motivation and second language aquisition

Motivation and Second Language Acquisition 1 R.C. Gardner University of Western Ontario I have been asked on occasion why I think there must be some sort of motivation to learn a second language, because most people learn at least one language, and often children from a bilingual home learn two languages, apparently with ease. Moreover, these people speak the language, they understand the language, and often they both read and write it, so why should motivation be important. My answer is that generally language is an integral part of growing up (which provides motivation in its own right), and is necessary to communicate and participate in ones environment. Often, this is not the case for second languages, especially those Alearned@ in school. There are many advantages for knowing other languages but they are not absolutely necessary, and as a consequence, motivation (as well as ability) can play an important role in learning a second language. And there are many things that can affect this motivation. I hope today to convince you of the importance of motivation in second language acquisition and to demonstrate that it is more complex than merely wanting to learn the language. Our research for the past 45 years has been concerned with the role of attitudes and motivation in second language acquisition, and during this time we have obtained a considerable amount of data and have developed a model linking attitudes and motivation to achievement in the second language as well as to a host of other behaviours that relate to language learning and retention. Rather than review a number of our studies and present a bunch of statistics today, I would like to focus on the role of motivation and language learning in general and discuss the implications of our research to language teaching and pedagogy. In this vein, I intend to direct my attention to the following four points: a. Two motivational constructs b. Stages of language acquisition c. Cultural and educational contexts d. Results from Spain. 1 This manuscript was the basis of an address by the author to the Seminario Sobre Plurilingüismo: Las Aportaciones Del Centro Europeo de Lenguas Modernas de Graz, on December 15, 2006 at the Universidad de Alcalá, Spain. Preparation of the manuscript was facilitated by a grant (410-2002-0810) from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. I would like to express my appreciation to Dr. M. Bernaus, Universitat Autònomia de Barcelona for her collaboration on the research reported and to Dan Koff for his assistance preparing this manuscript. 2 It is my view that these points are central to understanding a student=s general level of motivation to learn a second language as well as the specific motivation that exists in any language class or other language learning situation. I begin by making the obvious observation that motivation is a very complex phenomenon with many facets. In fact, in 1981, Kleinginna and Kleinginna presented 102 statements about the construct. It really isn=t possible to give a simple definition of motivation, though one can list many characteristics of the motivated individual. For example, the motivated individual is goal directed, expends effort, is persistent, is attentive, has desires (wants), exhibits positive affect, is aroused, has expectancies, demonstrates self-confidence (self-efficacy), and has reasons (motives). As you can see some of these characteristics are cognitive in nature, some are affective, and some are behavioural. Motivation to learn a second language is not a simple construct. It cannot be measured by one scale; perhaps the whole range of motivation cannot be assessed by even three or four scales. It definitely cannot be assessed by merely asking individuals to give reasons for why they think learning a language is important to them. When considering motivation and second language learning or acquisition, it is possible to consider two types of motivational constructs. Our research has always contended that there are in essence two types of motivation that should be considered when referring to second language acquisition, and I am not referring here to the integrative-instrumental dichotomy (or even the intrinsic-extrinsic one) that is often discussed in the research literature. I refer instead to the distinction between language learning motivation and classroom learning motivation. By language learning motivation, I mean the motivation to learn (and acquire) a second language. This type of motivation is considered in the socio-educational model of second language acquisition (Gardner, 1985), the social context model (Clément, 1980), the Self- determination model (Noels, & Clément, 1996), the Willingness to Communicate model (MacIntyre, Clément, Dörnyei, & Noels,1998), and the extended motivational framework (Dörnyei, 1994) to name a few. It is a general form of motivation relevant in any second language-learning context. It is not a trait, as some individuals contend, but it is a general characteristic of the individual that applies to any opportunity to learn the language. It is relatively stable, because of its presumed antecedents, but it is amenable to change under certain 3 conditions. The various models referred to above all agree that it as an attribute with significant implications for the individual; they differ in terms of its antecedents and/or correlates, as well as in how it might be assessed. The second class of motivation is classroom learning motivation, specifically the language classroom. This is the type of motivation emphasized by Heckhausen and Kuhl (1985); it is the type characterized by Dörnyei=s tripartite pre-actional, actional and post-actional motivation, and is common to educational psychology in general. It is also represented in the socio-educational model of second language acquisition, though it is considered an integral part of motivation in general (Gardner, 1985). It refers to the motivation in the classroom situation, or in any specific situation. The focus is on the individuals= perception of the task at hand, and is largely state oriented. Obviously, it will be influenced by a host of factors associated with the language class. Thus, it is clear that the teacher, the class atmosphere, the course content, materials and facilities, as well as personal characteristics of the student (such as studiousness, etc.,) will have an influence on the individual=s classroom learning motivation. In the socio- educational model, we contend that it will also be influenced by the general language learning motivation referred to above. Of course, in a very real sense, one cannot distinguish between the two types of motivation. They operate on the individual at any given time, but it is meaningful to consider that both of them are operative. Just as it is difficult to propose a simple definition of motivation, it is also difficult to provide a simple definition of what it means to learn a second language. In his seminal research on bilingual development, W. E. Lambert (1955; 1956a,b,c) identified what he referred to as two clusters in the process of becoming bilingual, the Vocabulary cluster and the Cultural cluster. In his research, he contrasted the language behaviour of three groups of individuals in his study conducted in the USA. One group was comprised of 14 Undergraduates majoring in French, another consisted of 14 graduate students majoring in French, and the third was a group of 14 native French speaking individuals who had lived for at least 7 years in the USA and who used English on a daily basis. He compared the three groups on a number of measures of French proficiency and French-English bilinguality involving word association and reaction time measures, and found as 4 expected that performance improved from the undergraduates to the graduates to the French native speakers. On some measures, however, there were no significant differences among the groups; on others there were no significant differences between the undergraduate and graduate students, while on other measures, the graduate students were significantly better than the undergraduates but significantly inferior to the native French speakers. On the basis of these results, he proposed that there was a distinct pattern in the growth of proficiency and bilingual skills due to experience in the other language. He concluded that there were a series of barriers to overcome in the process of language acquisition. He identified one as a vocabulary cluster, by which he meant the elements of the language, not simply individual vocabulary items. This he felt was a relatively easy stage to master. Another, and much more difficult one, he identified as the cultural cluster. He claimed that to overcome this barrier it was necessary for the individual to make the language part of the self. He also hypothesized that there may be other phases an individual must master in the process of learning a language. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Insert Figure 1 about here - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - In our model of second language acquisition and development, we hypothesize that there are at least four stages that can be identified, and they are comparable to those involved in the development of one=s first language. Figure 1 presents a schematic representation of these stages. The initial stage is Elemental. In this stage the individual is learning the basics of the language, vocabulary, grammar, pronunciations, etc. (what Lambert would term the vocabulary cluster). We see this in the development of one=s first language when the toddler learns new words, begins to put words together, mispronounces some words but corrects them later, etc... With the second language student, we see the same process when initial vocabulary is learned, equivalents with the first language are recognized, simple declarative sentences are memorized, etc.. The second stage is Consolidation, where the elements of the language are brought together and some degree of familiarity with the language is achieved. We see this stage in the young child learning the first language, when they begin to recognize that language is a system where some elements are correct and others incorrect, and they develop rules for pluralization, 5 sentence structure, and the understanding of idioms, etc... A similar pattern occurs for the student learning a second language, when they find that some of the structures and elements can be like those in their native language while others can be very different, when they learn that some expressions are meaningful, others not, etc… In the third stage, there is Conscious Expression, during which the individual can use the language but with a great deal of conscious effort. The individual can communicate thoughts and ideas, but there is a lot of deliberation about what is being expressed. For the young first language learner, this phase can be recognized by the use of a lot of speech hesitations such as um, er, uh, where the individual is actively searching for the right words or form of expression. For the learner of a second language, you can observe the same phenomenon, and often get the impression that the individual is in fact searching the first language for help in knowing how to express the idea in the second language. The fourth stage is identified as Automaticity and Thought to indicate that at the ultimate stage language and thought merge and language becomes automatic in most contexts. This could well correspond to Lambert=s cultural cluster. In this phase, language and self become interconnected. One no longer thinks about the language, but thinks in the language. This analysis is not meant to be definitive as to the stages of language acquisition, but it does serve to highlight what is meant by Alearning@ the language, and to emphasize that it has different meanings at different stages of the learning process. It is similar to Krashen=s (1988) distinction between second and/or foreign language learning versus acquisition, in that it emphasizes that language learning refers to the development of knowledge and skill that permits varying degrees of communication with others, while acquisition involves making the language part of the self. It is with this general view where the concept of motivation becomes important, and the distinction between language learning motivation and classroom learning motivation becomes paramount. Given that there are various stages of language development one can well ask what we mean by language learning. Learning vocabulary is language learning. Learning structure, pronunciation, etc., is language learning. Learning to communicate in the language is language learning. Even passing into the stage of automaticity and thought can be considered language 6 learning, though Krashen might favour the term acquisition at this stage. That is, at different ages and stages, learning the language can mean different things. In our research we have investigated different aspects of second language learning varying from simple vocabulary learning (in a laboratory setting) to the fluent use of the language in oral communication. We have defined achievement in terms of performance on objective tests of grammar and aural comprehension, written production, reading comprehension, oral production, grades in the language course, etc., and what amazes me is that motivation has been found to be implicated at all stages. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Insert Figure 2 about here - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - When discussing the roots of motivation to learn a second language in the school context we have proposed that we should consider it from the point of view of both the Educational Context (as we would for any school subject) and the Cultural Context (which is generally not that relevant to most school subjects). That is, studying a second language is unlike studying most other subjects in that it involves taking on elements of another culture (i.e., vocabulary, pronunciations, language structure, etc.,), while most other school subjects involve elements common to one=s own culture. By saying that this should be considered when focussing on the concept of motivation, we mean that the individual is a member of a particular culture and many features of the individual are influenced by that culture. In the individual, this cultural context is expressed in terms of ones attitudes, beliefs, personality characteristics, ideals, expectations, etc… With respect to language learning, therefore, the individual will have various attitudes that might apply to language learning, beliefs about its value, meaningfulness, and implications, expectations about what can and cannot be achieved, and the importance of various personality characteristics in the learning process. All of these characteristics originate and develop in the overall cultural context as well as the immediate family. In North America, it is generally accepted that Europeans are better at learning languages than North Americans, and whether or not this is true, it can influence the North American=s beliefs about his/her own success. Hence, we hypothesize that the cultural context can have an effect on the individual=s ultimate success in 7 learning the language. The Educational Context is important too, of course, and for most subjects it will play a role in the motivation of the student. Other variables might be relevant, but generally they will be relatively less important and largely idiosyncratic. The educational context refers generally to the educational system in which the student is registered, and specifically to the immediate classroom situation. When considering the educational context, we focus on the expectations of the system, the quality of the program, the interest, enthusiasm, and skills of the teacher, the adequacy of the materials, the curriculum, the class atmosphere, etc. All of these can influence the student=s level of motivation in any school subject. Thus, when we discuss the motivation to learn a second language, we have to take both contexts into consideration. Our research is based on the assumption that these two contexts have an effect on two general characteristics of the student. One of these characteristics derives from the Cultural Context and includes socially relevant variables. In our original research we labelled this component Integrativeness and focussed attention on the individual being interested in learning the language in order to interact with valued members of the other community and/or to learn more about that community (i.e., an integrative orientation and favourable attitudes toward the community), but in later research we found that it could also involve an open interest in other cultural communities in general (i.e., an absence of Ethnocentrism and authoritarianism, or the presence of Xenophilic attitudes, etc., which we measured with our AInterest in Foreign Languages scale@). Because of the excess meanings that have become associated with the “integrative” concept, I now sometimes refer to it as Openness, or Openness to Cultural Identification. The important point is that Integrativeness reflects the various attributes that can be linked to the Cultural Context of language. Other researchers have identified similar constructs in their studies in different cultural settings (see, for example, Kraemer, 1993; Yashima, 2002) The other characteristic of the individual that our model considers to be important in second language learning derives from the Educational Context, and includes all variables that can be linked directly to the educational system and the experiences associated with the educational environment. We have labelled this characteristic as Attitudes toward the 8 Learning Situation because it is our assumption that it is the influence of the Educational Context on the individual=s attitudes that influence the individual=s level of motivation. Furthermore, the two contexts do not operate in isolation of one another. They coexist in their influence on the student. The cultural context can have an effect on the student=s attitudinal reaction to the school environment, and the educational context can play a role (though not a large one, and probably more so for young students) in the individual=s level of integrativeness. As shown in the figure, Integrativeness and Attitudes toward the Learning Situation are expected to have an influence on the individual=s level of motivation. And, as indicated earlier, motivation is a multifaceted construct. The motivated individual is goal directed, expends effort, is persistent, is attentive, has desires (wants), exhibits positive affect, is aroused, has expectancies, demonstrates self-confidence (self-efficacy), and has reasons (motives). All of these attributes characterize the individual who is motivated to learn a language. In our research, we have found that we can tap into motivation in terms of three measures which tap the cognitive, affective and behavioural (motivational intensity) components. Motivation plays a role in various ways in the process of learning a second language. In our research, we have examined a number of th