Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING

Background of the Study

As a crucial factor, Spielmann and Radnofsky (2001) articulated

anxiety as an unpleasant feeling associated with discomfort and insecurity

and has a negative way to present human feelings. When people are anxious,

they struggle, tremble, perspire that their hearts beat quickly. It could also

mean feeling of worry: nervousness or agitation, often about something that is

going to happen.

In the global setting, a study conducted among the students in Shiraz

University of Medical Sciences in Iran last 2005 resulted a study which

showed that nursing students were not satisfied with the clinical component of

their education. They experienced anxiety as a result of feeling incompetent

and lack of professional nursing skills and knowledge to take care of various

patients in the clinical setting.

In the national setting, a study conducted by Del Villar (2010) in UP

Diliman concluded that Filipino students have that innate knowledge of what

causes public speaking anxiety. To a surprising degree, they were also

knowledgeable about ways to remedy unpleasant manifestations of anxiety.

With the students’ instinctive knowledge about public speaking anxiety and

the teacher’s expert intervention and guidance, effective learning can certainly

be successful.

In the local setting, a study conducted by Capul and Mendez (2009)

among sophomore students in the University of Southeastern Philippines

 2

resulted a study which showed that the level of language anxiety among

sophomore students taking up Bachelor of Arts in English is average. This

means that the level of language anxiety of the students has an effect in their

studies.

As mentioned, anxiety may have effects in the teaching and learning

process within the students. For this reason, the researchers are encouraged

to conduct a research about student’s level of intellectual engagement and

their anxiety in the classroom. In this manner, the researchers aim to find out

the relationship between student’s intellectual engagement and their anxiety in

the classroom of the selected colleges in the University of Mindanao.

Statement of the Problem

The study aimed to determine the relationship between student’s level

of intellectual engagement and their anxiety in the classroom among first year

student from selected colleges in the University of Mindanao.

Specifically, it sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the level of intellectual engagement of the respondents in

terms of:

1.1 interests and motivation,

1.2 effort, and

1.3 quality instruction?

2. What is the level of their anxiety in the classroom of the respondents

in terms of:

2.1 state anxiety,

2.2; trait anxiety, and

2.3 situation-specific anxiety?

 3

3. Is there a significant relationship between students’ intellectual

engagement and their anxiety in the classroom of the selected College

students in the University of Mindanao?

4. What is the percentage of influence of students’ intellectual

engagement to their anxiety in the classroom of the first year students from

selected Colleges in the University of Mindanao?

Hypothesis of the Study

The null hypothesis tested in this study at 0.05 level of significance

states that there is no significant relationship between students’ level of

intellectual engagement and their anxiety in the classroom.

Review of Related Literature

Presented in this section are factual concepts of authorities on

significantly related topics. This is to establish clear framework of the

concepts and principles of the variables under study.

Intellectual engagement

According to Willms (2001), intellectual engagement means a serious

emotional and cognitive investment in learning, using higher order thinking

skills (such as analysis and evaluation) to increase understanding, solve

complex problems, or construct new knowledge. Further, he claimed that

some students meet the institutional demands of school, but they are not truly

engaged in their learning.

Deep intellectual engagement is crucial for the development of

expertise, even if not always necessary for academic success (Shanahan &

Meyer, 2006).
 4

Moreover, learners who adopt a surface approach to learning are

intellectually disengaged from the world around them, unable to connect what

they learned in history or sociology to current event. At times, they were

unable to connect concepts in science to the natural world around them as

cited by Perkins (2006)

Shanahan & Meyer (2006) added that intellectual engagement is very

important as a research has clearly demonstrated that students may get

through high school, do well on standardized tests, and even complete

college using surface level understandings and mimicry rather than

developing true understanding.

Interest and Motivation. According to Craincross & Manion (2001),

interactive elements to enhance learning should be included so that the

student interest and motivation will increase which will allow them to be more

active in the teaching and learning process.

In addition, it was found that individual interest exerts a powerful

influence on learning motivation and attention (Ainley, Hidi, & Berndorff,

2002); Falk, Storksdieck, & Dierking, 2007 and persistence (Palmer, 2009;

Renninger, Ewen, & Lasher, 2002). For more specific definition, interest and

motivation have been treated separately.

Interest. Published in 2012, Random House Webster's College

Dictionary had given a clear definition that interest is a feeling of having one's

attention, concern, or curiosity particularly engaged by something.

Taken from the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language

(2009), the word interest is something that refers to a quality, subject, or

activity, which evokes one’s mental state. Another definition provided online
 5

states that interest is the feeling of a person whose attention, concern, or

curiosity is particularly engaged by something.

Motivation. According to Palmer (2007) motivation is an essential

element that is necessary for quality education. Teachers know or measure if

the students are motivated and if they pay attention. Students also begin

working on tasks immediately. They will ask questions and volunteer answers,

and appear to be happy and eager.

An online resource, Kidsource (2000) included a discussion on

motivation as to how it drives the students' desire to participate in the learning

process. But it also concerns the reasons or goals that underlie their

involvement or noninvolvement in academic activities. Although students may

be equally motivated to perform a task, the sources of their motivation may

differ.

According to McGlynn (2008) some students like group activities and

want to learn information relevant to their lives and that can make a difference

in the world. That is, experiential and service-learning or that is they will have

direct-experience about the lesson. Such programs could be very effective

with this group of students. The learner-centered classroom is effective with

this group in that it requires a shift from teacher-driven and content-centered

learning to seeing the classroom as student-centered and process driven.

Collaborative learning is effective with the students of today. Also, it is

important to teach students how to find information and to evaluate the validity

of the information.

Moreover, motivation is optimized when students are exposed to a

large number of these motivating experiences and variables on a regular

 6

basis. That is, students ideally should have many sources of motivation in

their learning experience in each class (Palmer, 2007; Debnath, 2005;

D’Souza and Maheshwari, 2010).

On the other hand, students may have tendency or learning less if they

are not motivated. And there are five ingredients impacting students

motivation (Palmer, 2007; Debnath, 2005; D’Souza and Maheshwari, 2010),

that would be the student, teacher, content, method/process, and

environment. For example, the student must have access, ability, interest, and

value education. The teacher must be well trained, must focus and monitor

the educational process, be dedicated and responsive to his or her students,

and be inspirational. The content must be accurate, timely, stimulating, and

pertinent to the student’s current and future needs. The method or process

must be inventive, encouraging, interesting, beneficial, and provide tools that

can be applied to the student’s real life. The environment needs to be

accessible, safe, positive, personalized as much as possible, and

empowering.

Student engagement is a key to academic motivation, persistence, and

degree completion. Teachers are competing for the students’ attention, that is,

jobs, family, personal activities and interests, surfing the Web, instant-

messaging, social media, cell phones and apps, text-messaging, video

games, and so forth. In addition, students almost have a “consumer” attitude

about learning; it is another acquisition to purchase rather than a learning

process. Also, students are use to 24/7 convenience and expect instant

gratification from their teachers. Reaching out to students will help in finding a
 7

connection between how students learn and how instructors teach. (McGlynn,

2008)

According to Weinstein (2010), the professor’s knowledge of the

subject matter and the motivational level of the professor are most important

to motivate college students to do well in college. That may be because

professors could influence the student’s internal state of wanting to do well in

college. While high school students make statements like “I want to get a job,

to feel proud of myself, to graduate with my friends, and to avoid feeling like a

failure”, college students are motivated by the professor’s knowledge of the

subject matter. They are also motivated by the professor’s sense of humor.

Further, college students will be influenced by the motivational level of the

professor, high quality of teaching, intellectual challenge, engagement in

class, and academic help outside of the class.

Qualifications of the teacher employed in universities should be

questioned and improved. Educators need to acquire new qualities and

continue to grow and evolve as they are role models for the students.

(Celikoz, 2010)

In addition, according to Truman (2007), teachers need to know how to

give tests that are motivating to the students. Tests need to have thematic

relevance, that is, they need to aim at checking what students have learned

and whether they can apply it to real-life tasks. That is, tests that are more

demanding or challenging than anything practiced in class will have negative

effects on student motivation. Also, tests should be based on course

objectives and should not involve surprise or novelty. Specifically, test

questions should be as easy as possible for test takers to process, even when
 8

the content is very challenging. In general, test-taking instructions,

terminology, layout, and item choices need to not be ambiguous, confusing,

illogical, unclear, imprecise, or poorly designed.

Students experience success is an extremely important strategy for

motivation. Palmer (2007) emphasizes success which creates self confidence

which in turn makes students more inclined to engage in learning. This

requires that tasks be moderate and have an achievable level of difficulty. The

goal is to have students experience success in their understanding. Some

techniques for ensuring this success include: state the goal for the lesson;

provide simple and clear explanations; ask the students to express their

comments, questions, and ideas; question the students; provide hand-on

activities as often as possible; and assessment tasks should be flexible.

Similarly, the various choice options need to be based on students’

needs, interests, goals, abilities, and cultural backgrounds. Choices need to

not be too numerous or complex as well as congruent with the students’

values. (Katz and Assor, 2007; Simmons and Page, 2010; Garger, Thomas,

and Jacques, 2010)

To add, interactivity is important in lectures and can take many forms:

pop quizzes, questioning and discussion, problems, visual aids, films,

questions on the board, questions through e-mail, handouts, simulations

(Gillentine and Schultz, 2001), board games (Mummalaneni and Sivakumar,

2008),

On the other hand, according to Palmer (2007) novel content can

introduce a surprising or unusual experience creating a discrepancy in the

student’s mind, and this can cause a short-term arousal of interest in order to
 9

resolve the discrepancy. Some ways to increase novelty might include using

discrepant events and demonstrations, amazing facts, fantasy, or games.

Furthermore, making the content relevant to real life can increase a student’s

motivation. As such, teachers should emphasize the links between real life

and school subjects, design assignments, and experiments that use everyday

materials and situations, and use personal anecdotes. Indeed, Frey and

Fisher in 2010 acknowledged that tasks that are meaningful to the students’

real life motivate them.

On the other hand, motivation can also be discussed intrinsically and

extrinsically as typical students bring varying degrees of both intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation to the learning arena.

According to Palmer (2007) encouragement and praise, positive verbal

statements of encouragement and praise can strongly influence student

motivation. Praise for effort and for improvement can build a student’s self-

confidence. Esteem can be boosted by emphasizing his or her performance

relative to personal goals. It is important that the student feel seen and

“gotten.” In fact, Lei (2010) supported that intrinsic motivational factors found

to be at work with most students include involvement (the desire to be

involved), curiosity (find out more about their interests), challenge (figuring out

the complexity of a topic), and social interaction (creating social bonds).

Extrinsic motivational factors include compliance (to meet another’s

expectation, to do what one is told); recognition (to be publicly acknowledged);

competition; and work avoidance (avoid more work than necessary).

Individuals who are motivated intrinsically tend to develop high regard for

learning course information without the use of external rewards or

 10

reinforcement. On the other hand, individuals who are motivated extrinsically

rely solely on rewards and desirable results for their motivation, e.g., tests and

GPA.

Students who are motivated externally are at a greater risk of

performing lower academically than intrinsically motivated students. It is

interesting to note that nontraditional students report higher levels of intrinsic

motivation than traditional students (Dean and Dagostino, 2007; Daniels,

2010; Bye, Pushkar, and Conway, 2007; Afzal, et al., 2010).

According to Barlow (2004), motivation is affected by the learner’s self-

concept and sense of self-efficacy, and students who are going through

significant physical or emotional changes during early adolescence

sometimes lack confidence in their own ability to meet further new challenges.

A belief in themselves and their ability to succeed in classroom tasks has an

energizing effect on both teachers and students. Teachers often need to pay

particular attention to motivating students who have experienced difficulties in

reading or writing. Effective modeling by teachers and peers who are actively

engaged in reading and writing can strongly influence the development of

students’ motivation and interest, especially when the class members think of

themselves as an active community of readers and writers.

Moreover, environment is the fifth key ingredient of student motivation.

First of all, an environment must be available and accessible. Thereafter, that

environment must be of a quality or caliber that contributes to the motivation

of the students (Palmer, 2007).

Effort. According to Merriam Webster’s Dictionary updated 2012 effort

means the overall work done to achieve a particular end.

 11

Similarly, effort usually refers to whether a student tries hard, asks for

help, and/or participates in class (Stateuniversity.com 2012).

On the other hand, Bernard et al., 2009 states that student effort is

often considered an indicator of personal commitment and motivation to learn

and have been shown to affect student academic achievement.

Achievement and effort is obviously linked together. However, students

rarely realize the connection between the two. But the belief that effort has no

connection with achievement can be changed according to research. For the

students to do this, teachers must be of help to give clear connection between

effort and achievement (Marzano, Pickering, and Polloc, 2001).

According to Poropat (2009) he found that conscientiousness predicted

academic performance as much as intelligence did, suggests the importance

of effort in the learning process.

Students' effort is strongly related to students' learning, and track

differences in students' effort account for a modest portion of track differences

in students' learning. Finally, the effect of students' effort on students' learning

is roughly the same, regardless of the track in which a student is placed

(William Carbonaro 2005; vol. 78, 1: pp. 27-49)

Moreover, students who prefer working in a group tend to feel a greater

sense of classroom community (SOCC) and devote more effort to the course

than those with individual learning orientation as cited by Yang, Yan; Cho,

YoonJung; Mathew, Susan; Worth, Sheri (2011).

Quality Instruction. Quality is defined to be the highest form or

standard. Instruction on the other hand means teaching in a particular subject

or skills, or simply the facts or skills taught as defined by Microsoft Encarta

 12

Dictionary (2009).

According to Marzano (2007), quality instruction means engaging

students in learning and problem solving while meeting the diverse needs of

all students.

Boston & Wolf, 2004 argues that quality instruction is affected on how

teachers chose the task for the students, the kind of activity or opportunities

they will give to the student. It is also affected on how will they implement

those tasks, the way they see each students’ work and the manner of

assessing the will have great effect on their instruction.

Also, emphasis on monitoring instructional quality is considered as a

great factor because it influences student’s involvement according to Darling-

Hammond, 2000.

In addition, a research conducted by McCaffrey, Lockwood, Koretz &

Hammilton 2003; Rivkin, Hanushek & Kain 2000; Rowan, Correnti & Miller

2002 found that quality instruction matters to student learning. Also, teacher

quality and their effects on student’s learning contribute to be the most

important school-based factor in student achievement and are cumulative and

long lasting.

Besides, effective teachers, those who beat the odds in preventing

student failure, combine direct, explicit instruction of strategies and concepts

with other teaching approaches, nesting it within complete programs of

literacy development (Graves, 2004; Langer, 2002).

Furthermore, to achieve quality instruction, teacher, as agent of

instruction should also be considered as qualified teacher. According to NCLB

or the No Child Left Behind Policy 2000 defined a qualified teacher as

 13

one with at least a bachelor’s degree, full state certification and is

knowledgeable about the subject matter S/he taught.

In fact, a research found that since teachers are agent of instruction,

they should be conditioned and experienced. In this manner, they will be able

to create professional community; formal higher education and above all

specialized pedagogy (Burchinal, Mashburn, Pianta, & Vandergrift, 2009).

Similarly, a quality teacher is one who has a positive effect on student

learning and development and it is basically on how he or she combines

mastery of the content, command of a broad set of pedagogic skills and

communications or interpersonal skills.

On the other hand, quality teachers should not stop their learning. It

should be a life-long learning in their subject areas. Quality teachers also

should teach with commitment and have their own reflection about their

teaching practices. As they transfer knowledge of their subject matter and

learning process, it should be in a way of good communication, diagnostic

skills, ability to understand different learning styles and cultural influences in

order for them to use quality and effective strategies. (Pianta & Hadden, 2008;

Sadowski, 2006).

In addition, quality instruction is also expected to have a quality teacher

that is knowledgeable about child development and the ability to organize a

broad collection of techniques to meet student needs. Teachers should also

organize the environment where the child is taking its learning as well as

helping the child to make connections to the topics, and promote higher-order

thinking skills. The assumption is that quality early-childhood teachers

possess these abilities, which will translate into academic and developmental
 14

success in future schooling and life (Pianta & Hadden, 2008; Sadowski,

2006).

Nevertheless, early-childhood educators with a bachelor’s degree are

found to be more responsive to children and to provide more activities that

promote language development and arising literacy than teachers without a

bachelor’s degree (Ackerman, 2005; Saracho & Spodek, 2007; Whitebook,

2003).

Again, research has demonstrated that a bachelor’s degree alone is

insufficient to ensure teacher quality at the early-childhood level. Rather, it is

the presence of that degree in combination with specialized training relating to

classroom practice that results in quantifiable teacher-quality improvements

(Pianta & Hamre, 2009).

In other words, there is reason to believe that coursework or

assignment in pedagogy has a stronger effect on teacher performance when

the courses are combined with courses in content areas (Rice, 2003; Wayne

& Youngs, 2003).

According to Goe, Bell, & Little 2008), to ensure holistic instruction,

teacher should evaluate his or her teaching through observations in the

classroom and measure the processes in the classroom. That is to say that

there should be specific teacher practices and interaction between teachers

and students

Further, because few teachers are identified as unsatisfactory or

ineffective, it has been suggested that such evaluations are obligatory in

nature (Baratz-Snowden, 2009)

Accordingly, some researchers say that teacher evaluations often result

 15

in little instructional improvement and the continued employment of weak

teachers (Donaldson & Peske, 2010; The New Teacher Project, 2009).

Moreover, system in education should be widely understood by child

care providers and that when providers reach higher levels, they are

increasing the quality of care and education they provide for children, as

assessed by objective and valid quality measures (Bryant et al., 2008; Elicker,

Langill, Ruprecht, & Kwon, 2007).

On the other hand, numerous studies found that because of quality

instruction, children in early-childhood programs have higher grades and

passing rate from one grade to the next. Chances would be they would have

greater earning of a high school diploma. Further, there would be lesser

referrals for special education, remedial services or tutorial service because in

the first place they were offered quality instruction. A student which is a

product of a high-quality instruction would also manifest greater ability to

focus and engage in school work and would also result lower risk of

engagement in criminal activities (Ackerman, 2005; Bueno, Darling-

Hammond, & Gonzales 2010; Frede, Jung, Barnett, & Figueras 2009).

According to Gravios, et. al 2007, the student, the task and the

instruction is at success if the effective learning (match) is equated to effective

instruction (capacity to create the match. By then, match will be equal to

success.

On the other hand, establishing a contextualized understanding of

quality would mean inclusion relevant stakeholders. Key stakeholders often

hold different views and meanings of educational quality (Motala, 2000;

Benoliel, O’Gara & Miske, 1999).

 16

According to Glatthorn & Jailall, 2000, curriculum should also provide

for individual differences, closely coordinate and selectively integrate subject

matter, and focus on results or standards and targets for student learning. The

specific content of school curriculum, however, depends on local and national

values.

Moreover, in the main subject areas of primary education, which

include language, math, science and social studies, little variation is found

among different regions in the developing world. Nation states, however,

“Tend to have a high degree of consistency in curriculum emphasis over time,

but differ sharply from each other, reflecting unique historical patterns”

(Benavot & Karmens, 1989, cited in UNICEF, 2000)

Furthermore, literacy also is a must to have quality instruction. A recent

UNICEF study on curriculum showed that in some cases, literacy skills are

taught as a separate subject, in a language course, where the instruction

tends to focus on teaching the language as an end in itself. Such an approach

tends to be linear-first teaching auditory skills, then speaking, reading and

writing skills. Alternatively, literacy skills may be developed through other

subjects such as social studies or science. The UNICEF study found that in

these cases, there is a greater focus on language as a tool for social

development; situations from daily life are incorporated into activities that

foster the acquisition of reading and writing skills (UNICEF, 2000).

In the light of education, teacher should not only be effective in the

classroom, but also outside of their territorial influence. This is true with a

program in Kenya, the Mombassa School Improvement Project, who built on

this approach to professional development and showed that teachers

 17

supported with in-service as well as external workshop training improved

significantly in their abilities to use child-centered teaching and learning

behaviors (Anderson, 2000).

A study in 12 Latin American countries found that children in schools

where many teachers work in other jobs in addition to teaching are 1.2 times

more likely to have lower test scores and/or higher grade repetition (Willms,

2000).

On the other hand, technology also, is seen as an important tool to

provide quality instruction. According to Denny (2000), the vast diversity of

school facilities in the developing world concerns many who believe that

technology and students’ development of technology-related skills will be

crucial factors in the 21st century knowledge-based global economy.

Further, using Internet technologies to assign teachers where they are

needed is an innovation that could be explored further in developing countries

(Droste, 2000).

Especially important, are the findings that students do not "outgrow"

reading problems or the vast majority of reading problems, even those that

would develop into serious reading difficulties can be prevented when

students in the primary grades are provided with quality classroom reading

instruction along with additional small-group intervention when needed

(Mathes & Denton, 2002; Torgesen, 1998, 2000).

According to Wisconsin RTI Center, curriculum, instruction, and

assessment that are grounded in the culturally responsive practices of

relevance, identity, belonging and community will serve to best engage all

students. High-quality curriculum and instruction should be culturally

 18

appropriate for the students being served and prepare all students for a

multicultural world.

Anxiety

According to Encarta Dictionary 2009, anxiety is defined as feeling of

worry, nervousness or agitation, often about something that is going to

happen.

In addition, anxiety is a negative way to present human feelings. When

we are anxious, we feel nervous, worried, and fearful. We struggle, tremble,

perspire, and our hearts beat quickly. (Spielmann & Radnofsky, 2001).

An inability to comprehend, having to participate in speaking practice,

the way they are taught and how they are corrected by their instructors are all

sources von Worde (2003) notes as being conducive to raising feelings of

anxiety within students.

Moreover, Barlow (2004) comments that anxiety attaches to

intellectuals engaged in social movement work because who they are and

what they do set off alarms.

According to an article in PubMed Web of Science 2010, anxiety is an

important subject in educational psychology because it is known to interfere

with children's ability to learn, the level of their classroom performance, and

their relationships with classmates. Anxiety can be understood as a

multisystem response to an object or event that arouses apprehension.

According to Huberty (2004), most schoolchildren cope satisfactorily

with anxiety or can be taught to cope more effectively without the need for

formal therapy. Between 15 and 20 percent of children in the United States,

however, may eventually require treatment for a childhood anxiety disorder.

 19

In addition, Huberty (2004) recommends looking at the child's daily

functioning to determine whether professional help is needed. If children are

having difficulty with everyday classroom activities, then the anxiety must be

addressed regardless of its cause. Evaluating the degree to which the anxiety

is interfering with daily life will guide answers to such questions as whether

the anxiety is typical for the child's age, whether it is limited to specific learning

situations.

Furthermore, Twenge (2000, p. 1018) conducted a study on axiety

among children and after analyzing a number of studies, she came to the

conclusion that self-reported levels of anxiety have risen “about a standard

deviation between the 1950s and 1990s, a result consistent across samples

of college students and children and across different measures.”

According to Khan and Zafar (2010), anxiety arousal at the early

stages of processing will create cognitive deficits that can only be overcome

when the individual has the opportunity to re-learn the missing material.

On the other hand, Na (2007) added that anxiety can play a somewhat

debilitative role in language learning, noting that high-anxiety students,

whether male or female, may be discouraged, lose faith in their abilities,

escape from participating in classroom activities, and even give up the effort

to learn a language well.

According to Oya, Manalo and Greenwood (2004) found that

individuals experiencing greater levels of anxiety would make more mistakes

in their sentence construction; especially if they were speaking in a language

they are not fully confident in using.

How anxiety affects students’ engagement in speaking activities was

 20

also the topic of Baker and MacIntyre (2000).

Recently, previous studies have indicated that excessive worry tends to

exist both in people with higher intelligence and lower intelligence, and less so

in people of moderate intelligence. It has been hypothesized that people with

lower intelligence suffer more anxiety because they achieve less success in

life (Nauert, 2012).

State Anxiety. According to an article in Hindawi Journals (2012) state

anxiety is defined as an acute response to a threatening or challenging

situation.

In addition, state anxiety refers to any reliably measured characteristic,

but typically, state refers to conscious, verbally accountable qualities such as

mood (Matthews, Deary & Whiteman, 2003, pp.77).

Further, Tasnimi (2009) give a description that state anxiety has been

described as an apprehension that is experienced at a particular point in time,

According to Fernandez (2011), state anxiety is characterized as a temporary

change in a person's emotional state due to an outside factor, according to

the Linden Centre UK. For example, a person may become worried,

apprehensive or tense if he sees a large, threatening dog. In this

case, the autonomic nervous system becomes heightened.

In addition, state anxiety is a normal physiological response. It is a

feeling of anxiety eventually subsides, and the person will then feel "normal"

again, according to the Linden Centre UK 2011.

Moreover, state anxiety tends to increase when individuals are placed

in stressful situations such as studying, memorizing large portions of content

in small periods of time, grade competition, and difficult examination periods

 21

(Misra & McKean, 2000).

In association with feelings of state anxiety, individuals often

experience feelings of depression, desperation, and suicidal thoughts

(Taliaferro, Rienzo, Pigg, Miller & Dodd, 2009).

In order to combat state anxiety and other negative mood states,

several studies explored exercise as a technique for improving emotional

welfare. Kim and Kim (2007) specified that non-aerobic routines are not as

effective at modifying state anxiety because individuals experience boredom

and are not stimulated by the activity enough to distract themselves from their

negative moods.

Trait Anxiety. According to an article in State of New South Wales,

Department of Education and Communities and Charles Sturt University,

2011, trait anxiety refers to a general level of stress that is characteristic of an

individual that is a trait related to personality. Trait anxiety varies according to

how individuals have conditioned themselves to respond to and manage the

stress. What may cause anxiety and stress in one person may not generate

any emotion in another. People with high levels of trait anxiety are often quite

easily stressed and anxious.

In addition, Tasnimi (2009) said that trait anxiety is explained as being

a stable part of a person's personality, which gives them a more permanent

tendency to be anxious.

Situation-specific anxiety. According to Brown (2001), situation-

specific anxiety is usually experienced in relation to some particular event or

situation

According to Mosby's Medical Dictionary, 8th edition, 2009, situation-

 22

specific anxiety is a state of apprehension, discomfort, and anxiety is triggered

by the experience of new or changed situations or events. Situational anxiety

is not abnormal and requires no treatment. It usually disappears as the person

adjusts to the new experience.

In addition, situation-specific anxiety is a situational anxiety that

occurring specifically in relation to a situation or object that is according to

Miller-Keane Encyclopedia and Dictionary of Medicine, Nursing, and Allied

Health, Seventh Edition 2003.

Furthermore, situation-specific anxiety is explained as the anxiety one

may feel due to a specific type of situation or event. Situation-specific anxiety

may be the type of anxiety best used to describe the anxious feelings

students get in class, whether they are taking an important test, or learning a

new language (Tasnimi, 2009).

In summary, student’s intellectual engagement may progress if they are

interested, if they exert effort and if there is quality instruction in learning

regardless if they have state, trait or situation-specific anxiety.

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework

This study was anchored on the viewpoint of Willms, (2001) that

students who have low level of intellectual engagement at school are about

1.2 times as likely to experience anxiety as those with average to above

average levels of intellectual engagement.

Similarly, Barlow (2004,) 1 anxiety attaches to intellectuals engaged in

social movement work because who they are and what they do set off alarms.

Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework of the study. As cited Willms

(2001), the independent variable is intellectual engagement which has three

 23

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Student’s Intellectual Anxiety

Engagement
 State Anxiety
 Interest and  Trait Anxiety
Motivation  Situation-Specific
 Effort Anxiety
 Quality Instruction

Fig. 1. Conceptual Framework Showing the Variables of the Study

 24

indicators such as interest and motivation, effort and quality instruction. The

dependent variable is anxiety which has three indicators such as state

anxiety, trait anxiety and situation-specific anxiety (Spielberger, 1983).

Significance of the Study

The results of the study were deemed beneficial to the following:

Administrators. The result of this study may guide the administrators

in maintaining appropriate programs that will encourage language learners to

intellectually engage in learning the English language and develop curriculum

for consistent implementation.

Teachers. The results will guide them in designing instructional

activities that will boost the intellectual engagement of the students in the

learning process. Develop pedagogical aids to sustain quality learning.

Students. The Criminal Justice Education, Teacher Education and

Engineering Education students, will become motivated in engaging

intellectually and handling anxiety in the classroom to develop skills needed

for their future profession.

In essence, the findings can be of valuable benefit to those people who

were interested in handling anxiety that would be of less effect to intellectual

engagement.

Definition of Terms

For clarity and understanding of the terms used in this study, the

following terms were defined operationally:

Intellectual Engagement. In this study, the term refers to student’s

level of intellectual engagement in terms of interest and motivation, effort and

 25

quality instruction.

Anxiety. In this study, the term refers to the level of anxiety of students

in the classroom in terms of state anxiety, trait anxiety and situation-specific

anxiety.
 26

Chapter 2

METHOD

This chapter deals with a discussion on research steps and procedures

employed by the researchers in this study. These include the research design,

research subjects, research instruments, data gathering procedure and the

statistical treatment of the data.

Research Design

The researchers employed the descriptive-correlational method.

Descriptive method approach studies the nature and status of person, objects,

class of events, conditions and others. In this study, the method includes the

collection of data in order to test the hypothesis or to answer the questions

concerning the status of the subject of the study. Aquino (2002) stated that

descriptive method is to describe systematically a situation or area of interest

factually and accurately. Further, he emphasized that it is fact-finding with

adequate interpretation and is something more and beyond just data-

gathering. He further mentioned that this method determines the prevailing

conditions, personal, situational, environmental and intellectual factors and

practices and will enable the researcher to seek accurate descriptions of the

correlation between the Student’s Level of Intellectual Engagement and their

Anxiety in the Classroom.

Research Subjects

The respondents of this study were the 1st year from the College of

Criminal Justice Education, College of Engineering Education and College of

 27

Teacher education students enrolled in the University of Mindanao during the

1st term, 2nd semester of SY 2012-2013. The sampling method that was used

in gathering the data was the quota sampling wherein 45 students selected

from the College of Criminal Justice Education, College of Engineering and

College of Teacher Education in the University of Mindanao served as

respondents.

Table 1 shows the distribution of the research population. The

respondents comprised of 15 or 33% of first year Criminology students’

population; 15 or 33% first year Engineering students’ population and 15 or

33% from Education students’ population. There were 45 first year students

who served as respondents resulting to 100% total percentage. The tools

were subjected to validation, after which, the researchers made some

revisions based on their comments and suggestions.

Research Instruments

The major tool in the data gathering process was an adapted survey

questionnaire patterned from STAI or State-Trait Anxiety Form Y Instrument

by Charles D. Speilberger (1983), Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale Test by Dr.

Michael R. Liebowitz for anxiety questions and Student questionnaire on

teaching by National University of Ireland, Galway.

The questionnaire was in two parts. Part 1 dealt with the level of

student’s intellectual engagement with its indicators: interest and motivation,

effort and quality instruction.

 28

Table 1

Distribution of Respondents

College Frequency Percentage

Criminal Justice Education 15 33.33%

College of Engineering Education 15 33.33%

College of Teacher Education 15 33.33%

Total 45 100%
 29

Part 2 dealt with students’ anxiety in the classroom with its indicators:

trait, state, and situation-specific. There were five questions for each indicator.

In quantifying the responses, each item of the indicator were

interpreted accordingly using the Likert scale below:

Range of Means Verbal Description Interpretation

4.20 – 5.00 Very High This indicates that the level of

student's intellectual engagement
is manifested all the time.

3.40 – 4.19 High This indicates that the level of

student’s intellectual engagement
is manifested most of the time.

2.60 – 3.39 Moderate This indicates that the level of

student’s intellectual engagement
is manifested sometimes.

1.80 – 2.59 Low This indicates that the level of

student’s intellectual engagement
is manifested at long interval of
time.

1.00 – 1.79 Very Low This indicates that the level of

student’s intellectual engagement
is never manifested.

The following adapted rating scale was used in interpreting the anxiety

in the classroom of the respondents.

Range of Means Verbal Description Interpretation

4.20 – 5.00 Very High The students’ anxiety in the

classroom is far above the
expected level.

3.40 – 4.19 High The students’ anxiety in the

classroom is above the
expected level.
 30

2.60 – 3.39 Moderate The students' anxiety in the

classroom is just within the
expected level.

1.80 – 2.59 Low The students’ anxiety in the

classroom is below the expected
level.

1.00 – 1.79 Very Low The extent of second language

acquisition is far below the
expected level.

Data Gathering Procedure

The following were the steps to follow in gathering the data:

1. Seeking permission to conduct the study. The researchers

asked permission from the Dean of the College of Criminal Justice Education,

College of Teacher Education and College of Engineering Education to

conduct the study.

2. Administration and distribution of the questionnaires. After

the approval, the study was commenced. Questionnaires were personally

administered to the respondents by the researchers.

3. Retrieval of the questionnaires. The data were then retrieved,

collected, tallied, tabulated, analyzed and interpreted confidentially and

accordingly through the aid of the statistician.

Statistical Treatment of the Data

The responses to the items on the questionnaires were tallied and

recorded accordingly. The statistical tools that were used in the study will be

the following:
 31

Mean. This statistical tool was used to determine the student’s level of

intellectual engagement and their anxiety in the classroom to answer sub-

problems 1 and 2.

Pearson Product – Moment Coefficient Correlation. This measure

was used to determine the level of significant relationship existing between

student’s level of intellectual engagement and their anxiety in the classroom.

Coefficient of Determination (r2). This statistical tool was used to

determine the percentage of influence of student’s intellectual engagement to

their anxiety in the classroom to answer sub-problem 4.

 Chapter 3

PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS

Presented in this section are the discussion on the presentation and

analysis of findings. The following headings center the discussions: student’s

level of intellectual engagement, level of student anxiety, and significance of

the relationship between student’s level of intellectual engagement and their

anxiety in the classroom among First Year students from selected colleges of

the University of Mindanao.

Student’s Level of Intellectual Engagement

Shown in Table 2 is the statistical result on the student’s level of

intellectual engagement as measured through the following indicators: interest

and motivation, effort and quality instruction. The overall mean rating for the

student’s level of intellectual engagement among UM first year students from

selected colleges is 4.12 or high which indicates that the student’s level of

intellectual engagement is manifested most of the time. This implies that the

student’s level of intellectual engagement refers to the student’s response and

participation in the classroom in whichever anxiety he/she feels.

Interest and Motivation. In terms of interest and motivation, the mean

rating posted at 4.33 or very high which indicates that student’s level of

intellectual engagement is manifested all the time. This means that students

participate more when class work involves interesting tasks; willing to

participate in various classes because the content is exciting and challenging;

most important goal in their studies is to prepare them for entering a career;
 33

Table 2

Student’s Level of Intellectual Engagement among first year students from

selected Colleges of the University of Mindanao

Indicators Mean Verbal Description

Interest and Motivation 4.33 Very High

Effort 4.02 High

Quality of Instruction 4.00 High

Over-all Mean 4.12 High

 34

getting a good grade in the class is the most satisfying thing; and being

confident in doing an excellent job on the assessment task (ex. assignments

and tests in the class. It is supported by Craincross & Manion (2011) that

interest and motivation are interactive elements to enhance learning which will

allow them to be more active in the teaching and learning process.

Effort. In terms of effort, the mean rating posted at 4.02 or high which

indicates that manifested most of the time. This means that students

participate on class discussions to keep up with the class; punctual in

attending the class; worked much harder than average on my course; submit

homework(s) and project(s) on that particular subject on time; engage in

different classroom activities. This is true with Bernard et al., 2009 statement

which states that student effort is often considered an indicator of personal

commitment and motivation to learn and have been shown to affect student

academic achievement

Quality Instruction. In terms of quality instruction, the mean posted at

4.00 or high which indicates that manifested most of the time. This means that

the lesson is well organized; the time allotted for the class is enough to cover

the lesson for the day; handouts are clear and very useful; the teacher(s)

encourage(s) questions and interaction; and the teacher(s) make(s) good use

of examples. As Darling Hammond (2000) emphasized, monitoring

instructional quality is considered as a great factor because it influences

student’s involvement.

Level of Anxiety in the Classroom

Shown in Table 3 is the statistical result on the level of student’s anxiety in

the classroom as measured through the following indicators: state anxiety,

 35

trait anxiety and situation-specific anxiety. The overall mean rating for the

student’s anxiety in the classroom among UM first year students from

selected Colleges is 2.21 or low which indicates that the students’ anxiety in

the classroom is below the expected level.

State Anxiety. In terms of state anxiety, the mean rating posted at

2.39 or low which indicates that the students’ anxiety in the classroom is

below the expected level. This means that the students feel secure upon

entering the classroom; not tense when the teacher calls on names; not

presently worrying about un-announced classroom activities; feel comfortable

when the teacher is accommodating; and not nervous in answering the

question thrown by the teacher.

Trait Anxiety. In terms of trait anxiety, the mean posted at 1.90 or low

which indicates that the students’ anxiety in the classroom is below the

expected level. This means that students feel satisfied with themselves;

students are calm‚ cool‚ and collected; feel that they can overcome the

difficulties that might arise; don’t worry over something that really doesn’t

matter; and treat disappointments positively.

Situation-specific Anxiety. In terms of situation-specific anxiety, the

mean posted at 2.34 or low which indicates that the students’ anxiety in the

classroom is below the expected level. This means that students are not

frightened when participating in a small group activity; can perform or speak in

front of the class when asked; not frightened when giving a prepared oral talk

to a group; not frightened when entering the room when others are already

seated; and not frightened when writing while being observed.

 36

Table 3

Level of Student’s Anxiety in the Classroom among first

year students from selected Colleges of the University of
Mindanao

Indicators Mean Verbal Description

State anxiety 2.39 Low

Trait anxiety 1.90 Low

Situation-specific 2.34 Low

anxiety

Over-all Mean 2.21 Low

 37

Significance of the Relationship between Student’s Level of

Intellectual Engagement and their Anxiety in the Classroom

The main focus of this research is to find out if the student’s anxiety in

the classroom was considerably an influencing factor in determining the level

of student’s intellectual engagement among the first year students from

selected colleges. Result of the statistical tests of the significant relationship

between the variables understudy is reflected in Table 4.

The overall result obtained from the preceding tabulations shows that

there is a significant relationship between the two variables of this study.

Furthermore, the null hypothesis is rejected since the computed P–value of

0.001s which is less than 0.05 level of significance. This means that the

relationship is statistically significant which further implies that student’s level

of intellectual engagement has significant relationship with their anxiety in the

classroom.

Table 4 shows the significance of the relationship between student’s

level of intellectual engagement and their anxiety in the classroom. The

correlated variable had a computed r-value of -0.491 and probability

0.241which was significant, thus the null hypothesis which states that there is

no significant relationship between teacher and student engagement was

rejected. This implies that the student’s level of intellectual engagement would

be affected by their anxiety in the classroom. This is true with the viewpoint of

Willms, (2001) that students who have low level of intellectual engagement at

school are about 1.2 times as likely to experience anxiety as those with

average to above average levels of intellectual engagement.

 38

Table 4

Significant Relationship between Student’s level of Intellectual

Engagement and their Anxiety in the Classroom

Independent Dependent R r2 p-value Decision

Variable Variable
Anxiety
Intellectual inside the -0.491 0.241 0.001s Reject Ho
Engagement Classroom
P ≤ 0.05 Significant
 39

Percentage of Influence of Student’s Intellectual Engagement

to their Anxiety in the Classroom

Percentage of Influence of Student's

Intellectual Engagement to their Anxiety on
the Classroom

24.10%

Student's
intellectual
engagement

75.90% Other Factors

Fig. 2 Percentage of Influence

 40

Percentage of Influence of Student’s Intellectual Engagement to

their Anxiety in the Classroom

Figure 2 shows the percentage of influence of student’s intellectual

engagement to their anxiety in the classroom. The data reveals that the

student’s intellectual engagement has 75.90% influences to their anxiety in

the classroom of the respondents specifically in the respondents’ state, trait

and situation-specific components. This further means that the level of their

anxiety in the classroom of the respondents is affected by some other factors

other than student’s intellectual engagement as shown in the percentage of

influence of other factors to the level of their anxiety in the classroom which is

24.10%.
 Chapter 4

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Presented in this chapter are the summary, conclusions, and

recommendations based on the analysis and interpretation of the data

obtained.

Summary

The study aimed to determine the relationship between student’s level

of intellectual engagement and their anxiety in the classroom among first year

student from selected colleges in the University of Mindanao. Specifically, it

sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the level of intellectual engagement of the respondents in

terms of:

1.1 interests and motivation,

1.2 effort, and

1.3 quality instruction?

2. What is the level of their anxiety in the classroom of the respondents

in terms of:

2.1 state anxiety,

2.2 trait anxiety, and

2.3 situation-specific anxiety?

3. Is there a significant relationship between students’ intellectual

engagement and their anxiety in the classroom of the selected College

students in the University of Mindanao?

 42

4. What is the percentage of influence of students’ intellectual

engagement to their anxiety in the classroom among first year students from

selected Colleges in the University of Mindanao?

Hypothesis of the Study

The null hypothesis tested in this study at 0.05 level of significance

states that there is no significant relationship between students’ level of

intellectual engagement and their anxiety in the classroom.

This study made use of the descriptive correlation method of research

and employed quota sampling technique involving fifty (45) first year students

officially enrolled during 1st term, 2nd semester AY 2012-2013 from 3 selected

colleges of the University of Mindanao.

The following were the findings of the study:

1. The level student’s level of intellectual engagement yielded the

following results: interest and motivation, 4.33; effort, 4.02; and quality

instruction, 4.00 with an overall mean of 4.12.

2. The level of student’s anxiety in the classroom yielded the following

results: state anxiety, 2.39; trait anxiety, 1.90; and situation-specific anxiety,

2.34 with an overall mean of 2.21.

3. The statistical test on the significance of the relationship between the

student’s level of intellectual engagement and their anxiety in the classroom

yielded a p-value of 0.001s which is less than the tabular value of 0.05 level of

significance.

4. The percentage of influence of student’s intellectual engagement to

their anxiety in the classroom is 75.90%.

 43

Conclusions

On the basis of the foregoing findings, it can be concluded that:

1. The students’ level of intellectual engagement among first year

students from selected colleges of the University of Mindanao in terms of

interest and motivation, effort and quality instruction is high which indicates

that the level of student’s intellectual engagement is manifested most of the

time.

2. The level of student’s anxiety in the classroom among first year

students from selected colleges of the University of Mindanao in terms of

state, trait and situation-specific anxiety is moderate which indicates that the

students' anxiety in the classroom is just within the expected level.

3. There is a significant relationship between student’s level of

intellectual engagement and their anxiety in the classroom among first year

students from selected colleges of the University of Mindanao.

4. The percentage of influence of student’s intellectual engagement to

their anxiety in the classroom is affected by some other factors other than

student’s intellectual engagement as shown in the percentage of influence of

other factors to the level of their anxiety in the classroom.

Recommendations

On the basis of the aforementioned conclusions, the researchers

therefore recommend:

1. The school administrators should be consistent and maintain

appropriate programs to develop quality curriculum that will encourage

 44

teachers to be more effective in teaching for it will fortify and drive student’s

intellectual engagement.

2. The teachers should continuously involve themselves on seminars

and trainings to enhance further understanding of the role of interest and

motivation, effort and quality instruction in meeting the academic needs of

their students as well as student’s intellectual engagement with whatever

anxiety is present among students; state, trait and situation-specific anxieties.

3. The students should be more aware in recognizing the factors

influencing their intellectual engagement and involve themselves more in

activities that will sustain or develop their intellectual engagement in the

classroom.

4. Further study may be conducted to address other factors not

included in this study which may have an influence in the learning outcomes

of the students.
 45

References

Aquino, G. (2002). Descriptive and correlational research strategies.

Retrieved November 19, 2012 from
http://www.u.arizona.edu/~dusana/psych290Bpr

Basten, U., Stelzel, C., & Fiebach, C. (2012). Trait anxiety and the neural
efficiency of manipulation in working memory. Cogn Affect Behav
Neurosci 12, p. 571–588.

Boston, M. and Wolf, M. K. (2004). Using the instructional quality assessment

(IQA) toolkit to assess academic rigor in mathematics lessons and
assignments. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.

Carbonaro, W. (2005). Tracking, students’ effort, and academic achievement.

Sociology of Education, 78 (1) 27-49. SAGE Publications.

Fernandez, C. (2011). Differences Between State Anxiety and

Trait Anxiety.Retrieved November 27, 2012
from http://www.livestrong.com/article/98672-differences-between-state-
anxiety-/#ixzz2DPuhf0A6

Furnham, A., Monsen, J., & Ahmetoglu, G. (2009). Typical intellectual

engagement, Big Five personality traits, approaches to learning and
cognitive ability predictors of academic performance. British Journal
of Educational Psychology , 79. 769-782.

Gravois, T. (2009). Closing the Gap: The pivotal role of quality instruction
in student achievement. ICAT Resources, Inc. p. 8-9

Hidi, S., Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest

development. Educational Psychologist.41(2), 111-127

Hightower, A. (2011). Improving student learning by supporting quality

teaching: Key Issues, Effective Strategies. Retrieved November 27,
2012 from
http://www.edweek.org/media/eperc_qualityteaching_12.11.pdf

Howirtz, E. (2001). Language anxiety and achievement. Annual Review

of Applied Linguistics. 21, 112-126.

Interest. (n.d.). Definitions.net. Retrieved January 9, 2013, from

http://www.definitions.net/definition/interest.

Junker, B. (2004). Overview of the instructional quality assessment.

Retrieved November 27, 2012
 46

from http://www.stat.cmu.edu/~brian/AERA04/AERA04-bwj-
overview-2.pdf

King, K. &Knight-McKenna, M. (2010). Collaborative inquiry into deep and

integrative learning intellectual engagement QEP proposal. Retrieved
November 23, 2012 from http://www.elon.edu/docs/e-
web/administration/provost/qep/comments/IntellectualEngagementProp
osal.pdf

Marzano, R. J. (2007). Quality instruction SECTION III. Retrieved

November 23, 2012 from http://ed.sc.gov/agency/programs-
services/173/documents/Section_III_QualityInstruction.pdf

Matsumura, et al. (2004). Assessing the quality of reading comprehension

assignments and student work. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting
of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.

Nauert, R. (2012). Are worrying and intelligence linked?. Psych Central.

Retrieved on November 24, 2012, from
http://psychcentral.com/news/2012/04/13/are-worrying-and-
intelligence-linked/37322.html

Palmer, D. 2007. Motivation. Retrieved November 27, 2012 from Five key
ingredients for improving student motivation. Retrieved November 27,
2012 from http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/11834.pdf )

Pointer, et al., (2012). State anxiety is associated with cardiovascular

reactivity in young, healthy African Americans. International Journal of
Hypertension, 7.

Poropat, A. E. (2009). Importance of effort in the learning process. Retrieved

November 28, 2012 from
http://business.highbeam.com/435253/article-1G1-301479289/college-
student-effort-expenditure-online-versus-faceface.

Pslhologija (2009). The role of trait anxiety in induction of state anxiety.

Department of Psychology, University of Novi Sad, Serbia 42 (4), str.
491-504.

Querol, M. (2010). College students’ use of affective and Social Language

Learning Strategies: A Classroom-Based Research. Philippine ESL
Journal, Vol. 5.
Renninger, A. K. (2013). Effort and Interest. Retrieved November 27, 2012
from: <a href="http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/1946/Effort-
Interest.html">Effort and Interest - Effort, Interest, Effort and
Interest</a> <a
href="http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/1946/Effort-
Interest.html">Effort and Interest - Effort, Interest, Effort and
Interest</a>
 47

State of New South Wales, Department of Education and Communities and

Charles Sturt University, 2011. Retrieved November 23, 2012, from
http://hsc.csu.edu.au/pdhpe/core2/focus2/focus2/4021/fac2_2_2_1.htm

Spielberger, C.D. (1989). State-trait anxiety inventory: Bibliography (2nd ed.).

Palo Alto,CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. (4th Ed.). (2000)
by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by
Houghton Mifflin Company.
Tóth, Z. (2010). Foreign language anxiety and the advanced language
learner: A study of Hungarian students of English as a foreign
language. 12 Back Chapman Street, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6
2XX, UK. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data.

United Nations Children’s Fund (2000). Defining quality in education. Working

paper series education section programme Division United Nations
Children's Fund New York, NY, USA.

Willms, J.D. (2011). Students in SK Christ the Teacher Catholic Schools

"Tell Them From Me" about Student Engagement . 2-3

Williams, K. & Williams, C. (2011). Five key ingredients for improving student
motivation. Research in Higher Education Journal. 12, 1-23

Wisconsin RTI Center. (2011) Chippewa Falls [Brochure]. Retrieved

November 23, 2012 from
http://www.wisconsinrticenter.org/administrators/understanding-rti/high-
quality-instruction.html

Wu, K. (2010). The relationship between language learners’ anxiety

and Learning Strategy in the CLT Classrooms. International
Education Studies. .3, 1

Yeung, A., Schmid, S. & George, A. (2009). Increasing students’ interest

and motivation through effective design of online learning
environments. Sydney, Australia: UniServe Science, 132-133.
48