Rapport and ESL / EFL Classrooms

ELLSWORTH, Ian E.

Success [ in language teaching] depends less on materials, techniques and

linguistic analyses and more on what goes on inside and between the people in
the classroom."

Earl W. Stevick

Most ESL teachers and students would agree with Stevick; so, how can teachers
form the relationships necessary for success? One way is through rapport. An ability
to establish rapport in the classroom is characteristic of excellent teachers and builds
relationships crucial for learning (Lowman, 1995; Hilgemann & Blodget, 1991).
Because of the unique social and interpersonal nature of the ESL/EFL classroom,
teachers should strive to generate and establish positive rapport. ESL/EFL teachers
address students who have English language proficiency and cultural awareness
gaps. Therefore, establishing and maintaining rapport will help bridge these gaps and
foster language acquisition.
Creating rapport, in my opinion, is on a continuum, with learnable or observable
elements on one end and innate or personality elements on the other. Toward the
learnable/teachable side of the continuum, I include the teaching methods and
techniques teachers employ, strategies teachers can learn or be taught, and data
drawn from classroom research. The innate/personality side of the continuum
includes more nebulous factors like how teacher personality influences rapport, how
reflective practices affect teacher-student relationships, and how the interpersonal
nature of the classroom influences learning. It is clear, however, that some teachers
are better able to create rapport than others. If teachers lack the ability to create
rapport, can it be learned? The possibility of learning rapport, its influence in the
classroom, and its role in teacher development are the issues I shall explore.

What is Rapport and Why is It Important?

Brown (2001) defines rapport as . . . the relationship or connection you establish

with your students, a relationship built on trust and respect that leads to students'
feeling capable, competent, and creative" (p. 202). This relationship or connection has
physiological implications for learning. Carson (as cited in Fleming, 2003, p.1) states:

― 63 ―
 Studies of the relationship between emotions and cognition explain in [a]
way the link between how students feel about their professors and how they
perform in the classroom . . . The very first stages of both learning and
remembering what was learned are affective . . . When we respond to
something with emotional intensity, stress hormones excite the part of the
brain that transforms impressions or short-term memories into long-term
memories. The greater the affective intensity, the easier both the original
imprinting and the recall.

By generating rapport, teachers strengthen the emotional connection students have

to a concept, thus promoting and enhancing learning. According to Tiberius (as cited
in Fleming, 2003), rapport helps establish a context that positively influences
learning. Tiberius and Billson (as cited in Fleming, 2003, p. 1) explain the impact in
this way:

Teaching is inherently interactive because it depends on making connections

with an active, growing mind. The relationships between teachers and
learners can be viewed as a set of filters, interpretive screens or
expectations that determine the effectiveness of interaction between teacher
and student. Effective teachers form relationships that are trustful, open, and
secure, that involve a minimum of control, are cooperative and are
conducted in a reciprocal interactive manner. They share control with
students and encourage interactions that are determined by mutual
agreement.

Though Tiberius and Billson are discussing rapport between university professors
and their students, I feel that the descriptions of effective university teachers are
very similar to descriptions of effective ESL/EFL teachers. In fact, approaches to
ESL/EFL such as learner-centered instruction, cooperative and collaborative learning,
and whole language education stress the importance of sharing classroom control
with the students, of forming open relationships, of encouraging cooperation, and of
allowing student involvement in curriculum decisions (Brown, 2001). I am also struck
by Tiberius and Billson's view that relationships formed between learners and
teachers may function as a set of filters. Their explanation closely resembles the
words of Krashen (1985) and his affective filter. I believe that creating rapport can
reduce the affective filter, improve teacher and student interaction, and promote
learner autonomy, all of which furthers language acquisition.
I feel that inherent in this somewhat slippery but important concept" (Brown,
2001, p. 202) of establishing rapport are both learnable or teachable elements and also
teacher personality or innate elements. These elements are analogous to the nature

― 64 ―
versus nurture continuum in science. Beginning at the teachable/observable end, I
will consider how the role of methodology, the place of neurolinguistic programming
(NLP), the importance of rapport building strategies, the value reflective teaching
practices, and the results of classroom based research affect rapport.

What Role Does the Teaching Method Play in Creating Rapport?

The effectiveness of a teacher's methodology should be judged by how much his

or her students actually learn. In a study of three classrooms where significant
learning was demonstrated on a wide variety of indicators, Clarke, Davis, Rhodes, and
Baker (1998a) examined the role of methodology and the nature of teaching and
learning. They set out with an assessment of literacy instruction in forty Denver
area classrooms. The study then began to focus on three teachers [Mary, Jackie,
and Barbara] who emerged as especially successful; they achieved remarkable
success under difficult circumstances, yet espoused dramatically different philosophies
and approach their teaching in strikingly different ways" (p. 1). Mary's classroom
goal was for the students to love reading and writing. The children published
their writings and read each other's work in small groups, while Mary worked on
her own reading and writing or circulated to confer with the students about theirs"
(p. 2). Jackie is bilingual and uses both Spanish and English in the classroom.
Jackie's instruction [is] organized around thematic units, projects, and frequent
field trips" (p. 2). The students move around the room, from computers to art
centers to conference tables and back again, as they complete their projects. The
third teacher, Barbara, describes herself as a traditional teacher. The children
participate in drills, spelling bees, and choral work to teach concepts and practice
skills" (p. 2). Clearly, the methods and approaches vary greatly among these very
successful teachers. Yet as Clarke et al. sum up, What matters is not which method,
but the congruence between the details of the particular method and the attitudes,
beliefs and personal proclivities of the teacher" (p. 4).
Although the teachers in Clarke et al.'s study are not ESL/EFL teachers, research
in SLA has come to similar conclusions. According to Ellis (as cited in Ur, 1997), the
effectiveness of different methodologies has not produced conclusive results. In fact,
when considering the importance of method, training, and experience, Ur (1997)
declares that methodology is perhaps the least important factor in successful
teaching" (p. 2). Because of the methodological differences among the teachers,
Clarke, Davis, Rhodes, and Baker (1998b) came to understand effective teaching as
a function of relationships rather than methods. [Mary, Jackie, and Barbara]
established meaningful relationships with each student, and they worked within those
relationships to move students toward their goals" (p. 593). Though Clarke et al. do
not use the term rapport, their words parallel much of Brown's earlier definition.

― 65 ―
The mere mastery of the latest ESL/EFL teaching method will not automatically
create rapport; it is generated by the relationships formed between effective teachers
and their students.

NLP: Science, Pseudoscience or a Bit of Both?

Recently, neurolinguistic processing (NLP) has been promoted as a way to teach

rapport. A formal definition of NLP is that

it evolved out of Cognitive Science research (linguistics, psychology,

computer science (cybernetics), anthropology) at the University of California
(in Santa Cruz) between 1972 and 1981. It seems to have given up its
scientific claims since then to become a set of tools that will enhance your
communication skills, your emotional intelligence, etc. (Merl, n. d., p. 1) italics
added.

NLP resulted from detailed observations and analysis of the words, voice tone, and
body language used by expert therapists to establish rapport and effect changes in
others" (Clabby & O'Connor, 2004, p. 541).
In a study by Clabby and O'Connor (2004), NLP was used to help medical
students develop a strong, therapeutic, and effective relationship" with their patients
(p. 541). One important aspect of this relationship was developing doctor-patient
rapport by use of physical and verbal mirroring.
In physical mirroring, the doctor mirrors the body language of her patient. For
example, if the patient were to cross his left leg over his right, then the doctor
would cross her right leg over her left, creating a mirror image (Clabby &
O'Connor, 2004). The doctor, however, needed to lag behind the patient by a few
seconds to several minutes" to avoid being obvious (p. 542).
Not only does the doctor mirror the patient's body language, but she also mirrors
her patient's speech. Verbal mirroring occurs when the physician approximates the
patient's voice tone and repeats the patient's last few words or word and
occasionally uses a slight questioning inflection" (p. 542). If the doctor repeatedly
utters back channels like uh-huh," I see," etc., she might appear disingenuous and
lose a valuable opportunity to build rapport" (p. 542). On the other hand, verbal
mirroring may act as a prompt to encourage the patient to elaborate, increasing
output. When teachers use verbal mirroring, they model practical active listening
techniques. Students who notice these techniques may begin to incorporate them into
their interlanguage, facilitating language acquisition.
ESL teachers have used NLP techniques in their classrooms to help them
recognize the learning processes of their students. By recognizing the learning

― 66 ―
process for each student, a teacher can then form rapport. At a TESOL conference
in Korea, Skye (1998) suggests using eye cues to understand the internal cognitive
operations underlying learning" (p. 1). The eye accessing cues" are the positions the
eyes assume when a student is processing sensory experience and information for
storage or retrieval in memory" (p. 1). In other words, watch the positions of
students'eyes while they are thinking so you can have an idea how they learn.
There are seven eye positions which give clues to the cognitive operations for a
majority of right-handed people; the positions are usually reversed for left-handed
people (Grinder & Bandler as cited in Skye, 1998). By observing eye access cues,
such as the eye being up and to the left of the eye socket for visual remembered
images", teachers can see a representation of the internal process of memory,
learning and recall. The eye accessing cues give the teacher information that can be
used for rapport in communication" (p. 2). The eye cues characterize a student's
learning preference (visual, auditory, or kinetic), enabling a teacher to tailor the
lesson plan to the student's learning preference. After tailoring the lesson plan,
Learning Rapport depends on how the teacher presents and communicates the
information in the class and how the student perceives the information" (p. 4).
Though my review of NLP has been rather cursory, I believe NLP to be
pseudoscientific. NLP seems to share some of the qualities of Krashen's work. For
instance, Krashen's (1985) theories of the affective filter and i + 1 are, in essence,
scientifically untestable. Trying to test visual and verbal mirroring and their effect on
rapport is similarly untestable. There are too many variables to control to produce
results that are not confounded. Also, both Krashen and NLP have given up their
scientific claims and turned toward the practical. We can certainly thank Krashen for
our awareness of the importance of input in SLA theory and practice, as well as for
the need to create a low-stress learning environment. Likewise, there may be some
use for NLP techniques in the classroom. NLP may help focus teachers'attention on
the importance of their body language and verbal responses. ESL/EFL students,
especially beginners, are very unlikely to be able to understand every word spoken
by their teachers. How teachers say something and the body language used while
saying it can influence rapport as strongly as the words themselves. Moreover,
verbal mirroring and active listening techniques employed by a teacher may
encourage student output, aiding language acquisition.
The eye accessing techniques, on the other hand, are very likely impractical in a
classroom of more than a couple of students. Teachers already have their hands full
implementing lesson plans, balancing student talk time, distributing teaching material,
etc., and are not able to notice the eye positions of individual students in their
classes. I am also very skeptical of the claim that the eye positions allow teachers to
understand internal processes for a majority of right-handed people, though there
are exceptions, and the positions are usually reversed for left-handed people" (Skye,

― 67 ―
1998, p. 2). Words like majority", exceptions", and usually" are vague and
pseudoscientific. Finally, one cannot create rapport simply by matching a teaching
style to a learning style. This premise ignores the interpersonal nature of the
classroom and its effect on rapport.
Despite the lack of solid scientific evidence for eye accessing cues, NLP techniques
that encourage learning through visualization may hold promise. Skye (1998)
describes a visual method for learning vocabulary. Students first picture the
vocabulary word to be learned in their minds, for example apple. The students then
make the image of the apple clear and strong." Next, they embed the word A-P-P-
L-E on the picture of the fruit, so [they] see the word and the fruit" (p. 4). After
forming this image with the spelling, the learners say the word aloud. By saying the
word aloud, the visual memory of the apple with the spelling will be connected to
the sound of the word. The steps should be repeated about 10 times in order to
embed the word, image and spelling into long term memory. I find this process both
helpful for learning vocabulary and testable, though its effect on rapport seems
negligible.
In brief, practical NLP techniques, such as physical and verbal mirroring, can be
incorporated into lessons to increase language acquisition and aid rapport. Physical
mirroring raises the instructor's awareness of the important messages that his or
her body language sends. Verbal mirroring promotes student output by signaling
that the learner should elaborate. Using open and comforting body language and
allowing students to say more will have a positive effect on teacher-student
relationships.

Rapport Building Strategies

There are many websites, books, and journal articles with lists detailing rapport
building strategies. Much of the information and advice covered in the lists overlap
(see Wankat & Oreovicz 1998; Hawley, 1997 for typical website examples). The first
suggestion on nearly every list for building rapport is to learn and to use
students' names. Other advice in common includes being flexible, being polite, and
planning your lessons thoroughly. Hawley (1997) also recommends entering the
classroom with confidence, smiling, and having a sense of humor. Wankat and
Oreovicz (1998) suggest being enthusiastic, communicating a positive attitude,
showing appreciation for your students, arriving early and staying late, and chatting
with them.
Though many of these strategies may seem like common sense notions, teachers
will likely benefit from a review of the lists before their first class begins. Also, many
of the strategies can be easily implemented, especially learning students' names. An
approach advocated by Wankat and Oreovicz (1998) is to take photographs of the

― 68 ―
students and to study their faces in order to learn everyone's name. This approach
has the added benefit of being visible. Students see that you are making an effort,
and they appreciate it" (p. 1).
I feel that rapport is not only improved when the teacher knows the
students' names, but also when the students know the names of their fellow
classmates as well. I agree with Wankat and Oreovicz's contention that a name
game can be a particularly effective strategy to use in large classes to enable
everyone to learn each other's names. For example, I have a university TESOL
professor who very successfully uses a name game to open his first class. While
standing in a circle, he asks each student to learn the names of the three students
standing to his or her right. This routine is repeated for the students standing to the
left. The whole process begins again, but with additional names to learn. Finally,
various students are chosen to give the names of the students around them until
everyone learns the names of all their classmates. This was the first large university
class I had ever taken in which I knew everyone's name. The results were
immediate and the atmosphere created was positive and cooperative. The rapport felt
among the members of this class was dramatic; and, I believe its foundation was laid
using this name game strategy.
After learning the students' names, an additional strategy to employ is to display
a personal interest in the students and their learning. Teachers should also
encourage and foster student to student interest as well. As Fleming (2003) states,
A teacher who encourages students to take a personal interest in other students
may lead students to an enhanced perception of the teacher" (p. 2). Some tips to
promote personal interest in the students include: displaying a genuine concern for
students and avoiding patronizing language; personalizing classroom interactions by
chatting with the students before and after class; using students' names; encouraging
students to visit during office hours; and enriching the course by drawing on
students' perspectives, examples, and references (Chism, as cited in Fleming, 2003).
Another tip to bolster personal interest in the students is to collect information
about their prior knowledge. Teachers should consult with the students' former
teacher(s) and review or ask for autobiographical data. With an understanding of
what the students already know, teachers can identify students' existing frameworks
and attach new knowledge to those frameworks (Fleming, 2003). As McKeachie (as
cited in Fleming, 2003, p. 3) sums up, . . . our task in teaching is to help students
reorganize existing structures or to add new dimensions or new features to existing
structures." This task will be made easier and more effective if teachers use material
derived from the students' interests.
Teachers are powerful models in the language learning classroom. As models, we
can directly convey to students that taking a personal interest in them is
advantageous. For example, a teacher listening to student's [sic] stories or examples

― 69 ―
in a sensitive way can be a model as can learning their names and respecting their
privacy. Teachers who model respectful silence while their students are speaking are
making a positive contribution" (Fleming, 2003, p. 3). A further benefit of respectful
silence is to encourage student output. Increased student output should improve
language acquisition.
In short, using rapport building strategies, personalizing lessons to include the
interests of the students, and acting as a model for respectful interaction helps
establish rapport, which will strengthen language acquisition.

Changes in Classroom Rapport over Time

Though the classroom is dynamic, Lowman (1984) reports predictable changes in

rapport over time. Initially, courses begin with an air of optimism for both teachers
and students. Students arrive early to class and teachers hope they will teach well
and be positively received. In addition to the optimistic air, there is some underlying
fear. Students fear that they will have an authoritarian teacher or will not perform
up to their standards. Teachers face the challenge of winning over a new group of
students. Despite their fears, the overall mood at the beginning of class tends to be
positive for everyone" (Lowman, 1984, p. 42).
The first few classes build on the positive expectations initially felt by all. There
is a brief honeymoon period during which the students discover that the teacher is
not as controlling as initially feared and the teacher discovers that the students are
not as dull or dependent as initially feared. This honeymoon period occurs primarily
due to everyone's prior positive expectations and less so to their actual experience
in the classroom.
The honeymoon period ends with a rather sharp drop in satisfaction and an
increase in anxiety among teachers and students. According to Mann (as cited in
Lowman, 1984), the drop tends to occur after six to eight classes and often coincides
with the first test or graded assignment. Students' anxiety increases as the teacher's
role of evaluator is dramatized. The drop in morale takes place even in classes
without exams. For teachers, grading students' work reminds them that their
relationship with the students is unavoidably an evaluative one; thus, …teachers'
morale drops too" (p. 43).
The drop in morale is usually short-lived and is followed by a more realistic
period of satisfaction and independent work" (p. 43). This optimal work atmosphere"
typically occurs during the middle third to last half of the course. During this period,
students participate more willingly in classroom discussions and display independent
thinking. By fostering positive interpersonal relationships, teachers may be able to
extend this period; however, it cannot be attained too quickly or be created by
gimmicks like class picnics.

― 70 ―
 The end of a course is an emotional time for teachers and students alike. As the
class nears completion, students may worry about their performance, particularly if
there is a final examination or other graded work. The level of anxiety, however, is
unlikely to reach the levels attained just before the first test or graded assignment.
In addition, many students may be disappointed that the course is ending, even if
it has not been particularly satisfying to them" (p. 43). As for teachers, they may be
dissatisfied with the amount of material presented in the course or with the
students'ability to master the material. Other emotions also arise. For example, if the
morale and rapport have been high, students may ask teachers personal questions
during the last class as a final attempt to strengthen their relationship.
Lowman gathered his data from evaluations and observations of university
professors and their students, not ESL/EFL students and teachers. As a result, there
are likely to be small differences in the conclusions drawn by Lowman and future
research involving ESL/EFL classrooms and rapport. Data on the behavior of various
groups do exist, however. As Lowman states, A predictable sequence of phenomena
occurs in the life of every group, structured or unstructured" (p. 40). Within the life
of every group are maintenance needs. Maintenance needs are the personal needs
of the members, primarily needs for control and affection" (p. 41). Effective teaching
addresses maintenance needs at the start. As Lowman sums up, personal teaching
is based on this well accepted principle of organizational leadership: Recognizing and
attempting to meet the emotional needs of group members from the outset leads to
greater work (or learning) in the long run" (p. 41).
ESL/EFL teachers can clearly benefit from research done in college classrooms.
First, ESL/EFL teachers should immediately address the maintenance and emotional
needs of their students. Learners have a strong desire for affection and approval
from instructors (Lowman, 1984). Students would like their teacher to approve of
them as learners and persons. Students find learning much more satisfying when
they believe that their instructor likes and trusts them" (p. 36). ESL/EFL teachers
who understand the importance of students' needs for affection and approval will
improve classroom rapport and language acquisition.
Tests increase the stress and anxiety levels of students, though some stress likely
has a facilitating effect on learning. To lower the level of anxiety and to improve test
performance or the quality of graded work, teachers should clearly explain their
grading criteria and their expectations far enough in advance to allow students
sufficient time to prepare for tests or to complete graded assignments. Teachers
should also prepare a study guide to help narrow the points to be covered on
examinations. Finally, teachers need to remind themselves to grade the work and not
the student; personal feelings should not affect grading (Wankat & Oreovitz, 1998).
If the student's work is of poor quality, we must take care to communicate clearly
that it is the quality of the work you find unacceptable, not the student" (p. 1-2).

― 71 ―
 By acknowledging a need for approval, managing stress and anxiety, and grading
work as fairly as possible, we can meet some of the emotional and affective needs of
the students, enhancing rapport.
A related step in addressing maintenance and emotional needs involves control.
Students feel more in control if they are with a predictable teacher than with a
capricious one (Lowman, 1984). As Lowman contends:

When students are unsure what topics will be covered, what the assignments
are, or what the teacher's objectives are, they miss the sense of control that
comes from knowing why the challenges that await them were selected and
what rules will govern their evaluation (1984, p. 37).

Consequently, teachers must plan courses and individual classes carefully in order to
maintain a sense of predictability and continuity.
Another factor influencing control is instructor language. When giving directions
for a task or activity, teachers should think about specificity. The more specific task
directions are or the more limited in the number of choices students have, the more
controlling teachers become in the eyes of students (Lowman, 1984). Allowing
students some freedom to choose the outcome of a task or activity will promote
independence. Brown (2001), in his checklist to create intrinsic motivation, also
stresses that students should have some input when choosing some aspect of the
technique" and/or determining how they go about fulfilling the goals of the
technique" to increase their motivation (p. 15). An instructor's choice of words
should also encourage independence and increase motivation. Instructions such as I
think you will enjoy reading articles about the history of one of your hobbies. Please
write a two page paper summarizing the history of your hobby and describe how
you became interested in it. I look forward to reading your papers" convey that the
students will enjoy and succeed at this written assignment. As Lowman sums up,
Teacher messages that are overtly controlling or emphasize the hierarchical power
relationship between teacher and student encourage students to be less independent"
(p. 34). I believe independent and intrinsically motivated learners are best equipped
for language learning success inside and outside of the classroom.
Teacher language should not only encourage independence and boost motivation,
but also avoid sarcasm. Sarcasm and indifference from teachers communicate a lack
of respect for students (Rodabaugh, as cited in Fleming, 2003). When addressing
individuals or the whole class, teachers must consider how their body language,
inflection, and tone of voice are understood. Using your voice and body language to
create a comfortable classroom atmosphere will improve your relationship with the
students.
ESL/EFL instructors with an awareness of how rapport changes over time are

― 72 ―
better able to plan their lessons. In the first few classes when morale is particularly
high, instructors ought to make a conscious effort to learn and to use
students' names. Instructors should also learn something about each student, though
this is likely a process that continues throughout the course. Quickly and successfully
creating personal relationships with each class member will extend the initial
honeymoon period. A realization that rapport is likely to drop, especially before the
first graded assignment or test, can prepare teachers to minimize the decline. At this
point, we need to be extra careful with our body language, tone of voice, and, of
course, choice of words. It is especially important to avoid sarcastic comments and
overly negative language.
During the optimal work atmosphere" period, which typically starts in the second
half or middle third of the course, students should be more independent. Teachers
ought to rely less on whole class presentations and should be setting students to
work in pairs or groups, while using only a minimum of teacher set-up. Students
should, hopefully, have a very strong idea of what the next activity or class will
entail because the teacher has been well-organized, creating predictability.
Finally, the last class is likely an emotional time for all, and plans need to reflect
this. Students need a time to reflect emotionally as well as intellectually on the
[course] coming to an end" (Lowman, 1984, p. 44). Lowman does not recommend
trying to cram in one last topic or giving a final examination on the last day. I
believe it is beneficial to plan a good-bye lesson where students have a chance to say
good-bye to the instructor and to all their classmates.
In sum, by understanding how rapport changes over time and valuing their
students' maintenance and emotional needs, teachers can plan lessons that generate
and maintain rapport, fostering language acquisition.

The Personality Side of the Continuum

Teacher personality greatly influences teaching effectiveness. In a study of

university psychology professors using colleague ratings of an instructor's
personality and student evaluations of teaching proficiency, Murray, Rushton, and
Paunonen (1990) could predict teaching effectiveness in different course types.
Murray et al. also found that a teacher's effectiveness tended to vary depending on
the kind of course taught. Moreover, they found that the specific personality traits
that contributed to effective teaching differed markedly for different course types.
Murray et al. found that most teachers were better suited to particular types of
courses rather than consistently successful or unsuccessful in all courses. By
analyzing peer ratings of instructors' personalities and later comparing them to
student evaluations of the instructors' teaching ability, Murray et al. were able to
predict which teachers would be successful with what classes. Analyses of peer

― 73 ―
ratings of instructors on 29 different personality traits and of student evaluations for
different types of courses have identified neurotic extraverts" as especially capable
instructors in large, lower-level, lecture classes; whereas, instructors who scored high
on the Extroversion and Liberalism factors and . . . [received] very low scores on
Negative Affect" were more successful in smaller, higher-level, discussion classes (p.
258; see Murray et al. p. 253 for definitions of Extroversion and Liberalism). A
neurotic extravert tends to be friendly, warm, and approachable." He or she also is
fair and reasonable in relations with students, but shows an element of neurotic
worrying" (p. 258). This neurotic worrying may compel the instructor to attend to
the organizational details involved in heading a large lecture class. Instructors who
are successful in smaller, higher-level, discussion classes have a tendency to be
friendly, gregarious, fair, and supportive, and, at the same time, flexible, adaptable,
and open to change. Presumably, this is the type of person who is at ease in a
discussion format where students exert greater control over classroom activities" (p.
258)
Because certain personality types are better suited for particular sizes and kinds
of classes, few teachers excel or fail in all of the classes they teach. Typically,
teaching effectiveness evaluations varied across different types of classes for the
same teacher. In other words, receiving high or low instructional ratings in one type
of course is no guarantee that ratings will be similarly high or low in another type
of course" (p. 254). Indeed, only three of 46 participating teachers scored in the top
third for all types of classes taught, while three scored in the bottom third for all
types of classes taught. As Murray et al. sum up, In general, it appears that
different and sometimes incompatible combinations of personality traits are necessary
for effective performance in different types of courses, which would explain why
very few teachers are outstanding in all types of courses taught" (p. 256).
When Murray et al. looked at the characteristics of the three highly effective
teachers, they identified certain similarities in personality. For example, effective
teachers score high on Liberalism and Extroversion factors; and, that these two
personality dimensions are critical in determining breadth of teaching effectiveness"
(p. 258). In other words, the higher the Liberalism and Extroversion scores, the more
likely teachers will teach classes ranging from small seminar classes to large lecture
hall classes effectively. Furthermore, the personality trait of leadership is associated
with across-the-board teaching skill. Ur (1997) also links the quality of
charisma/leadership" as being necessary to become a master teacher. A master
teacher, like an effective leader, presumably has the ability to modify his or her
approach so as to adapt successfully to the requirements of different situations"
(Murray et al, 1990, p. 260).
The professors in Murray et al.'s study taught a wide range of classes from
undergraduate introductory lectures to graduate level seminars and from three to

― 74 ―
450 students per class. For my purposes, I shall concentrate on the types of
personalities best able to teach lectures and seminars. In Japan, for example, high
school teachers regularly teach 40 students per class, while universities typically have
25 students per class. In the case of for-profit, private English conversation schools,
teachers usually teach classes with a maximum of eight students. I consider the
personality traits identified by Murray et al. as being necessary to teach a lecture
class effectively to be similar to those necessary to teach ESL/EFL at a high school
or university. Likewise, traits necessary to teach small university seminar classes
effectively are similar to those needed at private conversation schools.

Personality and Rapport

By using rapport building strategies, monitoring instructor language and gestures,

and becoming aware of research done in the classroom, teachers may learn how to
improve rapport and how to get on better with students in their classrooms. The
importance of instructor personality on classroom rapport cannot be ignored,
however. As Ur (1997) states, Some aspects of personality . . . are extremely stable
and difficult to change. I do not think it is feasible to attempt to change a person's
basic value system or personal motives for action" (p. 7). If a teacher's personality
is fixed and he or she lacks certain traits or qualities identified as being typical of
successful teachers in specific classroom environments, then can this teacher develop
positive class rapport? My feeling is a qualified no. For instance, this teacher may be
able to form a decent rapport with some students some of the time but will
ultimately form less productive relationships than a teacher with traits identified as
necessary in a particular classroom. In fact, Murray et al. (1990) state the following:

A faculty member's effectiveness as a teacher is determined, at least in

part, before he or she sets foot in the classroom. In other words, preexisting
personality traits (among other factors) are assumed to determine the
instructor's classroom teaching behaviors, which in turn determine student
ratings and student achievement. (p. 259)

Regarding ESL/EFL teachers, Ur (1997) believes that there are some people who
come to teaching with certain personality characteristics that make them particularly
fitted for the teaching profession" (p. 6). She further explains that some
characteristics are more essential than others. As a result, some teachers, in spite of
efforts to better themselves in the classroom, lack the right personality for a specific
classroom to competently teach. This personality mismatch will negatively affect
teacher-student rapport, impacting learning. Ur (1997) quotes an experienced teacher
as saying, some people, no matter how much training they receive [, ] just don't

― 75 ―
succeed in the classroom" (p. 7). This failure is, at least in part, due to an inability
to establish rapport.

What Can We Learn from the Masters?

According to Ur (1997), there doesn't seem to be one factor or combination of

factors that contribute to master or born teachers. She does, however, try to describe
some of the qualities that distinguish master teachers from masters in other
professions. For instance, Ur identifies qualities such as: I sense where the learner
is at; I know how to transform what I know about the language into a form that is
accessible to my learners; I know how to design and administer activities; I know
when learning is not happening"; and, I get my buzz from when the students
succeed" as uniquely typical of master ESL/EFL teachers (p. 5-6). Other qualities
defining good" teachers are that they cared about us, that they were genuinely
committed to us as students and to their profession. These impressions were
conveyed to us by way of clear expectations that we would work hard and learn a
great deal" (Bailey, Bergthold, Braunstein, Jadogzinski, Fleischman, Holbrook, &
Zambo, 1996, p. 16). To these characterizations, I would add an ability to foster
intrinsic motivation and to instill a belief in the students that they can learn English
and will experience success.
In our long careers as students, we have likely had at least one teacher that we
considered to be masterful. So, the question becomes: What can we learn from the
masters? The answer: Not as much as we would hope. According to Ur (1997),
master or born teachers do so much based on intuition within the classroom that
they are unlikely to make good trainers [and] may find it difficult or impossible to
explain to others how it is done-except through demonstration" (p. 6-7). Lowman
(1984) expresses similar sentiments, for example, When considering individual skills,
innate talent for teaching comes to mind" (p. 212). Part of the innate talent includes
an ease in front of groups and an ability to give original and involving presentations.
Perhaps because of a high degree of empathy or an aptitude for presenting clear or
concrete examples, master teachers can explain complex concepts simply and clearly.
Lowman continues his assertions that some instructors are naturally more sensitive
and insightful than other people" (p. 212). I feel that this intuition and talent lead to
positive teacher-student rapport and play a prominent role in teaching success.
Neither carefully observing master teachers'teaching nor adopting their teaching
methodology will ensure others'success in the classroom.
Despite the difficulties of transferring intuitive qualities or talents from master
teachers to others, highly-skilled teachers have a role to play in improving rapport.
The attitudes of master teachers can create supportive teaching environments
(Lowman, 1984). A negative attitude within a school or department will decrease the

― 76 ―
amount of student learning and satisfaction. Pervasive negative attitudes
communicated during teacher meetings or around the water cooler can have an
especially profound effect on new instructors. In a negative teaching environment,
Lowman (1984) explains that:

A new instructor . . . risks becoming socialized into a culture that does not
value students or have rapport with them. If colleagues never comment on
the process of teaching except to complain, an instructor runs the risk of
adopting the beliefs that there is nothing important to learn about teaching,
that one need not strive to improve as a teacher during one's career, [and]
that it does not matter how well one teaches (p. 215)

Thus, one role of master teachers is to discuss the techniques they have effectively
used in the classroom and to speak positively about the students, motivating teachers
around them and fostering a supportive teaching environment (Lowman, 1984). A
second role is to act as a mentor to a less experienced or skilled teacher. Master
teachers have a large repertoire of teaching techniques. By sharing some of these
techniques, less experienced colleagues may experience some of the success of the
masters.
In brief, master teachers cannot pass elements of their personality that create
student-teacher rapport to their colleagues; however, their positive attitudes will
infuse and motivate others to improve their relationships with the students.

Rapport and Reflective Teaching

Reflective teaching is one way to develop as teachers by looking inward to access

information and inspiration about [our] efforts in language classrooms" (Murphy,
2001, p. 499). According to Murphy, reflective teaching has three purposes: (1) to
expand one's understanding of the teaching-learning process; (2) to expand one's
repertoire of strategic options as a language teacher; and (3) to enhance the quality
of learning opportunities one is able to provide in language classrooms" (p. 499-500).
Reflective teachers often focus on the affective climate of the classroom" (p. 501). I
feel that rapport has a strong influence on the affective climate. When teachers and
students establish rapport, students' feelings of stress or anxiety are lessened, thus
improving the affective climate in the classroom. Reflective teaching provides tools in
which to gather information about the teaching-learning process. Use of these tools
will allow teachers to improve rapport.
One tool that may be used effectively in classes is the five-minute paper (Murphy,
2001). During the last five minutes of class, students anonymously write responses to
one or two prompts such as:

― 77 ―
 (1) What is the one thing you are likely to remember from today's class?
(2) What was the most confusing concept we covered? (3) Is there anything
you would like to know more about? (4) Is there anything you think I
should be doing differently? (Murphy, 2001, p. 502)

These papers may not be as effective for low proficiency students, especially if their
L1 cannot be understood by the teacher(s). However, teachers are likely able to use
the responses to better rapport by tailoring lessons and techniques to suit their
students' needs. When using a five-minute paper, teachers openly solicit
students' ideas and feelings and value and respect what students think and say,
enhancing rapport (Brown, 2001). Teachers can also share the responses with a
master teacher. Working with a master teacher provides a second perspective and
will likely result in more and better ideas to improve one's teaching.
Formative teacher assessment surveys are a complement to five-minute papers
(Murphy, 2001). These surveys are similar in style to instructor assessment ratings
done at American universities and can be distributed at various times throughout the
course. Formative teacher assessment surveys are more in depth and detailed than
five-minute papers. Murphy recommends including the surveys in the syllabus so
students will know from the start that their impressions will be valued, when their
impressions will be solicited, and what the survey will include" (p. 504). Like five-
minute papers, surveys are a step toward valuing and respecting students' thoughts;
and, if the surveys are included in the syllabus, then teachers begin this step
immediately. Beginning a course well is important because students make their
decisions about the qualities of a teacher in the first two hours of contact"
(McKeachie, as cited in Fleming, 2003, p. 3).
A third tool to aid reflective teachers is videotaping the class. I recommend this
tool only if the taping does not interfere with the normal flow of the class and is as
unobtrusive as possible. Videotaping provides the teacher with a clear means to
critique his or her performance. Videotaped lessons allow teachers to observe their
gestures, amount of eye contact, body language, etc. as well as to review their tone
of voice and choice of words. Teachers can correct any shortcomings they uncover
in later classes.
A second advantage of videotaping lessons is that it allows for monitoring of the
amount of teacher speech. Too much teacher talk time takes away from student
opportunities to speak. When teachers view videos or listen to audio recordings of
their lessons, they are often surprised by how wordy some of their instructions are.
Use of videotaped lessons will help to eliminate unnecessary teacher comments and
maximize student learning opportunities. Whether teachers use the video to
concentrate on their body language, monitor their amount of speech, or both,

― 78 ―
screening the video with a master teacher allows for a different perspective which
should improve teaching.
The tools I have suggested are merely three of many. Individual teachers can
adopt or modify the tools to meet the goals of reflective teaching. By reflecting on
lessons taught, teachers will not only improve the quality of their lessons but also
strengthen rapport, thus improving student language acquisition.

Implications and Conclusions

Many of my conclusions concerning rapport and ESL/EFL classrooms are based

upon research done in university classrooms where teachers and students are all (or
nearly all) native speakers of English. Information concerning university teaching
effectiveness and rapport is widely available. ESL/EFL information concerning
teaching effectiveness and rapport is difficult for me to locate. One of the reasons is
the composition of ESL classrooms. For example, within these classrooms, there may
be students from many different countries, speaking many different first languages.
Student evaluations of teachers and their ability to teach would likely be completed
in the students' second language, if they were to be filled out at all. Furthermore,
schools are unlikely to have teachers proficient in the first languages of all of the
various students. Teachers are unable to translate teacher evaluation forms into the
students' first languages. When completing an evaluation in a second language,
particularly if the students are beginners, the resulting data may be less revealing
than data gathered in classes where students and teachers share a first language.
The nature of ESL/EFL teaching situations also creates research challenges and
limits the amount of information available on rapport in ESL/EFL classrooms. Since
I began teaching in Korea and Japan thirteen years ago, I have worked with many
dozens of teachers; most of whom work/have worked on one year contracts. When
the contract ends, many leave for their home country, move to a different teaching
job, or begin teaching in a different country. If one is teaching ESL in America,
research challenges also exist. Many ESL teachers are part-time, hourly workers.
Because of the limited time offered in many teaching contracts and the extensive
reliance on part-time instructors, rapport may be more difficult to research than in
university settings. Studies like Murray et al.'s would be very difficult to replicate in
many ESL/EFL situations because of high teacher turnover and of the difficulty for
students to complete teacher evaluations forms in English.
Despite the obstacles to researching rapport in the ESL/EFL classroom, more
needs to be done. Action research orientated toward investigating rapport will likely
help. Also, ESL/EFL teachers from different programs may need to join together in
order to gather participants for research. The purpose would be to find a large
number of willing teachers who teach classes of different sizes and abilities and to

― 79 ―
evaluate their classroom rapport across the various classes. The research goals
should be to begin to address concerns about ESL/EFL teacher personality and
rapport, learner proficiency levels and rapport, teacher personality and its effect on
the macroskill(s) taught, teacher experience and classroom rapport, job satisfaction
and teacher-student rapport, etc. Rapport is undoubtedly a necessary factor in
effective ESL/EFL teaching and answers to these concerns will improve language
instruction and acquisition.
Though I have chosen to base many of my conclusions on research done in
university classrooms and not ESL/EFL classrooms, I feel confident that the
following conclusions are correct or will be proved correct with future research:
First, creating rapport is on a continuum. There are elements for building rapport
that can be learned or taught and some that are innate or personality based. At the
far end of the learnable/teachable end of the continuum, teachers can take advantage
of a name game to improve rapport. On the other hand, an ability to empathize with
students and to read the subtle meanings of interpersonal communication is not likely
to be learnable, and is at the far end of the innate/personality side of the continuum.
Understanding how rapport changes throughout the course contains both learnable
and personality elements. Teachers can research and become familiar with this
change (a learnable element); whereas, an ability to recognize how student-teacher
rapport is evolving during the course is bound closely to teacher perception and
intuition (an innate element). Rapport building strategies, NLP techniques, applications
of reflective teaching, teacher personality and its effect on rapport, and teaching
approaches and methods all contain some learnable/teachable and personality/innate
elements. My intention is not to place these strategies, techniques, methods, etc. on
the continuum, but to assert that there are both learnable/teachable and personality/
innate elements in nearly all of them.
The implication then becomes clear: the more learnable/teachable a strategy or
research finding is, the easier it is for teachers to implement this strategy or finding
in class. If, however, the strategy or finding contains many elements that are
intuitive or closely intertwined with personality, the more difficult, perhaps
impossible, it becomes to implement that strategy or finding. My recommendation is
that beginner or below average teachers should immediately make use of the most
learnable/teachable elements of building rapport in their classroom. Then, as these
teachers develop and gain experience, become more comfortable addressing their
classes, and refine their teaching approach and method, they are better able to look
at how their personality affects rapport. Though many areas of personality are set
and may positively or negatively affect teacher-student relationships in particular
kinds of classes, understanding the types of personalities that succeed in specific
classes and the methods they use will allow teachers to modify their teaching
techniques and behaviors to generate rapport.

― 80 ―
 Second, forming positive relationships and building rapport with students is
integral to teacher development and student learning and should be included in
teacher training programs. As Bailey et al. (1996, p. 15) state:

It became clear . . . that the teacher factor in general was more important to
us [when we were] learners than were materials or methodology per se . . .
We find this contrast intriguing, given that methodology courses are
emphasized in language teacher education, and that the issue of teacher
personality, or style, is so little understood.

Similarly, Clarke et al. (1998a) demonstrate that highly effective teachers can use
distinctively different methods and teaching theories to produce comparable learning
results. Clarke et al. (1998b) suggest that teacher training courses should not be
organized solely around theories or methodology, but by the results teachers are
expected to produce. Therefore, Clarke et al. conclude, and I agree, that The
particulars of teaching must be understood in relationship to the multiple contexts
within which they occur" (p. 594-595). In other words, because teaching situations
differ noticeably, teacher training programs should not focus on theory and
methodology in the abstract, but should consider the contexts within which theory
and methodology are applied in ESL/EFL classrooms. Regarding rapport, we must
also consider the teaching context carefully. Rapport building strategies that work
well with adults may not work well with children. Researchers and teachers need to
test rapport building techniques and report their findings so others can apply the
techniques that are most likely to work in their particular contexts.
Like marrying theory and methodology to the desired results of ESL/EFL
classrooms, a strong emphasis on reflective teaching will also improve teacher
development. Conscientious teachers reflect on their teaching with an eye for
improvement. Teacher development should, therefore, include the techniques and
tools that are available to gather information about the teaching-learning processes.
We need to encourage teachers to use these tools and to revise their lessons for the
better based on the information gathered.
Teacher development must also include skills and strategies that effectively build
rapport. Ideally, teachers would have a clear understanding from research or practice
of which specific skills or strategies work best in particular teaching situations. We
should encourage teachers to publish the benefits of using rapport building strategies.
Action research would be helpful here.
A third conclusion is that master teachers in ESL/EFL do have certain innate
qualities or specific personality types that allow them to establish rapport and to
teach exceptionally well. According to Ur (1997), those teachers who lack some or
all of these qualities may never become good teachers, or only with the greatest

― 81 ―
difficulty" (p. 8). She explains further that people who are not naturally possessed"
of these qualities may not be able to acquire them. From personal observation as
well, you can just tell the teachers who have it." Their classes always seem to flow
smoothly; the students are actively engaged in learning; and, there seems to also be
what Brown (2001) calls classroom energy, which is perceivable only through a
sixth sense" (p. 203). These master teachers are also unique in their ability to foster
rapport in classes of widely varying numbers of students. Their personality is so
flexible that they can readily adapt to the demands created by the differences in the
number of students. The ability of master teachers to quickly establish and maintain
rapport with students, generate energy in the classroom, maximize student learning,
and adapt to the specific teaching situation is due in part to their innate qualities or
their ideally-suited teaching personalities.
The final conclusion answers the question at the beginning of the paper: If a
teacher lacks the ability to create rapport, can it be learned? I feel that the answer
is yes―but only up to a point. Many aspects of rapport can be learned or taught,
but some remain unlearnable. Some teachers are less-skilled in the classroom due in
large part to an inability to form relationships that precipitate learning. If these
teachers focus on generating rapport by utilizing strategies, reflective teaching or
other means, they can develop better teacher-student relationships. What is more,
aiming for improved relationships with the students and for better teaching in
general is inherently more rewarding than accepting mediocrity. As new or less-
skilled teachers improve their rapport with students and gain classroom experience
and wisdom, teaching becomes more rewarding and enjoyable. When teachers feel
rewarded and enjoy their classes, the motivation to teach increases, which will also
increase language acquisition in their students. These teachers will benefit from a
school environment where students and effective teaching are highly-valued and
where teacher-student rapport is emphasized. To paraphrase Lowman (1984), if
teachers make a conscious effort to improve rapport, and as a result their teaching,
and are in a supportive teaching environment, their scores on teacher evaluations
can go from well below average to well above average. Should these teachers who
have worked on building rapport lack the personality traits that are ideal in
ESL/EFL classrooms, then they are very unlikely to become master teachers. But, an
improvement in classroom rapport, no matter how small and regardless of the
current ability of the instructor, will enhance language acquisition. A work force of
teachers who share the goal of improving teacher-student rapport will optimize
teaching effectiveness, which in turn creates model classrooms for language
acquisition.
I would like to thank Neil Ryder for his proofreading assistance. I would also like
to thank Terri and W. R. Elliott for their capable and timely translation of the
English abstract into Japanese.

― 82 ―
 References

Bailey, K.M., Bergthold, B., Braunstein, B., Jagodzinski Fleischman, N., Holbrook, M. P.,
Tuman, J., Waissbluth, X., & Zambo, L. J. (1996). The language teacher's
autobiography: Examining the apprenticeship of observation". In Freeman &
Richards (Eds.) Teacher learning in language teaching (Chapter 1, pp. 11-29).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language
pedagogy (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
Clabby, J., O'Connor, R. (2004). Teaching learners to use mirroring: Rapport lessons
From neurolinguistic programming. Family medicine, 36 (8), 541-543.
Clarke, M. A., Davis, A., Rhodes, L. K., & Baker, E. (1998a). Lessons learned in
fourth-grade classrooms. The language teacher online 22.09. Retrieved November
26, 2004, from http://jalt-publications.org/tlt/files/98/sep/clarke.html
Clarke, M. A., Davis, A., Rhodes, L. K., & Baker, E. (1998b). Principles of collaboration
in school-university partnerships. TESOL Quarterly 32 (3), 593-600.
Fleming, N. (2003, October). Establishing rapport: personal interaction and learning.
Idea paper #39. Retrieved November, 26, 2004, from
http://www.idea.ksu.edu/papers/ Idea_Paper_39.pdf
Hawley, C. (1997). Building rapport with students. Center for Adolescent Studies.
Retrieved November 29, 2004, from
http://education.indiana.edu/cas/tt/v3i1/tips_st. html
Hilgemann, V., & Blodget, J. (1991). Profiles of excellent teachers: Summary of
research. Salem, OR: Chemeketa Community College. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED 353 017)
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis, pp. 1-4. New York: Longman.
Lowman, J. (1984). Mastering the techniques of teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lowman, J. (1995). Mastering the techniques of teaching (2nd ed.). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Merl, (n. d.). NLP Definition. Retrieved November 30, 2004, from
http://www.nlp.biz/NLP/Footer.htm
Murphy, J. M. (2001). Reflective teaching in ELT. In Celce-Murcia, M. (Ed.).
Teaching English as a second or foreign language, 3rd edition. (Unit V, 499-514).
Singapore: Heinle and Heinle.
Murray, H. G., Rushton, J. P., & Paunonen, S. V. (1990). Teacher personality traits
and student instructional ratings in six types of university courses. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 82 (2), 250-261.
Skye, J. (1998). Neuro-linguistic programming in the classroom. Available FTP:
hostname: kotesol.org Directory: pubs/proceedings/1998/skye.pdf

― 83 ―
Ur, P. (1997). Are teachers born or made? In Grundy (ed.) IATEFL 1997 Edinburgh
conference selections, pp. 1-8, IATEFL Publications.
Wankat, P., & Oreovicz, F. (1998, November). Building better rapport. Retrieved
November 26, 2004, from
http://www.asee.org/about/publications/prism/nov98teaching.cfm

― 84 ―
 Rapport and ESL / EFL Classrooms

The following paper addresses the role of rapport in ESL/EFL classrooms and its
implications for teaching. This research asserts teacher and student rapport is
formed from both learnable strategies and from more innate qualities of individual
instructors. Improving rapport, its influence in the classroom, and its role in teacher
development are explored. Finally, forays into further research on the subject of
rapport are suggested.

ESL / EFL 教室における相互理解

次の論文は ESL/EFL 教室での相互理解と授業の影響について述べる｡ この研究は教員

と学生の相互理解が､ その獲得手法及び個々の教員の生来の質によって形成されるといえ
る｡ 相互理解の改善､ 教室での影響力そして教員の改良の役割が探求される｡ 最後に､ 相
互理解問題における更なる研究を提案する｡

― 85 ―