The attitude of Hungarian university students towards

English as an international language

A magyar egyetemisták hozzáállása az angol

nemzetközi nyelvként való tanításához

Dr. Illés Éva Sarkadi Zsuzsanna

egyetemi adjunktus angol nyelv és irodalom szak

2011

Abstract

Today, English is the language of international communication. Being this the case, it is

not sufficient to prepare language learners only for encounters with native speakers of

English; more extensive instruction is called for. The adjustment of English Language

Teaching (ELT) should start with the adjustment of teacher training curricula, which

should be preceded by an investigation into what university student know and think about

English as an International Language (EIL) and how to teach it.

A study was conducted to investigate what dispositions university students have

towards English as an International Language, towards native and non-native speakers of

English, and towards some topics of ELT which are important for the teaching of EIL

(namely teaching about different varieties of English, discussing English as used by non-

native speakers, and teaching communication strategies). In May 2010 a questionnaire was

made available on the Internet, and in the end 105 respondents completed it.

It was found that university students show generally positive attitudes concerning all

three topics mentioned above. Concerning native and non-native speakers of English,

participants showed a more positive attitude towards non-native speakers. It was also

investigated whether the attitude towards EIL or the attitude towards native and non-native

speakers of English influences attitude towards the three areas that might enhance teaching

EIL, but no correlation was found. 

CERTIFICATE OF RESEARCH

By my signature below, I certify that my ELTE thesis, entitled

The attitude of Hungarian university students towards

English as an international language

is entirely the result of my own work, and that no degree has previously been conferred

upon me for this work. In my thesis I have cited all the sources (printed, electronic or oral)

I have used faithfully and have always indicated their origin. The electronic version of my

thesis (in PDF format) is a true representation (identical copy) of this printed version.

If this pledge is found to be false, I realize that I will be subject to penalties up to and

including the forfeiture of the degree earned by my thesis.

Date: ...14.04.2011........ Signed: ...........................................................

Contents

1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................................1

2. Literature review ............................................................................................................................3

2.1. English as an International Language......................................................................................3

2.2. English in Hungary..................................................................................................................5

2.3. Teaching English as an International Language ......................................................................6

2.4. Teaching EIL in Hungary ........................................................................................................9

2.5. Research questions and hypotheses .......................................................................................11

3. Research design............................................................................................................................14

3.1. Participants ............................................................................................................................14

3.2. Instrument..............................................................................................................................14

3.3. Procedure ...............................................................................................................................18

4. Results and discussion..................................................................................................................19

4.1. Structure and internal consistency of the scales ....................................................................19

4.2. Research Question 1: Attitude towards EIL ..........................................................................20

4.2.1. Mean and standard deviation values of the individual items of the perception scales....... 21

4.2.2. Mean and standard deviation values of the individual items of the attitude scales............ 23

4.2.3. Comparison of the results of the subcategories of perception and attitude ........................ 25

4.3. Research Question 2: Attitude towards native and non-native speakers of English..............26

4.3.1. Mean and standard deviation values of the individual items of the scales ......................... 26

4.3.2. Comparison of the results of the native and non-native scales ........................................... 28

4.4. Research Question 3: Practices enhancing Teaching English as an International Language 29

4.4.1. Mean and standard deviation values of the individual items of the “good teacher” scales 30

4.4.2. Mean and standard deviation values of the individual items of the “self” scales............... 32

4.4.3. Comparison of the results of the “good teacher” and “self” scales..................................... 34

4.5. Research Question 4: Comparing findings of Topic 1 and 3.................................................35

4.6. Research Question 5: Comparing findings of Topic 2 and 3.................................................37

5. Conclusion....................................................................................................................................38

5.1. Summary and implications ....................................................................................................38

5.2. Limitations of the study.........................................................................................................39

5.3. Recommendations for further research..................................................................................40

References ........................................................................................................................................42

Appendix: The questionnaire ...........................................................................................................45

Attachment: The original questionnaire and the data collected………………….………………..CD

1. Introduction

English has become the language of international and intercultural communication. We

may come across it not only in situations where we meet people from different parts of the

world; English has become part of our everyday life. The question arises how this

development would or should influence English language teaching (ELT).

Throughout history, the English language “repeatedly found itself in the right

place at the right time” (Crystal, 1997, p. 110), and today it is all around us: it is the

language of international meetings, advanced science, higher education, popular culture,

broadcasting, and advertising. At the same time, the English language has acquired the role

of gatekeeper to better job opportunities as well as to international success.

As more people came to speak English, more and more different varieties started

to arise (Balogné Bérces, 2008). British, American, and Australian English are different in

many aspects, for instance pronunciation, lexis, or pragmatics. Moreover, in areas where

English is only a second language, new varieties have come into existence, which often

reflect the first language of their users. The situation is even more complex in those areas

where English is used for communication by people with different linguistic backgrounds,

who have all learnt English as a foreign language.

For ELT, this means that it is not sufficient to teach only the norms of one chosen

native speaker variety (which is usually the British or the American variety; Jenkins, 2000,

p. 204). While teachers can influence how their students will speak, they cannot influence

what students will hear, i.e. which varieties of English they will come across in the future

(Medgyes, 1984, p. 715). Being this the case, apart from communication strategies that can

help overcome communication breakdowns (e.g. Seidlhofer, 2006), learners should be

instructed about the different varieties of English (Melchers and Shaw, 2003), while it

1

should be also discussed in class how English is used by non-native speakers (Görlach,

2002).

However, it is questionable whether teachers of English are prepared for

integrating the topics mentioned above into their teaching, particularly because they do not

get enough support for doing so. Coursebooks, which frequently provide the basis of

teaching, do not show examples of interaction with other non-native speakers (Coperías

Aguilar, 2007, p. 71), while the teacher training curriculum (at least that of Eötvös Loránd

University) does not include courses on dialectology or pragmatics.

The best way to support future teachers is to improve teacher training. The first

step towards this is to explore university students’ dispositions towards how English is

used in today’s world, towards native and non-native speakers of English, and towards

those topics of ELT which are most important for preparing learners for coping with the

unpredictable nature of English language communication. I hope that my research, which

is to be presented in the following paper, will one day contribute to the development of the

teacher training curriculum.

2

2. Literature review

2.1. English as an International Language

In the last four hundred years, English expanded from the language of a small island to a

language spoken all around the globe. The English language achieved this because it has

“repeatedly found itself in the right place at the right time”. It was the language of the leading

colonial nation (Britain), then of the leader of the industrial revolution (Britain again), and

later of the leading economic power (USA) (Crystal, 1997, p. 110). As English spread all

over the world, it inevitably developed several varieties (Balogné Bérces, 2008, p. 1).

To help understand the spread of English, Kachru (1982) designed a model which

has often been quoted and used as a system of reference since then (e.g. by Crystal, 1997;

McKay, 2002; Melchers and Shaw, 2003; Řepová, 2010).1 He divided the English

speaking world into three concentric circles. The “Inner Circle” contains the countries

where people speak English as their mother tongue and use it in all possible domains of

life such as at home, in the street, or in education (as in Great Britain, the USA, or

Australia). In “Outer Circle” countries (including Nigeria, India, and Singapore), people

have various indigenous languages, and English plays a mediatory role, in this way it is

part of everyday life. Here English is an official language, it is usually taught as a second

language (SL), and it is used in governmental administration and education. In the

“Expanding Circle”, English has no official status and does not necessarily play an

essential role in everyday life. Instead, it is taught as a foreign language (FL) and is mainly

used for higher education, business, and international communication (for example in

Japan, Russia, or most countries in Europe – including Hungary).

The Kachruvian Inner and Outer Circles comprise those types of English which

we think about as varieties. In these areas the English language has such a long history that

1 Pickering (2006, p. 219) even claims it to be the “mutually agreed starting point.”

3

distinctive features could develop (Balogné Bérces, 2008). Those who live in Outer Circle

countries usually speak English as a second official language; hence here English is a non-

native variety (Crystal, 1997, p. 61). Accordingly, works on dialectology (e.g. Balogné

Bérces, 2008) usually treat English as spoken in the Inner and Outer Circles in detail,

while they make no or little mention of English as spoken in the Expanding Circle.

The Kachruvian Outer and Expanding Circles comprise of the non-native

speakers (NNS) of English, who in this way outnumber native speakers (NS). Kachru

(1986, p. 98) has noted that there are more non-native speakers of English than native

speakers, and Crystal (1997, p. 61) claims that English is the first language of only around

25 % of the world’s English speakers. Řepová (2010) estimates that today there are two

billion English speakers around the globe, while Gnutzmann (2000) and Beneke (1991)

claim that 80% of verbal English interactions have no native-speaker participants. This

means that today English is being shaped by non-native as well as native speakers

(Seidlhofer, 2005, p. 339).

When English as spoken by non-native speakers is discussed, two terms emerge

most often. One is “English as a Lingua Franca” (ELF), which usually refers to English as

spoken in the Expanding Circle (Burt, 2005, p. 3), and concentrates on speakers “for

whom English is the chosen foreign language of communication” (Firth, 1996, p. 240).

Scholars examining ELF exclude from the analysis English spoken as a first or official

second language, and concentrate on the search for distinctive features of English spoken

in the Expanding Circle. At the same time, they also investigate whether there are any

correlations between speakers’ linguistic background and how they speak English (see e.g.

Seidlhofer 2000). The other important term is “English as an International Language”

(EIL), which refers to the use of English in international settings, and includes native as

well as non-native speakers (e.g. Jenkins, 2000).

4

2.2. English in Hungary

In Hungary English is not the native language of the majority of the population, and has no

official status, therefore Hungary belongs to the Expanding Circle. Accordingly, English is

not the essential part of everyday life, although it often appears in the different domains of

life. It is present in the manuals of electronic devices, in advertisements in the street, and in

pop songs (see e.g. Crystal, 1997, pp. 86–94; Melchers and Shaw, 2003, pp. 179–183).

While speaking English is not indispensable for most people in Hungary, it plays

an important role in people’s lives. With the help of the English language, people can gain

access to information and establish relationships (Crystal, 1997, p. 11). If someone wants

to contribute to science, participate in higher education, or travel abroad, speaking English

will help them achieve their goals (McKay, 2003, p. 22).

English may also play an important role for those who do not speak it. Lack of

English may deprive people of the access to the information, education, or relationships

mentioned above. Since speaking English is often a requirement for more highly paid jobs,

the lack of it may deprive people of the opportunity to occupy these posts. If English

becomes a requirement for instead of remaining an instrument of achieving people’s goals,

it may infringe upon their linguistic rights, and may even legitimate the exploitation of

certain groups by others (Phillipson, 1992).

Experience with the English language influences people’s views and attitude

towards English (see e.g. Atkinson and Hilgard, 2005, 706). Attitude is a key factor for

motivation, which heavily influences behaviour (see e.g. Dörnyei, 2001, p. 48.). In this

way having positive attitude towards the English language may improve performance and

contribute to the success of communication.

Besides having positive attitude towards the language, having positive attitude

towards the interlocutor may also facilitate communication. As Hungary belongs to the

5

Expanding Circle, its citizens may have contact with both native and non-native speakers.

Consequently having positive attitude towards non-native as well as native speakers is

imperative.

2.3. Teaching English as an International Language

The ultimate goal of language teaching is usually to achieve “native-like command” of the

language (see e.g. Kachru, 1986, p. 118; McKay, 2002, p. 26; Murray, 2003, p. 152). The

main reason for this is that any language is automatically tied up with its native speakers;

this is why virtually all SLA operates with a native speaker model (Seidlhofer, 2004, p.

212). Accordingly, English Language Teaching also focuses on native speaker, i.e. on

Inner Circle norms (Murray, 2003, p. 152).

However, because of the spread of English, learners may come across not only

native speakers of the language. As a result, it is not enough to prepare language learners for

encounters with native speakers. Furthermore, “students should also develop tolerance

towards varieties of English and learn how to cope with the diversity and unpredictability of

international communication in English” (Illés and Csizér, 2010, p. 16). While this might be

true, teachers seem reluctant to abandon the NS norms for fear of confusion, lower

standards, and lower level of proficiency (Čeh, 2008, p. 63; Řepová, 2010, p. 210). In her

2003 research, Murray has found that while the new role of English as an international

language is generally acknowledged, teachers and learners alike have trouble accepting

any model other than a NS (p. 162).

To avert confusion that might be created by introducing different varieties of

English in ELT, Melchers and Shaw (2003, pp. 191-192) devised a new, straightforward

classification, which correctly describes the different roles of the English language in the

classroom. They distinguish between exposure, production model, and production target.

6

Exposure concerns learners’ receptive skills, listening and reading – this implies that

maybe texts from the periphery of the English language should also be presented to

students (as Görlach 2002, p. 164 also suggests). This is important because teachers can

make students speak one variety but they cannot influence what students hear. In this way

students can be “spared the schizophrenia” of being good speakers but slow listeners

(Medgyes, 1984, p. 715).

The production model concerns the teacher’s language use and the textbook

material; these two should always be consistent. In this way the production model can be

either a NS or a NNS variety of English. By contrast, it is unclear who should choose the

dialect or accent to be taught, or whether this accent or dialect should be a native one or

something else. In any case, this is also in accordance with Medgyes (1984), who claims

that a teacher is obliged to recommend one norm as a model.

The production target is what learners should aim for, what they want to be able

to produce on each level (pronunciation, lexis, morphology, syntax, discourse, and

pragmatics) of the language. This target may also remain the NS, even if teachers know

that most learners will not reach that level of proficiency (Davies, 1995, p. 149). However,

native speakers may be internationally, nationally, locally effective or ineffective speakers

(Melchers and Shaw, 2003, p. 29). Being this the case, native speakerhood in itself is not

sufficient as learning goal; students (and teachers) should aim at internationally effective

language use as the highest possible level of communication.

However, if teachers decide to expose learners to the different varieties of

English, the question arises as to how thoroughly learners need to know the language

before being introduced to variation. Timmis (2002), who researched teachers’ and

students’ willingness to conform to the NS norm (as apparently NS-like competence is still

“the benchmark of perfection”, p. 243), touched on the topic of spoken grammar as well.

7

While there was serious disagreement among teachers upon the grammatical status of such

utterances, it was also widely agreed that students should be exposed to these structures.

Teachers also pointed out the need to distinguish between reception and production.

Furthermore, they added that students’ level of proficiency should also be taken into

consideration, as learners already have to be in control of the language in order to

acknowledge the variations (p. 248).

To promote the integration of exposure to different varieties of English into the

ELT syllabus, Görlach (2002, pp. 164f) has proposed a few useful methods. For instance, a

teacher may present learners a text and let them “correct” it, in fact listing the deviances

from what they would have expected based on what they have already learnt. In doing so,

learners can explore the distinctive features of each variety. The texts could include both

native and non-native, moreover, standard and non-standard varieties.

Based on contrastive work, the class may also discuss how the different types of

deviances affect understanding, which deviance renders the text incomprehensible and

which not. At the same time, students may also learn to reflect upon the norms provided by

grammars and the way these norms affect our thinking about the different users of English.

It is also important to emphasize that speakers of non-standard varieties or non-native

speakers of English may be fully competent users of English, even if their language is

more difficult to understand than the standard. Furthermore, learners should realize that

today most speakers of English are non-native speakers just like themselves; therefore they

are more likely to come across non-native than native-speakers (Görlach, 2002, pp. 164f).

Additionally, teaching communication strategies, which can help learners

overcome breakdowns, is equally important. Baker (2009, p. 588) asks how participants of

international communication could “be prepared for the wealth and complexity of cultural

backgrounds and the associated communication practices they are likely to encounter.”

8

Jenkins and Seidlhofer (e.g. Seidlhofer, 2006; Jenkins, 2009) give an evasive answer, and

instead emphasize that learners should be taught to anticipate that there would be

problems. In this way learners will be able to overcome those problems more easily.

As can be seen from the above, the teaching of English as an International

Language does not differ much from traditional ELT. The main difference is that some

topics should gain more emphasis, and should become integral parts of ELT. These topics

include teaching about the different varieties of English, discussing English as used by

non-native speakers, and teaching communication strategies. Should these topics become

integral parts of ELT, I suppose that students will probably develop more easily the skill of

how to communicate successfully in international settings.

2.4. Teaching EIL in Hungary

In Hungary, the National Core Curriculum (NCC) has been designed to define the main

objectives and core contents for language teaching in general. It states that students should,

apart from being able to communicate in the specific foreign language they learn, become

aware that there are languages, cultures, values, and behaviour patterns outside of their

own and they should appreciate the differences and similarities (1995, pp. 55-68). These

requirements are in accordance with those topics of ELT which can enhance teaching

English as an International language (namely teaching about the different varieties of

English, discussing English as used by non-native speakers, and teaching communication

strategies).

However, the NCC does not specify how any of these topics should be applied to

the ELT syllabus, and trusts this with the individual schools or teachers. While regulations

give teachers great freedom as for what to teach, “it seems to be an unwritten law in

Hungary that teachers are supposed to teach British English” (Nagy, 2008, p. 11), whereas

9

students appear to be “more closely associated with the American than the British variety”

(Dörnyei, 1996, p. 14). While focussing on the British variety would not necessarily be a

problem in itself, the fact that teachers “like to take no notice of other varieties of the

English language and tend to pass them unmarked” (Nagy, 2008, p. 12) might prove

counterproductive when learners in the future come across those varieties which were

ignored in school. At the same time, students are often interested in the different varieties

and are curious about the reasons for the differences (Nagy, 2008, p. 13). In this way

teachers could exploit this curiosity to introduce the most distinctive features of other

varieties, or discussions about linguistic tolerance.

Another reason why the topics most important for the teaching of EIL may be left

out from ELT syllabi is that most coursebooks are not sufficient for the teaching of EIL

(Coperías Aguilar, 2007, p. 71). They present only the features of one variety of English,

moreover, in the example situations there are only NS-NS interactions, ignoring NS-NNS

and NNS-NNS interactions (Coperías Aguilar, 2007, p. 71). In this way the task of

compiling a syllabus which includes the topics most important for the teaching of EIL and

which would satisfy learners’ future needs falls upon the teacher. Creating supplementary

material is an arduous and time-consuming task, and teachers should be given as much

help as possible (Řepová, 2010, p. 211). While more and more coursebooks include tasks

that help students reflect upon their own environment and culture, there are only few

which facilitate the development of internationally intelligible pronunciation,2 or help

students contemplate on the aspects of culture and language.3

Moreover, current teacher training in Hungary does not prepare future teachers

sufficiently for handling topics connected to EIL (at least not according to the course catalogue

of Eötvös Loránd University – ELTE). While there are some courses at the university

2 E.g. Gilbert, J. (2000). Clear Speech from the Start. Recommended by Jenkins (2000, p. 234). 3 E.g. Végh Gy. (2007). Zoom In. Recommended by Coperías Aguilar (2007, p. 74).

10

dealing with dialectology, pragmatics, or EIL, the current teacher training curriculum

includes only one seminar dealing with “English speaking cultures”, and that usually

focuses on the culture of NS countries (see study unit lists and course descriptions at the

ELTE websites: http://seas3.elte.hu/cgi-bin/ideal-schedule.pl?prog=ma-tan-5&lang=en and

http://seas3.elte.hu/seas/catalogue.pl).4 This means that freshly trained English teachers do

not get sufficient instruction on the importance of treating English as an International

Language, or on how discussions about the different varieties could be integrated into the

teaching of English. Because of this, when these issues emerge in class, only what teachers

know and think about the diversity of English and what attitudes they have adopted towards

the varieties will be accessible for them to direct their teaching (Richardson, 1996, p. 103).

If we want learners of English to be prepared to cope with the complex situations

emerging due to the unpredictable nature of English used in international settings, first the

system of teacher training should be adjusted to include the topics which are most

important for the teaching of English as an International Language. These topics include

teaching about different varieties of English, discussing English as used by non-native

speakers, and teaching communication strategies.5 Teaching communication strategies is

already an essential element of teacher training (see e.g. Kontra, 2006), but discussing

varieties and English as used by non-native speakers should assume a much more

prominent role in teacher training.

2.5. Research questions and hypotheses

For the future promotion of topics connected to EIL in teacher training, first university

students’ attitudes towards these topics should be examined. As instruction should build on

4 In fact, this state of affairs is already better than it used to be in the former education system, where the teacher training curriculum did not include any courses connected to EIL (see the former study unit lists, e.g. Déri, 2004, p. 25). 5 Actually teaching EIL is much more complex, but I think these are the core areas which should be addressed.

11

the existing knowledge of learners, in our case university students, first this should be

explored; only following this exploration can any changes to teacher training be

implemented.

In an investigation like this, university students should be included regardless of

whether they participate in teacher training or not. There are two reasons for this. First,

some of the students who have not yet started teacher training may still decide to start it

later. Secondly, many students who do not participate in teacher training are already

teaching, although not officially.

In hopes of contributing to the process of improving teacher training, I decided to

undertake a study in which the research questions are as follows.

RQ1: What is the attitude of English major university students towards EIL?

RQ2: What is the attitude of English major university students towards native and

non-native speakers of English?

RQ3: What is the attitude of English major university students towards those topics

of ELT (teaching about different varieties of English, discussing English as used

by non-native speakers, and teaching communication strategies) which may help

to prepare learners for the use of English in an international setting?

RQ4: Is there a correlation between English major university students’ attitude

towards EIL and their attitude towards those topics of ELT (teaching about

different varieties of English, discussing English as used by non-native speakers,

and teaching communication strategies) which may help to prepare learners for

the use of English in an international setting?

RQ5: Is there a correlation between English major university students’ attitude

towards native and non-native speakers and their attitude towards those topics of

12

ELT (teaching about different varieties of English, discussing English as used by

non-native speakers, and teaching communication strategies) which may help to

prepare learners for the use of English in an international setting?

My hypothesis is that English major university students will show a generally

positive attitude towards the three topics of first three research questions. Concerning

RQ2, participants’ attitude towards native speakers of English will possibly be more

positive than towards non-native speakers. As for RQ4 and RQ5, I presume that those

university students who show a more positive attitude towards EIL and towards non-native

speakers of English will also show a more positive attitude towards those topics of ELT

which may help to prepare learners for the use of English in an international setting.

13

3. Research design

3.1. Participants

This research investigated English major students at Eötvös Loránd University. The

selection of participants was based on convenience sampling. Those students were invited

to fill in the online questionnaire whose e-mail address was available at the university web

interface. In this way it was ensured that all respondents were or had been university

students. The invitation letters were sent out at the beginning of May 2010. Over the next

month, 176 people started to fill in the questionnaire, but it was completed only by 105

respondents.

Among the 105 participants there were 20 males and 80 females (the gender of 5

participants are unknown). Their age was between 21 and 35 years, the mean age was 25

years. 12 of the participants had already finished their studies; 9 of those who graduated

had attended teacher training courses and 8 had already taught in schools. 75 of the

participants were trainee teachers, and 3 of the participants were planning to start teacher

training soon. Altogether 94 respondents had already some teaching experience, either as

private tutors, in language schools, in teacher training schools as trainees, or in other

schools.

3.2. Instrument

The Hungarian language questionnaire contained 65 Likert-type items, where the

participants had to choose one option of the five-point scale, which ranged from “strongly

agree” through “neither agree nor disagree” to “strongly disagree”. Since in Hungarian

schools evaluation of students’ performance is also based on five-point scales, participants

were expected to be familiar with them; this construction was supposed to increase the

reliability of the test.

14

The items of the questionnaire aimed to measure the following broad topics:

attitude towards English as an International Language, attitude towards native and non-

native speakers of English, and attitude towards the techniques that would enhance

teaching English as an International Language (teaching about different varieties of

English, discussing English as used by non-native speakers, and teaching communication

strategies). Some of the scales were adapted from earlier studies of Kata Csizér, who

generously gave her permission to use them, while most of the scales were developed for

the purpose of this study. The items were intended to cover the following latent

dimensions with the help of a five-point scale.

(1) Perception of English as being ubiquitous (4 items): whether participants are

aware of how often they come across English. Example: “Recently English has

become part of everyday life.”

(2) Perception of English as the means of international communication (4 items):

whether participants are aware of the fact that English is today the means of

international communication. Example: “People with different mother-tongues

can get to know each other's culture using the English language.”

(3) Perception of English as the instrument of achieving your goals (4 items):

whether participants are aware of how important English is for success in life.

Example: “If you can speak English, you can manage your affairs even

abroad.”

(4) Attitude towards English as being ubiquitous (4 items): to what extent

participants approve of the fact that they often come across English. Example:

“I like it when I come across English in my everyday life.”

(5) Attitude towards English as the instrument of international communication (4

items): how much participants approve of the fact that English has become the

15

main instrument of international communication. Example: “The English

language makes people with different first languages understand each other

better.”

(6) Attitude towards English as the instrument of achieving your goals (6 items):

how much participants approve of how important English has become for

success in life. Example: “I’m glad that speaking English improves my

chances to get on in life.”

(7) Attitude towards native speakers of English (9 items): how highly participants

think of native speakers of English. Example: “I like speaking with foreigners

coming from English-speaking countries.”

(8) Attitude towards non-native speakers of English (6 items): how highly

participants think of non-native speakers of English. Example: “How much do

you like speaking with foreigners coming from non-English-speaking

countries?”

(9) “Good teacher” teaching about the varieties of English (4 items): whether

participants think a good teacher would discuss the different varieties of

English in class. Example: “It’s good if an English teacher sometimes refers to

varieties of English which are not mentioned in the coursebook.”

(10) “Good teacher” discussing English as used by non-native speakers (4 items):

whether participants think a good teacher would discuss English as used by

native and non-native speakers in class. Example: “A teacher should raise

learners’ awareness of the fact that they might come across speakers of English

who speak it as a second language, just like them.”

(11) “Good teacher” teaching strategies that can help students overcome commu-

nication difficulties (4 items): whether participants think a good teacher should

16

prepare students for communication breakdowns. Example: “An English

teacher has to prepare learners to handle the misunderstandings occurring in

communication.”

(12) “Self” teaching about the varieties of English (4 items): whether participants

think they would discuss the different varieties of English in class if they were

teachers. Example: “If I were an English teacher, I’d sometimes bring exercises

to the students so that they can compare the British, the American, or other

varieties of English.”

(13) “Self” discussing English as used by non-native speakers (4 items): whether

participants think they would discuss English as used by native and non-native

speakers if they were teachers. Example: “If I were a teacher, I’d show my

students examples of non-native speakers talking in English.”

(14) “Self” teaching strategies that can help students overcome communication

difficulties (4 items): whether participants think they would want to prepare

students for communication breakdowns. Example: “When I am an English

teacher I’d make my students aware of the fact that they shouldn’t worry if

they don’t understand at first what the other is saying to them.”

Apart from the above 65 items aiming to measure the above latent dimensions, 8

questions intended to explore the participants personal background directly related to the

purpose of the research, including intention to work as a teacher and participation in

teacher training. The last question asked participants if they have any comments on the

questionnaire.

17

The full English version of the questionnaire can be found in Appendix A. The

data collected, the tables containing the analysis and the original Hungarian version of the

questionnaire can be found on the CD attached to the thesis.

3.3. Procedure

After the items were pooled, the questionnaire was piloted with the help of five volunteers.

They after filling in the questionnaire provided useful insights with reference to the

wording and ordering of the items. However, based on the comments of the participants

who complained about the monotonousness of the questionnaire, piloting should have been

more thorough.

The questionnaire was advertised through e-mails; the addresses were gathered

from the address-book of the university web interface. Participants could fill in the

questionnaire online, as it was available at http://gs-survey.com/s.asp?s=12261. The

questionnaire was administered in the students’ native language. In the invitation letter

respondents were guaranteed anonymity, and they were told that the questionnaire could

be completed in about 20 minutes.

All the questionnaires were computer-coded. For the purposes of computer

analysis, the original five-point Likert-scales were recoded; “5” represents “strongly

agree”, “3” represents “neither agree nor disagree”, and “1” represents “strongly disagree”.

To ensure reliability, most scales contain reverse-worded items, the scores of which had to

be reversed for the statistical analysis. These items are marked with an “x” in Chapter 4, in

the sections presenting the mean values and standard deviations of the individual scales.

Excel and ROPstat were used for analyzing the data.

18

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Structure and internal consistency of the scales

The presentation of the findings should be started with the formation of the scales. Each

scale contains 4–9 items, most of which are statements. In order to make sure that the

grouped items belong to the same dimension, the internal consistency of the scales was

examined with the help of their Cronbach Alpha values. The value for the whole of the

questionnaire was acceptable (0.80). After the examination, the items of scales 7 and 8

were rearranged to achieve better cohesion. However, the values for some of the scales are

still low, and become acceptable only if we treat the scales not individually but in small

groups. Despite this fact, the existing scales will be employed for the purpose of this paper.

Nevertheless, any follow-up studies would need to restructure these scales, or at least

reconsider the items.

Table 1. Cronbach Alpha values of the scales, individually and in groups

Scales Items Cronbach Alpha

1 Perception of English as being ubiquitous 09, 35, 36, 52 0.75

2 Perception of English as the means of international communication

04, 18, 54, 61 0.61

3 Perception of English as the instrument of achieving one’s goals

02, 11, 13, 64 0.50

0.77

4 Attitude towards English as being ubiquitous 01, 17, 47, 65 0.49

5 Attitude towards English as the means of international communication

06, 10, 32, 51 0.69

6 Attitude towards English as the instrument of achieving one’s goals

07, 12, 27, 38, 48, 59

0.56

0.79

0.87

7 Attitude towards native speakers of English 03, 24, 30, 41, 42,

45, 46, 53, 62 0.55

8 Attitude towards non-native speakers of English

05, 19, 22, 23, 28, 57

0.40 0.59

9 “Good teacher” teaching about the varieties of English

25, 26, 37, 50 0.68

10 “Good teacher” discussing English as used by non-native speakers

08, 15, 56, 58 0.42

11 “Good teacher” teaching strategies that can help students overcome communication difficulties

14, 21, 34, 63 0.30

0.72

0.86

19

12 “Self” teaching about the varieties of English 16, 40, 43, 44 0.63

13 “Self” discussing English as used by non-native speakers

31, 33, 39, 60 0.62

14 “Self” teaching strategies that can help students overcome communication difficulties

20, 29, 49, 55 0.38

0.74

4.2. Research Question 1: Attitude towards EIL

RQ1 aimed to discover what dispositions English major students have towards English as

an International Language. This section of the study had six latent dimensions (see 3.2 (1)–

(6)). In developing these, the two main questions were whether students are aware of the

role of English in our globalised world, and what attitudes they have towards it. The reason

for this division was that the teacher interviews analysed in Jenkins (2005) revealed that

while some teachers actively research EIL, some have not even heard of it. Therefore it

seemed reasonable to test students’ awareness as well as investigating their attitude. Then

both major topics were divided into the same three subtopics. The first subtopic investi-

gated students’ awareness of and attitude towards the ubiquitous presence of the English

language. The second investigated whether students saw English as the means of

international communication, and what attitudes have towards it. The third investigated

whether students saw English as indispensable for success in professional life, and what

attitudes had towards this.

While the Cronbach Alpha values for the individual scales were sometimes low,

the value for the six scales of this topic is high enough. The mean is also fairly high, which

indicates that respondents generally showed positive attitudes towards EIL

Table 2. mean standard deviation

Cronbach Alpha

RQ1 Attitude towards EIL 4.16 0.93 0.87

20

The following sections contain the detailed presentation of the findings connected to the

first topic, which concerns attitude towards EIL. The scales are grouped in the two

subcategories concerning perception of and attitude towards EIL.

4.2.1. Mean and standard deviation values of the individual items of the perception scales

Three scales are connected to the subcategory of perceiving English as an international

language. Their joint mean is high, which is natural for university students, who have daily

contact with the language, and often are involved in multicultural activities. (For a more

detailed examination of university students’ experiences with English see Erling, 2007.)

The result reflecting that participants are aware of the fact that English has become an

international language validates the findings of the other sections of the study, as it

confirms that participants are aware of the situation we are making our enquiries about.

The Cronbach Alpha value for the three related scales is also high enough.

Table 3. mean standard deviation

Cronbach Alpha

RQ1/a Perception of English as an International Language 4.18 0.91 0.77

As can be expected from English major students, the results for the scale

concerning perception of English as ubiquitous are generally fairly high, with low standard

deviations. University students therefore seem to agree on the prevalence of the English

language. Item 36, which states that English has become part of everyday life, received the

highest mean value. Item 52, which states that English is all around us, and which received

the lowest mean value, scored only 0.15 points under item 36.

Table 4. Items of perception of English as being ubiquitous mean standard deviation

09. All around the world, English is the language learnt most often. 4.45 0.60

35. English is the most widespread language in the world. 4.43 0.87

21

52. Nowadays English is all around us. 4.39 0.90

36. Recently English has become part of everyday life. 4.54 0.69

total 4.45 0.78

Concerning perception of English as the means of international communication,

the joint mean is somewhat lower than that of the previous scale, while it is still high.

Standard deviation is a little higher here. Item 04 received the highest mean value – it is

even higher than the highest mean value of the previous scale. Item 18, which received the

lowest mean value, scored only 0.85 points under this.

Table 5. Items of perception of English as the means of international communication

mean standard deviation

54. If you speak English well, you can get to know more foreign people (not necessarily from English-speaking countries).

4.18 0.88

18. The English language helps us learn how people leave in other parts of the world.

3.73 0.95

61. People with different mother-tongues can get to know each other's culture using the English language.

4.33 0.73

04. According to you, how often is English used for communication between people with different first languages?

4.58 0.49

total 4.21 0.84

The mean value for perception of English as the instrument of achieving one’s

goals is noticeably lower than those of the previous two scales. Standard deviation is also

the highest here, both for the individual items and for the whole scale. Strangely enough,

we find here the highest (item 02) as well as the lowest mean value (item 13) for the

subcategory of perception.

Table 6. Items of perception of English as the instrument of achieving one’s goals

mean standard deviation

64. If you speak English, you can access information in any field. 3.70 0.97

02. According to you, if someone wants to get on in life, how much do they need to speak English?

4.67 0.55

13. If you cannot speak English, you have less chance to get on in life. 3.48 1.10

11. If you can speak English, you can manage your affairs even abroad. 3.70 0.85

total 3.89 1.00

22

4.2.2. Mean and standard deviation values of the individual items of the attitude scales

The joint mean value of the three scales connected to the subcategory of attitude was

slightly lower than that of the subcategory of perception, just like its standard deviation.

The Cronbach Alpha value for the three related scales is also high enough.

Table 7. mean standard deviation

Cronbach Alpha

RQ1/b Attitude towards English as an International language 4.14 0.95 0.79

The scale investigating the attitude towards the ubiquitous presence of English

received the highest mean value of the six scales related to RQ1, while standard deviation

is here the lowest. Item 01, which asked how important English is in the world, received an

extremely high mean value (4.93). Item 65 received the lowest mean value, which is,

however, still high enough (4.00). Indeed, it is reasonable to assume that people who have

chosen to study English appreciate English as used outside the university as well.

Table 8. Items of attitude towards English as being ubiquitous mean standard deviation

01. According to you, how important is English in today's world? 4.93 0.25

65. The fact that English is a global language makes life easier. 4.00 0.86

17. I like it when I come across English in my everyday life. 4.63 0.61

47. I don't like it that I come across English wherever I go. x 4.37 0.93

total 4.48 0.79

Concerning the attitude towards English as the means of international

communication, the joint mean value is significantly lower (only 4.01), while the joint

standard deviation is only a little higher than that of the previous scale. Here the highest

mean value is only 4.34 (for item 32), while the lowest is 3.54 (for item 06). It is

interesting that while participants appreciate the presence of English in their everyday

lives, they assume it is less important in establishing and maintaining relationships with

23

people with different linguistic backgrounds. One possible explanation may be that

participants, 90 of whom speak other languages as well, felt that English is not the most

important or exclusive instrument of international communication.

Table 9. Items of attitude towards English as the means of international communication

mean standard deviation

10. The English language helps to understand people from all over the world.

4.05 0.80

06. According to you, how important is the English language in getting to know the culture of other people?

3.54 0.89

51. It’s great that it’s enough to speak English in order to get to know people from other parts of the world.

4.10 0.80

32. The English language makes people with different first languages understand each other better.

4.34 0.71

total 4.01 0.85

The scale investigating attitude towards English as the instrument of achieving

one’s goals received a joint mean value similar to the previous scale (4.00), while the joint

standard deviation is higher here. The highest mean value is 4.64 (item 07), showing that

participants find it useful to have a global language which can be used for various purposes

all around the world. The lowest mean value is 3.01 (item 59), reflecting that participants

think neither too positively nor too negatively about the fact that English may act as a

gatekeeper for better opportunities in life.

Table 10. Items of attitude towards English as the instrument of achieving one’s goals

mean standard deviation

12. It’s great that if you speak English, you can access information in any field.

4.26 0.82

27. It’s perturbing that I’ll need the English language whatever field I want to research.

x 4.21 0.96

38. I’m glad that speaking English improves my chances to get on in life. 3.65 0.94

48. It frightens me that the key to getting on in life is to know only one certain language.

x 4.23 0.94

59. I think it’s wrong that if someone does not speak English, their chance to get on in life is minimized.

x 3.01 1.12

07. According to you, how useful it is to have one language that is understood all over the world?

4.64 0.60

total 4.00 1.05

24

4.2.3. Comparison of the results of the subcategories of perception and attitude

As can be seen from the above tables, the results for the subcategory of perception are

generally higher than those for attitude. While participants, who are English major

students, are aware of the fact that English has become a global language which is today

used in different domains of life all over the world, the attitude they show towards this is

less positive than it could be expected according to the results of the perception scales.

Nevertheless, the results for attitude are still high, without any explicitly low values.

In both subcategories, the first scales scored the highest, which investigated

perception and attitude towards the ubiquitous presence of English. They were followed by

the scale discussing English as the means of international communication, and the scales

discussing English as the instrument of achieving one’s goals had the lowest values –

although in the attitude category the difference between their joint mean values was only

0.01 point.

If we compare only the mean values of the two subcategories, we can easily

determine the correlation between the two subcategories using ROPstat for the analysis.

The similar standard deviations make it possible to compare the two variables. As the

distribution of the variables is not normal, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was applied. It

showed that there is a strong positive link between the two variables, i.e. participants who

scored higher in the subcategory of perception, also scored high in the subcategory of

attitude and vice versa. This may lead to the conclusion that raising awareness of the use of

English as an international language may positively influence the attitude towards it.

25

Chart 1. Comparison of the means of the two subcategories

RQ1/a Perception

2 20

3

11

16 16

24 23

8

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2.78 3.01 3.23 3.46 3.68 3.91 4.13 4.36 4.58 4.81

RQ1/b Attitude

24 4

12

19 19

1411

15

5

0

5

10

15

20

3.1 3.3 3.5 3.7 3.9 4.1 4.3 4.5 4.7 4.9

mean: 4.18 standard deviation: 0.44 mean: 4.14 standard deviation: 0.43 Rpb = 0.725*** (p = 0.0000)

4.3. Research Question 2: Attitude towards native and non-native speakers of English

RQ2 aimed to discover respondents’ attitude towards native and non-native speakers of

English. The reason for this was that attitude is a key factor for motivation (see e.g.

Dörnyei, 2001, p. 48.), and having positive attitude towards the interlocutor (and their

language use) is essential for successful communication. For EIL communication this

means that having positive attitude towards non-native as well as native speakers is

imperative.

Accordingly, this section of the questionnaire consisted of two scales, one

investigating attitude towards native speakers and one towards non-native speakers. Since

this section produced the lowest Cronbach Alpha value and not even the joint Cronbach

Alpha value of the two scales reached the minimal 0.60, the data obtained should be

handled with caution and anyone wishing to conduct a similar research should reconsider

the items.

4.3.1. Mean and standard deviation values of the individual items of the scales

The scale concerning participants’ attitude towards native speakers of English produced

the lowest joint mean among the scales (3.86), while the joint standard deviation is slightly

high (1.09). Item 03, which asked whether participants wanted to speak like a native

26

speaker, received the highest mean value (4.75) and the lowest standard deviation (0.51).

This may reflect that ELT still concentrates on native speaker norms. Item 42 received the

lowest mean value, but not the highest standard deviation. Its mean value, which is around

“3”, may indicate participants’ uncertainty about the issue, which may be due to the

complexity of the item.

Table 11. Items of attitude towards native speakers of English mean standard deviation

41. I think that if you learn English, it is more useful to practice speaking with native speakers than with non-native speakers.

3.37 1.10

03. Do you want to speak English like a native speaker? 4.75 0.51

45. I try to be polite with native speakers of English. 4.13 1.03

24. I like speaking with foreigners coming from English-speaking countries.

4.51 0.82

46. It’s hard to talk to native speakers of English because it’s difficult to understand their accent.

x 3.46 1.13

62. It’s difficult for me to understand native speakers of English because they use too many idioms.

x 3.90 1.04

30. It’s easier to understand non-native speakers of English because of their accent.

x 3.71 1.01

53. I think that if you learn English, it is more useful to practice speaking with non-native speakers than with native speakers.

x 3.86 0.75

42. Non-native speakers of English are easier to understand because they don’t use that many idioms than native speakers.

x 2.99 1.04

total 3.86 1.09

It is surprising that attitude towards non-native speakers of English received a

relatively high joint mean value (4.10) as compared to attitude towards native-speakers,

while standard deviation is the same for the two scales. Item 57 scored the highest, which

claimed that “not only native speakers of English can speak English well,” while item 22,

which stated the opposite (and the values of which were reversed) received a mean value

0.30 points lower. Interestingly, item 28 received the lowest mean value (3.33), which

concerned the language use of non-native speakers.

27

Table 12. Items of attitude towards non-native speakers of English

mean standard deviation

22. Only native speakers of English can speak English well. x 4.22 0.89

57. Not only native speakers of English can speak English well.

4.52 0.97

05. How much do you like speaking with foreigners coming from non-English-speaking countries?

4.47 0.63

19. It’s annoying that non-native speakers of English often speak faulty English.

x 3.47 1.16

23. Usually I’m less polite with non-native speakers of English.

x 4.56 0.87

28. I think non-native speakers of English use less difficult sentences than native-speakers.

x 3.33 1.15

total 4.10 1.09

4.3.2. Comparison of the results of the native and non-native scales

As can be seen from the above tables, the results for the scale concerning attitude towards

non-native speakers are generally higher than those for the one concerning attitude

towards native speakers. This may be due to the fact that participants themselves are non-

native speakers of English, moreover, most (90) of them speak other languages apart from

English. In this way they learned to appreciate efforts acquiring a foreign language

necessitates. Nevertheless, their attitude towards native speakers is still positive.

Participants’ generally positive attitude towards both native and non-native speakers of

English may contribute to successful communication on the international stage, and if they

become teachers, their positive attitudes may help their students take up similar

propositions and achieve similar success.

If we compare only the mean values of the two scales, we can easily determine

the correlation between the two attitudes using ROPstat for the analysis. The similar

standard deviations make it possible to compare the two variables. As the distribution of

the variables is not normal, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was applied. It showed that the

variables are not equals of each other, i.e. participants who scored higher in one scale

usually scored lower in the other and vice versa. There is a stable, but mild correlation

28

between the two variables, which makes it possible to deduce results of one of the

variables seeing only the results of the other, but the difference will not be substantial.

Chart 2. Comparison of the means of the two scales

RQ2/a NS attitude

1 1 1 1

3

78

13

10

8

10 109

3 3

5 56

1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2.67 3 3.22 3.44 3.67 3.89 4.11 4.33 4.56 4.89

RQ2/b nNS attitude

1

4

6

3

1112

15

1112

11

9 9

1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

2.67 3.17 3.33 3.5 3.67 3.83 4 4.17 4.33 4.5 4.67 4.83 5

mean: 3.86 standard deviation: 0.45 mean: 4.10 standard deviation: 0.48 Rpb = 0.271** (p = 0.0052)

4.4. Research Question 3: Practices enhancing Teaching English as an International

Language

RQ3 investigated university students’ attitude towards some topics of ELT that would help

students to prepare for using English as an International Language. This section of the

study had six latent dimensions (see 3.2 (9)–(14)). The scales were developed to focus on

three key areas of instruction, including teaching about the varieties of English, discussing

English as used by non-native speakers, and teaching communication strategies that can

help overcome communication breakdowns. Each of these categories was divided in two

subcategories, one concerning participants’ notion of the “good” English teacher, the other

investigating how participants picture themselves as teachers.

While the Cronbach Alpha values for the individual scales are sometimes low, the

value for the six scales of this topic is high enough. The mean is also fairly high, which

indicates that respondents generally agreed that teaching English as an International

Language should include teaching about the different varieties of English, discussing

English as used by non-native speakers, and teaching strategies that can help overcome

breakdowns and difficulties of communication.

29

Table 13. mean standard deviation

Cronbach Alpha

RQ3 Attitude towards practices enhancing Teaching English as an International Language

4.30 0.91 0.86

The following sections contain the detailed presentation of the findings connected

to this topic. The scales are grouped in the two subcategories reflecting the expected

behaviour of the “good teacher” and the way respondents imagine themselves as teachers.

4.4.1. Mean and standard deviation values of the individual items of the “good teacher”

scales

Three scales are connected to the subcategory of the expected behaviour of the “good”

English teacher. Their joint mean is high, which is favourable for university students,

especially if we presume that many of them will become teachers (although many of them

are already teaching in one way or another). The Cronbach Alpha value for the three

related scales is also sufficiently high.

Table 14. mean standard deviation

Cronbach Alpha

RQ3/a “Good teacher” scales 4.35 0.85 0.72

Concerning teaching about the varieties of English, the joint mean value of the

scale is high (4.41). It is diminished only by item 25, which received a surprisingly low

score (3.74), while its standard deviation was also much higher than that of the other items

of the scale. This may be due to the fact that this was a reverse-worded item. Item 50

received the highest mean value, which was, however, not much higher than that of item

26 and 37. The generally high mean values and low standard deviations indicate that

participants agree on that the different varieties of English should be presented to learners.

30

Table 15. Items of “good teacher” teaching about the varieties of English mean standard deviation

26. It’s good if an English teacher sometimes refers to varieties of English which are not mentioned in the coursebook.

4.62 0.59

50. It’s good if an English teacher sometimes brings exercises to the students so that they can compare the British, the American, or other varieties of English.

4.70 0.54

37. An English teacher has to prepare the learners to be able to understand English varieties different from their own.

4.58 0.61

25. I think it’s just enough if the learners recognize one variety of English.

x 3.74 1.02

total 4.41 0.82

Discussing English as used by non-native speakers was rated lower than teaching

about varieties, but the joint mean value of this scale is still high (4.17). Similarly to the

previous scale, the reverse-worded item received the lowest mean value (item 15, 3.57).

Item 58 scored the highest (4.55), and it was closely followed by item 56 (4.50). These

scores indicate that participants generally agree on that English as used by non-native

speakers should also be presented to learners, while they consider it less important than

presenting other varieties.

Table 16. Items of “good teacher” discussing English as used by non-native speakers

mean standard deviation

58. It’s good if the teacher shows the students examples of non-native speakers talking in English.

4.55 0.66

56. A teacher should raise learners’ awareness of the fact that they might come across other speakers of English who speak it as a second language just like them.

4.50 0.66

08. According to you, how important it is to discuss in class that the majority of people speaking or writing in English is not a native speaker?

4.04 0.84

15. A good teacher first and foremost prepares the learners for the encounter with native speakers of English.

x 3.57 0.92

total 4.17 0.88

The scale investigating overcoming communication difficulties received the

highest joint mean value and the lowest joint standard deviation among all of the scales.

The very high joint mean was diminished only by the mean of the reverse-worded item

(14), which was slightly low (3.77), just like in the case of the other scales of the

31

subcategory. Item 21 received an extremely high mean value (4.90), and the mean values

of the other two items are also above 4.50. This good result may be due to the fact that

teaching communication strategies is fundamental in communicative language teaching,

which is today the dominant approach to second language teaching – and as such, it is also

an important element of English teacher training courses.

Table 17. Items of “good teacher” teaching strategies that can help students overcome communication difficulties

mean standard deviation

34. An English teacher has to prepare learners to handle the misunderstandings occurring in communication.

4.70 0.57

63. It’s important that an English teacher show the students which mistakes disturb communication the most.

4.56 0.58

21. An English teacher should make the learners aware of the fact that they shouldn’t worry if they don’t understand at first what the other is saying to them.

4.90 0.32

14. The only duty of the English teacher is to teach the learners how to express themselves in English.

x 3.77 1.05

total 4.49 0.81

4.4.2. Mean and standard deviation values of the individual items of the “self” scales

The joint mean value of the three scales connected to the subcategory of participants’

image of themselves as teachers was slightly lower than that of the subcategory of the

image of the “good teacher”, while the standard deviation was almost the same. The

Cronbach Alpha value for the three related scales is also high enough.

Table 18. mean standard deviation

Cronbach Alpha

RQ3/b “Self teacher” scales 4.24 0.97 0.74

The scale investigating the teaching about the varieties of English received the

lowest joint mean value of the six scales related to RQ3, while standard deviation is here

the highest. As in the case of the other subcategory, the reverse-worded item (40) is the

one which produced the lowest mean value. Here, however, it is as low as 2.83 points.

Without this item, the Cronbach Alpha value of this scale would grow from 0.63 to 0.70.

The joint mean value would also grow to 4.54, as the other mean values for the scale are

32

relatively high, the lowest being 4.42. Nevertheless, the joint mean value of the scale may

not be considered low, as it is still over 4.00. This result shows that participants indeed

consider it important to teach about the different varieties of English. The low mean value

for item 40, on the other hand, may indicate participants’ lack of confidence rather than

their opposition to teaching about varieties.

Table 19. Items of “self” teaching about the varieties of English mean standard deviation

44. If I were an English teacher, I’d sometimes refer to varieties of English which are not mentioned in the coursebook.

4.51 0.65

16. If I were an English teacher, I’d sometimes bring exercises to the students so that they can compare the British, the American, or other varieties of English.

4.70 0.57

43. If I were an English teacher, I’d want to prepare my students to be able to understand English varieties different from their own.

4.42 0.66

40. If I were a teacher, I’d be satisfied if my students would be able to understand one variety of English.

x 2.83 1.12

total 4.11 1.08

Discussing English as used by non-native speakers also received a relatively high

joint mean value, in fact, higher than the similar scale of the other subcategory. Here too

the reverse-worded item (39) received the lowest mean value, while the other items scored

significantly higher. Items 31 and 33 received similarly high mean values (4.50 and 4.48),

while that of item 60 was not much lower (4.39). These results indicate that participants

regard it as important to discuss with learners how English is used by non-native speakers.

Table 20. Items of “self” discussing English as used by non-native speakers mean standard deviation

33. If I were a teacher, I’d show my students examples of non-native speakers talking in English.

4.48 0.77

31. If I were a teacher, I’d raise my students’ awareness of the fact that they might come across other speakers of English who speak it as a second language just like them.

4.50 0.73

60. If I were a teacher, I’d discuss in class that the majority of people speaking or writing in English is not a native speaker.

4.39 0.77

39. As a teacher, first and foremost I’d like to prepare the learners for the encounter with native speakers of English.

x 3.45 1.00

total 4.20 0.93

33

Just like in the other subcategory, the scale investigating overcoming commu-

nication difficulties received the highest joint mean value and the lowest joint standard

deviation. The generally problematic reverse-worded item (29) also received a relatively

high mean value (3.65), although it is still very low compared to the mean values of the

other items of the scale. Item 49 received the highest mean value (4.83), and the mean

values of the other two items are also above 4.50. This good result attests that teaching

communication strategies is truly considered important by participants.

Table 21. Items of “self” teaching strategies that can help students overcome communication difficulties

mean standard deviation

20. If I were an English teacher, I’d prepare my students to handle the misunderstandings occurring in communication.

4.59 0.64

55. As a teacher of English, I’d show m students which mistakes disturb communication the most.

4.53 0.66

49. When I am an English teacher I’ll make my students aware of the fact that they shouldn’t worry if they don’t understand at first what the other is saying to them.

4.83 0.38

29. If I were a teacher I’d concentrate on teaching my learners how to express themselves in English.

x 3.65 1.11

total 4.40 0.87

4.4.3. Comparison of the results of the “good teacher” and “self” scales

In both subcategories the last scales received the highest scores, which considered

overcoming communication difficulties. This indicates that participants truly think that

teaching communication strategies is an important part of teaching English; this conviction

might make it easier for them to help their future learners acquire the skills necessary for

successful communication.

As can be seen from the above tables, the results for the subcategory of “good

teacher” were in most cases higher than those for the subcategory of participants’ image

of themselves as teachers. Here the first category may be taken as concerning the ideal and

the second as concerning the actual self. As the values connected to the ideal self are

normally higher than those connected to the actual self (Atkinson and Hilgard, 2005, p.

34

706), it is normal for the scales concerning the ideal self to yield higher results. Examining

only the means of the two subcategories, the value of the “good teacher” is higher in 72

cases out of the 105. In 19 cases the values are higher for the way participants image them-

selves, which may be due the fact that this questionnaire was not a personality test. In 14

cases the mean values of the “good teacher” and of participants themselves were the same.

Here too, ROPstat was used to determine the correlation between the two

subcategories, considering only the mean values. As the distribution of the variables was

not normal, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was applied. It showed that there is a strong

correlation between the two variables: what participants considered important for the

“good teacher”, they also considered important for themselves, even if the scores were

generally lower for the latter subcategory. This suggests that there is a high chance that

what they acknowledged to be important will also become manifest in their teaching (if

they decide to work as teachers). And since they mostly agreed with the practices

proposed, they will presumably adopt them, which is an important step towards teaching

English as an international language in Hungary.

Chart 3. Comparison of the means of the two subcategories

RQ 3/a Good teacher

2 3

710

17

10

20

15 16

5

0

5

10

15

20

25

3.5 3.66 3.81 3.97 4.13 4.29 4.45 4.6 4.76 4.92

RQ 3/b Self teacher

52

7

14 15

7

19 20

79

0

5

10

15

20

25

3.34 3.51 3.69 3.86 4.04 4.21 4.39 4.56 4.74 4.91

mean: 4.35 standard deviation: 0.361 mean: 4.24 standard deviation: 0.40 Rpb = 0.879*** (p = 0.0000)

4.5. Research Question 4: Comparing the findings of Topic 1 and 3

During the development of the study it seemed relevant to investigate whether attitude

towards EIL might influence participants’ attitude towards the topics which may enhance

35

the teaching of EIL, namely teaching about different varieties of English, discussing

English as used by non-native speakers, and teaching communication strategies. The

hypothesis was that participants showing more positive attitude towards EIL would show

more positive attitude towards those topics of ELT (teaching about different varieties of

English, discussing English as used by non-native speakers, and teaching communication

strategies) which may help to prepare learners for the use of English in an international

setting.

For the purpose of comparison in ROPstat, the mean values of the two topics were

used. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was applied again, and it showed that there was no

correlation between the two variables, and had there been correlation, it would not have

been reliable (Rpb = 0.065; p = 0.5078).

In pursuit of a positive result, another test was applied, this time involving the

demographic data concerning teaching practice and participation in teaching programme.

Since in the other groups the distribution of participants was not acceptable, only the

intention to become a teacher made it possible to conduct an analysis of variance with an

independent variable. Accordingly, I compared the means of Topic 1 and Topic 3 in case

of only those participants who intend to become teachers. However, the result was again

negative.

Table 22. Demographic data concerning teaching

number of participants

participating in teacher training 75

intending to become a teacher 57

teaching (anywhere) 94

teaching (in school) 33

36

Although this latter result may be due to the sample being small (only 105

participants), it nonetheless confirms the first result: there is no correlation between

participants’ attitude towards EIL and their acceptance of the proposed teaching strategies.

4.6. Research Question 5: Comparing the findings of Topic 2 and 3

Another question which seemed relevant during the development of the study was whether

there was a correlation between participants’ attitude towards native and non-native

speakers of English and their attitude towards the strategies enhancing the teaching of EIL.

It was hypothesised that participants showing more positive attitude towards non-native

speakers of English would show more positive attitude towards those topics of ELT

(teaching about different varieties of English, discussing English as used by non-native

speakers, and teaching communication strategies) which may help to prepare learners for

the use of English in an international setting.

For the purpose of comparison in ROPstat, here again the mean values of the two

topics were used. As no joint mean could be calculated for the two scales investigating

attitude towards native and non-native speakers, the means for the two scales were treated

separately. In this way we had three variables. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was applied

again, and it showed that there was no correlation between the variables, and had there

been correlation, it would not have been reliable (for NS: Rpb = 0.112, p = 0.2564; for

NNS: Rpb = 0.127, p = 0.1966). Just like in the case of the previous research question, the

correlation was tested taking into consideration only the participants intending to become

teachers, but the result was again negative. This confirmed that there is no correlation

between attitude towards native or non-native speakers and attitude towards the proposed

topics.

37

5. Conclusion

5.1. Summary and implications

The examination of the three broad topics, which were attitude towards English as an

International Language, attitude towards native and non-native speakers of English, and

attitude towards the topics of ELT which might enhance teaching English as an

International Language yielded positive results. This indicates that participants’ overall

attitude towards English as an International Language and the related topics is positive.

Having positive attitude towards EIL may not only improve participants’ performance in

international communication situations, but may also help them in preparing students for

similar situations (if they decide to work as teachers). The positive attitude of university

students may also be a firm starting point if changes are to be implemented in the teacher

training curriculum.

The analysis of the scales connected to the first topic showed that participants not

only are aware of the fact that English has become an international language, but they also

think positively about this development. As there is a strong positive link between

perception of and attitude towards the way English is used today, it may be concluded that

raising awareness of the use of English as an International Language may positively

influence attitude towards it.

The analysis of the two scales connected to the second topic showed that

participants think positively about both native and non-native speakers of English.

Participants regard non-native speakers higher, which is a favourable result considering

that they are more probable to come across non-native speakers of English, as today non-

native speakers of this language are more numerous than native speakers.

The analysis of the scales connected to the third topic revealed that participants

show a generally positive attitude towards teaching about the different varieties of English,

38

discussing English as used by non-native speakers, and teaching strategies that can help

overcome communication breakdowns. It is encouraging to see that the mean values were

the highest for the scales concerning communication strategies, as those are essential in

coping with the difficulties emerging due to the unpredictable nature of English as used in

international communication. The positive attitude towards the teaching about the different

varieties of English and discussing English as used by non-native speakers indicates that

these topics are also progressing towards becoming integral part of ELT, in this way

helping learners use English as an International Language.

The last two research questions were formulated in order to discover whether

attitude towards EIL or attitude towards native and non-native speakers can influence

attitude towards those topics of ELT that can enhance teaching EIL. Counter to the

preliminary hypothesis, no correlation was found between these topics.

5.2. Limitations of the study

The selection of participants was based on convenience sampling. While this method of

collecting participants is often used, it should be kept in mind that the sample produced in

this way is not representative. As a result, the findings of the study should also be treated

with caution (Babbie, 2003, p. 205).

With its approximately 100 participants, this is still a relatively small scale study.

A bigger sample would possibly have returned more accurate results (Babbie, 2003, p.

218). Furthermore, the small sample made it almost impossible to perform the analysis of

variance with an independent variable, which has rendered the collected demographic data

less significant.

The structure of the questionnaire itself is probably also responsible for the small

size of the sample. From participants’ remarks provided at the end of the questionnaire it

39

seems that the questionnaire was too long. Participants sometimes felt bored, or even

annoyed, when they had to answer “the same” questions over and over again – while

“there is a general consensus among survey specialists that more than one item is needed

to address each identified content area” (Dörnyei, 2003, p. 27). The criticism received

shows that piloting should have been more thorough, and more changes should have been

made to the questionnaire. Because of this, anyone wishing to conduct a similar research

should reconsider the wording of items and the construction of the scales.

Another reason for reconsidering the items and scales is that some of the

individual scales received too low Cronbach Alpha values. Although the values for the

joint scales are high enough, the inner cohesion of the scales is at least problematic.

5.3. Recommendations for further research

Any further study should work with a bigger sample and in this way the analysis would

yield more accurate results. With a bigger sample, demographic data could also be

included in the analysis, as the distribution of participants would probably make it possible

to perform the analysis of variance with an independent variable. In that case, it could be

investigated whether participation in teacher training, intention to work as a teacher, or the

number of languages spoken influences any of the results.

At the same time, anyone wishing to conduct a similar study should reconsider

the wording of items and the construction of the scales. The reason for this is twofold. On

the one hand, Cronbach Alpha values were too low for some of the scales. On the other

hand, the questionnaire was too long and contained too many repetitions, this way

participants sometimes felt bored or annoyed when they completed it.

Nevertheless, it would be very interesting to conduct a similar study with the

participation of practising teachers instead of university students. It could be investigated

40

how attitude towards EIL influences teaching practice. More experienced teachers could

possibly provide useful insights on how aspects of English used as an international

language may be integrated into syllabi, and what are the best practices to prepare students

for English language communication under the unpredictable conditions of the

international stage.

41

References

Atkinson, R. L. & Hilgard, E. R.(2005). Pszichológia. Budapest: Osiris.

Babbie, E. (2003). A társadalomtudományi kutatás gyakorlata. Balassi Kiadó, Budapest.

Baker, W. (2009). The cultures of English as a lingua franca. TESOL Quarterly, 43, (4),

pp. 567-592.

Balogné Bérces K. (2008). Beginner’s English dialectology: an introduction to the accents

and dialects of English. Budapest: Ad Librum.

Beneke, J. (1991). Englisch als lingua franca oder als Medium interkultureller

Kommunikation [English as lingua franca or as medium of intercultural

communication]. In: R. Grebing (Ed.), Grenzenloses Sprachlernen (pp. 54-66).

Berlin, Germany: Cornelsen.

Burt, Ch. (2005). What Is International English? Teachers College, Columbia University

Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 2005, Vol. 5, No. 1. [On-line].

Available: http://journals.tc-library.org/index.php/tesol/article/viewFile/72/79

Čeh, Ž. (2008). English as a lingua franca. Academica Turistica I, 3-4, December. 62-65.

[On-line]. Available: http://www.turistica.upr.si/downloads/revija/Academica

Turistica-Nr3-4-December2008.pdf#page=63.

Coperías Aguilar, M. J. (2007). Dealing with intercultural communicative competence in

the foreign language classroom. In: Eva Alcón Soler & Maria Pilar Safont Jordà

(Eds.), Intercultural language use and language learning (pp. 59-78). Dordrecht:

Springer. [On-line].

Available:http://www.bcl.edu.ar/spip/IMG/pdf/AcrDA.tmp.pdf#page=15.

Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Davies, A. (1995). Proficiency and the native speaker: What are we trying to achieve in

ELT? In: G. Cook, & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle & practice in applied

linguistics – Studies in honour of H.G. Widdowson. (pp. 145–158). Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Déri B. (Ed.) (2004). Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem Bölcsészettudományi Kar – Az

alapképzési szakok kredites tanegységlistái, nappali tagozat. Budapest:

Argumentum.

Dörnyei Z.; Nyilasi E.; Clément, R. (1996). Hungarian school children's motivation to

learn foreign languages: A comparison of target languages. NovELTy 3(2), 6-16.

Dörnyei Z. (2001). Teaching and researching motivation. Harlow: Longman.

42

Dörnyei Z. (2003). Questionnaires in second language research – construction,

administration, and processing. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Erling, E. J. (2007). “Local identities, global connections: affinities to English among

students at the Freie Universität Berlin.” World Englishes 26 (2), 111–130.

Firth, A. (1996). The discursive accomplishment of normality: on 'lingua franca' English

and conversation analysis. Journal of Pragmatics 26, 237-259.

Gnutzmann, C. (2000). Lingua franca. In: M. Byram (Ed.), The Routledge encyclopedia of

language teaching and learning (pp.356-359). London: Routledge.

Görlach, M. (2002). Still more Englishes. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: Benjamins.

Illés É. & Csizér K. (2010). Secondary school students’ contact experiences and

dispositions towards English as an international language – A pilot study.

Working Papers in Language Pedagogy, Volume 4, 2010. [Online] Available:

http://langped.elte.hu/W4IllesCsizer.pdf

Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Jenkins, J. (2005). Implementing an international approach to English pronunciation: The

role of teacher attitudes and identity. TESOL Quarterly, 39, (3), 535-543.

Jenkins, J. (2009). Negotiating intelligibility in the ELT classroom: the role of

accommodation. In: Rakesh Bhanot & Illés Éva (Eds.), Best of ‘Language Issues’

(pp. 477-486). London: LLU+London South Bank University.

Kachru, B.B. (1982). Teaching world Englishes. In: B.B. Kachru (Ed.), The other tongue:

English across cultures (pp. 355–366). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Kachru, B. B. (1986). The alchemy of English: The spread, functions, and models of non-

native Englishes. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

Kontra E. (2006). Topics in the methodology of teaching EFL. Budapest: Okker Kiadó.

McKay, S.L. (2002). Teaching English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Medgyes P. (1984) To teach what: British or American English. In: Frank T. (ed.), The

origins and originality of American culture (pp. 709-714). Budapest: Akadémiai

Kiadó.

Melchers, G. & Shaw, P. (2003). World Englishes: an introduction. London: Arnold.

Murray, H. (2003). Swiss English teachers and Euro-English: Attitudes to a non-native

variety. Bulletin suisse de linguistique appliquée, 77, 147-165.

43

Nagy P.K. (2008). A study to analyze and interpret the role and position of American

English in the Hungarian educational system. published by the author.

Nemzeti alaptanterv. (1995). Budapest: Korona.

Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pickering, L. (2006). Current research on intelligibility in English as a lingua franca.

Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 26, 219-233. [On-line]. Available:

http://www2.gsu.edu/~wwwlup/aralproofs.pdf.

Řepová, K. (2010). Bringing English as an international language into the classroom. In:

Roman Trušník and Katarína Nemčoková (Eds.), Theories in practice:

proceedings of the First International Conference on English and American

Studies. September 9, 2009; Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Czech Republic (pp.

207-214). Zlín, Univerzita Tomáše Bati. [On-line]. Available:

http://conference.uaa.utb.cz/TheoriesInPractice2009.pdf#page=207

Richardson, V. (1996): The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In: Sikula, J.

ed.: Handbook of research on teacher education. Second Edition, MacMillan,

New York, 102-119.

Seidlhofer, B. (2000). Mind the gap: English as a mother tongue vs English as a lingua

franca. Vienna English Working Papers, 9/1, 2000 August, 1-68. [On-line].

Available: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.115.3060&

rep=rep1&type=pdf#page=51.

Seidlhofer, B. (2004). Research perspectives on teaching English as a lingua franca.

Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 209-239.

Seidlhofer, B. (2005). English as a lingua franca. ELT Journal 59 (4) October, 339-341.

Seidlhofer, B. (2006). English as a lingua franca in the expanding circle: What it isn't. In:

Rani Rubdy & Mario Saraceni (Eds.), English in the world: global rules, global

roles (pp. 40-50). London: Continuum.

Timmis, I. (2002). Native speaker norms and international English: a classroom view. ELT

Journal 56 (3), 240-249.

Eötvös Loránd University School of English and American Studies website:

http://seas3.elte.hu/seas/portal.html

44

Appendix: The questionnaire

The original Hungarian language questionnaire was available in May 2010 at

http://gs-survey.com/s.asp?s=12261

Welcome to my questionnaire!

I’m writing my thesis about what future English teachers think about English being an international language. The questionnaire is anonymous, and takes approximately 20 minutes to complete.

very

muchfairly more

or less

not really

not at all

01. According to you, how important is English in today's world?

02. According to you, if someone wants to get on in life, how much do they need to speak English?

03. Do you want to speak English like a native speaker?

04. According to you, how often is English used for communication between people with different first languages?

05. How much do you like speaking with foreigners coming from English-speaking countries?

06. According to you, how important is the English language in getting to know the culture of other people?

07. According to you, how useful it is to have one language that is understood all over the world?

08. According to you, how important it is to discuss in class that the majority of people speaking or writing in English is not a native speaker?

I

stronglyagree

I agree

I neither agree nor

disagree

I disagree

I strongly disagree

09. All around the world, English is the language learnt most often.

10. The English language helps to understand people from all over the world.

11. If you can speak English, you can manage your affairs even abroad.

12. It’s great that if you speak English, you can access information in any field.

13. If you cannot speak English, you have less chance to get on in life.

14. The only duty of the English teacher is to teach the learners how to express themselves in English.

15. A good teacher first and foremost prepares the learners for the encounter with native speakers of English.

16. If I were an English teacher, I’d sometimes bring exercises to the students so that they can compare the British, the American, or other varieties of English.

17. I like it when I come across English in my everyday life.

45

I stronglyagree

I agree

I neither agree nor

disagree

I disagree

I strongly disagree

18. The English language helps us learn how people leave in other parts of the world.

19. It’s annoying that non-native speakers of English often speak faulty English.

20. If I were an English teacher, I’d prepare my students to handle the misunderstandings occurring in communication.

21. An English teacher should make the learners aware of the fact that they shouldn’t worry if they don’t understand at first what the other is saying to them.

22. Only native speakers of English can speak English well.

23. Usually I’m less polite with non-native speakers of English.

24. I like speaking with foreigners coming from English-speaking countries.

25. I think it’s just enough if the learners recognize one variety of English.

26. It’s good if an English teacher sometimes refers to varieties of English which are not mentioned in the coursebook.

27. It’s perturbing that I’ll need the English language whatever field I want to research.

28. I think non-native speakers of English use less difficult sentences than native-speakers.

29. If I were a teacher I’d concentrate on teaching my learners how to express themselves in English.

30. It’s easier to understand non-native speakers of English because of their accent.

31. If I were a teacher, I’d raise my students’ awareness of the fact that they might come across other speakers of English who speak it as a second language just like them.

32. The English language makes people with different first languages understand each other better.

33. If I were a teacher, I’d show my students examples of non-native speakers talking in English.

34. An English teacher has to prepare learners to handle the misunderstandings occurring in communication.

35. English is the most widespread language in the world.

36. Recently English has become part of everyday life.

37. An English teacher has to prepare the learners to be able to understand English varieties different from their own.

38. I’m glad that speaking English improves my chances to get on in life.

39. As a teacher, first and foremost I’d like to prepare the learners for the encounter with native speakers of English.

40. If I were a teacher, I’d be satisfied if my students would be able to understand one variety of English.

41. I think that if you learn English, it is more useful to practice speaking with native speakers than with non-native speakers.

42. Non-native speakers of English are easier to understand because they don’t use that many idioms than native speakers.

46

I stronglyagree

I agree

I neither agree nor

disagree

I disagree

I strongly disagree

43. If I were an English teacher, I’d want to prepare my students to be able to understand English varieties different from their own.

44. If I were an English teacher, I’d sometimes refer to varieties of English which are not mentioned in the coursebook.

45. I try to be polite with native speakers of English.

46. It’s hard to talk to native speakers of English because it’s difficult to understand their accent.

47. I don't like it that I come across English wherever I go.

48. It frightens me that the key to getting on in life is to know only one certain language.

49. When I am an English teacher I’ll make my students aware of the fact that they shouldn’t worry if they don’t understand at first what the other is saying to them.

50. It’s good if an English teacher sometimes brings exercises to the students so that they can compare the British, the American, or other varieties of English.

51. It’s great that it’s enough to speak English in order to get to know people from other parts of the world.

52. Nowadays English is all around us.

53. I think that if you learn English, it is more useful to practice speaking with non-native speakers than with native speakers.

54. If you speak English well, you can get to know more foreign people (not necessarily from English-speaking countries).

55. As a teacher of English, I’d show m students which mistakes disturb communication the most.

56. A teacher should raise learners’ awareness of the fact that they might come across other speakers of English who speak it as a second language just like them.

57. Not only native speakers of English can speak English well.

58. It’s good if the teacher shows the students examples of non-native speakers talking in English.

59. I think it’s wrong that if someone does not speak English, their chance to get on in life is minimized.

60. If I were a teacher, I’d discuss in class that the majority of people speaking or writing in English is not a native speaker.

61. People with different mother-tongues can get to know each other's culture using the English language.

62. It’s difficult for me to understand native speakers of English because they use too many idioms.

63. It’s important that an English teacher show the students which mistakes disturb communication the most.

64. If you speak English, you can access information in any field.

65. The fact that English is a global language makes life easier.

47

48

Now please answer a few personal questions.

66. How old were you when you started learning English?

67. What other languages do you speak? (Please, indicate if none.)

68. How old are you?

69. Gender: Male / Female

70. In which system are you attending the English major at the university?

BA / MA / credit system / non-credit system / supplementary / other

71. Are you participating in teacher training?

Yes / No / Not yet, bit I plan to.

72. Do you want to work as a teacher?

Yes, very much / Yes, quite so / I don’t know yet / Not really / Not at all

73. Are you teaching / Have you ever been teaching? (You may tick more options.)

No / Yes, I did private tutoring / Yes, I taught groups in a language school / Yes, I have taught in a

training school / Yes, I have taught in a school / Other

74. Do you have any comments?

Thank you for your help. If you want to be informed about the findings of the research, you may submit your

e-mail address here.

Thank you for your answers!