22 Celtic: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature and Linguistics Vol. 8, No. 1, June 2021 http://ejournal.umm.ac.id/index.php/celtic/index BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION STUDENTS’ ANXIETY IN SPEAKING SKILL PRACTICE Fu’ad Sholikhi* Universitas Islam Balitar, Indonesia ABSTRACT Speaking anxiety is a feeling of fear about what is to come when speaking. Students' conditions may trigger excessive anxiety that can make students struggle to move and speak in front of the public. The purposes of this study are to determine the level of business administration students’ speaking anxiety at UNISBA Blitar and to investigate the most dominant speaking anxiety in ESP class. This study utilizes descriptive quantitative with thirty-three questionnaires as a research instrument distributed to second-semester of Business Administration students of UNISBA. The questionnaires were then analyzed and categorized into responses and speaking anxiety levels. Once the data of Business Administration students’ speaking anxiety level had been collected, the researcher calculated the average and the percentage of the data and categorized them into three types of speaking anxiety in the classroom. In addition, the researcher utilized a five-point Likert scale, discovering two students experienced an anxiety level, three students experienced a relaxed level, and twenty-five students were mildly anxious. The most dominant speaking anxiety type was Test Anxiety with a total of 450 items (45.45%), followed by Communication Apprehension (33.34%), and students’ fear of negative evaluation as the lowest (21.21%). In the end, the future researcher interested in conducting similar research about speaking anxiety is expected to use a different number of participants and research methodology to enrich the knowledge about speaking anxiety in higher education. Keywords: English Speaking Skill; Students’ Speaking Anxiety; Types of Speaking Anxiety ABSTRAK Kecemasan dalam berbicara adalah sebuah bayang-bayang rasa takut ketika berbicara. Kondisi murid yang lagi stress akan menimbulkan kecemasan berlebihan yang dapat membuat murid sulit untuk berbicara dan bergerak. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk menentukan level ketakutan berbicara dari murid administrasi bisnis dan untuk mengetahui tipe kecemasan berbicara Bahasa sing yang paling dominan di kelas ESP atau kelas Bahasa Inggris untuk jurusan bukan Bahasa Inggris. Penelitian ini menggunakan metodologi penelitian kuantitatif dengan menggunakan 33 kuesioner sebagai instrument penelitian. Kuesioner tersebut kemudian dianalisa oleh peneliti untuk dikategorikan menjadi kategori tingkat kecemasan dan persepsi dari 30 murid semester dua dalam kelas berbahasa asing. Data yang diperoleh dari proses tersebut kemudian dicari rata-ratanya dan persentasinya yang akhirnya dikategorikan dalam kategori jenis-jenis pengaruh dalam kecemasan berbahasa asing. Lebih lanjut, penelitian ini mendapati ada 2 murid yang termasuk dalam kategori cemas, 3 murid masuk dalam kategori cemas jika ada ujian mengenai berbicara, dan selebihnya atau 25 murid termasuk dalam kategori agak kecemasan atau kecemasan yang terkendali. Tipe kecemasan paling berpengaruh adalah kategori kecemasan akan ujian berbicara Bahasa asing atau mendapati 45.45%, diikuti dengan kategori kecemasan berbicara atau 33.34%, dan yang paling kecil dominasinya adalah kategori kecemasan terhadap komentar yang negatif atau 21.21%. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian ini, peneliti yang melakukan peneltiain serupa diharapakan untuk merevisi jumlah peserta atau murid dan cara melakukan penelitiannya untuk memperkaya khasanah keilmuan dibidang yang serupa di tingkatan perkuliahan atau Pendidikan setelah sekolah menengah atas. Kata Kunci: Jenis-jenis Kecemasan; Berbicara dalam Bahasa Asing; Kemampuan Berbicara Bahasa Inggris E-ISSN: 2621-9158 P-ISSN:2356-0401 *Correspondence: fuad.sholiki@gmail.com Submitted: 2 November 2020 Approved: 22 May 2021 Published: 25 June 2021 Citation: Sholikhi, F. (2021). Business Administration Students’ Anxiety in Speaking Skill Practice. Celtic: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature and Linguistics, 8(1), 22-32. Doi: 10.22219/celtic.v8i1.14132 Celtic: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature and Linguistics Vol. 8, No. 1, June 2021 http://ejournal.umm.ac.id/index.php/celtic/index 23 INTRODUCTION Speaking is an expression of someone’s feelings. The ability to master English speaking is crucial for higher education students because speaking is not only talking to someone else but also conveying messages. Understanding oral language is necessary as it leads students to have better speaking skills to share information (Komariah et al., 2020). Students require experience and practices to deliver ideas properly so that they can have the ability to speak interactively (J & Fajar, 2019). Nowadays, speaking is a symbol of educated people, and it is one of the keys to having a better carer in the modern era. Speaking is a spear for politicians because they have to convey their followers to build strength in the group. Speaking is a daily necessity used by politicians to achieve their goals (Thornbury, 2005). While for Business Administration students, English Speaking could affect social interaction, such as cooperation, exchange, and competition in the classroom. In addition, spoken language will involve students in daily communication (Goh & Burns, 2012). Speaking skills are essential for Business Administration students at Balitar Islamic University. It could lead them to perform well in public (educational and career), especially in marketing. Moreover, speaking skills related to conveying speech and speaking activities strongly relate to speaking performance (Ngatmini & Fatimah, 2019). In higher education (for example, communication students at Balitar Islamic University), the students learn many things related to speaking skills that will support their careers. The university students will learn a functional language, and horizontal and vertical communication are the best speaking skills in higher education (Ngatmini & Fatimah, 2019). For EFL students, speaking skills are essential to gain jobs and to work abroad. However, speaking is not an easy task because the students should know the foundations of speaking, such as pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary. Most students use mother-tongue in English speaking rather than use the foundations of the target language. Speaking is a complex language requiring clear pronunciation and intonation (Renandya & Widodo, 2016). To overcome speaking problems in higher education is by acknowledging students’ failure in speaking. Mayangta (2013) argues that English speaking is an essential skill to master because it will lead to a better career, but in reality, the students face various problems such as productive skills and receptive skills. The lecturers need to exploit the students’ strengths to provide proper materials and teaching strategies. Teachers can support English speaking by using students’ strengths (Renandya & Widodo, 2016). According to Horwitz et al. (1986), a mental block issue in learning a foreign language and preparation is the best way to overcome it. Horwitz et al. (1986) emphasize a relationship between anxiety and achievement in speaking because the student will experience anxiety at various levels. According to Abderrezzag (2010), anxiety is mental preparation for danger. So, speaking anxiety needs the lecturer’s attention to reduce their anxiety. Anxiety is nervousness (Horwitz et al., 1986). Therefore, students may experience sweating palms and a shaky voice in speaking (for example, delivering a speech in front of a class). If there is speaking anxiety, the students will struggle to talk. In reality, most students will experience speaking anxiety in speaking performance, and it is impossible to eliminate speaking anxiety. So, the students have to use this kind of phenomenon to their advantage. Foreign language classroom Fu’ad Sholikhi Business Administration Students’ Anxiety in Speaking Skill Practice 24 anxiety is the number one enemy of EFL learners (Gawi, 2020). Gawi (2020) states that teachers play an important role in the classroom because teachers' behaviors will affect students’ performance (speaking anxiety). In the end, the teacher can turn the students’ weaknesses into the students’ strengths. The lecturer may use visual aid during the lecturing to reduce speaking anxiety (Limantoro, 2014). Anxiety can negatively affect the performance of Business Administration at UNISBA (Balitar Islamic University), mainly in ESP Speaking class. Excessive anxiety is the reason why students are unable to do anything in front of the public (Damayanti & Listyani, 2020). However, speaking anxiety is normal. Angellia (2019) states anxiety is a normal state and is not a disease. The students and lecturers in a university should be aware of foreign language learning anxiety. It is a unique and complex behavior related to language learning. These beliefs cannot disappear easily (Horwitz et al., 1986). Horwitz et al. (1986) state that the perspective about anxiety (Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale) can assess specific anxiety in the classroom. It consists of thirty-three items of questionnaires with positive and negative statements inside. Each item has five scale levels to choose from, which include the “strongly agree,” ”agree”, “neither agree nor disagree”, “disagree”, and “strongly disagree” statements. Based on the observation, communication students reveal that anxiety is their number one problem in English speaking, and their anxiety is getting higher when they are asked to speak in front of the class. Three students claim to have confidence in front of the class, while 80% of students feel nervous. Most of the students are worried about making mistakes in grammar and pronunciation. Previous studies from Mukminin et al. (2015) discussed speaking anxiety in high school involving 10 participants. The researchers utilized demographic profiles and semi-structured interviews to gain data. This study reported the source of speaking anxiety, and the result was five themes related to speaking anxiety. Next, Amiri and Ghonsooly (2015) stated that anxiety would disturb students’ performance in the classroom, and anxiety comes from various factors. In their study, they investigated students’ anxiety and their score (achievement). The study used FLCAS to determine the anxiety level using a five-point Likert scale. The result showed that anxiety affects students’ performance in the classroom (r=0.348, p<0.001). Another study is from Indrianty (2016) who investigated speaking anxiety related to tourism students’ experience. The researcher utilized a case study with thirty-three tourism students involved. Data analysis and interpretation were made using observation and interviews, and then the data were transcribed, categorized, and interpreted into meaningful data. The study focused on speaking anxiety investigation, and the result revealed two types of speaking anxiety, and there were three primary sources of speaking anxiety in the classroom. Next is a study from Prastiyowati (2019) who researched anxiety in listening using a mixed-method methodology. It involved forty-eight participants (university students in Malang) and used a close-question questionnaire and interview to gather data (research instrument). This study utilized a five-point Likert scale in solving anxiety in listening. There were teachers’ factors, students’ factors, listening material, and processes contributing to students’ anxiety, and those factors disturbed the students’ listening performance. Celtic: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature and Linguistics Vol. 8, No. 1, June 2021 http://ejournal.umm.ac.id/index.php/celtic/index 25 Debreli and Demirkan (2015) suggest further researchers use FLCAS in solving speaking anxiety based on previous statements. Therefore, this study will do similar research about speaking anxiety using a five-point Likert scale, and it will fill the gap about speaking anxiety in ESP class (Business Administration). The research problems in this study are, what are the levels of Business Administration students’ speaking anxiety in ESP class? And what is the dominant type of Business Administration students’ anxiety in ESP class? METHOD The researcher utilized descriptive quantitative to answer Business Administration students’ speaking anxiety at UNISBA Blitar. The purpose of this approach was to describe Business Administration students’ speaking anxiety using numbers (in a simple way) because the researcher would gain a lot of information about speaking anxiety in ESP class through the approach. Creswell (2009) stated that quantitative relied on statistical data, and it would provide a numeric description. Quantitative research demands a lot of numbers (Siyoto & Sodik, 2015). Bungin (2017) emphasized that descriptive quantitative was to describe students’ various conditions in society so that society had its description. Arifin and Alaydrus (2020) agreed that descriptive quantitative was to describe the types and the factors of anxiety in English Speaking. This approach, which involved Business Administration students, provided simple summaries only the result of FLCAS questionnaires. It would then be categorized into some groups related to FLCAS in ESP class. In doing so, the data will be entered in the table, and the researcher will provide clarification of the sum and the percentage. Participants of the current study were thirty students of ESP class (second- semester students) at UNISBA Blitar. The researcher used FLCAS Questionnaires (33 items) as a research instrument of the study. FLCAS Questionnaires consisted of five five-point Linkert scale with the lowest score was 33, and the maximum score was 165 (Mayangta, 2013). The data collection procedure was held in ESP class (speaking) at UNISBA Blitar. The Business Administration students had to fill out FLCAS questionnaires for half an hour. Then, the researcher analyzed and processed the result of FLCAS questionnaires. The data analysis was adopted from Horwitz et al. (Horwitz et al., 1986), and it contained Positive and Negative Statements of FLCAS. In analyzing the data, the first thing to do was calculating the result of questionnaires from each Business Administration student at UNISBA Blitar. Then, the data were categorized into Business Administration Students’ Response (positive and negative category). Second, the students’ responses were calculated by the researcher into the students’ preference category. Third, converting the data from the questionnaire into a five-scale (1,2,3,4, and 5) speaking anxiety and determining Business Administration Students’ level Anxiety, so that the researcher knew distribution and the highest score of the Business Administration Students’ level Anxiety. In the last step, the analyzed data were categorized into three types of speaking anxiety levels (Communication Apprehension, Test Anxiety, Fear of Negative Evaluation). In detail, there were thirty-three FLCAS items which included students’ responses (Strongly Agree or SA, Agree or A, Neither Agree nor Disagree or NA, Fu’ad Sholikhi Business Administration Students’ Anxiety in Speaking Skill Practice 26 Disagree or D, and Strongly Disagree or SD) and two forms of statements. The statements were positive (the scale will be ranging from 1-5), and the negative statements (the scale ranged from 5-1). Business Administration students’ data will be calculated manually (using 33 up to 165 range) and categorized to “very relaxed”, “relaxed”, “mildly anxious”, “anxious”, and “very anxious” levels. This FLCAS was in line with Mariam’s (2018) study. In doing so, the researcher categorized the data into “the questionnaires’ answers” table (it contained positive and negative statements of participants in this study), and then the results were divided into the “students’ responses” table with its description of the sum and its percentage. Arifin and Alaydrus (2020) agreed that positive and negative table and Grouping of Table Data were the first things to do to know students’ Communication Apprehension. The previous tables were the basis for constructing the “students' preference” table which inlines with Mariam’s (2018) study. To discover Business Administration students’ speaking anxiety level, Mariam (2018) suggested the researcher translate the previous table into a “scoring and categorizing” table which contained the students’ total score, the students’ anxiety level, and the questionnaire numbers with a clear description of the FLCAS scale (1 up to 5 scales is for positive and negative is the opposite) of Business Administration students. The “scoring and categorizing” table was instrumental in knowing students’ speaking anxiety. It would generate “scoring and categorizing of FLCAS of business administration students” table and “the highest and the lowest score” table. The “the highest and the lowest score” table would give a clear description of students who have the highest scores and the lowest scores of speaking anxiety level. In contrast, another table would give a clear description of how many students were categorized into speaking anxiety level with its range (relaxed level, anxious level, and so on). Moreover, the “students' preference” table was very useful in this study because this table was the key to make Dominant Type of Speaking Anxiety level in ESP class; it included Communication Apprehension, Test Anxiety, and Fear of Negative Evaluation table. To construct those tables, the researcher paid attention to the types of FLCA in this study, for example, numbers 2, 7, 13, 19, 23, 31, and 33 belong to the Fear of Negative Evaluation type. There were three types of Causes of FLCAS in speaking anxiety with its distribution of items, for example, number 1, 4, 9, 14, 15, 18, 24, 27, 29, 30, and 32 belonged to the Communication Apprehension type (Mariam, 2018). If those tables (three types of Causes of FLCA) were ready, the researcher would be able to answer the dominant type of Business Administration students’ anxiety in ESP class. FINDINGS The Levels Students’ Speaking Anxiety in ESP Class There are thirty-three items in the questionnaires of this study, and those items are separated into positive and negative. The description of those questionnaires is presented in Table 1. As indicated in Table 1, this study utilizes a five-point Likert scale; strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, and strongly disagree. This scale will affect the categorization of Business Administration students’ response, level anxiety, and Dominant Type of Anxiety in this studyThe current study does not follow Debreli and Demirkan’s (2015) Celtic: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature and Linguistics Vol. 8, No. 1, June 2021 http://ejournal.umm.ac.id/index.php/celtic/index 27 perspective in terms of displaying low, moderate, and high (Percentages and Frequencies) scale in speaking anxiety. Table 1. Summary of Students’ Responses No. Statements Students’ Responses Sa A Na D Sd Total 1 Positive 25(9.26%) 105(38.9%) 66(24.44%) 63(23.33%) 11(4.07%) 270 2 Negative 49(6.81%) 230(31.94%) 134(18.61%) 248(34.45%) 59(8.19%) 720 Then, thirty participants (at UNISBA Blitar) received treatment for speaking anxiety. The assessment of Business Administration Students’ speaking anxiety level can be seen in Table 2 below: Table 2. Scoring and Categorizing of Students’ FLCAS No. Range Level of Anxiety Result 1 124 – 165 Very Anxious 0 respondents (0%) 2 108 – 123 Anxious 2 respondents (7%) 3 87 – 107 Mildly Anxious 25 respondents (83%) 4 66 – 86 Relaxed 3 respondents (10%) 5 33 – 65 Very Relaxed 0 respondents (0%) Table 2 shows the result of FLCAS in ESP Class (speaking), and it indicates the researcher follows Mayangta’s (2013) anxiety scale rather than Oetting’s scale. There are five levels on this scale. The levels are very relaxed (33-65), relaxed (66- 86), mildly anxious (87-107), anxious (108-123), and very anxious level (124-165). The Dominant Type Students’ Anxiety in ESP Class To answer the second research question in this study, a simple calculation is made by the researcher. The calculation can be seen in Table 3 below: Table 3. The Dominant Type of Anxiety No. Type of Anxiety The Percentage (%) 1 Communication Apprehension 33.34 2 Test Anxiety 45.45 3 Students’ Fear of Negative Evaluation 21.21 Total 100 Table 3 indicates that the researcher follows Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope’s (1986) perspective on the causes of FLCA (foreign language classroom anxiety). It includes Communication Apprehension (item number 1, 4, 9, 14, 15, 18, 24, 27, 29, 30, and 32), Test Anxiety (item number 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 25, 26, and 28), and Fear of Negative Evaluation (item number 2, 7, 13, 19, 23, 31, and 33). DISCUSSION In this section, the researcher will elaborate on three findings. The findings will answer the research questions of the study. It includes the discussion of Table 1, Table 2, and Table 3. First and foremost, Table 1 shows there are positive and negative questionnaires adopted from Horwitz's (1986) study in speaking anxiety. These questionnaires use a five-point Likert for each statement. The negative statement Fu’ad Sholikhi Business Administration Students’ Anxiety in Speaking Skill Practice 28 starts with 5 up to 1 range, on the contrary, the positive statement begins the calculation with 1 up to 5 range. Positive statements do not start with number 1, but there is a selection number out of it, including numbers 5, 8, 11, 14, 18, 22, 28, and 3 (the rest number belongs to a negative statement). To answer The Levels of Business Administration Students’ Speaking Anxiety in ESP Class, positive and negative calculation is the first thing to do. It determines the most dominant types of speaking anxiety in this study. Positive and negative statements are the first calculation using FLCAS with 33 questionnaires, and the result will determine the most dominant anxiety level in speaking (Arifin & Alaydrus, 2020). Moreover, there are thirty-three participants of Business Administration students of UNISBA Blitar. The students are second-semester students who will answer the questionnaire from Horwitz et al.'s (1986) study regarding speaking anxiety. The result shows that negative statement (720 items found) is the most dominant than positive statements (270 items found) in this section. In negative statements, the highest score is “disagree” or 248 items, followed by “agree” statements with 230 score, then Neither Agree nor Agree is 134 items, Strongly Agree is 49 items, and the last one is Strongly Disagree with 59 items. In positive statements, the most dominant is Agree scale with 105 items, followed by Neither Agree nor Agree with 66 items, then Disagree scale is 63, Strongly Agree is 25 items and the last one 11 items. After the researcher has the distributed positive and negative statements, the researcher continued calculating The Percentage of Students' Preference. The Percentage of Students' Preference is to know Business Administration Students’ responses to each questionnaire distributed in the classroom. Based on Table 1, the researcher found that the highest score was in statement number 5 (It wouldn't bother me at all to take more English classes) with 20 answers or 67 %. Mariam (2018) states that the highest percentage is in number 2 or 65% of respondents. Based on Table 1 that has been converted into The Percentage of Students' Preference, there is homogeneity in questionnaires. The homogeneity is in a statement that contains 4 and 7 respondents. Mariam (2018) states that there is also homogeneity in speaking anxiety with 6 students or 1 %. Another point worth noting is the findings in Table 2. Based on Table 2, there is a distribution of the participants in this study. Two students are categorized into the anxious level (7%), three students are categorized into the relaxed level (10%), twenty-five students experienced mildly anxious level (83%), and no students experienced very relaxed level (0%) and very anxious level (0%). In details, the students who get the highest score of “anxious” level is WPN with 114 scores, and the lowest one is UND with 110 scores, the student who gets the highest score of “relaxed” level is ABI (86) and the lowest one is SLI (78), and the highest score of Mildly Anxious level goes to RNS (104), and ETY and SMK get the lowest score (both get 89). Also, mildly anxious is when the student feels nervous, but that feeling does not control him. Mariam (2018) states that Mildly Anxious is a normal condition, and the user or the student can neglect this condition. A relaxed level means the student can speak the words clearly and separately. Mariam (2018) agrees that student has no fear or no problem in speaking. The next is the discussion of Table 3. Based on Table 3, there are three types of speaking anxiety (CA, TA, SFNE) in the current study. The most dominant type of Celtic: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature and Linguistics Vol. 8, No. 1, June 2021 http://ejournal.umm.ac.id/index.php/celtic/index 29 Business Administration students’ speaking anxiety is Test Anxiety (TA), followed by Communication Apprehension (CA), and Students' Fear of Negative Evaluation (SFNE). The component of FLCAS significantly and negatively affect students’ examination scores (Amiri & Ghonsooly, 2015). The following explanation relates to the components of FLCAS in this report (Communication Apprehension, Test Anxiety, and Students' Fear of Negative Evaluation). Dealing with Communication Apprehension, the highest score is statement number one with sixteen students (53%), followed by statements number nine (50%), fifteen (43%), and twenty-seven (43%). It concludes that the Business administration students at UNISBA Blitar have great confidence in their speaking ability in English. They can manage their emotion or calm even if they do not have preparation for speaking performance. However, almost half of the students feel angry or upset about unclear instructions during the lecturing. Additionally, almost half of the students feel nervous when the lecturer asks the students to perform English speaking in ESP class. Debreli and Demirkan (2015) state that the student in the target language needs good preparation. Here, the role of the teacher determines the level of anxiety (Prastiyowati, 2019). The unclear instructions may lead the students to be less successful in speaking because the teacher is the factor of students’ success (Mukminin et al., 2015). The lecturer at UNISBA Blitar and other universities need to understand that Communication Apprehension is a teacher’s challenge because it comes from personal beliefs and behavior. Observation and interview data are solutions to understand students’ Communication Apprehension (Indrianty, 2016). Besides, this category is at an average level. This result is the same as Arifin and Alaydrus’s (2020) study. Business Administration students believe that English speaking is essential for their career, but it is challenging. There is more pressure if the lecturer asks the students to speak in front of the class. According to Indrianty’s (2016) study, English speaking is challenging, and it is better to sit down rather than speaking in front of a teacher. In terms of Communication Apprehension, it will affect their gesture. The common action or gesture is the students are looking for another option other than speaking in front of the class (Indrianty, 2016). The next discussion is about Test Anxiety. The highest score is statement number five (67%), followed by statement number twenty-two (53%), eight (50%), and thirteen (50%). It concludes that Business Administration students need more English courses to support their careers in the future, for example, speaking ability for digital marketing. Speaking for good customer service (satisfying) is a key success for e-marketing. In doing so, the students have to understand about 5Ss of digital marketing (Chaffey, 2019). Indrianty (2016) emphasizes that students’ career is the reason why they learn to speak in English. The students at UNISBA Blitar believe that preparation is the best practice for them, and it makes the students do not feel anxious during the examination or test. They do not have to be worried if they miss a lesson in speaking class because they can manage their emotion based on Communication Apprehension so that the students can communicate with the lecturer about the missing course. Also, this category is the most dominant type of speaking anxiety in this study. It means that most Business Administration students are worried about speaking performance. It happens because they do not want to look foolish in front of the class. Fu’ad Sholikhi Business Administration Students’ Anxiety in Speaking Skill Practice 30 At the same time, English speaking skills will be beneficial for Business Administration students in Digital Era and Digital Marketing (their career). It happens because most students are worried about the consequences (Amiri & Ghonsooly, 2015). Even though students have a well-preparation, it will not guarantee that students will not experience speaking anxiety. There is no correlation between anxiety and well-preparation in speaking class, and the consequences of failing always exist (2018). According to Indrianty (2016), the result of the speaking class will contribute to Business Administration students’ careers in the future. On the other hand, Arifin and Alaydrus (2020) find out Test Anxiety is the lowest type of speaking anxiety. It indicates that students are unique, and they have their purposes when they go to college. Last, it is about Students' Fear of Negative Evaluation. The highest statements are in number thirteen (53%), nineteen (53%), and twenty-three (53%), then followed by thirty-three (43%). It concludes that Business administration students feel guilty about their classmate's feelings when they respond in speaking class because they believe that their classmates have better performance in speaking. Based on that condition, the lecturer’s correction makes Business Administration students’ feeling worse. The students’ views affect the learning process (Prastiyowati, 2019). The students have speaking anxiety when they have to speak in front of familiar people such as classmates (Indrianty, 2016). In learning speaking, there must be a peer assessment. Giving peer assessment in the classroom is necessary because it could motivate other students to avoid the same mistakes in the future (J & Fajar, 2019). Teachers and students have to learn to control their responses (voice) in English-speaking activities. Mocking is one reason the students do not want to express their ideas and feelings (Mukminin et al., 2015). This category has the lowest score in the study. It is the opposite of Mariam’s (2018) study. Mariam (2018) states the students have their imagination about speaking evaluation or feedback, and it allows the students to have imagination about punishment. Mukminin et al. (2015) argue that the students who are afraid of conversation could lead participants to have a poor score. This phenomenon happens because the students do not have good preparation (Amiri & Ghonsooly, 2015). CONCLUSION Based on the findings and discussions, Business Administration students of UNISBA Blitar experienced speaking anxiety when joining the ESP class. There is no evidence or 0% that students experienced very anxious level, however, two business administration students experienced Anxious level (7%), twenty-five students were in Mildly Anxious level (83%), three students were in Relaxed level (10%), and no students experienced Very Relaxed level (0%). In responding to the second research question, there are three types of FLCAS (Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale) that can cause speaking anxiety in ESP class, and Test Anxiety is the most dominant type of speaking anxiety, followed by Communication Apprehension, and Students’ Fear of Negative Evaluation. Finally, the author hopes that future researchers who are willing to conduct similar research revise the research methodology. For example, future researchers Celtic: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature and Linguistics Vol. 8, No. 1, June 2021 http://ejournal.umm.ac.id/index.php/celtic/index 31 could have qualitative research to understand speaking anxiety in higher education better, especially in ESP classes. REFERENCES Abderrezzag, S. (2010). The effects of Anxiety On Students’ Achievement The case of third-year LMD students [University of Constantine]. In Ph.D. Dissertation. https://www.mendeley.com/sign/in/?routeTo=https://www.mendeley.com/ catalogue/effects-anxiety-students-achievement-case-third-year-lmd- students/?add=true Akwetey, L. M. (2011). Business Administration for Students & Managers. Trafford Publishing. Amiri, M., & Ghonsooly, B. (2015). The Relationship between English Learning Anxiety and the Students’ Achievement on Examinations. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 6(4), 855. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0604.20 Angellia, & Listyani. (2019). Freshmen's anxiety in an intensive listening class: A qualitative study. Educational Research and Reviews, 14(12), 443–457. https://doi.org/10.5897/err2018.3624 Arifin, F., & Alaydrus, Y. (2020). A Study on The Anxiety of Low and High Speaking. Jurnal Penelitian, Pendidikan, Dan Pembelajaran, 2006. Bungin, H. M. B. (2017). Metodologi penelitian kuantitatif : komunikasi, ekonomi, dan kebijakan publik serta ilmu-ilmu sosial lainnya (2nd ed.). Kencana. Chaffey, D. (2019). Digital Marketing. Pearson UK. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. SAGE Publications. Damayanti, M. E., & Listyani, L. (2020). An Analysis of Students’ Speaking Anxiety in Academic Speaking Class. ELTR, English Language Teaching and Research Journal, 4(2), 152–170. Debreli, E., & Demirkan, S. (2015). Sources and Levels of Foreign Language Speaking Anxiety of English as a Foreign Language University Students with regard to Language Proficiency and Gender. International Journal of English Language Education, 4(1), 49. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijele.v4i1.8715 Gawi, E. M. K. (2020). The Impact of Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety on Saudi Male Students’ Performance at Albaha University. Arab World English Journal, 11(2), 258–274. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol11no2.18 Goh, C. C. M., & Burns, A. (2012). Teaching Speaking: A Holistic Approach. Cambridge University Press. Horwitz, K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1986.tb05256.x Indrianty, S. (2016). Students ’ Anxiety in Speaking English ( a Case Study in One Hotel and Tourism College in Bandung ). Eltin, 4(I), 28–39. http://e- journal.stkipsiliwangi.ac.id/index.php/eltin/article/view/337 J., S. W., & Fajar, R. (2019). the Effect of Peer Assessment Towards Students’ Speaking Skill At Semester II of University Muhammadiyah Jambi 2018-2019. Celtic: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature and Linguistics, 6(2), 26. https://doi.org/10.22219/celtic.v6i2.9886 Komariah, E., Erdiana, N., & Mutia, T. (2020). Communication strategies used by EFL Fu’ad Sholikhi Business Administration Students’ Anxiety in Speaking Skill Practice 32 students in classroom speaking activities. International Journal of Language Studies, 14(3), 27–46. Limantoro, S. W. (2014). Anxiety on the Presentation or Oral Examination in Learning Esl. 61st Teflin International Conference, 44(4), 443–444. Mariam, D. (2018). An Analysis of Speaking Anxiety in English Classroom [IAIN Salatiga]. http://e-repository.perpus.iainsalatiga.ac.id/6481/1/SKRIPSI FIX.pdf Mayangta, T. (2013). Students’ Speaking Anxiety in an EFL Classroom. Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia. Mukminin, A., Masbirorotni, Noprival, Sutarno, Arif, N., & Maimunah. (2015). EFL Speaking Anxiety among Senior High School Students and Policy Recommendations. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), 9(3), 217. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v9i3.1828 Ngatmini, & Fatimah, S. (2019). The Communicative Model of Learning Speaking in Higher Education. 2nd International Conference on Education and Social Science Research (ICESRE 2019), 417(Icesre 2019), 61–65. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200318.011 Prastiyowati, S. (2019). Anxiety on Students’ Listening Comprehension in University Students in Malang. A Journal of Culture English Language Teaching Literature & Linguistics, 6(1), 65. https://doi.org/10.22219/celticumm.vol6.no1.65-77 Renandya, W. A., & Widodo, H. P. (2016). English Language Teaching Today Linking Theory and Practice (W. A. Renandya & H. P. Widodo (Eds.); 5th ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38834-2 Siyoto, S., & Sodik, A. (2015). Dasar Metodologi Penelitian. Literasi Media Publishing. Thornbury, S. (2005). How To Teach Speaking. New York: Pearson Education ESL.