Petra Schenke Anxiety in the Foreign Language Classroom Abstract. There is mounting evidence in language teaching research that affective variables play an important part in the success and enjoyment of learning a foreign language but the role of anxiety in a classroom situation has not been given much attention. Inhibitions to speak in a foreign language are still associated with a Jack of communicative skills. Accordingly, anxious students are seen to be less competent. Recent psychological research, however, has described anxiety as a learned social response that might effect the individual learner's confidence and be of some importance for his or her learning efforts. This article will show the necessity of dealing with anxiety in the classroom in order to make learners feel comfortable with their language learning experience. 1. Affective components of language learning Research on foreign language teaching in the 90s has reemphasized the importance of the learner's perspective on classroom events. Affective factors have been acknowledged to play an important part in foreign language learning inside and outside the classroom (Hermann 1978; Solmecke/ Boosch 1981; Moody 1988; Gardner/ Maclntyre 1991a,b; Ellis 1995; Larsen-Freeman/ Long 1991/ 1997; Hermann-Brennecke 1997; Riemer 1997), but there is little agreement on how anxiety (Angst) effects second language acquisition. Riemer (1997: 16) concludes that there seems tobe no linear relation between anxiety and success in learning a foreign language. Research on anxiety and learning has generally accepted Alpert and Haber's (1960) distinction betweenfacilitating and debilitating anxiety which implies that anxiety can either help or hinder performance. The stimulating effects of anxiety seem tobe most prominent with farniliar and/ or easy learning tasks and individuals that can keep their arousal at a moderate level. lt is accepted that the personality profile and individual learning experience of the learner largely determine levels of anxiety in a given learning situation. The so-called worrier as opposed to the non-worrier (cf. Mathews 1990) would feel exposed to relatively high levels of anxiety even if just faced with a simple task. Accordingly, the literature on anxiety distinguishes between a more permanent, personalitybased, state-anxiety and another form of anxiety that is caused by the situation itself (e.g. a test situation). Whereas this distinction is readily accepted in foreign language acqu~sition research (cf. Larsen-Freeman/ Long 1997), Crozier (1997) points out its limitations from an educational psychologist point of view. He suggests that learners should be taught strategies that help them to cope with anxiety rather than viewing anxiety as a fixed personality trait: "it would be desirable [...] to allow students with different personality profiles to reveal their acadernic abilities" (ibid.: 141). Undoubtedly, if we knew what our language learners think and feel about their language learning experiences, then it should be easier to cater for their individual needs. But how do the teachers possibly find out how their pupils feel in a specific learning situation at a lFLIIL 28 ( 1999) Anxiety in the Foreign Language Classroom 213 particular time of the day. How far is their learners' well-being even related to the subject that is taught in the lesson. Naiman [et al.] (1978/ 1995) have shown that "attitudes to the language learning situation play an important role in successful language learning". They argue that teachers should know about their students' positive and negative attitudes towards classroom activities in order to give them a choice between different learning tasks: some students should be allowed to listen to the foreign language passively for limited periods of time; they could be given a choice of different material...and content [...] Others who preferto use the language might want to select from different oral activities [...] (ibid.: 180) Affective variables such as anxiety have only recently been seen to have influence on foreign language development, but even in the 90s researchers seems to believe that second language anxiety is simply caused by a lack of language competence: Gardner and Maclntyre (1993: 5) define second language anxiety "as the apprehension experienced when a situation requires the use of a second language with which the individual is not fully proficient". Ganschow and Sparks are not yet convinced that "affective variables are more important for foreign language learning than for any other task" (1996: 208). Through talking to learners, researchers have found out that anxiety is frequently felt by a considerable number of learners, and not only in test situations. Some learners admit to apprehension in classroom conversation as a permanent state (cf. Horwitz [et al.] 1986: 128). Crozier (1997: 207) warns that "studies of primary and secondary school children suggest that some 30 percent of pupils remain silent in dass [...] and initiale seven times fewer interactions than their peers [...] A similar trend is apparent in higher education." So what are the underlying reasons for this widespread reticence? lt would be too easy for the educators to assume that there simply are shy pupils by nature because "there are many reasons why a child might appear withdrawn that do not necessarily reflect specific difficulties with social relationships" (Crozier 1997: 192). Extreme forms of anxiety should at least be easy to recognize for the teacher, but if he/ she is not faced with the physical evidence of a trembling stuttering student, the learners' anxiety might be more difficult to perceive. "lt is [therefore] important for teachers to rfmember that when students are unresponsive, it is possible that they are affected by language learning anxiety rather than simply being unmotivated or incompetent" (Tsui 1996: 165). 1.1 Anxiety, self-confidence and foreign language performance Crozier (1997: 124) reminds us that "according to learning theory, anxiety is a learned response that warns the person that an unpleasant event is going to happen." lt depends on the individual, however, whether he/ she decides to escape the situation in order not to lose face or, to the contrary, would try extra hard to perform well in a given learning situation. Current research on the correlation of anxiety and performance has not come to any final conclusions. Croziers (1997: 134) concludes that "anxiety can either help or hinder performance, depending on factors like the level of anxiety, the nature of the task, and the individual' s past learning". • lFLulliL 28 (1999) 214 Petra Schenke To the foreign language teacher this general concept might not be very helpful because it would be almost impossible for him/ her to know about each student's individual anxiety level in any given learning situation. From my action-research on the upper level of a German Gymnasium ( 1993-1995), I have found that speech anxiety in the dassroom almost never leads to increased performance, but more commonly results in the refusal to speak up in dass at all. Over a period of two years, learners who did not participate more than twice on average in t).le 5 English lessons per week did not improve their language skills. There was a strong negative correlation between the students' participation in dass and their marks in English for both oral and written work. The fact that the data came from only one course (with 24 students) and that the researcher and the teacher were the same person might cast some doubt on the validity of the data evaluation. On the other hand, the dose contact with the students helped to relate their dassroöm behaviour to their private problems. This is of great importance because even if a student is definitely found tobe anxious over a considerable period of time, the problem might not be caused by the lesson but be related to the learner's personal problems. In this empirical group it turned out that 5 students' private problems had led to long patches of dassroom withdrawal which the teacher was unable to change. Surprisingly, researchers of speech communication have so far defined avoidance predominantly as a strategy of learners who do not feel confident in the foreign language (cf. Foss/ Reitzel 1988: 442). They do acknowledge that there is a difference between students' actual language performance and their self-image in the language dassroom. Accordingly, the learners' decision to participate in the foreign language talk would be mostly determined by their confidence to understand what others are saying and in putting across their own message; their full linguistic potential can only be used when they feel comfortable with their own ability. The students' self-image is usually influenced by the teacher' s judgement but can also develop independently (cf. das Selbstfähigkeitskonzept in Nold [et al.] 1997). Students with a low self-regard for their language competence might, in fact, reinforce a negative teacher's judgement by dealing with language tasks in a self-conscious manner. Even though teachers should definitely look out for signs of learner-anxiety, we should also bear in mind that a lack of communicative participation might simply be induced by the learners' disinterest in the learning material and/ or the teacher's interactive behaviour that does not allow the learner to develop his/ her ideas (cf. Schenke 1998). The heterogeneity of opinion about the causes and consequences of anxiety in the foreign language classroom might not be so surprising if we can accept that language ability is not a measurable and definable entity but that it manifests itself in transient language performance which in itself is dependent on the learner's individual competence at a.particular time in a particular situation. 1.2 Addressing the problem of anxiety in the language classroom lt would certainly be unrealistic to demand of the language teacher that he/ she deals with every single problem of anxiety that occurs in his/ her classroom considering the restraints of the school environment and the time limits of teacher training: "Many of the methods suggested, such as systematic desensitization, hypnosis, or biofeedback, demand levels of lFlL111L 28 (1999) Anxiety in the Foreign Language Classroom 215 training and expertise beyond those of ESL teachers" (Foss/ Reitzel 1988: 439). This does not imply, however, that teachers should not try to do something about anxiety. But before they can reduce existing levels of classroom anxiety, teachers would have tobe informed by language research in what way anxiety in foreign language leaming differs from general communicative apprehension inside and outside the classroom (cf. ibid.: 438). lt has only been since the 90s that researchers acknowledged the necessity of finding an empirically based concept for anxiety in the foreign language classroom: "Second language research has neither adequately defined foreign language leaming anxiety nor described its specific effects on foreign language learning" (Horwitz [et al.] 1986). Empirical research of Horwitz [et al.] (1986) at the Learning Skills Center of the University of Texas strongly suggests that language leamers have to face anxiety to a greater extent than leamers of other subjects. The researchers argue that we all feel a certain apprehension when communicating with each other. In a foreign language classroom we supposedly have even "(less) control of the communicative situation and (our) performance is constantly monitored" (ibid: 127). From their conversations with particularly anxious learners Horwitz [et al.] conclude that "many otherwise talkative people are silent in a foreign language dass". These students feel that their linguistic competence is not up to their communicative intentions. Ganschow/ Sparks (1996: 200) do not accept this result because Horwitz [et al.] "did not assess the students' native skills or foreign language aptitude to determine if highly anxious students had overt or subtle native language learning problems or weak foreign language aptitude". In their view, anxiety is usually not related to stronger language skills because the successful language learner would experience the learning environment in a more positive fashion than the poor foreign language learner. Ganschow/ Sparks (1996: 208) would therefore want to use anxiety measures to "identify students who are likely to perform poorly and might therefore be candidates for language intervention". This would imply that teachers should not even try to deal with their students' anxiety in the language classroom but exclusively concentrate on the development of language skills. But the relationship between anxiety and language proficiency has not been clarified so far by large-scale empirical studies and the results of single studies seem to be contradictory. Nunan/ Lamb (1996: 219) say that "the complexity of issues associated with affective factors in the learning process, and the oversimplistic assumptions we sometimes hold is highlighted by available research in the area". They conclude that high anxiety can also be related to superior language performance. Mathews ( 1996: 41) also finds empirical evidence for the stimulating effect of anxiety. These research findings tie in well with my own observations in EFL classes at 15 German Gymnasien between (1996-1997) where I rarely came across speech anxiety in those students that were pointed out by their teachers as poor language learners. In my observation scheme I did not have to rely purely on the teachers' classification of poor language learners but could also look at written work these pupils had produced in the past. About 20 % in a total of 350 pupils apparently had great difficulty in communicating in the foreign language because they were lacking in phonological, syntactical as well as semantic skills, but only 3 % of them seemed tobe hampered by anxiety as arule. Some (almost 7.5% out of 350) pupils were even more talkative in English than in their native language; they told me that they liked to talk in a foreign language because "you can say things more lFLIIIL 28 (1999) 216 Petra Schenke easily". In my observation-study 'anxiety in the foreign language classroom' bas been a construct of observable student bebaviour with prominent besitation, stammering, numerous false starts and/ or incomplete sentences combined witb pbysical signs of frustration, embarrassment, and disturbance. Students' reticence was not interpreted automatically as a sign of anxiety, instead tbose pupils wbo bad remained silent over tbe period of a lesson were questioned by me informally for tbeir reasons. Only a very small number of tbem stated any feelings of anxiety. But even thougb tbe 52 students interviewed were reassured that tbeir answers would not ·be passed on to tbeir teacbers, the information given to me, migbt not bave been totally accurate because tbe interviewees bad wanted to keep face. Triangulation of the interview-data would bave been desirable througb long term observation of tbese students' bebaviour botb by tbeir teacbers and peers. To arrive at any final conclusions about tbe interdependency of poor language aptitude and speecb anxiety further researcb would obviously be necessary. Tbe result of my study, however, indicates tbat a lack of foreign language skills migbt not foster speecb anxiety. lt also suggests to the teacber not to automatically assume that pupils previously seen as shy and reticent would never want to practice a foreign language in tbe classroom. Pupils wbo manage to overcome their L1 speecb anxiety wben speaking a foreign language are apparently not unique to the German classroom. Horwitz [et al.] (1986) made similar experiences with foreign language learners in the U.S. (cf. ibid.: 127). Apparently, the foreign language can provide the non-native speaker with a sort of mask and hide an otherwise sby personality; tbe learner wbo loses bis inbibitions to talk in tbe foreign language classroom feels relieved. But bow beneficial for language development is active participation in tbe classroom discourse (cf. Ellis 1995: 604)? How mucb and at wbat stage does the foreign language learner need to interact with otber speakers to gain a basic command of tbe new language? And is it sufficient for the learner to simply practice speech patterns or would classroom interaction bave tobe meaningful communication if it is going to enbance language learning? 2. How much need the foreign language learner talk? If Stephen Krasben' s Input Hypothesis (1985) is valid, which states that speecb production is not directly related to acquisition, tbe language teacher should grant the learner an initial period of silence in wbich he/ sbe can acquire speech patterns before he/ she is required to produce tbem. According to this theory, teacbers would inflict anxiety on their learners when they ask tbem to speak too early. Clearly, we would have to distinguish between teacber-structured classroom discourse focussing on specific aspects oftbe language taugbt and a more natural kind of spontaneous communication where learners can put their points of view across. Tbe latter form of discourse with its more flexible communication structures would obviously depend on learners not feeling sby and anxious. Henrici (1993: 219 f) has observed that anxiety and introvertness in tbe classroom lead to one way communication structures between teacher and class and be argues tbat learners wbo rarely talk to eacb otber would not bave a very good starting point at learning the foreign language. If bis claim could finally be proven by bis long-scale empirical researcb on the relevance of interaction IFlLlUIL 28 (1999) Anxiety in the Foreign Language Classroom 217 for second language acquisition, then anxiety has to be acknowledged as a problem that could deterrnine the success of classroom leaming (cf. Henrici 1996). Unfortunately, research on language learning and acquisition has not yet been clear about the beneficialeffect of either prestructured or spontaneous interactive communication in the language classroom (cf. Allwright/ Bailey 1991: 130). There seems tobe firm evidence of the "beneficial effect of interactionally modified input on comprehension" (cf. Ellis 1995: 276). Larsen-Freeman/ Long (1991/ 1997: 131) point out that teachers should seriously consider Hatch' s argument (1978) that learners acquire L2-syntactic structures through conversation. This would imply for the teacher that he/ she serves as a cooperative source of help in constructing dialogues rather than simply correcting mistakes of morphology and grammar. Referring to Hatch (1983) and Sato (1986), however, Larsen-Freeman/ Long (1991/ 1997) do acknowledge that conversational help can ease the pressure of correct grammatical coding and thus even hinder acquisition. This rnight explain why Ellis (1995: 276) could not find conclusive evidence for the importance of grammatical modification in discourse. lt does surprise, though, that Larsen-Freeman/ Long only refer to grammar acquisition and seem to ignore the meaning of L2-words and phrases as an integral part of foreign language learning and teaching (cf. Lewis 1997); and there is some evidence that negotiation of meaning primarily known as caretaker talk or motherese that seems to foster understanding in children' s first language acquisition (cf. Snow/ Ferguson 1977; Brown 1977) is also important for learning a second language (Seliger 1983; for review see Pica 1994, 1996). Breen ( 1996) goes as far as saying that anything the learner picks up in the classroom is filtered by the social discourse. Learners that do not participate either verbally or mentally would therefore not stand a chance to discover the communicative effect of language structures. This does. not imply that classroom conversation should simply be about expressing points of view. lt would be important to see the learner as an active participant also in those lessons that involve explaining new vocabulary and grammatical items because the teacher can only explain things well, if the class provides some sort of feedback as to what kind of explanation is wanted and needed (cf. De Florio-Hansen 1994: 578). If we do see the classroom as social environment, then indeed, we would be able to understand why students that do not get a chance to express their needs as learners withdraw from the classroom discourse. But what can EFL teachers do about pupils that do not want to take up their role as discourse practioners? Can teachers even find out why their students do not want to speak in their lessons? Of course, they could try and facilitate participation by prestructuring their pupils' utterances, be affirmative and supportive towards them, but, in the end, reluctant learners cannot be forced to use the language. Up to now it is far from clear if a lack of language skills does stop the learner from participating in the lesson ifhe/ she was otherwise interested in the discourse. A small empirical study in the advanced ELT classroom in Germany (Schenke 1995) provides a first answer; it has shown that learners do not actually mind being helped out with new words and phrases when communicating their viewpoints in the language classroom as long as their ideas are not censored by the teacher. Other research on language teaching (Slimani 1989) seems to indicate that "teacher-generated discourse is less memorable than leamer-generated discourse" and it is not those students who talk the most that necessarily profit linguistically. We should, of course, be wary to generalize Slimani's and Schenke's findings from a rather small number of subjects in a IFLm. 28 ( 1999) 218 Petra Schenke particular dassroom situation. However, teachers should perhaps be more aware that participation in the language dassroom does not simply mean speech production but also indudes listening. Accordingly, the teacher can only help those students that want to talk. One of the most common fears of the less confident language learner is being called upon by their teach~r and having to answer off the top of their heads in front of other pupils. Since there is no research evidence that spontaneous interactive discourse helps foreign language development, teachers are well advised to acknowledge that anxious students feel much more at ease liaving prepared oral activities in advance. lt is also worth meutioning that students are sometimes more concerned about looking good in front of their peers than their teacher' s evaluation. When this is the case, group work preparing the student for speaking in front of the whole dass seems to help him/ her feel less anxious because he/ she can rely on the support of at least a small group. But in the end, there cannot be any general guidelines for lowering anxiety in the language dassroom because the circumstances of each learning situation are unique and might vary from day to day. lt should be helpful for the language learner, however, if the language teacher is prepared to acknowledge that there might be a problem of anxiety in his/ her dassroom that is not only related to test situations. 3. Anxiety as a manageable problem Block (1996) wants to encourage open criticism by language students to find out what causes feelings of unease in particular learning situations. He is, on the other hand, aware that this method has its drawbacks in that less able learners could simply try to vent their frustration on the teacher by criticizing unfairly. This does not mean, though, that openly addressing the problern of anxiety in dass, has tobe a waste of time because there should be different perspectives constituting a picture of the dassroom situation. Once the teacher succeeds in making his/ her students feel responsible for their own learning, they might more readily communicate their needs and convey their fears. If this happens, anxiety should become a less abstract and therefore more manageable problem in the language dassroom. The language teacher should acknowledge that anxiety is not in any case a problem individual learners have because they are always unable to cope with the teaching environment. Anxiety also has tobe seen as as a temporary feeling of inhibition (or fear) in a social situation the individual feels threatened by. This does not necessarily imply that he/ she fears tobe physically attacked. Mandl/ Huber (cf.Soziale Angst 1983: 133 ff) distinguish between a private and a public seif; and it is the latter that can feel threatened by the expectations of other people. If the social situation has evaluative character, then the individual very likely feels self-conscious, does not like to speak in front of others or even stammers. If the teacher does acknowledge anxiety as a social phenomena inside the dassroom, he/ she would have to realize that his/ her behaviour is a critical component in the dassroom discourse because learners constantly have their public selfs on display. If the dass is led to believe that the teacher is too critical of anything they say, this rnight result in wide-spread speechanxiety. IFLIIIL 28 (1999) Anxiety in the Foreign Language Classroom 219 We have to keep in mind, however, that feelings of anxiety should best be seen on a wide continuum starting with slight feelings ofunease sometimes growing into actual fear (Angst) and only very rarely culminating into real phobia. Whereas on the phobia end of the scale the scared learner clearly would have to be passed on from the teacher to the psychotherapist, mild forms of anxiety can be dealt with easily on the school premises. Low levels of anxiety are considered to be part of the school routine in testing situations and wherever learners have to present themselves in front of the class; but this should not make the teacher less sensitive to other factors causing classroom anxiety. Pupils that do not participate in the classroom communication over long periods of time signify that there is something wrong in their eyes which might have nothing to do with anxiety but may be a sign of disinterest or lacking concentration. The teacher should certainly not force the reticent pupil to participate nor tel1 him/ her off for his/ her bad performance. If talking to the pupil in private reveals that he/ she feels inhibited because of language deficits, the teacher might be able to point out directions for improvement. The teacher might also succeed in improving the learner's apparently unmotivated or exaggerated negative self-image. Of course, there might be other reasons for the learner's reticence in the classroom. This might be a simple lack of motivation concerning the school subject, the teaching method or a puberty related general aversion against anything that goes on at school. These reasons would not be directly linked to anxiety and therefore will not be discussed further. The emotional content of the classroom topic could, however, most likely have an impact on the anxiety of individual learners because it is automatically related to the learner' s personal experience. If the classroom-topic is associated with a negative experience or a highly personal event in the student's life, he/ she could start feeling very uneasy that the topic is raised in the classroom since there is not much chance for him/ her to withdraw completely without upsetting the rules of classroom-discourse. Without delving into students' private life the teacher should find out how much the pupils want to get involved with a topic and which topics would be on their "black lists", e.g. it goes without saying that life and death is not a good topic to choose in a classroom where there has been a recent death in a student's family. The choice of topic beyond the realms of schoolbook favourites can and should always be open to negotiation between all classroom participants. If the teacher feels that he/ she is not going to have an honest and open exchange about teaching topics the use of questionnaires might be helpful to find out about the learners' topic preferences for the language classroom. Ideally the pupils are not simply asked to brainstorm general topics but are required to develop ideas and project schedules with the teacher in accordance witli curriculum requirements. Instead of simply declaring an interest or disinterest in a foreign language text recommended by the teacher, learners could choose from a range of possible texts and suggest how they want to approach it. Should some learners come up with some questions to ask about the text, this would be a good way to start off the language lesson in a pupil-oriented way (cf. Schenke 1998). lt is obvious, however, that decisions about teaching procedures cannot be based on everyone's consent and that even majority votes do not make everyone happy, but how to approach a classroom topic should always be a question of negotiation between all classroom participants. Even though the teacher has the final vote on classroom procedures, students who choose to opt for a more silent role in the classroom, should have the right to do so. If they lFL1llllL 28 (1999) 220 Petra Schenke want to remain silent in a range of classroom discussions about a topic they do not appreciate, they should be able to negotiate some alternative contributions with their teacher. To sum up,resolving the problem of anxiety in the foreign language classroom, where speaking the new language seems to be part of the learning process, it is of prime importance to find reasons for a leamer's withdrawal. The teacher should be aware if there is a large discrepancy between leamers' self-image and their evaluation oftheir performance. lt might not always be possible to know about students' personal problems but it would help the classroom atmosphere iflearners' lack of participation is not automatically seen as a lack of competence in the subject taught. Moreover, speech anxiety should be seen as a problem that most learners of a foreign language are facing to different degrees because the classroom situation challenges and potentially threatens the leamer' s social seif: even advanced talented learners would experience sometimes that their linguistic means are not sufficient to express themselves as they wish. This does mean that every language learner is constantly made aware of his/ her limitations in the classroom which could lead to speech anxiety in even the most self-confident student, if the teacher does not offer the emotional and linguistic (cognitive) support needed in the class. Only if the teacher has come to realize that the classroom creates a social situation where students are the weaker communication partners, can he/ she be more tolerant of students' mistakes and more appreciative of their communicative attempts. References ALLWRIGHT, Dick/ BAILEY, Kathleen M. ( 1991 ): Focus on the Language Classroom: An Introduction to Classroom Researchfor Language Teachers. Cambridge: CUP. ALPERT, Richard/ HABER, Ralph Norman (1960): "Anxiety in academic achievement situations". In: Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 61, 207-215. BAILEY, Kathleen M. / NUNAN, David (eds.) (1996): Voices From the Language Classroom. Cambridge: CUP. BLOCK, David (1996): "A window on the classroom: classroom events viewed from different angles". In: BAILEY/ NUNAN (eds.), 168-194. BREEN, Michael (1996): "Constructions of the learner in second language acquisition research". In: ALATIS, James E. [et al.]: Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1996, Linguistics, language acquisition, and language variation: Current trends and future prospects. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 84-107. CR0ZIER, W. Ray (1997): Individual Learners. Personality differences in education. London/ New York: Routledge. DEFL0RI0-HANSEN, Inez (1994): Vom Reden über Wörter. Vokabelerklärungen imltalienischunterricht mit Erwachsenen. Tübingen: Narr. ELLJS, Rod (1995): The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: OUP. ELLJS, Rod ( 1998): "Plenary: Second Language Acquisition research what' s in it for teachers? Teacher Knowledge: Language Acquisition andLanguage". In: GRUNDY, Peter (ed.): IATEFL / 998Manchester Conference Selections, 10-18. Foss, Karen. A. / REITZEL, Armeda C. (1988): "A Relational Model for Managing Second Language Anxiety". In: TESOL Quarterly 22.3, 437-454. IFLlJIL 28 (] 999) Anxiety in the Foreign Language Classroom 221 GANSCHOW, Leonore/ SPARKS, Richard (1996): "Anxiety about Foreign Language Learning among High School Warnen". In: The Modern Language Journal, 80, 199-212. GARDNER, Robert C. / MACINTYRE, Peter D. (] 991a): "Methods and results in the study of anxiety and langauge learning: A review ofthe literature". In: Language Learning 41, 85-117.' GARDNER, Robert C./ MACINTYRE, Peter D. (1991b): "Language anxiety: its relationship to other anxieties and to processing in native and second languages". In: Language Learning 41, 513-534. GARDNER, Robert C. I MACINTYRE, Peter D. (1993): "A student's contributions to second-language learning. Part II: Affective variables". In: Language Teaching 26, 1-11. GEISLER, Wilhelm/ HERMANN-BRENNECKE, Gisela ( 1997): "Fremdsprachenlernen zwischen Affekt und Kognition - Bestandaufnahme und Perspektivierung". In: ZFF 8.1, 79-93. HATCH, Evelyn (1983): Psycholinguistics: a second language perspective. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House. HERMANN, Gisela (1978): Lernziele im affektiven Bereich. Eine empirische Untersuchung zu den Beziehungen von Englischunterricht und Einstellungen von Schülern. Paderborn: Schöningh. HENRICI, Gert ( 1993): "Fremdsprachenerwerb durch Interaktion? Zur Diskussion und Überprüfung einer Hypothese aus der Forschung zum gesteuerten Fremdsprachenerwerb". In: Fremdsprachen Lehren und Lernen 22, 215-237. HENRICI, Gert (1996): "Forschungsansatz, -erträge und-perspektiven der Arbeitsgruppe Fremdsprachenerwerb Bielefeld 1985-1995". In: BAUSCH, Karl-Richard [et al.) (Hrsg.): Erforschung des Lehrens und Lernens fremder Sprachen. Zwischenbilanz und Perspektiven. Tübingen: Narr, 68-79. HORWITZ, Elaine K. / HORWITZ, Michael B. / CüPE, Joann (1986): "Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety". In: The Modern Language Journal 70, 125-132. KRASHEN, Stephen D. (1985): The Input Hypothesis: Issues and lmplications. London: Longman. LARSEN-FREEMAN, Diane / LONG, Michael (1991/ 1997): An introduction to second language acquisition research.. London: Longman (Applied Linguistics and Language Study). LEWIS, Michael ( 1997): lmplementing the lexical approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications. MANDL, Heinz/ HUBER, Günther ( 1983): Emotion und Kognition. München: Urban und Schwarzenberg. MATHEWS, Andrew (1990): "Why worry? The cognitive function of anxiety". In: Behaviour Research and Therapy 28, 455-468. MATHEWS, Thomas J. (1996): "A case for increasing negative affect in foreign language classes". In: Language Learning Journal 13, 38-41. Mü0DY, Raymond (1988): "Personality preferences and and foreign language learning". In: The Modem Language Leaming Journal 72, 389-401. NA IMAN, Neil [et al.) (1978/ 1996): The good language learner. Modern languages in practice. Clevedon: Multilingual Mauers. NOLD, Günter [et al.] ( 1997): "Die Rolle von Lernstrategien im Fremdsprachenunterricht". In: ZFF 8.1, 27-50. NUNAN, David/ LAMB, Clarice (1996): The Self-directed Teacher. Managing the learning process: 219-221. PICA,Teresa (1994): "Review article: research on negotiation: What does it reveal about secondlanguage learning conditions, Processes, and outcomes? " In: Language Learning 44.3, 1-35. PICA, Teresa ( 1996): "Do second language learners need negotiation? " In: ! RAL XXXIV.! , 1-21. RIEMER, Claudia ( 1997): Individuelle Unterschiede im Fremdsprachenerwerb. Die Wechselwirksamkeit ausgewählter Einflußfaktoren. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider (Perspektiven Deutsch als Fremdsprache; Band 8). SATO, Charlene J. (1986): "Conversation and inter-language development: rethinking the connection". JFLllJl]L 28 ( 1999) 222 Petra Schenke In: DAY, Richard R. (ed.), 'Talking to learn ': conversation in second language acquisition. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House, 23--45. SCHENKE, Petra ( 1995): "Die Relevanz bestimmter Interaktionsstrukturen und Kommunikationsformen für den Erfolg textbezogener Rezeptionsgespräche im Englischunterricht der Sekundarstufe II". In: BRUSCH, Wilfried/ STILLER, Hugo (Hrsg.), Lust auf Sprachen. Beiträge zum internationalen Fremdsprachenkongreß in Hamburg 1994. Hamburg: Petersen, 207-217. SCHENKE, Petra (1998): Die Rezeptionsperspektive des Schülers als Zugang zu literarischen Texten im Englischunterricht der Sekundarstufe ll. Augsburg: Universität (l & I Schriften; 76). SELIGER, Herbert W. (1983): "Learner interaction in the classroom and ist effect on language acquisition". In: SELIGER, Herbert W. / LONG, Michael H. (eds.): Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House, 246-267 SLIMANI, Assia (1989): "The role of topicalization in classroom language learning". In: System 17, 223-234. SNOW, Catherine / FERGUSON, Charles (eds.) (1977): Talking to children. Cambridge: CUP. SOLMECKE, Gert / BOOSCH, Alwin (1981 ): Affektive Komponenten der Lernerpersönlichkeit und Fremdsprachenerwerb. Tübingen: Narr. TSUI, Amy B. M. (1996): "Reticence and anxiety in second language learning". In: BAILEY/ NUNAN (eds.), 145-167. IFJLlllL 28 ( 1999)