Do ‘sprinkles’ ring a bell? At first glance, sprinkles may seem decorative or trivial additions to your cupcakes. However, sprinkles can be essential, as they potentially make your cupcakes taste better. More importantly, sprinkles come in different forms to accommodate taste preferences, whether chocolate, coconut flakes, or confetti toppings. This is why I chose to name my fictional character Sprinkle (see Figure 1) to represent diverse and multiple ways to show willingness to communicate (WTC). While an individual’s predisposition to communicate varies (MacIntyre et al., 1998; McCroskey & Baer, 1985), WTC is not a mere addition but a critical learning goal in educational settings (Lin & Forey, 2025). This opinion piece uses Sprinkle to think about this aspect of active learning in a different way.

Active learning ‘involves students in doing things and thinking about the things they are doing’ (Bonwell & Eison, 1991, p. 2). This student-centred approach engages learners through various pedagogical practices (Prince, 2004). While active learning is underpinned by social constructivism which highlights that learning is social at its core (Vygotsky, 1978), not all students are equally ready to communicate (Lin & Forey, 2025). Some may appear less participative or struggle to express themselves. Instead of problematising these learners as non-active participants (Shao & Gao, 2016), we should recognise that students’ quietude or perhaps unwillingness to communicate is complex and highly contingent on teaching and learning contexts. Factors such as topics, teachers’ pedagogy, and technology contribute to this variation (Eddy-U, 2015; Huang & Zhang, 2025; Peng, 2025). In this respect, it is important to note that students’ WTC can manifest in multifarious forms of class participation. In the illustration of Sprinkle, his large red head shaped like a mouth emphasises that oral communication is the primary medium. However, facial expressions, eye contact, active listening, gestures, and other potential alternatives can also be considered forms of participation.

Equally important is the idea that students’ WTC is inherently relative, rather than absolute (Lin, 2025). When students perceive themselves as talkative, there is someone who may be more talkative than they are. To evaluate whether a student is active, it is best to consider individual cases. A relatively quiet student who makes an effort to communicate can demonstrate their commitment to engagement. Therefore, every communicative endeavour students undertake, whether verbal or non-verbal, loud or subtle, should be recognised.

Sprinkle serves as a valuable reminder that students participate in their own way, in their own right. Sometimes, such readiness to communicate aligns with our expectations, but at other times, it can fall outside our imagination.

References

Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom (ED336049). ERIC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED336049

Eddy-U, M. (2015). Motivation for participation or non-participation in group tasks: A dynamic systems model of task-situated willingness to communicate. System, 50, 43-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.03.005

Huang, F., & Zhang, H. (2025). Enhancing willingness to communicate in the second language through technology: The effects of community of practice, enjoyment, and boredom in online classes. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1-33. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2025.2497496

Lin, V. (2025). Vibrant voices: Empowering students to communicate and participate. ALDinHE Conference Proceedings of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, United Kingdom, 37. https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi37.1758

Lin, V., & Forey, G. (2025). Exploring the underexplored: Assessing students’ willingness to communicate in the curriculum [Manuscript submitted for publication]. Department of Education, University of Bath.

MacIntyre, P. D., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. The Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 545-562. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb05543.x

McCroskey, J. C., & Baer, J. E. (1985). Willingness to communicate: The construct and its measurement (ED265604). ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED265604.pdf

Peng, J. E. (2025). Willingness to communicate in a second language (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223-231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x

Shao, Q., & Gao, X. (2016). Reticence and willingness to communicate (WTC) of East Asian language learners. System, 63, 115-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.10.001

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

About the author

Vienne Lin is a doctoral researcher in Education at the University of Bath. Her research interests include willingness to communicate, class participation, assessment transparency, and pedagogic research. She received the Doctoral Recognition Award in 2023, 2024 and 2025, and the Peer Support Champion in 2025.

hyl238@bath.ac.uk