective factors are closely connected with self-concept, which plays an importantrole in determining students’ motivation to speak and see their actual competency levels(Dincer & Yesilyurt, 2017; Eccles & Wigfield, 2002).
It should also be noted that although anxiety is accepted as an indicator of poor speaking
performance and the cause of failure in speaking in the literature (Horwitz, 2001; Horwitz,
Horwitz & Cope, 1986; Liu, 2006), the case might be different for advanced learners ofEnglish. Since these learners are much more aware of the importance of the activity and theresulting higher expectations, they might place significant self-imposed pressure on theirspeaking ability. Sometimes, higher proficiency means higher anxiety as well (Kitano, 2001;
Marzec-Stawiarska, 2015, Marcos-Llinas & Garau, 2009). Significant anxiety does not equate
with limited proficiency, as there is no positive relationship between success and anxiety
among advanced-level learners (Marcos-Llinas & Garau, 2009). As Marzec-Stawiarska (2015)
hypothesizes, L2 anxiety might have a more facilitative nature for speaking engagement.
Emphasizing the connection among self-concepts, students in this study are relaxed while
speaking as they have great self-confidence and sociable characteristics. They are also morerelaxed while speaking with their acquaintances than while speaking with a foreigner. Thisfinding corroborates the findings of Dewaele (2007).
Conclusion
The study findings presented above provide further understanding about the nature of proficient
speakers of English and help explain why some students outperform others while speaking.
The findings also provide a basis for some teaching implications for language teachers andeducators. They reveal that proficient speakers of English are autonomous learners who takeresponsibility for their own learning and seize every opportunity to practice both inside andoutside class. While self-practice strategies and school-related factors are influential, theselearners also practice their English in experiences abroad and in their home country. They use
technology for practice and acknowledge that language learning should go beyond the confinesof the classroom to ensure better oral communication. Additionally, they have revealed
affective factors for speaking proficiency enhancement. Considering these findings, it is clearthat language teachers should create opportunities for learners to practice speaking within an

94

IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

autonomy-supportive L2 context and move language learning beyond the classroom withtechnology integration. Based on the literature (Dincer & Yesilyurt, 2017; Lai et al., 2015;
Reeve, 2012), teachers should first acknowledge students’ interests and care about students’needs and interests during the teaching process. They should let students be physically,
emotionally, and cognitively engaged in their learning and support language learners’autonomous motivation to study English with authentic language learning experiences. It
should also be noted that this study, with its pure qualitative design, is not flawless, and one
should approach its findings with caution. First, the study was conducted with a small sample
of advanced learners of English. Second, one type of data collection methodology was adopted
in the study. Then, further research could be conducted with larger sample size and diversified
data collection strategy to yield stronger results. Although focus-group interviews provide richdata and strengthen the results, adopting student observation techniques, allowing students tokeep language-learning diaries, and encouraging them to write a reflective journal on their daily
exercises for further research might add much to the understanding of proficient speakers.
Additionally, as L2 anxiety painted a different picture for proficient speakers in this study,
further research might focus on this issue and examine more closely the links between anxiety
and language proficiency level. In sum, understanding the nature of proficient English speakers
is a less charted-terrain of language learning research, and examining why proficient learners
outperform others remains a promising area of study waiting for answers.

Acknowledgments
A part of the data in this study was presented orally at The 19th International INGED ELT
Conference, 2019 and the authors thank the reviewers for their insightful comments.

95

IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

References
Abrar, M., Mukminin, A., Habibi, A., Asyrafi, F., Makmur, M., & Marzulina, L. (2018). “If
our English isn’t a language, what is it?” Indonesian EFL student teachers’ challenges
speaking English. The Qualitative Report, 23(1), 129–145.
Amuzie, G. L., & Winke, P. (2009). Changes in language learning beliefs as a result of study
abroad. System, 37(3), 366–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.02.011
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy(2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
Chamot, A. U. (2004). Issues in language learning strategy research and teaching. Electronic
Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 1(1), 14–26.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.).
New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539
Cotterall, S. (2008). Autonomy and good language learners. In C. Griffiths (Ed.), Lessons
from good language learners (pp. 110-120). Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Crystal, D. (2008). Two thousand million? English Today, 24(1), 3–6.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078408000023
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in humanbehavior. New York, NY: Plenum.
Dewaele, J. M. (2007). The effect of multilingualism, sociobiographical, and situational
factors on communicative anxiety and foreign language anxiety of mature language
learners. International Journal of Bilingualism, 11(4), 391–409.
https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069070110040301
Dincer, A. (2017). EFL learners' beliefs about speaking English and being a good speaker: A
metaphor analysis. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(1), 104–112.
https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.050113
Dincer, A., & Yesilyurt, S. (2013). Pre-service English teachers' beliefs on speaking skill
based on motivational orientations. English Language Teaching, 6(7), 88–95.
https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v6n7p88
Dincer, A., & Yesilyurt, S. (2017). Motivation to speak English: A self-determination theory
perspective. PASAA: Journal of Language Teaching and Learning in Thailand, 53(1),1–25. https://doi.org/10.14456/pasaa.2017.1
Dörnyei, Z., & Csizér, K. (1998). Ten commandments for motivating language learners:
Results of an empirical study. Language Teaching Research, 2, 203–229.
https://doi.org/10.1177/136216889800200303
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review
of Psychology, 53, 109–132.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135153
English First. (2019). EF English proficiency index: A ranking of 100 countries and regions
by English skills (9th ed.). Retrieved from https://www.ef.com/ca/epi/
Ethnologue (2019). What are the top 200 most spoken languages? Retrieved fromhttps://www.ethnologue.com/statistics/size

96

IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

Forbes, K., & Fisher, L. (2018). The impact of expanding advanced level secondary school
students' awareness and use of metacognitive learning strategies on confidence andproficiency in foreign language speaking skills. The Language Learning Journal,
46(2), 173–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2015.1010448
Gan, Z. (2013). Understanding English speaking difficulties: An investigation of two Chinese
populations. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 34(3), 231–248.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2013.768622
Graddol, D. (2006). English next. Why global English may mean the end of ‘English as aforeign language’. London: British Council.
Griffiths, C. (2015). What have we learnt from ‘good language learners’?. ELT Journal,69(4), 425–433. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccv040
Horwitz, E. (2001). Language anxiety and achievement. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 21, 112–126. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190501000071
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, E. K., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety.
Modern Language Journal, 70(2).
125–132. https://doi.org/10.2307/327325
Kawai, Y. (2008). Speaking and good language learners. In C. Griffiths (Ed.), Lessons fromgood language learners (pp. 218–230). Cambridge: Cambridge University.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511497667.020
Kaypak, E., & Ortaçtepe, D. (2014). Language learner beliefs and study abroad: A study on
English as a lingua franca (ELF). System, 42, 355–367.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.01.005
Kitano, K. (2001). Anxiety in the college Japanese language classroom. The Modern
Language Journal. 85(4), 549–566. https://doi.org/10.1111/0026-7902.00125
Lai, C. (2017). Autonomous language learning with technology: Beyond the classroom. New
York, NY: Bloomsbury.
Lai, C., Zhu, W., & Gong, G. (2015). Understanding the quality of out‐of‐class English
learning. TESOL Quarterly, 49(2), 278–308. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.171
Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2006). Learning English with computers at university level.
In E. A. Macià, A. S. Cervera, & C. R. Ramos (Eds.), Information technology inlanguages for specific purposes (pp. 157–176). New York, NY: Springer
Lee, J., & Heinz, M. (2016). English language learning strategies reported by advanced
language learners. Journal of International Education Research (JIER), 12(2), 67–76.
https://doi.org/10.19030/jier.v12i2.9629
Levis, J. M., Sonsaat, S., Link, S., & Barriuso, T. A. (2016). Native and nonnative teachers of
L2 pronunciation: Effects on learner performance. TESOL Quarterly, 50(4), 894–931.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.272
Lew, S., Yang, A. H., & Harklau, L. (2018). Qualitative methodology. In A. Phakiti, P. De
Costa, L. Plonsky, & S. Starfield (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of applied linguistics
research methodology (pp. 79–101). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59900-1_4
Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

97

IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

Liu, M. (2006). Anxiety in EFL classrooms: Causes and consequences. TESL Reporter,
39(1), 13–32.
Marcos-Llinás, M., & Garau, M. J. (2009). Effects of language anxiety on three proficiency‐
level courses of Spanish as a foreign language. Foreign Language Annals, 42(1), 94–
111. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2009.01010.x
Marzec-Stawiarska, M. (2015). Investigating foreign language speaking anxiety among
advanced learners of English. In M. Pawlak & E. Waniek-Klimczak (Eds.), Issues inteaching, learning and testing speaking in a second language (pp. 103–119).
Heidelberg–New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38339-7_7
Merriam, S. B. (1998) Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Morgan, D. L. (1996). Focus groups. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 129–152.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.22.1.129
Pawlak, M. (2014). Error correction in the foreign language classroom: Reconsidering theissues. Heidelberg-New York: Springer.
Pawlak, M. (2015). Advanced learners’ use of communication strategies in spontaneous
language performance. In M. Pawlak & E. Waniek-Klimczak (Eds.), Issues inteaching, learning and testing speaking in a second language (pp. 121–141).
Heidelberg–New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38339-7_8
Pawlak, M. (2018). Investigating the use of speaking strategies in the performance of two
communicative tasks: The importance of communicative goal. Studies in Second
Language Learning and Teaching, 8(2), 269–291.
https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2018.8.2.5
Reeve, J. (2012). A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In S. L.
Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student
engagement (pp. 149–172). New York, NY: Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_7
Reinders, H., & White, C. (2011). Special issue commentary: Learner autonomy and newlearning environments. Language Learning & Technology. 15(3), 1–3.
https://hdl.handle.net/10652/2497
Reiss, M. A. (1985). The good language learner: Another look. Canadian Modern Language
Review, 41(3), 511–523. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.41.3.511
Richards, J. C. (2008). Teaching listening and speaking. From theory to practice. New York,
NY: Cambridge University.
Rubin, J. (1975). What the "good language learner" can teach us. TESOL Quarterly, 9(1), 41–
51. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586011
Ruixue, M., Zejun, M., & Yijing, W. (2012). An empirical study on speaking proficiency
training for Chinese EFL learners. Higher Education of Social Science, 2(1), 26–31.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs inmotivation, development, and wellness. New York, NY: The Guilford.
Shumin, K. (2002). Factors to consider: Developing adult EFL students’ speaking abilities. In
J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An
anthology of current practices (pp. 201–211). Cambridge: Cambridge University.

98

IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 1 – 2020

Stake, R. E. (2005) Qualitative case studies. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.) The Sage
handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp 443–66), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Surtees, V. (2016). Beliefs about language learning in study abroad: Advocating for alanguage ideology approach. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study
Abroad, 27, 85–103.
Sylvén, L. K., & Sundqvist, P. (2012). Gaming as extramural English L2 learning and L2
proficiency among young learners. ReCALL, 24(3), 302–321.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S095834401200016X
Takeuchi, O. (2003). What can we learn from good foreign language learners? A qualitative
study in the Japanese foreign language context. System, 31(3), 385–392.
Tarone, E. (2005). Speaking in a second language. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of researchin second language teaching and learning (pp. 485-502). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Thomas, D. R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation
data. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 237–246.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214005283748
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Zhang, X., & Head, K. (2009). Dealing with learner reticence in the speaking class. ELT
Journal, 64(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp018
Corresponding author: Ali Dincer
Contact email: adincer@erzincan.edu.tr

99