Front. Psychol. Frontiers in Psychology Front. Psychol. 1664-1078 Frontiers Media S.A. 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.874522 Psychology Empirical Study Toward the Role of Teacher Caring and Teacher-Student Rapport in Predicting English as a Foreign Language Learners’ Willingness to Communicate in Second Language Song Lili 1 2 * Luo Runfeng 3 Zhan Qiqi 3 1Institute of Education, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China 2Office of Development Planning and Quality Assurance, Xiamen City University, Xiamen, China 3School of Teacher Education, Shaoxing University, Shaoxing, China

Edited by: Ali Derakhshan, Golestan University, Iran

Reviewed by: Musa Nushi, Shahid Beheshti University, Iran; Mohammadsadegh Taghizadeh, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Iran

 *Correspondence: Lili Song, songlili@stu.xmu.edu.cn

This article was submitted to Educational Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology

 06 05 2022 2022 13 874522 12 02 2022 07 03 2022 Copyright © 2022 Song, Luo and Zhan. 2022 Song, Luo and Zhan

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

Following the advent of positive psychology (PP), positive communication behaviors have been studied as significant predictors of language learners’ willingness to communicate in second language (L2WTC). Yet, the role of two important communication behaviors, namely teacher caring and teacher-student rapport, in predicting EFL learners’ L2WTC has remained elusive. To address this gap, this investigation assessed the impact of teacher caring and teacher-student rapport on Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC. To do so, 4392 Chinese EFL learners were invited to answer three reliable questionnaires. Performing Spearman correlation analysis, favorable relationships were found among the variables. Multiple regression analysis was also conducted to inspect the potential of teacher caring and teacher-student rapport in predicting Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC. The outcomes of multiple regression analysis indicated that Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC can be substantially predicted by teacher caring behaviors and teacher-student rapport. The implications and limitations of the findings are also discussed.

 teacher caring teacher-student rapport EFL learners positive psychology willingness to communicate in second language (L2WTC) Introduction

Language learners’ L2WTC has increasingly been recognized as a positive predictor of increased learning outcomes. To put it another way, there is a consensus among academics that those learners who are more inclined to communicate in the target language will attain higher language achievements (Menezes and Juan-Garau, 2015; Rastegar and Karami, 2015). Because of this, enhancing learners’ L2WTC has become a top goal for all language teachers, notably English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers (Dewaele, 2019). The construct of willingness to communicate generally refers to “one’s readiness to enter into discourse at a particular time with a specific person or persons” (MacIntyre et al., 1998, p. 548). Applied to the context of language education, L2WTC is concerned with individual learners’ inclination to communicate with their teacher and classmates, using a second/foreign language (Fu et al., 2012). According to Mystkowska-Wiertelak and Pawlak (2017), L2WTC can notably facilitate the laborious process of language acquisition. That is, learners with high levels of L2WTC can readily go through the different phases of language learning (Al-Murtadha, 2021). Similarly, Zhang et al. (2018) also noted that language learners who have a strong desire to communicate inside the classrooms may master the new language more easily. With respect to the importance of L2WTC in language learners’ academic success, factors motivating/demotivating learners to communicate in the target language need to be explored. In line with this necessity, personal variables (i.e., desire, emotional intelligence, motivation, self-confidence, grit, etc.) have long been examined as determinants of language learners’ WTC (e.g., Alemi et al., 2013; Fallah, 2014; Ghaemi and Anari, 2014; Aliakbari et al., 2016; Khajavy et al., 2016; Lee and Chen, 2019; Lee et al., 2019; Lee, 2020a). Additionally, with the emergence of “Positive Psychology” in the realm of education (Dewaele et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2021), positive interpersonal variables (i.e., credibility, immediacy, etc.) have also been studied as predictors of learners’ L2WTC (e.g., Gol et al., 2014; Zarrinabadi, 2014; Sheybani, 2019; Lee, 2020b; Chen et al., 2022). Nevertheless, the predictive potential of “teacher caring” and “teacher-student rapport” as two examples of positive interpersonal variables has scarcely been examined.

The concept of teacher caring generally deals with the degree to which teachers care about their pupils (Teven and Hanson, 2004). Put simply, teachers’ caring behavior has to do with their attention to students’ needs, preferences, interests, desires, and feelings (Comadena et al., 2007). As noted by Zhang (2021), caring teachers are able to create a trustworthy learning atmosphere wherein pupils are highly inclined to participate in the learning activities. In this regard, Dewaele (2019) postulated that teachers who attend to their students’ feelings, emotions, and interests can encourage them to communicate inside the classes. In a similar vein, Lavy and Naama-Ghanayim (2020) also submitted that language teachers who are concerned about students’ well-being are able to instill trust in their learners, which drives them to enthusiastically communicate in classroom contexts.

As another example of interpersonal behaviors, teacher-student rapport refers to an amicable relationship between teachers and pupils (Frisby et al., 2016). In Lammers and Byrd’s words (2019), teacher-student rapport is “an emotional connection between teachers and their learners based on understanding, caring, and mutual respect” (p. 128). With regard to this definition, to develop a strong rapport, teachers need to understand their learners, care about their needs, and respect their viewpoints (Reyes and Von Anthony, 2020). As put forward by Tan et al. (2018), teachers who develop a close bond with their pupils can create a comfortable and supportive learning climate in which students can safely communicate inside the classes. To put it another way, a warm and friendly relationship between teachers and learners can notably increase learners’ tendency to communicate (Maloney and Matthews, 2020). Likewise, Martin and Collie (2019) stated that positive teacher-student rapport prompts learners to actively interact with their instructors and classmates in instructional-learning contexts.

Despite the value of rapport and caring behaviors in promoting students’ L2WTC (Dewaele, 2019; Martin and Collie, 2019), the effects of these interpersonal behaviors on EFL learners’ L2WTC have remained unclear. This implies that few investigations (e.g., Peng, 2020; Cai, 2021) have been undertaken to inspect the impact of these interpersonal variables on EFL learners’ L2WTC. Moreover, to the researchers’ knowledge, no inquiry has delved into the role of these two interpersonal behaviors at the same time. To cover the existing gaps, the present investigation attempts to inspect the role of teacher caring and teacher-student rapport in raising EFL learners’ L2WTC levels.

 Literature Review Teacher Caring

Caring literally means “a good act with care for someone else” (Teven and McCroskey, 1997, p. 2). Extending this to the context of education, “teacher caring” refers to an individual teacher’s behavior with care for his or her pupils (Teven, 2007a). Put differently, teacher caring deals with teachers’ level of attention to their learners’ needs, interests, and feelings (Hawk and Lyons, 2008; Roberts, 2010). As put forward by McCroskey and Teven (1999), the construct of teacher caring comprises three components: “empathy,” “understanding,” and “responsiveness.” The first component of caring, empathy, refers to individual teachers’ capability to empathize with their students (Teven, 2001). The second component, understanding, pertains to teachers’ capacity to fully understand their students’ thoughts, emotions, and desires (Isenbarger and Zembylas, 2006). Responsiveness, as the last component, means being other-oriented and sensitive to students (Teven, 2007b). Taken together, these three components are believed to influence learners’ perceptions of teacher caring (Ramberg et al., 2019). To clarify the importance of teacher caring behaviors, Chory (2007) submitted that caring teachers provide learners with a trusting learning atmosphere, which is critical for their active involvement. Similarly, Lumpkin (2007) also noted that teachers who truly care about their learners can effectively involve them in the learning process. Miller (2008) further asserted that caring about students’ needs, desires, and emotions enables instructors to encourage their learners to talk. Teacher caring behaviors, according to Chan et al. (2011), can also culminates in learners’ increased achievement. They believe that those learners who perceive their teachers as caring try to give their all to acquire the course content. This appears to positively influence their academic performance and learning outcomes (Lee, 2014; Ko et al., 2016; Wang and Guan, 2020).

Because of the importance of teacher caring behavior, many investigations have been done on this positive interpersonal behavior and its potential consequences (e.g., Lewis et al., 2012; Gasser et al., 2018; Gallagher et al., 2019; Lavy and Naama-Ghanayim, 2020; Malik and Bashir, 2020). For instance, Lewis et al. (2012) examined the role of teacher caring in students’ academic achievement. To this aim, 3000 students were selected from various high schools in California. To delve into students’ perceptions, the researchers distributed a close-ended questionnaire and an achievement test among participants. Analyzing participants’ responses, the researchers discovered a positive association between teachers’ caring behaviors and students’ achievement. By the same token, Lavy and Naama-Ghanayim (2020) explored the effect of teacher caring on students’ well-being, self-esteem, and academic engagement. To do so, four reliable scales were administered to 675 students. Inspecting the correlations among the questionnaires, a strong and favorable relationship was found between teacher caring, student engagement, self-esteem, and well-being.

 Teacher-Student Rapport

Rapport is generally defined as “an overall feeling between two people encompassing a mutual, trusting, and prosocial bond” (Frisby and Martin, 2010, p. 148). In instructional-learning environments, rapport pertains to an intimate and amicable bond between teachers and learners (Webb and Barrett, 2014; Estepp and Roberts, 2015). There are several strategies by which teachers can develop friendly relations with their students (Wilson and Ryan, 2013). According to Thompson (2018), valuing students’ viewpoints and paying attention to their academic needs enables teachers to build a strong rapport. As put forward by Bieg et al. (2019), the judicious employment of humor also empowers instructors to establish a desirable relationship with their students. Additionally, as noted by Santana (2019), teachers may foster favorable relationships with their learners through appreciating their endeavors. On the value of teacher-student rapport, Yong (2019) suggested that an intimate teacher-student relationship will gradually result in increased learning outcomes. This is largely due to the fact that the close bonds that teachers establish with their learners encourage them to dedicate more time to their academic tasks (Rowan and Grootenboer, 2017). In a similar vein, Meng (2021) also submitted that strong relationships between teachers and pupils may serve a driving role in classroom contexts. That is, a close teacher-student connection can substantially enhance students’ state motivation (Anderman et al., 2011; Yunus et al., 2011).

So far, a plethora of research has been undertaken to delve into the impact of teacher-student rapport on students and their academic behaviors (e.g., Frisby and Housley Gaffney, 2015; Quin, 2017; Henry and Thorsen, 2018; Snijders et al., 2020; Thornberg et al., 2020; Cai, 2021; Li and Yang, 2021; Noble et al., 2021). For example, Thornberg et al. (2020) explored the effect of teacher-student rapport on students’ involvement. To this end, 234 Swedish students were asked to complete two valid questionnaires. Drawing on students’ answers, the researchers found that a strong teacher-student relationship can notably promote students’ classroom involvement. In another study, Li and Yang (2021) inspected the role of teacher-student rapport in Chinese students’ self-efficacy. To do this, two questionnaires were virtually administered to 649 Chinese students. The results showed that Chinese students viewed teacher-student rapport as a strong predictor of their self-efficacy. More recently, Cai (2021) assessed the role of teacher-student rapport in predicting Chinese students’ L2WTC. In doing so, 858 university students were invited to answer two pre-developed questionnaires. Multiple regression analysis was performed to evaluate participants’ viewpoints. The results depicted that a close teacher-student relationship can positively predict Chinese students’ L2WTC.

 Willingness to Communicate in Second Language

The concept of willingness to commutate has been simply defined as “one’ readiness to enter into discourse, at a particular time with a specific person or persons” (MacIntyre et al., 1998, p. 548). In light of this definition, Yu (2011) characterized language learners’ L2WTC as their propensity to talk in the target language. To underline the prominence of learners’ L2WTC, MacIntyre et al. (2003) stated that the primary goal of language education should be to “engender in language students the willingness to seek out communication opportunities and the willingness actually to communicate in them” (cited in Denies et al. (2015), p. 718). Peng (2012) also emphasized the importance of learners’ L2WTC by referring to its positive effects on learners’ academic performance. To him, learners with high levels of L2WTC outperform other learners who are reluctant to speak in the target language.

Due to the central role of L2WTC in the language acquisition process (MacIntyre et al., 2003; Peng, 2012), several scholars have attempted to identify the personal (e.g., Alemi et al., 2011; Lee and Chen, 2019; Lee, 2020a; Lee and Lee, 2020) and contextual (e.g., Khazaei et al., 2012; Dewaele and Dewaele, 2018; Khajavy et al., 2018; Peng, 2019) sources of learners’ L2WTC. Yet, interpersonal behaviors as another source of learners’ L2WTC have not been widely explored (e.g., Sheybani, 2019; Lee, 2020b; Chen et al., 2022). Among interpersonal behaviors, teacher caring and teacher-student rapport received far less attention (e.g., Peng, 2020; Cai, 2021). Moreover, no empirical inquiry, neither in general education nor in language education, has simultaneously inspected the role of these two factors in learners’ L2WTC. To address these lacunas, this investigation aimed to securitize the effects of teacher caring and teacher-student rapport on Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC. To this end, the present study seeks to respond to the following research questions:

Are there any significant associations among teacher caring, teacher-student rapport, and Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC?

Do teacher caring and teacher-student rapport positively predict Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC?

 Method Participants

In order to enhance the generalizability of the results, through maximum variation sampling strategy, a large sample comprised of 4392 EFL learners with various academic qualifications (i.e., Ph.D. candidates, MA students, BA students) and different academic majors (i.e., Business English, Tourism English, English Language Education, Applied English Language, English Translation) was selected from 12 provinces in China (e.g., Hebei, Fujian, Shanxi, Gansu, Shandong, Jiangsu, Hubei, Zhejiang, Jiangxi, Guangdong, Guangxi, Guizhou). The sample consisted of 2768 males (63%) and 1624 females (37%), ranging in age from 15 to 54 years old (Average = 20). It is worth mentioning that, to maintain the study’s trustworthiness, all participants were briefed on how to respond to the given scales and were convinced that their responses and information would be treated with confidentiality.

 Instruments Perceived Caring Scale

The “Perceived Caring Scale (PCS)” (Teven and McCroskey, 1997) was employed to examine the extent to which Chinese EFL learners perceive their teachers as caring. The PCS includes 10 items to which participants answer on a bipolar scale. Some instances of PCS’s items are: item (3) “Self-centered-Not self-centered,” item (5) “Insensitive-Sensitive,” item (7) “Not understanding-Understanding,” and item (10) “Doesn’t understand how I think-Understands how I think.” The reliability of PCS was 0.87 in this study.

 Professor-Student Rapport Scale

To assess how Chinese EFL students evaluate their connections with their teachers, the “Professor-Student Rapport Scale (P-SRS)” (Wilson and Ryan, 2013) was utilized. The P-SRS comprises 34 items to which participants answer on a 5-point Likert scale. The following are instances of P-SRS’s items: item (9) “I respect my professor”, item (18) “My professor maintains eye contact with me”, item (24) “I feel I have learned much less from this professor compared to others I have had in the past”, item (27) “My professor cares about students”, and item (32) “My professor is reliable”. In this inquiry, the calculated reliability of P-SRS was 0.96.

 Willingness to Communicate Questionnaire

The “Willingness to Communicate Questionnaire (WTCQ)”, designed by Peng and Woodrow (2010), was used to measure Chinese EFL learners’ willingness to speak in English. The WTCQ uses a 7-point Likert scale, varying in answers from 1 “Definitely not willing” to 7 “Definitely willing”. Some items of the questionnaire are as follows: item (1) “I am willing to do a role-play standing in front of the class in English”, item (8) “I am willing to ask my group mates in English the meaning of word I do not know”, and item (10) “I am willing to ask my peer sitting next to me in English how to say an English phrase to express the thoughts in my mind”. The WTCQ’s reliability was found to be 0.98 in this investigation.

 Procedure

At the very beginning, the consent form was sent to 5000 Chinese EFL learners using email and WeChat messenger. Then, through Wenjuanxing platform, three reliable scales (i.e., PCS, P-SRS, and WTCQ) were virtually administered to 4392 learners who agreed to take part in this study. To ensure the trustworthiness of the responses, participants received clear instructions regarding the completion of the scales. The answers were fully received within 15 days. Prior to initiating the data analysis process, the collected data were preprocessed to identify and eliminate problematic responses. Then, to inspect the association of teacher caring and teacher-student rapport with learners’ L2WTC, Spearman Rho correlation was utilized. Afterward, through SPSS (version 28), multiple regression analysis was run to assess how much of the variance in the L2WTC level of Chinese EFL learners can be explained by teacher caring and teacher-student rapport.

 Results

First, a test of normality was done to determine whether the data should be analyzed parametrically or not. As Table 1 demonstrates, the collected data were not normal for any of the variables.

Tests of normality for the variables.

Kolmogorov-Smirnov
 Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Teacher caring 0.121 4392 0.000 0.930 4392 0.000
Teacher-student rapport 0.121 4392 0.000 0.942 4392 0.000
Willingness to communicate 0.116 4392 0.000 0.935 4392 0.000

Second, to make sure of the reliability of the instruments, a Cronbach alpha test was run for each questionnaire. Table 2 portrays the outcomes of Cronbach alpha analyses for perceived caring scale (PCS), professor-student rapport scale (P-SRS), and willingness to communicate questionnaire (WTCQ).

The reliability of perceived caring scale (PCS), professor-student rapport scale (P-SRS), and willingness to communicate questionnaire (WTCQ).

Questionnaires Cronbach’s alpha Items (N)
PCS 0.87 10
P-SRS 0.96 34
WTCQ 0.98 10

As shown in Table 2, all three scales enjoyed a satisfactory Cronbach alpha value. Third, to inspect the correlation between teacher caring, teacher-student rapport, and Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC, Spearman Rho correlation was performed. The results of the Spearman Rho correlation are presented in Table 3.

The results of Spearman Rho correlation between teacher caring, teacher student rapport, and learner willingness to communicate in second language (L2WTC).

Teacher caring Teacher-student rapport Learner L2WTC
Teacher caring Correlation Coefficient 1.000 0.476** 0.387**
Sig. (2-tailed) . 0.000 0.000
N 4392 4392 4392
Teacher-student rapport Correlation Coefficient 0.476** 1.000 0.640**
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 . 0.000
N 4392 4392 4392
Learner L2WTC Correlation Coefficient 0.387** 0.640** 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 .
N 4392 4392 4392

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

As demonstrated in Table 3, a significant and favorable association was found between teacher caring and teacher-student rapport (r = 0.476, n = 4392, p = 0.000, α = 0.01). The outcomes of Spearman correlation analysis also revealed a strong association between teacher caring and learner L2WTC (r = 0.387, n = 4392, p = 0.000, α = 0.01). Similarly, a favorable relationship was discovered between teacher-student rapport and learner L2WTC (r = 0.640, n = 4392, p = 0.000, α = 0.01).

Finally, multiple regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the potential of teacher caring and teacher-student rapport in predicting Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC. The results of the regression analysis are shown in the Tables 4, 5 below.

Model summary for teacher caring, teacher-student rapport, and learner willingness to communicate in second language (L2WTC).

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Durbin-Watson
1 0.64a 0.42 0.42 12.80 1.97

aPredictors (Independent Variables): Teacher Caring, Teacher-student Rapport.

The coefficients for teacher caring, teacher-student rapport, and learner willingness to communicate in second language (L2WTC).

Model Unstandardized coefficients
 Standardized coefficients
 t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Independent) –5.048 0.909 –5.554 0.000
Teacher caring 0.077 0.020 0.055 3.854 0.000
Teacher-student rapport 0.396 0.009 0.614 42.802 0.000

As the above table indicated, 42% of the variance in Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC can be explained by teachers’ caring behaviors and teacher-student rapport. To know which of the variables included in the model contributed more to the prediction of Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC, the column labeled “Beta” in the following table was checked.

With regard to the beta column, it was found that the largest beta coefficient was 0.61, which was for teacher-student rapport. This implies that teacher-student rapport made the largest contribution to predicting Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC. The beta value for teacher caring was also significant since the sig value for the group was 0.000, which is far less than 0.05.

 Discussion

The current investigation was primarily intended to identify the extent to which teacher caring behaviors, teacher-student rapport, and Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC are correlated. The outcomes of Spearman correlation analysis demonstrated, first, a significant and favorable correlation between teacher caring and learners’ L2WTC, and second, a strong and positive association between teacher-student rapport and learners’ L2WTC. Additionally, a direct relationship was found between teacher caring and teacher-student rapport. As to the favorable relationship between teacher caring and learner L2WTC, it is possible to say that this finding accords with that of Peng (2020), who found that teacher caring as a positive communication strategy is positively associated with students’ L2WTC. It is also encouraging to compare this result with that of Zhang (2021), who reported that there is a positive bond between teacher care and students’ classroom behaviors, including involvement and L2WTC. Regarding the positive association between teacher-student rapport and leaner L2WTC, it can be noted that this outcome resembles Cai’s (2021) findings which revealed that students’ L2WTC is strongly correlated with teacher-student rapport. This result also lends support to Frisby and Housley Gaffney’s (2015) findings which indicated that the teacher-student relationship is tied to students’ tendency to communicate in college classrooms. The direct relationship between teacher caring and teacher-student rapport seems to be consistent with Thompson’s (2018) finding which showed that the construct of teacher care relates to teacher-student relationships.

Besides its primary intention, the present investigation also aimed to inspect the potential of teacher caring and teacher-student rapport in predicting Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC. As the results of multiple regression analysis indicated, both teacher caring and teacher-student rapport were found to be the positive predictors of Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC. This means that those EFL learners who have friendly relationships with their teachers and those who conceive their instructors to be caring are more motivated to communicate inside the classrooms. The predictability of Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC through their teachers’ caring behaviors may be explained by the fact that those teachers attend to their learners’ desires, needs, and welfare can effectively encourage them to talk (Miller, 2008; Dewaele, 2019; Lavy and Naama-Ghanayim, 2020). Another plausible explanation for this is that learners who perceive their teachers as caring are motivated enough to communicate with their teachers and classmates (Comadena et al., 2007). The predictability of learners’ L2WTC through teacher-student rapport may also be justified by the fact that the close bonds that language teachers establish with their learners encourage them to communicate in the target language (Tan et al., 2018). This result confirms the idea of Martin and Collie (2019) who asserted that positive teacher-student relationships serve a driving role in classroom contexts, prompting students to actively communicate with their peers.

 Conclusion

This investigation set out to inspect the role of teacher caring and teacher-student rapport in predicting Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC. The results of Spearman correlation and multiple regression analyses indicated that Chinese EFL learners’ L2WTC can be substantially increased by teachers’ caring behaviors and teacher-student rapport. This suggests that building close bonds with learners and caring about their welfare empowers language teachers to greatly enhance their learners’ L2WTC. This appears to be enlightening for English language teachers in all instructional-learning contexts with any kind of educational system. As the results of this study revealed, teachers’ caring behaviors serve a critical function in increasing learners’ inclination to talk. Hence, English instructors need to care about their learners’ interests, desires, and feelings in order to inspire them to talk. Given the centrality of teacher-student rapport in learners’ L2WTC, English language teachers are thus required to create a warm and friendly relationship with their learners to lead them to increased L2WTC levels. The outcomes of this investigation seem to be valuable and informative for teacher educators as well. With regard to the fact that some English language teachers have no idea how to build an intimate and amicable bond with their learners (Wilson et al., 2012; Moussaid and Zerhouni, 2017; Frisby, 2018), teacher educators are expected to train inexperienced teachers how to do so.

All investigations have a range of limitations, and the present one is not an exception by any means. First and foremost, the current investigation was undertaken in China as an EFL country. Hence, the results of this investigation may not be transferable to English as a second language (ESL) countries. Future investigation into this issue needs to be undertaken in an ESL country to find any discrepancy in the outcomes. Second, relying on the methodology of study, only close-ended scales were utilized to delve into participants’ viewpoints. Future studies are strongly recommended to make use of other data collection tools, including open-ended questionnaires, and interviews. Third, the effects of contextual factors (e.g., major, age, gender, etc.) on the association of the variables were neglected in this investigation. Further studies on this subject are thus required to measure the impact of situational factors.

 Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

 Ethics Statement

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by Xiamen University Academic Ethics Committee. The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

 Author Contributions

LS, RL, and QZ read the relevant literature and finished this manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

 Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

 Publisher’s Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

 Funding

This study was supported by (1) Key Project of Fujian Provincial Education Science “13th Five-Year Plan” in 2019: Research on Internal Quality Assurance Mechanism of IQA for Serve “One Belt And One Road” Construction of Sino-Foreign Cooperative Education in Higher Vocational Colleges (Project Approval No. 2019CG0636); (2) National Social Science (Education) Foundation General Project: Research on the Differential Development of High-Level Applied Technology Universities with Chinese Characteristics under the Background of “Double First-Class” (Project Approval No. BIA170239).

 References Alemi M. Daftarifard P. Pashmforoosh R. (2011). The impact of language anxiety and language proficiency on WTC in EFL context. Cross Cult. Commun. 7 150–166. 10.3968/j.ccc.1923670020110703.152 Alemi M. Tajeddin Z. Mesbah Z. (2013). Willingness to communicate in L2 English: impact of learner variables. J. Res. Appl. Ling. 4 42–61. Aliakbari M. Kamangar M. Khany R. (2016). Willingness to communicate in English among Iranian EFL students. Eng. Lang. Teach. 9 33–45. 10.5539/elt.v9n5p33 Al-Murtadha M. A. (2021). The relationships among self-reported and observed first language and second language willingness to communicate and academic achievement. Lang. Cult. Curric. 34 80–94. 10.1080/07908318.2020.1727495 Anderman L. Andrzejewski C. E. Allen J. (2011). How do teachers support students’ motivation and learning in their classrooms? Teach. College Rec. 113 969–1003. 10.1177/016146811111300502 Bieg S. Grassinger R. Dresel M. (2019). Teacher humor: longitudinal effects on students’ emotions. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 34 517–534. 10.1007/s10212-018-0402-0 Cai M. (2021). The predictability of Chinese English as a foreign language students’ willingness to communicate through teachers’ immediacy and teacher-student rapport. Front. Psychol. 12:769424. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.769424 34659074 Chan R. M. Lau P. S. Yuen M. (2011). Interrelationships among teacher care, students’ life skills development, and academic achievement: implications for school guidance work. Asia. J. Counse. 18 63–94. Chen X. Dewaele J. M. Zhang T. (2022). Sustainable development of EFL/ESL learners’ willingness to communicate: the effects of teachers and teaching styles. Sustainability 14:396. 10.3390/su14010396 Chory R. M. (2007). Enhancing student perceptions of fairness: the relationship between instructor credibility and classroom justice. Commun. Educ. 56 89–105. 10.1080/03634520600994300 Comadena M. E. Hunt S. K. Simonds C. J. (2007). The effects of teacher clarity, nonverbal immediacy, and caring on student motivation, affective and cognitive learning. Commun. Res. Rep. 24 241–248. 10.1080/08824090701446617 Denies K. Yashima T. Janssen R. (2015). Classroom versus societal willingness to communicate: investigating French as a second language in Flanders. Modern Lang. J. 99 718–739. 10.1111/modl.12276 Dewaele J. M. (2019). The effect of classroom emotions, attitudes toward English, and teacher behavior on willingness to communicate among English foreign language learners. J. Lang. Soc. Psychol. 38 523–535. 10.1177/0261927X19864996 Dewaele J. M. Chen X. Padilla A. M. Lake J. (2019). The flowering of positive psychology in foreign language teaching and acquisition research. Front. Psychol. 10:2128. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02128 31607981 Dewaele J. M. Dewaele L. (2018). Learner-internal and learner-external predictors of willingness to communicate in the FL classroom. J. Eur. Sec. Lang. Assoc. 2 24–37. 10.22599/jesla.37 33001059 Estepp C. M. Roberts T. G. (2015). Teacher immediacy and professor/student rapport as predictors of motivation and engagement. NACTA J. 59 155–163. Fallah N. (2014). Willingness to communicate in English, communication self-confidence, motivation, shyness and teacher immediacy among Iranian English-major undergraduates: a structural equation modeling approach. Learn. Individ. Differ. 30 140–147. 10.1016/j.lindif.2013.12.006 Frisby B. (2018). On rapport: connecting with students. Great. Faculties 2 9–13. Frisby B. N. Housley Gaffney A. L. (2015). Understanding the role of instructor rapport in the college classroom. Commun. Res. Rep. 32 340–346. 10.1080/08824096.2015.1089847 Frisby B. N. Martin M. M. (2010). Instructor–student and student–student rapport in the classroom. Commun. Educ. 59 146–164. 10.1080/03634520903564362 Frisby B. N. Slone A. R. Bengu E. (2016). Rapport, motivation, participation, and perceptions of learning in U.S. and Turkish student classrooms: a replication and cultural comparison. Commun. Educ. 66 183–195. 10.1080/03634523.2016.1208259 Fu L. Wang X. Wang Y. (2012). The research on willingness to communicate in Chinese students’ EFL study. J. Lang. Teach. Res. 3 112–117. 10.4304/jltr.3.1.112-117 Gallagher E. K. Dever B. V. Hochbein C. DuPaul G. J. (2019). Teacher caring as a protective factor: the effects of behavioral/emotional risk and teacher caring on office disciplinary referrals in middle school. School Mental Health 11 754–765. 10.1007/s12310-019-09318-0 Gasser L. Grutter J. Buholzer A. Wettstein A. (2018). Emotionally supportive classroom interactions and students’ perceptions of their teachers as caring and just. Learn. Instruct. 54 82–92. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.08.003 Ghaemi F. Anari N. N. (2014). Emotional intelligence, willingness to communicate, and academic achievement among Iranian EFL learners. Eur. J. Sci. Res. 118 172–182. Gol M. Zand-Moghadam A. Karrab M. (2014). The construct of willingness to communicate and its relationship with EFL learners’ perceived verbal and nonverbal teacher immediacy. Issu. Lang. Teach. 3 160–135. Hawk T. F. Lyons P. R. (2008). Please don’t give up on me: when faculty fail to care. J. Manage. Educ. 32 316–338. 10.1177/1052562908314194 Henry A. Thorsen C. (2018). Teacher–student relationships and L2 motivation. Modern Lang. J. 102 218–241. 10.1111/modl.12446 Isenbarger L. Zembylas M. (2006). The emotional labour of caring in teaching. Teach. Teach. Educ. 22 120–134. 10.1016/j.tate.2005.07.002 Khajavy G. H. Ghonsooly B. Hosseini Fatemi A. Choi C. W. (2016). Willingness to communicate in English: a microsystem model in the Iranian EFL classroom context. TESOL Q. 50 154–180. 10.1002/tesq.204 Khajavy G. H. MacIntyre P. D. Barabadi E. (2018). Role of the emotions and classroom environment in willingness to communicate: applying doubly latent multilevel analysis in second language acquisition research. Stud. Sec. Lang. Acqu. 40 605–624. 10.1017/S0272263117000304 Khazaei Z. M. Zadeh A. M. Ketabi S. (2012). Willingness to communicate in Iranian EFL learners: the effect of class size. Eng. Lang. Teach. 5 181–187. 10.5539/elt.v5n11p181 Ko J. W. Park S. Yu H. S. Kim S. J. Kim D. M. (2016). The structural relationship between student engagement and learning outcomes in Korea. Asia Pacific Educ. Res. 25 147–157. 10.1007/s40299-015-0245-2 Lammers W. J. Byrd A. A. (2019). Student gender and instructor gender as predictors of student-instructor rapport. Teach. Psychol. 46, 127–134. 10.1177/0098628319834183 Lavy S. Naama-Ghanayim E. (2020). Why care about caring? Linking teachers’ caring and sense of meaning at work with students’ self-esteem, well-being, and school engagement. Teach. Teach Educ. 91:103046. 10.1016/j.tate.2020.103046 Lee J. S. (2020a). The role of grit and classroom enjoyment in EFL learners’ willingness to communicate. J. Mult. Multicult. Dev. 59, 1–17. 10.1080/01434632.2020.1746319 Lee J. H. (2020b). Relationships among students’ perceptions of native and non-native EFL teachers’ immediacy behaviours and credibility and students’ willingness to communicate in class. Oxf. Rev. Educ. 46 153–168. 10.1080/03054985.2019.1642187 Lee J. S. (2014). The relationship between student engagement and academic performance: is it a myth or reality? J. Educ. Res. 107 177–185. 10.1080/00220671.2013.807491 Lee J. S. Chen H. J. (2019). Affective variables and willingness to communicate of EFL learners in in-class, out-of-class, and digital contexts. System 82 63–73. 10.1016/j.system.2019.03.002 Lee J. S. Lee K. (2020). Role of L2 motivational self-system on willingness to communicate of Korean EFL university and secondary students. J. Psychol. Res. 49 147–161. 10.1007/s10936-019-09675-6 31620960 Lee J. S. Lee K. Chen H. J. (2019). Understanding willingness to communicate in L2 between Korean and Taiwanese students. Lang. Teach. Res. 26, 455–476. 10.1177/1362168819890825 Lewis J. L. Ream R. K. Bocian K. M. Cardullo R. A. Hammond K. A. Fast L. A. (2012). Con cariño: teacher caring, math self-efficacy, and math achievement among Hispanic English learners. Teach. College Rec. 114 1–42. 10.1177/016146811211400701 Li L. Yang S. (2021). Exploring the influence of teacher-student interaction on university students’ self-efficacy in the flipped classroom. J. Educ. Learn. 10 84–90. 10.5539/jel.v10n2p84 Lumpkin A. (2007). Caring teachers the key to student learning. Kappa Delta Pi Rec. 43 158–160. 10.1080/00228958.2007.10516474 MacIntyre P. Baker S. Clément R. Donovan L. (2003). Talking in order to learn: willingness to communicate and intensive language programs. Can. Modern Lang. Rev. 59 589–608. 10.3138/cmlr.59.4.589 MacIntyre P. D. Clément R. Dörnyei Z. Noels K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: a situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. Modern Lang. J. 82 545–562. 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb05543.x Malik M. A. Bashir S. (2020). Caring behavior of teachers: investigating the perceptions of secondary school teachers and students in Lahore. Int. J. Innovat. Teach. Learn. 6 63–78. 10.35993/ijitl.v6i2.1295 Maloney T. Matthews J. S. (2020). Teacher care and students’ sense of connectedness in the urban mathematics classroom. J. Res. Mathe. Educ. 51 399–432. 10.5951/jresematheduc-2020-0044 Martin A. J. Collie R. J. (2019). Teacher-student relationships and students’ engagement in high school: does the number of negative and positive relationships with teachers matter? J. Educ. Psychol. 111 861–876. 10.1037/edu0000317 McCroskey J. C. Teven J. J. (1999). Goodwill: a reexamination of the construct and its measurement. Commun. Monogr. 66 90–103. 10.1080/03637759909376464 Menezes E. Juan-Garau M. (eds) (2015). “English learners’ willingness to communicate and achievement in CLIL and formal instruction contexts,” in Content-Based Language Learning in Multilingual Educational Environments (Cham: Springer), 221–236. Meng Y. (2021). Fostering EFL/ESL students’ state motivation: the role of teacher-student rapport. Front. Psychol. 12:754797. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.754797 34589039 Miller R. M. (2008). The Influence of Teachers Caring Behavior on High School Students’ Behavior and Grades, (Ph.D.thesis). South Orange, NJ: Seton Hall University. Moussaid R. Zerhouni B. (2017). Problems of pre-service teachers during the practicum: an analysis of written reflections and mentor feedback. Arab World Eng. J. 8 135–153. 10.24093/awej/vol8no3.10 Mystkowska-Wiertelak A. Pawlak M. (eds) (2017). Willingness to Communicate in Instructed Second Language Acquisition. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 10.21832/9781783097173 Noble R. N. Heath N. Krause A. Rogers M. (2021). Teacher-student relationships and high school drop-out: applying a working alliance framework. Can. J. School Psychol. 36 221–234. 10.1177/0829573520972558 Peng J. E. (2012). Towards an ecological understanding of willingness to communicate in EFL classrooms in China. System 40 203–213. 10.1016/j.system.2012.02.002 Peng J. E. (2019). The roles of multimodal pedagogic effects and classroom environment in willingness to communicate in English. System 82 161–173. 10.1016/j.system.2019.04.006 Peng J. E. (2020). Teacher interaction strategies and situated willingness to communicate. ELT J. 74 307–317. 10.1093/elt/ccaa012 Peng J. E. Woodrow L. (2010). Willingness to communicate in English: a model in the Chinese EFL classroom context. Lang. learn. 60 834–876. 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00576.x Quin D. (2017). Longitudinal and contextual associations between teacher–student relationships and student engagement: a systematic review. Rev. Educ. Res. 87 345–387. 10.3102/0034654316669434 Ramberg J. Laftman S. B. Almquist Y. B. Modin B. (2019). School effectiveness and students’ perceptions of teacher caring: a multilevel study. Improv. Schools 22 55–71. 10.1177/1365480218764693 Rastegar M. Karami M. (2015). On the relationship between foreign language Classroom anxiety, willingness to communicate and scholastic success among Iranian EFL learners. Theory Pract. Lang. Stud. 5 2387–2394. 10.17507/tpls.0511.25 Reyes R. D. G. D. Von Anthony G. T. (2020). The relationship of expert teacher–learner rapport and learner autonomy in the CVIF dynamic learning program. Asia Pacific Educ. Res. 30 471–481. 10.1007/s40299-020-00532-y Roberts M. A. (2010). Toward a theory of culturally relevant critical teacher care: African American teachers’ definitions and perceptions of care for African American students. J. Moral Educ. 39 449–467. 10.1080/03057241003754922 Rowan L. Grootenboer P. (eds) (2017). “Student engagement and rapport in higher education: The case for relationship-centered pedagogies,” in Student Engagement and Educational Rapport in Higher Education (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan), 1–23. Santana J. (2019). Establishing teacher-student rapport in an English-medium instruction class. Latin Am. J. Content Lang. Integr. Learn. 12 265–291. 10.5294/laclil.2019.12.2.4 Sheybani M. (2019). The relationship between EFL learners’ willingness to communicate (WTC) and their teacher immediacy attributes: a structural equation modelling. Cogent Psychol. 6:1607051. 10.1080/23311908.2019.1607051 Snijders I. Wijnia L. Rikers R. M. Loyens S. M. (2020). Building bridges in higher education: student-faculty relationship quality, student engagement, and student loyalty. Int. J. Educ. Res. 100:101538. 10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101538 Tan D. Yough M. Wang C. (2018). International students in higher education: promoting their willingness to communicate in classrooms. J. Appl. Res. High. Educ. 10 430–442. 10.1108/JARHE-01-2018-0008 Teven J. J. (2001). The relationships among teacher characteristics and perceived caring. Commun. Educ. 50 159–169. 10.1080/03634520109379241 Teven J. J. (2007a). Teacher caring and classroom behavior: relationships with student affect and perceptions of teacher competence and trustworthiness. Commun. Q. 55 433–450. 10.1080/01463370701658077 Teven J. J. (2007b). Teacher temperament: correlates with teacher caring, burnout, and organizational outcomes. Commun. Educ. 56 382–400. 10.1080/03634520701361912 Teven J. J. Hanson T. L. (2004). The impact of teacher immediacy and perceived caring on teacher competence and trustworthiness. Commun. Q. 52 39–53. 10.1080/01463370409370177 Teven J. J. McCroskey J. C. (1997). The relationship of perceived teacher caring with student learning and teacher evaluation. Commun. Educ. 46 1–9. 10.1080/03634529709379069 Thompson C. S. (2018). The construct of respect in teacher-student relationships: exploring dimensions of ethics of care and sustainable development. J. Leaders. Educ. 17 42–60. 10.12806/V17/I3/R3 Thornberg R. Forsberg C. Chiriac E. H. Bjereld Y. (2020). Teacher–student relationship quality and student engagement: a sequential explanatory mixed-methods study. Res. Papers Educ. 35 1–20. 10.1080/02671522.2020.1864772 Wang Y. L. Derakhshan A. Zhang L. J. (2021). Researching and practicing positive psychology in second/foreign language learning and teaching: the past, current status and future directions. Front. Psychol. 12:731721. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.731721 34489835 Wang Y. L. Guan H. F. (2020). Exploring demotivation factors of Chinese learners of English as a foreign language based on positive psychology. Rev. Argent. Clin. Psicol. 29 851–861. 10.24205/03276716.2020.116 Webb N. Barrett L. O. (2014). Student views of instructor-student rapport in the college classroom. J. Scholarship Teach. Learn. 14 15–28. 10.14434/josotl.v14i2.4259 Wilson J. H. Ryan R. G. (2013). Professor–student rapport scale: six items predict student outcomes. Teach. Psychol. 40 130–133. 10.1177/0098628312475033 Wilson J. H. Wilson S. B. Legg A. M. (2012). “Building rapport in the classroom and student outcomes,” in Evidence-Based Teaching for Higher Education, eds Schwartz B. M. Gurung R. A. R. (United States: American Psychological Association), 23–37. 10.1037/13745-002 Yong E. (2019). “Impact of student-instructor relationships on affective learning and test anxiety perceptions,” in Paper Presented at Proceedings of the 2019 3rd International Conference on Education and Multimedia Technology (Nagoya, Japan: ACM Press the 2019 3rd International Conference), 10.1145/3345120.3345133 Yu M. (2011). Effect of communication variables, affective variables, and teacher immediacy on willingness to communicate of foreign language learners. Chin. J. Commun. 4 218–236. 10.1080/17544750.2011.565678 Yunus M. M. Osman W. S. W. Ishak N. M. (2011). Teacher-student relationship factor affecting motivation and academic achievement in ESL classroom. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 15 2637–2641. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.161 Zarrinabadi N. (2014). Communicating in a second language: investigating the effect of teacher on learners’ willingness to communicate. System 42 288–295. 10.1016/j.system.2013.12.014 Zhang J. Beckmann N. Beckmann J. F. (2018). To talk or not to talk: a review of situational antecedents of willingness to communicate in the second language classroom. System 72 226–239. 10.1016/j.system.2018.01.003 Zhang M. (2021). EFL/ESL teacher’s resilience, academic buoyancy, care, and their impact on students’ engagement: a theoretical review. Front. Psychol. 12:731859. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.731859 34484087