The Effectiveness of an Engaging Program to Reduce Saudi Female University EFL Students’ Foreign Language Anxiety and to Enhance Their Motivation to Learn English at Taif University

Teaching a language is a complex but interesting process. It involves teacher, learner, curriculum, and learning environment. Also this process is affected by certain social, cultural and psychological factors. This study is aimed at investigating the effectiveness of a proposed program for developing EFL learners’ engagement in learning English. The sample of this study consisted of 103 females (M = 19.260, SD = 0.876 years), it was divided into two groups; the experimental group consisted of 53 girls and the control group consisted of 50 girls. Students’ engagement was measured by the Handelsaman, Briggs, Sullivan, and Towler (2005) questionnaire, while their foreign language anxiety was measured by the Horwitz, Horwitz and Cope (1986) questionnaire. Students’ motivation was measured by Gardner’s (1985) Attitude and Motivation Test Battery (AMTB). The research applied continued for three months which included the proposed program. The data proved that there were statistically significant differences between the experimental group and the control group on the post-test of the engagement questionnaire, the foreign language anxiety scale as well as the students’ motivation dimensions, showing a significant increase in students’ engagement and motivation in favor of the experimental group. The findings also indicated that there were statistically significant differences between the pre-test and post-test results for the experimental group on the students’ engagement and motivation. This shows that the experimental group had an increase in skills after having participated in the program as seen on the post-test. In light of these results, the study provides a number of procedural recommendations that may contribute to raising the degree of the importance of students’ engagement and motivation training for the students with foreign language anxiety. The paper concludes that more training should be given in using all engagement activities by embedding them in regular classroom activities. Suggestions are offered for future research.


Introduction
As an educator, the researcher has researched the web and asked our colleagues for ideas on how to engage students while at the same time, the teachers have little access to extra materials and resources.This paper explores ideas for student engagement which require little or no materials, but create effective learning environments through student engagement.Instead of students memorizing or repeating, students learn through experience, even if it is just in the classroom.One example is a simple learning activity.Let's say the students are studying a unit on holidays.The teacher calls out for the next letter of the alphabet, students say J for example and then the students shout out all the words they know starting with the letter J having to do with holidays.The teacher writes all the words on the board.This is a really fun activity and the students build their vocabulary.Another method is storytelling-that is story telling by both the teacher and the students.The students become engaged when hearing stories of another country or culture from the teacher.Student storytelling is a way to teach about past tense phrases and words, such as would or used to.How can we measure effective results from this method of teaching?We can use the traditional methods of diagnostic, testing, observation, and monitoring.The key is being interactive with the students so that they are participating and active.The days of "teacher in front of the class and the students sit and listen" are fast becoming "old school".
The researcher thinks that student engagement depends a great deal on teacher engagement as sort of contagious.It is a lot like trying to convince someone of something you do not believe yourself.Feeling a connection to the teacher, knowing the purpose of what they are doing in class, variety are classroom practices that can get students engaged!If the topic isn't relevant, it's unlikely to be of interest to the student no matter how many times you tell them it should be.

EFL Students' Engagement in Large Classes
There is a tendency across educational scholars that poor engagement with the classroom practices translates into reduced learning and performance (Wang, Bergin, & Bergin, 2014).Engagement can be described in various ways.Class engagement refers to active involvement of students to the learning processes (Christenson, Reschly, & Wylie, 2012).Malone (1981) defined also engagement as an exciting and enjoyable state of mind in which attention is willingly given and held.For most researchers, "engagement" entails some kind of mindfulness, cognitive effort and deep processing of new information (Salomon & Globerson, 1987).Common in these varied views on engagement is that engaging activities are intrinsically enjoyable, i.e., the activity is performed for intrinsic rewards and is not performed for extrinsic rewards (Deci & Ryan, 2000).A recent definition of student engagement includes behavioral, emotional, and cognitive components (Fredricks, McCloskey, Meli, Mordica, Montrosse, & Mooney, 2011) in addition to feelings of belonging, enjoyment, and attachment.
Studies concerning classroom engagement carry on the discussion over three major axes.Those are affective engagement, cognitive engagement and behavioral engagement (Wang et al., 2014).Sometimes, the fourth dimensions could be added to these major three, that is, agency (Reeve, 2013).In the classroom, emotional or affective engagement corresponds to the positive feelings of students such as interest, excitement and amusement.Cognitive engagement refers to the accompanying processes such as meaningful-processing, strategy use, concentration and metacognition.Behavioral engagement refers to the observable behaviors such as asking questions, being active in team-works and completing tasks on time (Skinner, Kindermann, & Furrer, 2009).
Research findings revealed that teachers of large classes encounter difficulties in getting their students involved in the learning process.In other words, large class size offers very limited opportunities to students to participate in classroom activities.The choice of the instructional technique the teacher uses can reveal an impediment to students' involvement in their learning process.For instance in Haiti, according to Renaud, Tannenbaum and Stantial (2007) "the educational system is traditionally based almost solely on rote learning and the classroom is a highly competitive place, therefore, convincing students of the necessity of working cooperatively with their peers is not an easy task" (p.14).This implies that students in that context are more interested in showing their teacher how better they personally constructed the knowledge taught to them.Therefore, the idea of sharing their knowledge with their peers is seen as giving ground to a rival to beat you.
According to Csikszentimihalyi (1997), when learners are involved in an activity that has a balance of challenge and skill, they are more inclined to take risks and become engaged.The freedom that comes from a balance of challenge and skill is what allows learners to immerse deeply enough into an activity to lose sense of time and space.Student engagement in learning is not only an end in itself but it is also a means to the end of students achieving sound academic outcomes (Russell, Ainley, & Frydenberg, 2005;Ryan & Deci, 2009).

Engagement and Achievement
In the process of English teaching, teachers should pay more attention to establishing certain relationship with their students.A harmonious and pleasant climate in the classroom can help to reduce the anxiety of students, maintain the focus of students when learning English and form emotional bonds between students and teachers at the same time.Teachers can create in the classroom a welcoming and relaxing place where psychological needs are met and language anxiety is kept to a minimum (Oxford & Shearin, 1994).According to Gage and Berliner (1991), students learn best in a non-threatening environment.This is one area where humanistic educators have had an impact on current educational practice.The orientation espoused today is that the environment should be psychologically and emotionally, as well as physically, non-threatening.
Student engagement has been proposed as a useful construct in seeking effective ways to address student boredom, disaffection, and disengagement.Engagement has been positively linked with achievement outcomes such as standardized test scores and grades across primary and secondary levels (Skinner, Wellborn, & Connell, 1990;Marks, 2000;Nako, 2015).Finn (1993) and Kahraman (2014) found a strong linear association between engagement and achievement.Engaged students seem to learn more, retain more, and enjoy school activities more than their disengaged peers (Akey, 2006).Furthermore, school engagement is useful because the attitudes and behaviors associated with engagement seem to be relatively malleable, that is, sensitive to changes in students and/or the classroom environment (Fredricks, Blumenfield, & Paris, 2004).
Being actively engaged in a learning activity has repeatedly been shown to be beneficial for learning (Price, Rogers, Scaife, Stanton, & Neale, 2003).Engagement comprises cognitive engagement, which involves attention to the activity and concentration and promotes "useful" learning (Stoney & Oliver, 1999).In conclusion, the study showed that more engaged students demonstrated higher academic achievement (Sbrocco, 2009).In the same line it was found that decline in student engagement statistically correlates to decreased student achievement (Cano, 2015).Students' lack of engagement hinders their ability to solve complex problems, communicate well with others, and think abstractly.Contrary to the extensive student engagement literature in developed countries, student engagement in out-of-class peer learning and extensive reading did not make any meaningful impacts on student achievement in the present study (Heng, 2014).Skinner and Belmont (1993) defined motivation as the cognitive, emotional, and behavioral indicators of students' investment in and attachment to education.Researchers, parents, and educators recognize the need for students to be motivated, whether in Grade 1 or in college; however, they disagree over what affects student motivation (Anderman & Anderman, 2009).Educators need to understand what motivation is and what motivates students in the classroom (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002).It is well acknowledged that motivation is very crucial in language learning as Dornyei (1998) mentioned that motivation has been widely accepted by both teachers and researchers as one of the key factors that influence the rate and success of second foreign language learning.Motivation provides the primary impetus to initiate learning the foreign language and later the driving force to sustain the long and often tedious learning process.Therefore, in class teachers should give their priority to motivation.Students will learn from their experience and keep developing their full potential.Otherwise, classroom realities increasingly ask awareness to an overlooked aspect, i.e., the motivational needs from teachers, since teachers' motivation has direct influence on students' language learning efficiency.However, ways to motivate language teachers take little amount of research but it will broaden the research area (Xu & Huang, 2010).

Engagement and Motivation in English Teaching Process
Learner engagement influences student interest and motivation, leading to increased performance and higher school achievement (Goodenow, 1992).Huang and Waxman (1996) added that achievement motivation is "the extent to which students feel the intrinsic desire to succeed…" (p.211).Students who are engaged in learning because they like it and not because they want to get good grades tend to stay with challenging tasks for longer periods of time and use more complex learning strategies than those who learn primarily to get good grades.Advanced readers showed stronger relations of motivation and engagement with achievement than struggling readers.However, motivation predicted concurrent engagement and growth in engagement similarly for struggling and advanced readers (Klauda & Guthrie, 2015).

Engagement and College Students' Anxiety
Research has indicated that college students experience various levels of anxiety and frustration that range from understanding assignments, completing assignments because of excessive course workload, to personal family-related issues (Ong & Cheong, 2009;Ratanasiripong, Sverduk, Hayashino, & Prince, 2010).In addition to anxiety among college students, the literature indicated that college students experienced a great amount of fear of test taking (Economides & Moridis, 2008), fear of statistics (Onwuegbuzie & Wilson, 2003;Williams, 2010), and fear of presentations in a college setting (Elliot & Chong, 2005).The American Psychological Association (2014) defined anxiety as an emotion characterized by feelings of tension, worried thoughts and physical changes like increased blood pressure.Peters Mayer (2008) defined anxiety as a state of intense agitation, tension, or dread occurring from a perceived threat of danger.
These fears can lead students to believe they will fail even though they have the intellectual level to succeed.The results of the study (Sharifrazi, 2012) conveyed changes in student anxiety from the experimental group who used the engagement program as an intervention.They believed that the engagement program helped them significantly decrease their frustration and anxiety.Igbaria and Parasuraman (1989) suggested the importance of training for the students to alleviate their anxiety.

Statement of the Problem
The National Research Council and Institute of Medicine found that large numbers of American students are not fully engaged intellectually in the teaching and learning enterprise (Marks, 2000).During my professional career as an educator, the researcher was consistently confronted with the problem of how to excite student interest and maintain student engagement in the learning process.When the learning process was initiated, it resulted in a learning experience.Desiring to catch initial learner interest, researcher developed some of warm-up activities that were sufficient to attract the interest and curiosity of even the hardest-to-reach students.This researcher discovered that sustaining student engagement and extending that engagement to self-sustaining motivation for deeper learning, however, required a different set of skills.So this is the reason that an engagement program needs to be devised because if the students see no personal relevance in the invitation to learn in the learning process, they will shut down, withdraw, or show signs of distraction.
Educators recognize the need to extend students' engagement.As it is known that making students engaged in class activities is so important as in order to help the students, especially EFL students, increase their achievement and enjoy learning, and in addition, helping the students to reduce their English learning anxiety and absolutely increase their motivation.Choosing tasks that are inherently engaging provides manageable challenges for learners (Malone, 1981).Further.It is widely recognized that students who experience anxiety are less academically successful (Ismail, 2011) and display lower rates of motivation and engagement (Klauda & Guthrie, 2015).
The specific problem is that administrators and professors are not able to identify the factors that motivate college students to engage in their studies, experience academic success, and graduate (Gregory, 2005;Hancock, 2002;Payne, 1999).Creating a learning environment that will motivate students might not be possible if administrators and professors do not have a clear indication of which motivation factors help create a positive classroom experience for students.
Yes the teacher is mostly responsible for helping students to engage.I feel that identifying with the students and helping them to see why what is being learnt is important is key.Everything should be related to the big picture and I always say to my students "if you don't think this is important, then let's not study that..." I ask them what the relevance is of everything we are doing in class.I also try to take a genuine interest in why they are studying and in them as people.A human and approachable teacher with personality makes all the difference.

Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to investigate to what extent the use of the engagement program assisted graduate students with alleviating frustration and stress and increasing their motivation when attending their classes.

Study Importance
The importance of this study emerges in several ways.First, it studies the effectiveness of the engagement training program on increasing students' motivation and on reducing the students' anxiety.Second, it is supposed that it may contribute to a larger body of knowledge related to feedback about classroom motivation.Third, it extends learner engagement and helps the students to become more motivated.Forth, it improves English learner's achievement.Lastly, the researcher believes that the results of this experimental research may provide practical information to teachers in formal educational settings.

This study addresses the following hypotheses:
1) There are significant differences between the experimental group scores and the control group scores on the post-tests of engagement, foreign language anxiety and motivation.
2) There are significant differences between the mean scores of the pre-and post-tests of engagement, foreign language anxiety and motivation for the experimental group.
3) There are no significant differences between the mean scores of the post-tests and follow up of engagement, foreign language anxiety and motivation for the experimental group.

The Pilot Study
First, twenty EFL students studying at Taif University participated in the pre-pilot testing of the two questionnaires to ensure that the terminology and intent of each question were understood by every respondent and to solicit suggestions to improve the questionnaire.And also the pre-pilot testing served to identify possible problems that might occur when the questionnaire was administered to the larger group of students participating in the study.In addition to completing the instruments, participants were interviewed and they gave their feedback about the instruments.Then the instruments were revised based upon the feedback provided by the students before they were distributed to the participants of the study.
Thirty-eight students were randomly chosen from the EFL preparatory non-English major students, second level, for the pilot study to determine the amount of time required to complete the questionnaire.Their ages range from 18 to 22 years old, M = 18.96,SD = 0.77.All of them were Saudis.

Participants
The participants in this study included 103 female undergraduate non-English major students.Participants ranged in age from 18-22 years with a mean of (M = 19.260,SD = 0.876).It was thus assumed that the participants in this study would provide a homogeneous sample in terms of their cultural environment and instructional input.The 51 students who participated were second level scientific students.They were randomly selected and randomly assigned a treatment group.The dependent variables were learner engagement and learner motivation.The independent variable was the training program.

Student Motivation Questionnaire
Participants in this study were asked to anonymously fill out three questionnaires, which respectively investigated their motivation concerning learning English, their engagement to learn in learning English and classroom language learning anxiety.The survey questionnaires are listed in Appendixes A-B.
The questionnaire, "Student Motivation Questionnaire", had a total of 33 items.It was adapted from Gardner's (1985) Attitude and Motivation Test Battery (AMTB), which is the most authoritative and reliable tool to assess students' language learning motivation so far and has been widely used in numerous studies on student motivation.The questionnaire was translated into Arabic as the students are Arabic native speakers.To make sure that the translation of the questionnaire was correct, it was sent to some bilingual experts in the English department and then to some experts in the Arabic Department.Part I had twelve items, and it aimed to investigate students' learning motivation inside class.Part II had nine items and it aimed to explore students' learning motivation outside class.Some specific, self-designed questions were incorporated in Part III to better investigate students' learning motivation in using the Web and the computer to do English assignments which had twelve items.
All the three questionnaires (Engagement, Motivation and Foreign Language Anxiety) were three and five-point Likert-scale items answered by the participants according to the actual performance in their English learning.To ensure that the participants totally understood the survey items, the questionnaires were distributed in Arabic.In this study, the translation was done by researcher.See Appendixes A, B and C.

Item validity and internal consistency for the motivation questionnaire in the current study:
The corrected item-total correlation ranged from 0.321 to 0.618 (p < 0.01), suggesting adequate item validity.While for the corrected item-Subscale 1 (class motivation) correlation ranged from 0.301 to 0.553 (p < 0.01), but for the Subscale 2 (participants' lack of confidence in their English study) correlation ranged from 0.311 to 0.545 (p < 0.01), but for the Subscale 3 (participants' motivation towards the web-based CALL program) correlation ranged from 0.355 to 0.652 (p < 0.01), suggesting adequate item validity.

Item validity and internal consistency for the Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale in the current study:
The corrected item-total correlation ranged from 0.364 to 0.762 (p < 0.01), suggesting adequate item validity.While for the corrected item-Subscale 1 (communication apprehension) correlation ranged from 0.331 to 0.623 (p < 0.01), but for the Subscale 2 (text anxiety) correlation ranged from 0.352 to 0.713 (p < 0.01), and for the Subscale 3 (fear of negative evaluation) correlation ranged from 0.504 to 0.661 (p < 0.01), suggesting adequate item validity.

Students' Engagement Questionnaire
The researcher modified the Engagement Questionnaire that was used in the Handelsaman et al. (2005) study on assessing American (Colorado) students' language learning engagement.Participants completed the 23-item questionnaire that assessed the engagement of the students that related to their learning of English.Principal components analysis, followed by varimax rotation, yielded a four-factor solution.These four factors together included 21 of the 23 items.Two items were deleted: 13 & 20.Items (1-9) concern the students' skills engagement about learning English; items (10-14) represent the emotional engagement about learning English; items (15-20) represent the students' participation in the classroom for learning English; items (21-23) deal with the students' performance about the English language.Students answered each item statement using a 5-point Likert-scale that ranged from 1 (Not at all characteristic of me) through 5 (Very characteristic of me).

Psychometric conditions of the engagement questionnaire in the current research Item validity and internal consistency for the engagement questionnaire in the current study:
The corrected item-total correlation ranged from 0.351 to 0.714 (p < 0.01), suggesting adequate item validity.While for the corrected item-Subscale 1 (skills engagement) correlation ranged from 0.362 to 0.613 (p < 0.01), but for the Subscale 2 (Emotional engagement) correlation ranged from 0.556 to 0.667 (p < 0.01), but for the Subscale 3 (participation/interaction engagement) correlation ranged from 0.355 to 0.609 (p < 0.01), and for the Subscale 4 (performance engagement) correlation ranged from 0.446 to 0.695 (p < 0.01), suggesting adequate item validity.

The Engagement Program
This program was designed and developed based on the acknowledgement in literature of a need for a program to assist under-graduate students in alleviating their frustration and anxiety and increasing their motivation.The engagement program is comprised of learning activities, drawing, writing on the board, exercises and educational videos that help the students to be engaged in the learning process.These tools were designed to alleviate students' anxiety and to increase the students' motivation.The program is consisted of twenty sessions; two sessions weekly, ten weeks in the semester.This program was developed by this researcher to assist students to understand more clearly how tools can support them in communicating with their instructor and classmates, and achieving the maximum benefits of their English course.The first session of the program included a welcoming comment and an introduction to the program.In the rest of the sessions the students' collaborated and engaged in group activities in selected small groups which were intended to focus on spontaneous brainstorming or gathering of old sayings or other activities meant to make learning English more fun and thus with less anxiety as this program provides a much higher focus on teamwork.In addition, the researcher gave some extra activities that required the students to give personal details, such as talk about the jobs of people in their families or to teach the students the past tense, the researcher asked them to talk about what did they did last weekend.Toward the end of week ten, before the course ended, students in both groups were given the post-tests.The post-tests were distributed to determine whether there were any changes in students' anxiety and their motivation.The program was evaluated through the pre-tests and post-tests, through the comparison between the experimental and control groups scores and also through the follow up in increasing their motivation and reducing their English language anxiety one month after stopping the program.

Results
Table 1.The differences between the mean scores of the pre-tests for the experimental and the control group on the motivation questionnaire and its factors As shown in Table 1, that there are no differences between the experimental and control groups on pre-test on the motivation factors and the total score.This result was shown in all subscales and in the total score of motivation.Table 2 shows that there are no differences between the control and experimental groups on anxiety questionnaire and its factors on the pre-tests.This result was shown in all subscales and in the total score of anxiety.Table 3 shows that there are no differences between the control and experimental groups on engagement questionnaire and its factors on the pre-tests.This result was shown in all subscales and in the total score of engagement.The reason for this might be that the two groups had not started the program yet.  4 indicates that there are significant differences between the control and experimental groups on the motivation questionnaire and its factors on the pre-tests.This means that the students' level was different than on the pre-tests where many students reported being unmotivated taking the English course, to the post-tests, where most reported being motivated.Therefore, there was a general increase in students' motivation level found in the post-tests results.This result was shown in all subscales and in the total score of motivation.This researcher explains that the positive results of the experimental group are due to the effects of the program which include a lot of engagement activities that the students share with each other.Table 5 shows that there are significant differences between the control and experimental groups on the engagement questionnaire and its factors on the pre-tests.This result was shown in all subscales and in the total score of engagement.The reason for this change among both groups may be that the control group was not involved in the program, while the experimental group experienced the program which has caused the change in the engagement process.Table 6 shows that there are significant differences between the control and experimental groups on the anxiety questionnaire and its factors on the pre-tests.This result was shown in all subscales and in the total score of anxiety.Overall, students' anxiety level decreased on the 53 post-test results.Therefore, after the course and exposure to the engagement program for the experimental group, on the post-test, students' anxiety level decreased and students felt less anxious.In Table 7 the data shows that there are differences between the mean scores of the pre-and post-tests of engagement subscales for the experimental group.As for the engagement questionnaire, the total score was (t(53) = 5.510, with effect size = 0.37, p < 0.001).These differences can be explained according to the perceived importance to the students of engagement and of its training, as well as showing the teaching style that the researcher follows during the program.Table 8 shows that there are significant differences between the control and experimental groups on the motivation questionnaire and its factors on the pre-tests.This result was shown in all subscales and in the total score of motivation.As for the motivation questionnaire, the total score was (t(53) = 6.101, with effect size = 0.42, p < 0.001).These results showed that motivation is playing an important role to the learning process and to the importance of the engaging training program.9 indicates that there are differences between the pre-tests and the post-tests on the language anxiety and its subscales in favor of the pre-tests on the experimental group.As for the motivation questionnaire, the total score was (t(53) = 2.771, with effect size (ES) = 0.13, p < 0.001).These results demonstrated that anxiety is playing an important part in the learning process that can misguide the students if they have a high rate of anxiety and to affect negatively on their academic achievement and this also showed the importance of the engagement training program that reduce the anxiety level of the experimental group.Table 11 shows that there are no differences between the post-tests and follow up on the motivation questionnaire.This finding was shown in all subscales and in the total score of motivation.The Table 12 shows that there are no differences between the post-tests and follow up on the foreign language anxiety questionnaire.

Discussion
This study discussed the development of an engagement program as a tool to help decrease students' anxiety and to increase their motivation to learn the English language.The main purpose of the present study was to investigate the effect of a program based on engagement tasks to increase the college students' motivation and to reduce the students' foreign language anxiety.The results of the present study proved that there are statically significant differences between the mean scores of the experimental group in each of the pre-and post-test administration and the control group in favor of the experimental group.The results of the present study indicated that engagement training program helped to increase the students' motivation and to lessen their foreign language anxiety, because activities encouraged students to interact freely using the target language.In that case of engagement training offers unique contributions to the students' motivation development.The findings of the current study supported earlier research of (Goodenow, 1992) and Huang and Waxman (1996) which showed that students who are engaged in learning because they like it and not because they want to get good grades tend to stay with challenging tasks for longer periods of time and use more complex learning strategies than those who learn primarily to get good grades.
With respect to the first research hypothesis results showed that differences would be found between the means of the experimental group and the control group on the post-tests of engagement, foreign language anxiety and motivation which confirmed the validity of the first hypothesis; the mean of experimental group was higher than the control group.This result is consistent with the results of many studies (e.g., Renaud et al., 2007;Csikszentimihalyi, 1997) which confirmed that when learners are involved in an activity that has a balance of challenge and skill, they are more inclined to take risks and become engaged.(Connell & Wellborn, 1991;Finn 1993;Marks, 2000;Akey, 2006) asserted that the significant relationship between engagement and motivation has a positive impact on achievement.Furthermore, school engagement is useful because the attitudes and behaviors associated with engagement seem to be relatively malleable, that is, sensitive to changes in students and/or the classroom environment (Fredricks et al., 2004).This means that the engagement program is a necessity for students with higher rates of anxiety and less motivation.
With respect to the second hypothesis, the findings indicated that there are significant differences between the mean scores of the pre-and post-tests of engagement, foreign language anxiety and motivation for the experimental group.This result is consistent with the results of (Archambault, Janosz, Fallu, & Pagani, 2009;Willms, Friesen, & Milton, 2009;Boekaerts, 2010;Hinton & Fischer, 2010) that indicated that people learn best when trying to do things that are challenging and of deep interest to them.This result is consistent with the results of (Schlechty, 2002(Schlechty, , 2011;;Saeed & Zyngier, 2012) that stated students who indicated that their motivation type was either intrinsic or integrated regulated motivation also demonstrated that they were authentically engaged in their education.It also goes in line with the findings of (Zyngier, 2011) who indicated that intrinsic motivation assisted authentic student engagement in learning.Not only that, but this hypothesis agrees with results of the study (Sharifrazi, 2012) which affirmed that conveyed changes in student anxiety from the experimental group who used the engagement program as an intervention.Igbaria and Parasuraman (1989) suggested also the importance of training for the students to alleviate their anxiety.
The third research hypothesis revealed that there are no significant differences between the mean scores of the post-tests and follow up of engagement, foreign language anxiety and motivation for the experimental group which was administered a month after the first post-test on the engagement, foreign language anxiety and motivation.Many studies asserted that students make good progress in motivation and their foreign language anxiety was reduced when they have good engagement training (e.g., Igbaria & Parasuraman, 1989;Sharifrazi, 2012).
In short, an engagement training program is important and of great interest to students, at any level, with low motivation and high anxious rate.This facilitates the process of acquiring the English language.The current findings support previous literature that has suggested that students who are highly engaged in the learning process have good achievement (e.g., Connell & Wellborn, 1991;Finn, 1993;Marks, 2000;Akey, 2006).

Conclusion
Engaged students perform exceptionally well in their achievement.The present study revealed that students' motivation can enhance their engagement which will lead them to good achievement.Furthermore, low level of students' anxiety can affect positively on their engagement and achievement.
At the end of the program, an exciting learning environment began to emerge in the class.Students found interest in topics, set personal goals for learning, and developed skills to meet those goals.Most importantly, they expressed enjoyment in the process of learning, became less anxious and more motivated.So teachers should know how to and are responsible for the design of such academic activities which will authentically and productively engage students in their learning.
In short, this study highlights the importance of promoting the engagement program of students in the classroom in an effort to improve students' achievement, increase their motivation and to reduce their foreign language anxiety.Alvarez ( 2002), states that if students are not engaged when doing academic tasks, then they may acquire only a very small amount of knowledge because engaged students are prepared to take a personal risk or chance in the learning task.

Further Research on the Students' Engagement
Based on the success of the engagement program in the current study, it is recommended that all classes have the opportunity to apply an engagement program in the courses.This study focused on the three constructs: students' engagement, motivation and foreign language anxiety.More research needs to be conducted in this area to research how an engagement program affects students in other universities.Expanding the engagement program to other universities may assist students in other departments with decreasing their anxiety and increasing their motivation in attending class courses.
Previous studies demonstrated that motivation had strong relationship with students' engagement.This study is a good attempt to investigate the relationships among these three constructs -motivation, engagement and anxiety.

Table 2 .
The differences between the mean scores of the pre-tests for the experimental and the control group on the anxiety scale and its factors

Table 3 .
The differences between the mean scores of the pre-tests for the experimental and the control group on the engagement scale and its factors

Table 4 .
The differences between the experimental group scores and the control group scores on the post-tests of motivation

Table 5 .
The differences between the experimental group scores and the control group scores on the post-tests of engagement

Table 6 .
The differences between the experimental group scores and the control group scores on the post-tests of foreign language anxiety

Table 7 .
The differences between the mean scores of the pre-and post-tests of engagement for the experimental group

Table 8 .
The differences between the mean scores of the pre-and post-tests of motivation for the experimental group

Table 9 .
The differences between the mean scores of the pre-and post-tests of EFL students' anxiety for the experiment

Table 10 .
The differences between the post-tests and follow up on the engagement questionnaire In Table10the study reveals that there are no statistically significant differences between the first post-test and the second (follow up) post-test which was administered a month after the first post-test on engagement.And this shows that the effects of the engagement training program continued and has a great benefit to learners.

Table 11 .
The differences between the mean scores of the post-tests and follow up of motivation

Table 12 .
The differences between the post tests and follow up on the foreign language anxiety questionnaire