# Cultural Familiarity, Foreign Language Speaking Skill, and Foreign Language Anxiety: The Case of Indonesian EFL Learners

Authors: Le Thi Ngoc Diep; Anna Gustina Zainal; Isyaku Hassan; Sunarti; Ahmed Qassem Ali Sharhan Al-Sudani; Yalalem Assefa
Journal: Education Research International
 (2022)

---

## Abstract

Since cultural aspects of language learning are not incorporated in some EFL materials and textbooks, this study can be important to investigate the impacts of using cultural-based instruction on developing the speaking skill of Indonesian EFL learners. In addition, this research tried to examine the effects of using cultural-based instruction on foreign language anxiety of Indonesian EFL learners. To reach these aims, the Oxford Quick Placement Test (OQPT) was given to 83 EFL learners, and 50 of them were selected for the target sample of the current investigation. The selected respondents were then randomly divided into two equal experimental and control groups. Afterward, the Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS) questionnaire was given to both groups. After providing the stated questionnaire, both groups were pretested by a speaking test. After that, the experimental group was instructed by applying a cultural-based instruction, while the control group received a noncultural-based education. After the instruction ended, the FLCAS questionnaire and the posttest of speaking were given to the respondents to determine the effects of the cultural-based instruction on their speaking skills and foreign language anxiety. The collected data were analyzed by using independent samples and paired samplet-tests. The results revealed that the experimental group had better performances than the control group on the speaking and anxiety posttests. Finally, based on the results, some conclusions and implications were suggested.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

Culture is a social concept concerned with applying language and communications carried out by humans in specific contexts. Learning a second or a foreign language requires people to learn both linguistic structures and get familiar with the target language culture to understand and establish cross-cultural communications. Thus, in English language learning, it is vital to provide students with cultural circumstances and awareness to gain proficiency in cross-cultural communications of the target language [1–3].Learning a foreign language is about learning a novel culture, lifestyle, traditions, thoughts, and a new and different logic; it is about entering a strange world, realizing people’s behaviors, expanding our knowledge and our level of comprehension. A language is not only an arranged sign system; it is an equation of diverse components of which linguistics is only one of many. Culture makes up an innate element of each individual and the language they express themselves. If culture does not exist without language, then language does not exist without culture. It is believed that language is applied in a cultural context to share intentions and ideas or exchange experiences. Indeed, a lack of proper cultural comprehension results in misunderstanding and breakdown in our communications, or it can lead to mistakes and misinterpretations since language is not just sending and receiving information, but it is considered as social behavior in a particular cultural situation [4–6].Having cultural knowledge can improve EFL learners’ speaking skills. Speaking is regarded as one of the four macro skills vital for all human interactions and communications in all languages, mainly when using a foreign or second language. Zaremba [7] states that speaking is the essential macro English skill for successful interactions. Speaking is defined as “the process of making and sharing meanings by using verbal and non-verbal signs in different situations” ([8], p. 13). Speaking skill is the most common and crucial tool for establishing communication. The key to effective communication is to speak successfully and articulately [9–11].Having cultural knowledge can reduce the foreign language anxiety of the students. Generally, anxiety refers to “the subjective feeling of tensions, apprehensions, nervousness, and worries related to an excitement of the autonomic nervous system” ([12], p. 125). The terror of speaking in front of people is associated with communicative apprehensions. It is a fearful feeling related to physical feelings that are unfortunately familiar to those affected: increased heart and breathing rate, rapid reaction, and tensions in the shoulders and neck areas [13–15]. Anxiety is a response related to physiology and is often defined as apprehension and vague fears [16].In learning English, anxiety is pervasive for the learners, and there exist a few reasons that cause their minds to grow fast toward anxiety. Pupils also feel anxious when others judge their performance in speaking skills. Cubukcu [17] provides the significant resources of anxiety: “(a) presenting before the class, (b) committing errors, (c) losing face, (d) being unable to express ourselves, (e) fears of failures, (f) instructors, and (g) fears of living up to the norms.”Based on Tanveer [18] and Shabani [19], the main problem of the majority of EFL students in language learning is speaking a foreign language. The thing that makes speaking more problematic than other skills is that speakers should possess fast access to all the related information needed to speak an appropriate language in a short time, while in other skills, the students may have sufficient time to match the inputs with the existing knowledge.Considering the important role of cultural background knowledge in language learning, this study pursued two main objectives. First, it examined the effects of cultural background knowledge on the speaking skill of Indonesian EFL learners. Second, it tried to investigate the impacts of cultural background knowledge on foreign language anxiety of Indonesian EFL learners.This research can be significant since it works on one of the main phycological variables (foreign language anxiety) that has a direct effect on language learning. Besides covering foreign language anxiety, this study covers foreign language speaking skill as one of the main skills in English language. The findings of this study can be significant for material developers to include more cultural-based materials in EFL/ESL syllabuses.


## 2. Review of the Literature

In Indonesia, English is instructed as a foreign language. This implies that most instructors and learners do not have opportunities to be subjected to English culture. They mainly do not apply it in their daily routine conversations and communications. Ozguzel [20] asserted that language is a means for presenting culture and translating it. Language is a cultural outcome. Without a culture, language cannot improve and maintain. Culture encompasses knowledge, feelings, traditions, and other types of behaviors learned by people in society, and they are needed in the teaching and learning processes.Learners cannot communicate with other English language users without cultural and linguistic knowledge. Only after cultural issues become a natural part of the language teaching can students learn a language successfully [21–23]. Students need to enhance their knowledge of the cultural differences between English and their mother tongue since knowing the foreign language culture aids them to learn two cultures and makes communication with EFL/ESL learners simple and successful. To reach this end, the instructors must provide contexts so that the students conduct their roles as native speakers. Kramsch [24] asserted that foreign language students could not be proficient in English if they do not know English culture.Kramsch held that having cultural knowledge and cross-cultural awareness accelerates language learning. Learning language and cultural knowledge are relevant, and they need to be considered while making curriculums of foreign languages. Suleiman [25] said that possessing cultural knowledge assists in comprehending the figurative speeches of the language, which in turn enhances teaching and learning the language.Familiarity with the target culture can assist EFL/ESL students to enhance their English learning because culture is the core of language [26–29]. Having cultural awareness can develop the speaking ability of EFL learners. Speaking ability does not mean only knowing how to pronounce the correct intonations. We must read a lot to realize the cultural background knowledge of the target language; only in this way can we successfully communicate with other people and not be misunderstood or misinterpreted. Thus, in teaching speaking, instructors must stress the practical uses of the language and attempt to apply the resources based on daily life. This will assist people in utilizing appropriate sentences in the right situations and contexts. Otherwise, even if someone is linguistically proficient, he may not communicate well since he lacks relevant cultural background knowledge [21, 30–33]. Based on Umaira [34], students should have cultural background knowledge to be able to speak English well and convey what they want to talk about.A few empirical investigations were performed to assess the influences of cultural awareness and knowledge on English language learning (e.g., [35–38]).In the study of Tsou [39], the amalgamation of an anthropology process and a task-based approach were used to do the culture lessons. During one term, cultural instructions were employed to teach the elementary EFL groups to determine the impacts of cultural instructions on learning the foreign language. When cultural materials were incorporated into EFL instructions, learners’ language achievements were highly enhanced. Moreover, the students had more interest in learning the language.Kitishat et al. [40] aimed to verify the significance of cultural background knowledge in foreign language learning. The research took the English language as an instance. Since there were interaction roles between teaching culture and language teaching, the study tried to confirm that English language teaching should not be restricted to the knowledge of the language but also the knowledge of culture. Eventually, the investigation concluded that having cultural background knowledge could aid learners to learn the English language more efficiently. The research offered that educational contexts must be supplied with a proper situation to encourage learning a foreign language.Nasirahmadia et al. [41] investigated the influences of integrating cultural-based resources such as the literature into EFL classes. The researchers chose storybooks as a sample of literature to be taught in their EFL classes to do this study. Then, several selective storybooks based on “Chicken Soup for the Soul” were chosen. After that, fourteen learners were randomly selected and divided into two groups: the conventional and experimental groups. Eventually, the researchers compared the means and medians of their final scores. They discovered that the experimental group outflanked the traditional group in the final test and within the semester regarding classroom discussions.Rasooli and Ahangari [38] scrutinized the effects of cultural familiarity on Iranian EFL students’ listening skill. They selected 60 intermediate EFL participants and assigned them to one experimental group and one control group. Their outcomes showed that the experimental group outflanked the control group on the listening posttest. They revealed that cultural familiarity had a constructive effect on enhancing Iranian EFL students’ listening skill.Al-khresheh [42] discovered that Saudi EFL pupils face any specific problems and challenges in their listening skills, recognize probable reasons for the difficulties, and comprehend if cultural awareness influences listening comprehension. To reach these ends, a triangulation method was utilized. An attitude questionnaire and a diagnostic exam were employed on thirty-one Saudi English learners, and a reflective essay was conducted on eight EFL instructors. First, the outcomes offered that the most challenging language skill was listening. Second, Saudi EFL learners encountered considerable difficulties in the perception, parsing, and use phases of their listening comprehension for several reasons. The results also showed that cultural awareness had a remarkable impact on the Saudi EFL learners’ listening comprehension.After reviewing the literature, we can conclude that cultural background knowledge can assist the students to comprehend and learn the English language better. The outcomes of the previous investigations revealed that activating students’ cultural schema can improve their language skills. Regarding the impacts of having cultural background knowledge on language learning improvement, the current research attempted to examine the effects of cultural-based instruction on boosting the Indonesian EFL learners’ speaking skills. Therefore, the following research questions were posed in this research:RQ1. Does speaking skill of the Indonesian EFL learners develop by using cultural-based instruction?RQ2. Does foreign language anxiety of the Indonesian EFL learners reduce by using cultural-based instruction?According to the above-stated research questions, two null hypotheses were suggested in this research:HO1. Speaking skill of the Indonesian EFL learners does not develop by using cultural-based instructionHO2. Foreign language anxiety of the Indonesian EFL learners does not reduce by using cultural-based instruction


## 3. Methodology

### 3.1. Design of the Study

This quantitative research applied a quasiexperimental design since the random selection was absent. Accordingly, the participants of this study were chosen based on a nonrandom sampling method. This study utilized a quantitative method design, including pre- and posttests. One control group and one experimental group were included in this study. This research examined one independent variable (cultural-based instruction) and two dependent variables (speaking skill and foreign language anxiety).


### 3.2. Participants

The participants of this research were 50 students who were selected among 83 Indonesian EFL learners based on the Oxford Quick Placement Test (OQPT). They were chosen from a private English Language Institute, in Jakarta, Indonesia. The participants’ English proficiency level was intermediate, and their age range was between 18 and 29 years old. Both males and females participated in this research. The target subjects were randomly assigned to two equal groups: experimental (culture) and control (conventional).


### 3.3. Instruments

To do this study, first, the researchers employed the OQPT. This test was used to make the subjects homogeneous. It was administered to assist the researchers in knowing if their participants were at elementary, preintermediate, intermediate, or advanced levels. This test included 60 multiple-choice items, and according to its results, those who scored between 40 and 47 were intermediate and were regarded as the target sample of the current research.The second tool for collecting data was a questionnaire, Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS), designed by Horwitz et al. [12]. There were 33 items in this five-point Likert scale test (1, strongly disagree; 2, agree; 3, neutral; 4, disagree; and 5, strongly agree). Thus, the lowest score was 33 (33×1=33), and the highest score was 165 (33×5=165). The higher the score is, the lower the anxiety is and vice versa. A group of English teachers verified the validity of the FLCAS, and its reliability was calculated by Cronbach’s alpha (r=.81). It should be noted that the mentioned instrument was used as the pretest and posttest of the research to assess the subjects’ anxiety. After the instruction, the questionnaire of FLCAS was used again to measure the effects of using cultural instruction on reducing the speaking anxiety of the respondents.The other instrument applied in this investigation was a speaking pretest designed by the researchers. Several questions about the subjects and the issues of the students’ coursebook were involved in the speaking pretest. The researchers required the control participants to speak about two topics (nationality and personality) and the experimental participants about White Marriage and Sending and Receiving Postcards for about 3 to 4 minutes. When the students started speaking, the researchers recorded their speeches for analysis by a second-rater. Three English instructors verified the validity of this test, and its reliability was measured by Pearson’s correlation analysis (r=.89).The fourth tool that the researchers used was a researcher-designed speaking posttest. Like the pretest, some questions related to the subjects and the issues of the students’ coursebook were included in the speaking posttest. The students were asked to speak about the mentioned topics, and the researchers recorded their speeches. The researchers verified the posttest validity and computed its reliability using Pearson’s correlation analysis (r=.84).The fifth tool in this study was the fluency measure which was previously used by a host of researchers like Ahmadian [43], Ahmadian and Tavakoli [44], and Yousefi [45] to measure the speaking complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF) of the participants. The fluency part of the model used by them is as follows:Fluency measures:(1)
Rate A: the number of syllables produced per minute of oral performance. It is measured by counting the number of syllables within each narrative divided by the articulation time used to complete the task and multiplied by 60 [45]For example, the sentence “We will make movies about animals and take care of their homes” was produced without pauses, received one score, but when accompanied by two or three pauses, received no score.(2)
Rate B: the number of meaningful syllables per minute of speech. It is measured by the use of the procedures used in Rate A, but all syllables, words, and phrases that are repeated, reformulated, or replaced should be excluded [44]


### 3.4. Procedure

To perform this research, the OQPT was first given to determine the respondents’ homogeneity in terms of English language proficiencies. According to the OQPT, 50 participants out of 83 were selected for the target sample of the current research. The subjects were then randomly divided into two equal experimental and control groups. Afterward, the questionnaire of FLCAS was administered to both groups. Then, both groups took the pretest of speaking. After presetting, the respondents of the experimental group received the instruction through using cultural-based instruction. The conversations trained to the experimental group contained some content and issues related to the English culture. Ten topics including English New Year’s Eve, Valentine’s Day, London Film Festival, Manchester Food and Drink Festival, Foodies Festival, White Marriage, Sending and Receiving Postcards, Cathedral, Boxing Day, and Poppy Day or Remembrance Day were selected to teach to the experimental group. The researchers made one conversation for each topic and then introduced it in the class. After teaching each conversation, the students were required to practice it and perform it in front of the class.The participants of the control group were deprived of the mentioned instruction. The conversations taught to the control group were free of any content and issues pertinent to the English culture. Ten general topics, including football, food, technology, COVID-19, nationality, personality, hobbies, abilities, traveling, and health, were selected to be instructed to the control group. One conversation was made for each topic, and then, it was trained in the control class. After teaching each conversation, the participants of the control class were asked to practice it and perform it in front of the class. It should be noted that the instructor of both groups was the same.After the treatment, the mentioned questionnaire and the speaking posttest were administered to the students to determine the impacts of the English cultural materials on their speaking skills and anxiety.The entire instruction took 15 sessions of 40 minutes. In session one, the OQPT was given to the participants for homogenizing them; in sessions two and three, the anxiety questionnaire and the speaking pretest were administered to the participants, respectively. The treatment was carried out during ten sessions, and in the last two sessions, the anxiety questionnaire and the speaking posttest were administered to the students. Eventually, the collected data received statistical analyses by employing SPSS software.


### 3.5. Data Analysis

When the data were all collected by the above-stated procedures, the researchers checked the normality distribution of the data. For checking the normality, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) test was applied. Second, descriptive statistics, including mean score and standard deviation, were provided. Third, inferential statistics encompassing independent samplet-test and paired-sample t-test were utilized for analyzing the data.


## 3.1. Design of the Study

This quantitative research applied a quasiexperimental design since the random selection was absent. Accordingly, the participants of this study were chosen based on a nonrandom sampling method. This study utilized a quantitative method design, including pre- and posttests. One control group and one experimental group were included in this study. This research examined one independent variable (cultural-based instruction) and two dependent variables (speaking skill and foreign language anxiety).


## 3.2. Participants

The participants of this research were 50 students who were selected among 83 Indonesian EFL learners based on the Oxford Quick Placement Test (OQPT). They were chosen from a private English Language Institute, in Jakarta, Indonesia. The participants’ English proficiency level was intermediate, and their age range was between 18 and 29 years old. Both males and females participated in this research. The target subjects were randomly assigned to two equal groups: experimental (culture) and control (conventional).


## 3.3. Instruments

To do this study, first, the researchers employed the OQPT. This test was used to make the subjects homogeneous. It was administered to assist the researchers in knowing if their participants were at elementary, preintermediate, intermediate, or advanced levels. This test included 60 multiple-choice items, and according to its results, those who scored between 40 and 47 were intermediate and were regarded as the target sample of the current research.The second tool for collecting data was a questionnaire, Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS), designed by Horwitz et al. [12]. There were 33 items in this five-point Likert scale test (1, strongly disagree; 2, agree; 3, neutral; 4, disagree; and 5, strongly agree). Thus, the lowest score was 33 (33×1=33), and the highest score was 165 (33×5=165). The higher the score is, the lower the anxiety is and vice versa. A group of English teachers verified the validity of the FLCAS, and its reliability was calculated by Cronbach’s alpha (r=.81). It should be noted that the mentioned instrument was used as the pretest and posttest of the research to assess the subjects’ anxiety. After the instruction, the questionnaire of FLCAS was used again to measure the effects of using cultural instruction on reducing the speaking anxiety of the respondents.The other instrument applied in this investigation was a speaking pretest designed by the researchers. Several questions about the subjects and the issues of the students’ coursebook were involved in the speaking pretest. The researchers required the control participants to speak about two topics (nationality and personality) and the experimental participants about White Marriage and Sending and Receiving Postcards for about 3 to 4 minutes. When the students started speaking, the researchers recorded their speeches for analysis by a second-rater. Three English instructors verified the validity of this test, and its reliability was measured by Pearson’s correlation analysis (r=.89).The fourth tool that the researchers used was a researcher-designed speaking posttest. Like the pretest, some questions related to the subjects and the issues of the students’ coursebook were included in the speaking posttest. The students were asked to speak about the mentioned topics, and the researchers recorded their speeches. The researchers verified the posttest validity and computed its reliability using Pearson’s correlation analysis (r=.84).The fifth tool in this study was the fluency measure which was previously used by a host of researchers like Ahmadian [43], Ahmadian and Tavakoli [44], and Yousefi [45] to measure the speaking complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF) of the participants. The fluency part of the model used by them is as follows:Fluency measures:(1)
Rate A: the number of syllables produced per minute of oral performance. It is measured by counting the number of syllables within each narrative divided by the articulation time used to complete the task and multiplied by 60 [45]For example, the sentence “We will make movies about animals and take care of their homes” was produced without pauses, received one score, but when accompanied by two or three pauses, received no score.(2)
Rate B: the number of meaningful syllables per minute of speech. It is measured by the use of the procedures used in Rate A, but all syllables, words, and phrases that are repeated, reformulated, or replaced should be excluded [44]


## 3.4. Procedure

To perform this research, the OQPT was first given to determine the respondents’ homogeneity in terms of English language proficiencies. According to the OQPT, 50 participants out of 83 were selected for the target sample of the current research. The subjects were then randomly divided into two equal experimental and control groups. Afterward, the questionnaire of FLCAS was administered to both groups. Then, both groups took the pretest of speaking. After presetting, the respondents of the experimental group received the instruction through using cultural-based instruction. The conversations trained to the experimental group contained some content and issues related to the English culture. Ten topics including English New Year’s Eve, Valentine’s Day, London Film Festival, Manchester Food and Drink Festival, Foodies Festival, White Marriage, Sending and Receiving Postcards, Cathedral, Boxing Day, and Poppy Day or Remembrance Day were selected to teach to the experimental group. The researchers made one conversation for each topic and then introduced it in the class. After teaching each conversation, the students were required to practice it and perform it in front of the class.The participants of the control group were deprived of the mentioned instruction. The conversations taught to the control group were free of any content and issues pertinent to the English culture. Ten general topics, including football, food, technology, COVID-19, nationality, personality, hobbies, abilities, traveling, and health, were selected to be instructed to the control group. One conversation was made for each topic, and then, it was trained in the control class. After teaching each conversation, the participants of the control class were asked to practice it and perform it in front of the class. It should be noted that the instructor of both groups was the same.After the treatment, the mentioned questionnaire and the speaking posttest were administered to the students to determine the impacts of the English cultural materials on their speaking skills and anxiety.The entire instruction took 15 sessions of 40 minutes. In session one, the OQPT was given to the participants for homogenizing them; in sessions two and three, the anxiety questionnaire and the speaking pretest were administered to the participants, respectively. The treatment was carried out during ten sessions, and in the last two sessions, the anxiety questionnaire and the speaking posttest were administered to the students. Eventually, the collected data received statistical analyses by employing SPSS software.


## 3.5. Data Analysis

When the data were all collected by the above-stated procedures, the researchers checked the normality distribution of the data. For checking the normality, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) test was applied. Second, descriptive statistics, including mean score and standard deviation, were provided. Third, inferential statistics encompassing independent samplet-test and paired-sample t-test were utilized for analyzing the data.


## 4. Results

The result section reported both descriptive and inferential statistics related to speaking skill and speaking anxiety. The details of the results and statistics are presented below.


### 4.1. Effect of Cultural-Based Instruction on Speaking Skill

In Tables1–6, the impacts of cultural-based instruction on enhancing the speaking skill of the Indonesian EFL learners are reported.Table 1
One-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (speaking skill).
Control preExperimental preControl postExperimental postN25252525Normal parametersMean13.4013.9014.3318.44Std. deviation4.564.902.102.91Most extreme differencesAbsolute.23.18.18.18Positive.16.15.18.16Negative-.27-.14-.13-.13Kolmogorov-SmirnovZ1.06.99.94.95Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed).20.48.43.86Table 2
Descriptive statistics of the two groups in the speaking pretests.
NMeansStd. deviationsStd. error meansControl2513.404.561.020Experimental2513.904.861.04Table 3
Independent samplet-test of both groups in the speaking pretests.
Levene’s test for equality of variancest-test for equality of means95% confidence interval of the differenceFSig.TDfSig. (2-tailed)Mean differenceStd. error differenceLowerUpperEqual variances assumed.73.31.6848.50-3.511.48-7.52-3.48Equal variances not assumed.6837.89.50-3.511.48-7.54-3.46Table 4
Descriptive statistics of both groups in the speaking posttests.
NMeansStd. deviationsStd. error meansControl2514.333.861.04Experimental2518.444.421.23Table 5
Inferential statistics of the two groups in the speaking posttests.
Levene’s test for equality of variancest-test for equality of means95% confidence interval of the differenceFSig.TDfSig. (2-tailed)Mean differenceStd. error differenceLowerUpperEqual variances assumed.07.962.63048.005.332.64.757.35Equal variances not assumed2.6037.49.005.332.64.797.81Table 6
Paired samplet-test (pre- and posttests of both groups).
Paired differencesTDfSig. (2-tailed)95% confidence interval of the differenceMeanStd. deviationStd. error meanLowerUpperControl group-5.524.621.26-6.06-2.84-4.4924.71Experimental group-1.754.381.25-4.39.89-1.4024.00Table1 presents that the statistics of scores are normal based on the results gained from applying SPSS software. Accordingly, the parametric statistics such as independent sample t-test and paired sample t-test were used to achieve the outcomes.Table2 shows that the control group’s mean score is 13.40 and the mean score of the experimental group is 13.90 in the speaking pretest.In Table3, an independent sample t-test was run to see if there were any considerable differences between the two groups’ performances in the speaking pretests. As Sig (.50) is higher than 0.05, the differences between the groups are not remarkable in the speaking pretest.Table4 shows the descriptive statistics of the two groups in the speaking posttests. They performed differently in the speaking posttests. The control group’s mean score is 14.33, and the mean score of the experimental group is 18.44. This implies that the experimental participants outflanked the control participants.Table5 demonstrates that the differences between the two groups are significant at (p<0.05). Indeed, the experimental group had higher achievement than the control group in the posttest of speaking.In Table6, two paired sample t-tests are applied to compare each group’s speaking pre- and posttests. As Sig (.71) is higher than 0.05, the differences between the speaking posttest and the pretest of the control group are not significant, but the differences between the speaking posttest and the pretest of the experimental group are significant because Sig (.00) is less than 0.05.


### 4.2. Effect of Cultural-Based Instruction on Foreign Language Anxiety

In Tables7–9, the impacts of cultural-based instruction on the Indonesian EFL learners’ foreign language anxiety are presented.Table 7
One-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (foreign language anxiety).
StatisticDfSig.EG. Anx. Pre.33025.12EG. Anx. Post.24525.09CG. Anx. Pre.20925.07CG. Anx. Post.34625.21Table 8
Descriptive statistics of both groups in the anxiety pretests and posttests.
GroupsNMeanStd. deviationStd. error meanPretestEG2564.8016.013.20CG2559.8416.043.20PosttestEG25133.0424.804.96CG2570.2017.493.49Table 9
Independent samplet-test of both groups in the anxiety pretests and posttests.
Levene’s test for equality of variancest-test for equality of meansFSig.tDfSig. (2-tailed)Mean differenceStd. error differencePretestEqual variances assumed.89.351.0948.274.964.53Equal variances not assumed1.0948.00.274.964.53PosttestEqual variances assumed12.83.0010.3548.0062.846.07Equal variances not assumed10.3543.14.0062.846.07The results of the KS test in Table7 show that the data are normal (p>.05); hence, the parametric statistics were applied in the following tables.Based on Table8, the control group’s mean score in the pretest of anxiety is 59.84, and the mean score of the experimental group is 64.80. Moreover, the control and experimental groups’ mean scores in the anxiety posttests are 70.20 and 133.04, respectively.As Table9 shows, the differences between the control and the experimental groups in anxiety pretests are not significant as Sig (.27) is higher than 0.05. Thus, based on this table, there are not any considerable differences between the pretests of the conventional and the experimental groups. Moreover, based on Table 9, the differences between the traditional and the experimental groups are significant because Sig (.00) is less than 0.05. This table indicates remarkable differences between the anxiety posttests of the conventional and the experimental groups in favor of the experimental group. It means that the anxiety of the experimental group decreased after the treatment.


## 4.1. Effect of Cultural-Based Instruction on Speaking Skill

In Tables1–6, the impacts of cultural-based instruction on enhancing the speaking skill of the Indonesian EFL learners are reported.Table 1
One-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (speaking skill).
Control preExperimental preControl postExperimental postN25252525Normal parametersMean13.4013.9014.3318.44Std. deviation4.564.902.102.91Most extreme differencesAbsolute.23.18.18.18Positive.16.15.18.16Negative-.27-.14-.13-.13Kolmogorov-SmirnovZ1.06.99.94.95Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed).20.48.43.86Table 2
Descriptive statistics of the two groups in the speaking pretests.
NMeansStd. deviationsStd. error meansControl2513.404.561.020Experimental2513.904.861.04Table 3
Independent samplet-test of both groups in the speaking pretests.
Levene’s test for equality of variancest-test for equality of means95% confidence interval of the differenceFSig.TDfSig. (2-tailed)Mean differenceStd. error differenceLowerUpperEqual variances assumed.73.31.6848.50-3.511.48-7.52-3.48Equal variances not assumed.6837.89.50-3.511.48-7.54-3.46Table 4
Descriptive statistics of both groups in the speaking posttests.
NMeansStd. deviationsStd. error meansControl2514.333.861.04Experimental2518.444.421.23Table 5
Inferential statistics of the two groups in the speaking posttests.
Levene’s test for equality of variancest-test for equality of means95% confidence interval of the differenceFSig.TDfSig. (2-tailed)Mean differenceStd. error differenceLowerUpperEqual variances assumed.07.962.63048.005.332.64.757.35Equal variances not assumed2.6037.49.005.332.64.797.81Table 6
Paired samplet-test (pre- and posttests of both groups).
Paired differencesTDfSig. (2-tailed)95% confidence interval of the differenceMeanStd. deviationStd. error meanLowerUpperControl group-5.524.621.26-6.06-2.84-4.4924.71Experimental group-1.754.381.25-4.39.89-1.4024.00Table1 presents that the statistics of scores are normal based on the results gained from applying SPSS software. Accordingly, the parametric statistics such as independent sample t-test and paired sample t-test were used to achieve the outcomes.Table2 shows that the control group’s mean score is 13.40 and the mean score of the experimental group is 13.90 in the speaking pretest.In Table3, an independent sample t-test was run to see if there were any considerable differences between the two groups’ performances in the speaking pretests. As Sig (.50) is higher than 0.05, the differences between the groups are not remarkable in the speaking pretest.Table4 shows the descriptive statistics of the two groups in the speaking posttests. They performed differently in the speaking posttests. The control group’s mean score is 14.33, and the mean score of the experimental group is 18.44. This implies that the experimental participants outflanked the control participants.Table5 demonstrates that the differences between the two groups are significant at (p<0.05). Indeed, the experimental group had higher achievement than the control group in the posttest of speaking.In Table6, two paired sample t-tests are applied to compare each group’s speaking pre- and posttests. As Sig (.71) is higher than 0.05, the differences between the speaking posttest and the pretest of the control group are not significant, but the differences between the speaking posttest and the pretest of the experimental group are significant because Sig (.00) is less than 0.05.


## 4.2. Effect of Cultural-Based Instruction on Foreign Language Anxiety

In Tables7–9, the impacts of cultural-based instruction on the Indonesian EFL learners’ foreign language anxiety are presented.Table 7
One-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (foreign language anxiety).
StatisticDfSig.EG. Anx. Pre.33025.12EG. Anx. Post.24525.09CG. Anx. Pre.20925.07CG. Anx. Post.34625.21Table 8
Descriptive statistics of both groups in the anxiety pretests and posttests.
GroupsNMeanStd. deviationStd. error meanPretestEG2564.8016.013.20CG2559.8416.043.20PosttestEG25133.0424.804.96CG2570.2017.493.49Table 9
Independent samplet-test of both groups in the anxiety pretests and posttests.
Levene’s test for equality of variancest-test for equality of meansFSig.tDfSig. (2-tailed)Mean differenceStd. error differencePretestEqual variances assumed.89.351.0948.274.964.53Equal variances not assumed1.0948.00.274.964.53PosttestEqual variances assumed12.83.0010.3548.0062.846.07Equal variances not assumed10.3543.14.0062.846.07The results of the KS test in Table7 show that the data are normal (p>.05); hence, the parametric statistics were applied in the following tables.Based on Table8, the control group’s mean score in the pretest of anxiety is 59.84, and the mean score of the experimental group is 64.80. Moreover, the control and experimental groups’ mean scores in the anxiety posttests are 70.20 and 133.04, respectively.As Table9 shows, the differences between the control and the experimental groups in anxiety pretests are not significant as Sig (.27) is higher than 0.05. Thus, based on this table, there are not any considerable differences between the pretests of the conventional and the experimental groups. Moreover, based on Table 9, the differences between the traditional and the experimental groups are significant because Sig (.00) is less than 0.05. This table indicates remarkable differences between the anxiety posttests of the conventional and the experimental groups in favor of the experimental group. It means that the anxiety of the experimental group decreased after the treatment.


## 5. Discussion

Having collected the needed data, the researchers analyzed them to find answers for each research question. The outcomes demonstrated that the experimental group outflanked the control group in the speaking posttest and anxiety posttest. Therefore, both null hypotheses of the research are rejected. The findings indicated that cultural-based instruction developed the Indonesian EFL learners’ speaking fluency and decreased their foreign language anxiety.The reason why the experimental participants outflanked the control participants can be attributed to the cultural exposures that the researchers had provided for the experimental group. Through studying a language by its cultural issues, students open their minds to novel opinions and styles, usually different from their own. Integrating culturally oriented materials in EFL instruction brings about undeniable and considerable impacts on the learners’ cultural knowledge, leading to enhancing their English language competencies. In fact, schemata activation is the reason for the better performance of the experimental group in the posttests. The activation of the experimental students’ schemata helped them rely on their previous knowledge and connect new information to the previous information. This connection is constructive in language learning.The findings of our investigation confirm the conclusions of Nasirahmadia et al. [41], who inspected the influences of integrating the cultural-based resources into the EFL classes and concluded that the experimental group outflanked the control group both in the final test and also in the discussions of the classrooms. Also, our study supports Al-khresheh [42], who discovered that cultural background had considerable influences on the Saudi EFL students’ listening development.In addition, the findings of the present investigation are advocated by Tsou [39], who incorporated culture lessons into EFL instructions and indicated that the learners’ language achievements were highly boosted. Furthermore, the outcomes of the current survey are advocated by Bakhtiarvand and Adinevand [35], who verified that cultural familiarity developed the Iranian EFL students’ listening competencies. Additionally, the present research is supported by Rasooli and Ahangari [38] who confirmed the positive effects of cultural familiarity on developing Iranian EFL students’ listening comprehension.Using culturally based conversations in the experimental group class could be the reason why their speaking fluency developed and their speaking anxiety reduced. Redaoui and Turqui [46] asserted that integrating cultural-based materials within the FEL teaching curriculum can enhance high proficiency in English. Schemata activation may be the other reason the experimental participants outflanked the control participants in the speaking posttest. Bilokcuoglu [47] stated that successfully activating background knowledge could lead to successful language learning. In schemata activation, students rely on their prior knowledge about the text and connect new information to that background knowledge. This connection aids them in learning the English language more successfully [48].Incorporating cultural issues into foreign language teaching is vital to facilitate foreign language learning. This can help EFL learners make communications with their users. Turkan and Celik [49] asserted that if effective integrations occur, the EFL/ESL students will be able to flexibly and logically along the lines of cultural norms they face within the target language culture. The results of the present study are supported by cultural schemata theory based on which a successful activation of background knowledge can lead to successful language learning. Based on this theory, students’ prior cultural knowledge about any topic is connected to the new cultural knowledge, and finally, this connection results in language learning.The findings of our study are in line with Menacho-Vargas et al. [50], who examined the effects of culturally based conversations on enhancing Peruvian EFL learners’ speaking performance. Their research demonstrated that the experimental participants who were trained by culturally based conversations outflanked the control participants in the speaking posttest. Also, the results of this study are in agreement with Mashudi et al. [51] who verified the effects of English cultural knowledge on Indonesian EFL learners’ grammar knowledge.


## 6. Conclusion

According to the results of this investigation, we can conclude that applying cultural materials in teaching and learning can bring about remarkable impacts on EFL learners’ language learning. Therefore, it can be said that learning the English language is not limited to learning its vocabulary and grammar but also includes understanding the culture of English. Regarding the effectiveness of cultural familiarity, EFL instructors are recommended to incorporate more culturally based materials and activities into their classes to pave the way for the students to become familiar with English culture.This research can bring about some instructional implications for EFL instructors, students, and syllabus designers. The outcomes of this study can persuade instructors to expose their learners more to the target culture by incorporating culturally oriented materials and activities in their teaching. Teachers should provide adequate cultural background knowledge for their students before starting teaching each lesson. They have a crucial role in acting as an intercultural mediator and in compensating for the missing sociocultural issues in language coursebooks. Hence, they must cover those cultural issues that are not present in the coursebooks to aid their students to improve their cultural knowledge and awareness. In addition, the findings of this research can aid EFL learners in developing their cultural knowledge by reading original English texts, books, and short stores. This study can encourage EFL learners to familiarize themselves with the target culture by following English TV channels and participating in English online courses. The results of this investigation can encourage material developers to pay more attention to the importance of English cultural familiarity in the EFL curriculum and syllabus. In addition, this study can help material developers to integrate more cultural-based content and materials in EFL English textbooks.


## 7. Limitations and Suggestions of the Study

Like other studies, this research suffers from some limitations. Due to some limitations, only 50 participants were included in this research. Upcoming investigations are recommended to add more subjects to their study samples to increase the generalizability of their findings. The present research investigated the impacts of the cultural-based instructional environment on speaking skills and speaking anxiety; future studies can examine the effects of cultural-based instruction on other skills and subskills. The other limitation refers to the treatment period, which was short; subsequent investigations can expand the treatment time. The study was limited to the Indonesian intermediate EFL learners; next studies can work on other proficiency levels.



---

*Source: 3910411-2022-04-16.xml*