Influences of Imperial China on culture and civilization in Vietnam, Korea, and Japan

factors. A case in point is Ely’s characterization of risk taking. In a study accomplished in 1986 (as cited in Nga, 2002), he clarifies that taking risks is intrinsically related to classroom participation and self-confidence. Ely ascertains a key pedagogical factor that was not comprised in previous definitions of the term and that is required in a language class: willingness to participate. According to Hongwei (1996) classroom participation may demonstrate for language learners a noteworthy chance to practice and improve their skills in the target language. On the other hand, Lee and Ng (2010) state that another classroom factor correlated with the willingness to speak is the teacher’s role and whether it can decrease student inhibition to participate in the second language class.

Since there have been numerous various approaches to the term risk taking, the effort to define it and its educational rationale have modified so much that research on learner differences has not come to a unified explanation of the term yet. In spite of this fact, one of the most general definitions of risk taking is found in the words of Beebe, one of the leading researchers in the field. In her analysis of risk taking, she attentively captures most of its essential characteristics. She characterizes the term as a “situation where an individual has to make a decision involving choice between alternatives of various desirability; the consequence of the selection is uncertain; there is a possibility of failure” (Beebe, 1983, p.39). Her definition of risk taking resonates with the observations of other authors, for example, Wen & Clément’s uncertainty of consequences and the choice of actions mentioned by Bem. Beebe (1983) does not comprehensibly clarify the pedagogical implication of risk taking; although, from her definition of the term, teachers and learners can conclude that the risk of being right or wrong, i.e. failure, is inherent to learning to speak a second language.

From all the specifications of the risk-taking construct reviewed so far, we can state that risk taking is not an isolated construct but is closely related to other fundamental learner variables such as classroom participation and willingness to communicate in a second language. What should be highlighted from the literature on risk taking is that this term requires interplay between the learner and the decisions that he makes, his willingness to participate, and the educational setting.

Definitely the definitions of risk taking have also caused research to account for the particular traits that a risk taker should have. In regard to the requirements that learners have to meet in order to be assumed risk takers, one of the most powerful reports corresponds to Ely’s dimensions. According to Ely’s (as cited in Alshalabi, 2003) first dimension, risk takers are not suspicious about utilizing a newly encountered linguistic component. The second dimension refers to risk takers’ willingness to use linguistic components perceived to be complicated or difficult. According to Alshalabi (2003) this dimension clarifies why risk