PRINCIPLES of LANGUAGE LEARNING AND TEACHING Eetecll H. DOUGLAS BROWN ] Hi il 1780130178 16% ISBN 0-13-01781b-0 3 3 PRINCIPLES of LANGUAGE LEARNING AND TEACHING FOURTH EDITION H. DOUGLAS BROWN142 7Tizinsots me chapters deat with wo fc f the cognii domain Of language learning: human learning processes in general, and cogni- tive variations in Tearning—styles and strategies, Similacy, this chapter and ipter 7 deal with cwo facets of the affective domain of second language acquisition. The first of these is the intrinsic side oF affectivity: personality factors within a person that conteibute in some way to the success of lan guage learning The second facet, treated in Chapter 7 encompasses extrinsic fictors--sociocultural variables chat emerge as the second language learner brings not just two languages into contact but vo cultures, and in some sense must earn a second culture along with a second language. I we were to devise theories of second language acquisition or caching methodologies that were based only on cognitive considerations, we would be omitting the most fundamental side of human behavior. mest Hilgard, well kriown for his study of humn learning and cognition, once noted that "purely cognitive theories of learning will be sejected unless role is assigned to affectivity” (1963: 267). In recent thinking (Amold 1999), there is no doubt at all about the importance of examining personality factors in building a theory of second language acquisition, ‘The afiective domain is difficult to describe scientifically. A large umber of variables are implied in considering the emotional side of ‘human behavior in the second language learning process. One problem in ores 6 Peony Fctrs 143, striving for alfective explanations of language success is presented by the task of subdividing and categorizing the factors of the affective domain, We are often tempted to use rather sweeping terms as if they were car: fully defined, For example, it is easy enough to say that ‘culture contfliet” accounts for many language learning problems, or that “motivation” is the key to sic: ‘cess in a foreign language; but it is quite another matter to define such {erms with precision. Psychologists also experience a dificulty in defining terms, Abstract concepts such 1s empathy, aggression, extroversion, and other common labels are difficult to define empirically. Standardized psy chological tests often form an operational definition of such concepts, but constant revisions are evidence of an ongoing struggle for validity Nevertheless, the elusive nature of affective and cognitive concepts need not deter us from seeking answers to questions, Careful, systematic study of the role of personality in second language acquisition has already led to 4a greater understanding of the language learning process and to improved language teaching designs. ‘THE AFFECTIVE DOMAIN Affect refers to emotion or feeling. The affective domain is the emotional side of human behavior, and it may be juxtaposed to the cognitive side. The eeclopment of affective states or feelings involves a variety of personaly factors, feelings both about ourselves and) about others with whom we come into contact. Benjamin Bloom and his colleagues (Krathwobl, Bloom, & Masia 1964) provided a useful extended definition of the affective domain that is still widely used today. 1L. At the first and fundamental level, the development of affeetivity begins with receiving. Persons must be aware of the environment surrounding them and be conscious of sitions, phenomena, people, objects; be willing 10 receive—to tolerate a stimulus, not avoid it—and give a stimulus their controlled or selected attention, 2. Next, persons must go beyond receiving to responding, commit: {ing themselves in at least some small measure to 2 phenomenon lor a person. Such responding in one dimension may be in acquis cescence, but in another, higher, dimension the person is willing to respond voluntarily without coescion, tion from that response. 3. The third level of affectivity involves valuing: pacing worth on a thing, behavior, of a person. Valuing takes on the characteristics of beliefs or attitudes as values ace internalized, Individuals do not144 crusre 6 Pesonaly Facts merely accept a value to the point of being willing to be identi- fied with it, ut commit themselves to the value to pursue it, seek it out,and want i, finally, to the point of conviction. 4. The fourth level of the affective domain isthe organization of values into a system of beliefs, determining interrelationships ‘among them, and establishing a hierarchy of values within the ‘system. 5. Finally, individuals hecome characterized by and understand themselves in terms of their cutive system. Individuals act consis. tently in accordance with the values they have internalized and integrate beliefs, ideas, and attitudes into a total philosophy or ‘world view. It is at this level that problem solving, for example, is approached oa the basis of a total, self-consistent system. Bloom's taxonomy was devised for educational purposes, but it has been used for a general understanding of the affective domain in human behavior, The fundamental notions of receiving, responding, and valuing are universal. Second language learners need to De receptive both t0 those ‘with whom they are communicating and to the language itself, responsive 10 persons and to the context of communication, and willing and able 10 place a certain value on the communicative act of interpersonal exchange. Lest you feel at this point that the affective domain as described by Bloom is a bit 100 fir removed from the essence of language, itis appro- ‘priate to recall that language is inextricably woven into the fabric of virtue ally every aspect of human behavior. Lange so pervasive a phenomenon in our humanity that it cannot be separated from the larger whole—from the whole persons that live and breathe and chink and feel Kenneth Pike (1967: 26) said that language is behavior that isa phase of human activity which must nor be treated in essence as structurally divorced from the struc- ture of nonverbal human activity. The activity of man constitutes 4 structural whole in such a way that it cannot be subdivided into neat “pasts” of “levels” of “compartments” with language in a behavioral compartment insulated in character, content, and ‘organization from other behavior. ‘Understanding how human beings feel and respond and believe and value is aan exceedingly important aspect of a theory of second language acquisition ‘We turn now to a consideration of specific personality factors in human behavior and how they relate to second language acquisition, crores 6 Peroaliy factors 145 Self-Esteem Seléesteem is probably the most pervasive aspect of any human behavior, It could easily be claimed that no successful cognitive or affective activity can be carried out without some degree of self-esteem, selfconfidence, Knowledge of yourself, and belief in your own capabilities for that activity, Malinowski (1923) noted that all human beings have a need for phatic communion—defining oneself and finding acceptance in expressing that self in relation to valued others. Personality development universally involves the growth of a person's concept of self, acceptance of self, and tefleetion of self as seen in the interaction between self and others, ‘The following is a wellaccepted definition of self-esteem (Coopersmith 1967:4-5): By self-esteem, we refer to the evaluation which individuals make and customarily maintain with regard to themselves: it expresses an attitude of approval or disapproval,and indicates the extent 10 which individuals believe themselves to be capable, significant, successful and worthy. In short, self-esteem is a personal judg: ment of worthiness that is expressed in the attitudes that individ uals hold towards themselves. Its a subjective experience whieh the individual conveys to others by verbal reports and other overt expressive behavior People derive their sense of selfesteem from the accumulation of experiences with themselves and with others and from assessments of the ‘external world around them, Three general levels of selE-esteem have been describe in the literature to capture its multigimensionality: 1. General, or global, selFestcem is said to be relatively stable in a ‘mature adult, and is resistant to change except by active and extended therapy. It is the general or prevailing assessment one makes of one’s own worth over time and across a number of site: ations. In a sense, it might be analogized to a statistical mean or median level of over selfappraisal 2. Situational or specifi self-esteem refers to one’s selFappraisals in particular life situations, such as social interaction, work, cdi tion, home, or on certain relatively discretely defined traits, such, intelligence, communicative ability, ty, or person- ty traits like gregariousness, empathy, and flexibility. The degree of specific self-esteem a person has may vary depending upon the situation oF the trait in question,146 exaite 6 Reson cers 3. Task self-esteem relates to particular tasks within specific situs tions. For example, within the educational domain, task self esteem might refer (0 one subject-matter area. tn an athletic content, skill in a sport—or even a facet of a sport such as net play in tennis oF pitching in baseball—would be evaluated on the level of task selfesteem, Specific self-esteem might encompass second language acquisition in general, and task self-esteem might appropriately refer to one's self evaluation of a particular aspect Of the proces’ speaking, writing, a particular class in a second lan- _gtage, or even a special kind of classroom exercise. Adelaide Heyde (1979) studied the effects of the three Jevels of self esteem on performance of an oral production task by American college st s a foreign language. She found that all three levels, fon the oral produc: dents learning French Of sellesteem corvelated positively with performancs ton measure, with the highest corretation 0c: ‘esteem and performance on oral production meas Rego (1991), Brodkey and Shore (1976), and Gardner and Tambert C1972) all included measures of selfesteem in their studies of success in language leaening, The results revealed that self-esteem appears to be an impor tant variable in second language acquisition, particularly in view of cross-cultural factors of second language learning that will be discussed in the next chapter ‘Macintyre, Dérnyei, Clément, and Noels (1998) saw the significance of, selfconfidence in their madel of “willingness to communicate" in a foreign fanguage. A number of factors appear to contribute to predisposing one leamer to seek, and another learner t© avoid, second language communi cation. Noting that 2 high level of communicative ability does not neces: sarily correspond with a high willingness to communicate, Macintyre et at proposed a number of cognitive and affective factors that underlie the latter: motivation, personality, intergroup climate, and two levels of self confidence, ‘The first level resembles what his already been described as situational selEesteem, or*state communicative self-confidence” (Macintyre e€ al. 1998: 347), and the second, an overall global level simply labeled “L2 selfconfidence” Both selfconfidence factors assume important roles in determining one’s willingness to communicate, ‘What we do not know at this time is the answer to the classe chicken. oregg question: Does high selfesteem cause language success, oF does lan guage success cause high self-esteem? Clearly, both are interacting factors. It is diffieul co say whether teachers should try to “improve” global self esteem or simply improve a learner's proficiency and tet selFesteem take ‘care of itself, Heyde (1979) foun! that certain sections of a beginning col- lege French course had better oral production and selfesteem scores than cee | ows 6 Peony Fos 147 other sections after only eight wecks of instruetion, This finding suggests that teachers really can have a positive and influential effect on both the linguistic performance and the emotional welkbeing of the student, Andrés (2999: 91) concurred and suggested classtoom techniques that can. help learners to“ unfold theie wings.” Perhaps these teachers succeeded hecause they gave optimal attention both to linguistic goals and to the personhood of their students. Inhibition Closely related to and in some cases subsumed under the notion of self: esteem is the concept of inhibition. All human beings, in their under. standing of themselves, build sets of defenses to protect the ego. The newborn baby has no concept of its own sell gradually it learns to identity 4 self that is distinct from others, In childhood, the growing degrees of awareness, responding, and valuing begin to create a system of affective ‘mits that individuals identify with themselves. In adolescence, the phys ical, emotional, and cognitive changes of the preteenager and teenager bring on mounting defensive inhibitions to protect a fragile ego, to ward off ideas, experiences, and feetings that threaten to dismantle the organization of values and beliefs on which appraisuls of selfesteem have been founded. ‘The process of building defenses continues into adulthood, Some per- sons—those with higher scifesteem and ego strengih—are more able 0 swithstand threats to their existence, and thus their defenses are lower. Those with weaker seiFesteem maintain walls of inhibition to protect what 's self perceived t0 be a weak or fragile ego, oF a lack of selE-confidence in a Situation of task The human ego encompasses what Guiora (19728) and Ehrman (1996) refer to as fanguage ego or the very personal, egoistic aacuce of second langage acquisition. Meaninglul language acquisition involves some degrce of identity conflict as language learners take on a new iden Lily with their newly acquired competence, An adkiptive language ego ‘enables learners to lower the inhibitions that may impede success, In a csi study of inbibition in relation to second language learning, Guiora, BeicHallami, Brannon, Dull, and Scovel (1972a) designed an experi ‘ment using sinall quantities of alcohol to induce temporary states of le ‘than-normal inhibition in an experimental group of subjects, The perform: ance on a pronunciation test in Thai of subjects given the alcohol was sig: nificantly better than the performance of a control group. Guiora and colleagues concluded that a direct relationship existed between inhibition (a ‘component of language exo) and pronunciation ability in a second language.148. vere 6 Personality acces [But there were some serious problems in the researchers’ conclusion, [Alcohol may lower inhibitions, but alcoho! also tends to alfect muscular tension and while” mind” and body" in this instance may not be clearly sep arable, the physical effect of the alcohol may have been a more important ‘hetor than the mental effect in accounting for the superior pronunciation performance of the subjects given alcohol. Furthermore, pronunciation may be a rather poor indicator of overall language competence. Nevertheless, the Guiora research team provided an important hypothesis, ‘that has tremendous intuitive—if not experimental—sapport. In another experiment (Guiora ct al, 1980), Guiora and his associates studied the effect of Valium on pronunciation of a second language. Inspired by a study (Schumann et al, 1978) thar showed that hypnotized subjects performed well on pronunciation tests, Guiort and colleagues hypothesized that various dosages of « cliemical relaxant would have a sim: iar effect on subjects’ pronunciation performance. Itis unfortunate that the results were nonsignificant, but itis interesting that the tester made a sig nificant difference. In other words, the person doing the testing made a bigger difference on scores than did the dosage of Valium. 1 wonder if this, result says something about the importance of teachers! Some have ficetiously suggested that the moral 10 Guiora’s experi ments is that we should provide cocktails—or preseribe tranguilizers—for Toreign language classest While students might be delighted by such a pro- posil, the experiments have highlighted a most interesting, possibilty: that the inhibitions, the defenses, that we place between ourselves and others fare imporiant factors contributing to second language success. Ehrman (1999, 1993) has provided further support for the importance of language ‘ego in studies of learners with “thin” (permeable) and “thiek” (not as per- meable) ego boundaries, While neither extreme has been found to have necessarily beneficial of deleterious effects on success, Ehrman has sts ested that the openness, vulnerability, and ambiguity tolerance of tose ich“thin” eyo boundaries create different pathways to success from those ‘with hare-driving, systematic, perfectionistic, "thick" ego boundaries. Such findings, coupled with Guiora’s earlier work, have given rise to a number of steps that have been taken in practices to create techniques that n the foreign language classroom, Language teaching, Approaches in the last three decades have been characterized by the cre: ation of contexts in which students are made to feel free to take risks, 10 ‘orally try out hypotheses, and in so doing to break down some of the bar. riers that often make learners reluctant (o try out their new language. “Anyone who has learned a foreign language is acutely aware that second language learning actually necessitates the making of mistakes. We Test out hypotheses about language by trial and many errors: children learning their first language and adults learning a second can really make Daves 6 Rasonaiy Fotos 149) progress only by learning from their mistakes. If we never ventured 10 speak a sentence until we were absolutely certain of its total correctness, ‘we would likely never communicate productively at all. But mistakes can he viewed as threats (0 one’s ego. They pose both internal and external tHireats Internally, one’s critical selfand one’s performing self can be in con: flict: the learner performs something “wrong and becomes critical Of his or her own mistake. Externally, learners perceive others to be critical, even judging their very person when they blunder in a second language. Earl Stevick (1976b) spoke of language learning as involving a number Of forms of “alienation”: ali forming me, between my native culture and my target culture, between me and my teacher, and between me and my fellow students. This alteration arises from the defenses that we build around ourselves, These defenses inhibit learning, and their removal can therefore promote language earning, which involves selFexposure £0 a degree manifested in few other ‘endeavors. Risk-Taking In the last chapter we saw that one of the prominent characteris ood language Feaeners, according 10 Rubin and Thompson (1982), was the bility to make intelligent guesses. Impulsivity was also described as a style that could have positive effects on language success, And we have just seen, {that inhibitions, or building defenses sound our egos, can be a detsiment These factors suggest that risk-taking is an important characteristic of sue: cessful learning of a second language, Learners have to he able to gamble & bit,to be willing to try out hunches about the language and take the risk of being wrong. Beebe (1983: 40) described some of the negative ramifications that foster fear of risktaking oth in the classroom and in natu setings. s oF In the classroom, these ramifications might include a bad grade in the course,a fail on the exam,a seproach from the texcher.a smirk rom a classmate, punishment or embarrassment imposed by one self. Outside the classroom, individuals learning a second tan guage face other negative consequences if they make mistakes ‘They fear looking ridiculous; they fear the frustration coming from a listener's blank look, showing that they have failed 10 communicate; they fear the danger of not being able to take cave of themselves; they fear the alienation of not being able t0 com municate and thereby get close co other human beings. Perhaps worst of all, they fear a loss of identity.150 cium 6 Pesonalty aces ‘The classroom antidote to such fears, according to Dufeu (994: 39-90), is to establish an adequate affective framework so that learners "feel comfortable as they take their first public steps in the strange world of a foreign language. To achieve this,one has to create a climate of acceptance that will stimulate self-confidence, and encourage participants to experi- rent and to discover the target language, allowing themselves to cake risks ‘without feeling embarrassed” (On a continuum ranging from high to low risk-taking, we may be tempted to assume with Fly (1986) that high risk-taking will yiekd positive results in second language learning: however, such is not usually the case. Beche (1983: 41) cited a study which claimed that “persons with a high motivation to achieve are... .. moderate,not high, siskalers, These ind viduals like to be in control and like 10 depend on skill. They do not take wild, frivolous risks or enter into no-win situations” Successful second lan- guage learners appear to fit the same paradigm. learner might be 100 bold in blurting out meaningless verbal garbage that no one can quite understand, while success lics in an optimum point where calculated guesses are ventured. As Rubin (1994) noted, successful language learners make willing and accurate guesses, Risketaking variation seems 0 be a fictor in a number of issues in second Janguage acquisition and pedagogy. The silent student in the class room is one who is unwilling {0 appear foolish when mistakes are made. Selfesteem seems to be closely connected to a risk-taking factor: when those foolish mistakes are made,a person with high global selesteem is, hot daunted by the possible consequences of being laughed at, Beebe (2983) noted that fosslization, or the relatively permanent incorporation of certain patterns of error, may be due to a lack of willingness to tae risks. Ie is"safe"to stay within patterns that accomplish the desired function even. though there may be some errors in those patterns. (See Chapter 8 for fur- ther discussion of fossilization.) The implications for teaching are impor ant. In a few uncommon eases, overly high risketakers, as they dominate the classroom with wild gambles, may need to be “tamed” a bit by the teacher. But most of the time our problem as teachers will be to encourage students to guess somewhat more willingly than the usual student is prone to do, and to value them as persons for those risks that they take, Intricately intertwined with selEesteem and inhibition and risk-taking, the construct of anxiety plays an imporsant affective role in second language acquisition. Even though we all know what anxiety is and we all have expe- rienced feelings of anxiousness, anxiety is still not easy to define in a simple comeran 6 Resonaliy Facto 15 sentence, Its associated with feelings of uneasiness, frustration, self-doubt, prehension, or worry (Scovel 1978: 134), ‘The research on anxiety suggests that, like selFesteem, anxiety can be ‘experienced at various levels (Oxford 1999), At the deepest, or global, level, trait anxiety is more permanent predisposition to be ansious. Some people are predictably and generally anxious abouit many things. Ata more ‘momentary or situational level, state anxiety is experienced in relation to some particular event or act. As we learned in the case of selfesteem, then, i is important in « classroom for a teacher to ty to determine whether a student's anxiety stems from a more global trait or whether it comes from 1 particular situation at the moment, ‘Trait anxiety, because of is global and somewhat ambiguously defined ‘nature, has not proved to be useful in predicting second language achieve- ‘ment (Macintyre & Gardner 199c), However, recent research on language anxiety, as it has come to be known, focuses more specifically on the sf ational nature of state anxicty. Three components of foreign language anx- ety have been identified (Horwitz et al, 1986; Maclatyse & Gardner 1989, 1y91e) sn order to break down the construct into researchable issues: 11. communication apprehension, arising from learners’ inability 10 adequately express mature thoughts ancl ideas; 2, fear of negative social evaluation, arising from learner's need to ‘make a positive social impression on others; and 3. test anxiety, oF apprehension over academic evaluation A decacle of research (Macintyre & Gardner 1988, 1989, 19913, 1991b, 1991¢, 1994; Gardner & MacIntyre 1993b; Macintyre, Noels, & Clément 1997; Horwitz & Young 1991; Young 1991; Phillips 1992; Ganschow etal 1994; Ganschow & Sparks 1996;Vogely 1998; Oxford 1999) has now given tus useful information on foreign language anxiety. Most of these studies conclude that “foreign linguage anxiety can be distinguished from other types of amiety and that it can have 4 negative effect on the language earning process” (Macintyre & Gardner 1991: 112) Yet another important insight to be applied to our understanding of anxiety lies in the distinction between debilitative and facilitative anx- jety (Alpert and Haber 1960, Scovel 1978), or what Oxford (1999) called “harmful” and “helpful” anxiety, We may be inclined to view anxiety as @ negative facior, something to be avoided at all costs. But the notion of facil: itative anxiety is that some concern—some apprehension—over a task to bbe accomplished is 4 positive fuctor. Otherwise, a learner might be inclined to be "wishy-washy lacking that facilitative tension that keeps one poised, alert, and just slightly unbalanced to the point that one cannot relax1 2 ‘ours 6 Personally Factors entirely. The feeling of nervousness before giving a public speech is, in experienced speakers, often a sign of fuciltative anxiety. symptom of just enough tension to get the job done. Sevenil studies have suggested the benefit of facilitative anxiety in learning foreign languages (Ehrman & Oxford 1995, Young 1992, Horwitz 1990). In Bailey's (1985) stucly of competitiveness and anxiety in second language learning, facilitative anxiety was one of the Keys to success, closely related! to” competitiveness. I noted in Chapter 4 that Rogers's humanistic theory of learning promotes low anxiety among learners and a nondefensive posture where learners do not feel they are in competition with one another. Bailey found in her selfanalysis, however, that while competitiveness sometimes hindered her progress (for example, the pres. sure t© outdo her pec#s sometimes caused her to retreat even to the point Of skipping class),at other times it motivated her to study harder (as in the cease of carrying out an intensive review of material in order to Feel more at ease in oral work in the classroom), She explained the positive effects of ‘competitiveness by means of the construct of facilitative anxiety. So the next time your language students are anxious, you would do well to ask yourself if that anxiety is truly debilicative. Ie could well be that ‘a itle nervous tension in the process is a good thing. Onee again, we find ‘chat 2 construct has an optimal point along its continuum: both 100 much and too litle ansiety may hinder the process of successful second language learning, Empathy “the human being is @ social animal, and the chief mechanism for main- taining the bonds of society is language. Some approaches to language teaching fil 1 accomplish the goal of communicativty in the learner by overlooking the social nature of language. While we tend to recognize the importance of the social aspect of kanguage, we also tend to oversimplify that aspect by not recognizing the complexity of the relation between fa ‘guage and society, or by considering socially oriented problems in language learning as a simple matter of “acculturation” Chapter 7 demonstrates that acculturation is no simple process, and it will become clear in this chapter dat the social transactions that the second language learner is called ‘upon to make constitute complex endeavors ‘Transaction is the process of reaching Out beyond the self to others, sand language #8 4 major tool used! to accomplish that process.A variety of ‘transactional variables may apply to second language learning: imitation, ‘modeling, identification, empathy, extroversion, aggression, styles of com> ‘munication, and others. Two of these variables, chosen for their relevance craeree 6 Reson Factors 153 to a global understanding of second language acquisition, will be treated here: empathy and extroversion, In common terminology, empathy is the process of "putting yourself into someone else's shoes” of reaching beyond the self to understand what Another person is feeling. It is probably che major factor in the harmonious coexistence of individuals in society, Language is one of the primary means of empathizing, but nonverbal communication facilitates the process of cempathizing and must not be overlooked. In more sophisticated terms, empathy is usually deseribed as the pro- jection of one’s own personality into the personality of another in order to ‘understand! him or her better. Empathy is not synonymous with sympathy. Empathy implies more possibility of detachment; sympathy connotes an agieement or harmony between individuals. Guiora (1972b: 142) defined empathy as “a process of comprehending in which a temporuey fusion af selfobject boundaries permits an immediate emotional apprehension of the affective experience of another” Psychologists generally agree with Guiorw’s definition and add that there are two necessary aspects to the ‘development and exercising of empathy:tirst,an awareness and knowledge of one’s own feelings, and second, identification with another person (Hogan 1969). In other words, you cannot fully empathize—or know someone else—until you adequately know yours, ‘Communication requires 1 sophisticated degree of empathy. In order to communicate effectively you need to be able to understand the other person’s affective and cognitive states; communication breaks down when false presuppositions or assumptions are mace about the other person's sate, From the very mechanical, syntactic level of language (© the most abstract, meaningful level, we assume certain structures of knowledge and certain emotional states in any communicative act. In onder to make those assumptions correctly, we need to transcend our own ego boundaries, of, using Guiora’s term, to"permeate” our ego boundaries so that we can send and receive messiges eleasy Oral communication is a case in which, cognitively atleast, itis easy to achieve empathetic communication because there is immediate feedback from the hearet. A misunderstood word, phrase, or idea can be questioned by the hearer and then rephrased by the speaker until a clear message is interpreted. Written communication requires a special kind of empathy — a* cognitive” empathy in which the writer, without the benefit of immediate {eeuack from the sealer, must communicate ideas by means ofa very clear ‘empathetic intuition and judgment of the reader's state of mind and struc ture of knowledge. So in a second language learning situation, the problem of empathy becomes acute. Not only must learner-speakers correctly entity cognitive134 ‘exnrie & Pesonaiy Factors ‘and affective sets in the hearer, but they must do so in a language in which they are insecure. Then, learneshearers, attempting t comprehend a second language, often discover that their own states of thought are misin terpreted by a native speaker, and the result is that linguistic, cognitive, and affective information easily passes in one ear and out the other, ‘Guiora and his colleagues (1972a, 1972b) found that a modified ver sion of the Micro-Momentary Expression (MME) test, a test claiming to ‘measure degrees of empathy, successfully predicted authenticity of pro nunciation of « foreign language. Naiman, Frohlich, Stern, and Tedesco (21978, 1996) included an empathy measure (Hogan’s Empathy Scale—sce Hogan 1969) in their battery of tests used (o try to discover characteristies ‘of the “good language learner’ but found no significant correlation between. ‘empathy and language success as measured by an imitation test and ls ening test. Theis finding was not unexpected, however, since they found field independence to be positively correlated with language success: the presumed antithesis of field independence—field dependence—has been shown 0 correlate highly with empathy (Witkin et al, 1971). But a great eal of the problem of the study of most personality variables lies in the accunicy of the fests used (o measure traits. Serious methodological probs Jems surround such measurement; the MME and Hogan's Empathy Scate are ceases in point, It has been shown that such tests accurately identify per sonality extremes (Schizophrenic, paranoid, or psychotic behavior, for example) but fl to differentiate among the vast “normal” population, Certainly one of the more interesting implications oF the study of empathy’ is the need to deline empathy cross-culturally—to understand how diferent enltures express empathy. Most of the empathy tests devised in the United States are culture-bound to Western, North American, middlc ‘lass society. Chapter 7 will deal more specifically with empathy in cross. cultural settings, particularly with the role of empathy in defining the concept of acculturation, Extroversion Extroversion and its counterpart, introversion, are also potentially impor- tant factors in the acquisition of a second language. The terms are often misunderstood because of a tendeney to stereotype extroversion. We are prone to think of an extroverted person as a gregarious, "life of the party” person, Introverts, conversely, are thought of as quiet and reserved, with tendencies toward reclusiveness. Western society values the stereotypical extrovert, Nowhere is this more evident than in the classroom where reachers admire the talkative, outgoing student who participates freely in iurre® 6 Personality Factors 155 class discussions. On the other hand, introverts are sometimes thought of as not being as bright as extrovert, Such a view of extroversion is misleading. Extroversion is the extent to which a person has a deep-seated need to receive ego enhancement, self. esteem, and a sense of wholeness from other people as opposed 10 receiving that affirmation within oneself. Exteoverts actually need other people in order (0 feel “good” But extroverts are not necessarily loud ‘mouthed andl talkative.They may be relatively shy but stil need the alfir ‘mation of others. Introversion, on the other hand, is the extent to which 2 person derives a sense of wholeness and fulfillment apart from a reflec- tion of this self from other people. Contrary to our stereotypes, introverts ‘can have an inner strength of character that extroverts do not have. Iis unfortunate that these stereotypes have influenced teachers’ per- ceptions of students. Ausubel (1968: 413) noted that introversion and ‘extroversion are a “grossly misleading index of social adjustment, and other ‘educators have warned against prejudging students on the basis of per- ccived extroversion. In language classes, where oral participation is highly valued, it is easy t0 view active participants with favor and to assume that their visibility in the clissroom is due to an extroversion factor (whieh may ‘not be so). Culturally, American society differs considerably from 2 number of other societies where it is improper to speaks out in the classroom, ‘Teachers need to consider cultural norms in their assessment of a student's presumed “passivity” in the classroom. _Extroversion is commonly thought co be related so empathy, but such ay not be the case. The extroverted person may actually behave in an extroverted manner in order to protect his or her own ego, with exteo- yerted behavior being symptomatic of defensive barriers and high ego boundaries. At the sume time the introverted, quictes, more reserved. person may show high empathy—an intuitive understanding and appre: hension of others—and simply be more reserved in the ouward and overt expression of empathy. Ie is not clear then, that extroversion or introversion helps or hinders the process of second language acquisition, The Toronto study (Naiman et al, 1978, 1996) found no significant effect for extroversion in characterizing, the good language learner. Busch (1982), in a comprehensive study on extroversion, explored the refationship of introversion and extroversion to. English proficiency in adult Japanese learners of English in Japan, She hypothesized that extroverted students (as measured by a standard per- ‘sonality inventory) Would be more proficient than introverts, Her hypoth: ‘esis was not supported by her findings. In fact introverts were significantly better than extroverts in their pronunciation (one of four factors which156 Compe 6 Pesenaliy Factors ‘were measured in an oral interview)! This later result clouded our stereo type of the extroverted language learner as a frequent and willing partici [PANE in class aetivities. But more appropriately, it suggested that Introverts ‘may have the patience and focus to attend to clear articulation in a foreign language. Even in the light of an appropriate definition of extroversion, it is new= cetheless conceivable that extroversion may be a faetor in the development Of general oral communicative competence (see Dewuele & Furham 1998), which requires face-to-tice interaction, but not in listening, reading, and writing. I i also readily apparent that cross-cultural norms of non verbal and verbal interaction vary widely, andl what in one culture (say. the United States) may appearas introversion is, in another culture (say, Japan), respect and politeness. Nevertheless, on a practical level, the fuilitating or interfering effects of certain language teaching practices that invoke extro- version need to be carefully considered. How effective are techniques that incorporate drama, pantomime, humor, role-plays, and overt personality exposure? teacher needs to beware of trying to” create” in a student more sovcalled extroversion than is really necessary. We need to be sensitive «© cultural norms, 10 a student's willingness t0 speak out in class, and 10. opti points berween extreme extroversion and introversion that may vary from student to student. MYERS-BRIGGS CHARACTER TYPES In the last several decades there has been a taemendous wave of interest, in Western society, inthe refationship between personality “type"and one's success in a job, in management of time, in neademic ppursuits in mar in child rearing, and in other contexts, We have become hypersensitized (© the “different stokes for different folks” syndrome that alerts us all to how unique every individual is and how each person can act on that uniqueness Co suceeed in business, school, sex life, and interpersonal selationships. The champions of this syndrome are Isabel Myers and Katheryn Briggs, whose rescarch in the 19508 and 1960s has come to fruition in the form of the widespread use, today, of the MyersBriggs ‘Type Indicator (Myers 1962), commonly relerred to as the” Myers-Briggs test” ‘The Myers Briggs test revived the work of Carl Jung of a half-century cearlierJung (1923) said that people are different in fundamental ways, and that an individual has preferences for functioning’ in ways chat are char: acteristic, or typical’ of that particular individual. Jung's work was all but forgotten with the boom of behavioristic psychology in the mille part of the century, but we have now returned to a recognition of the acute impor. tance of individual variation, especially in the realm of education. Curren 6 Peconaiy cts 157 Borrowing from some of Jung's “types! the MyersBriggs team tested four dichotomous styles of functioning in the Myers Briggs test:(1) introversion versus extroversion, 2) sensing versus intuition, (3) thinking versus feeling, and (4 judging versus perceiving, Table 6.1 on page 158 defines the four categories (Keirsey & Bates 1984: 25-26) in simple words and phrases, ‘The Extroversion-Introversion (E/D) category relates to an aspect of personality already discussed in this chapter, the way we either “turn in ward” or “turn outward” for our sense of wholeness and selfesteem. The Sensing-Intuition (S/N) category has to do with the way we perceive and take in” the world around us. Sensing types are dattoriented and empit- cay inclined to stick to observable, measurable facts, while intuitive types are more willing to rely on hunches, inspiration, and imagination for per- ceiving reality. The Thinking-Feeling (T/F) category describes ways of arriving at conclusions and of storing realty in memory. Thinking types are generally cognitive, objective, impartial, and logical. Feeling involves more affectivity,a desire for harmony, capacity for warmth, empathy,and com- passion, Myers and Briges extended beyond Jung's types to add the udging-Perceiving /P) dichotomy, which has to do with one’s attitude toward the “outer world.” “Js” want closure, planning, organization, while *Ps"are spontaneous, flexible, and comfortable with open-ended contexts With four two-dimensional categories, sixteen personally profiles, or combinations. are possible. Disciples of the Myers Briggs research (Kersey 8 Bates 1984, for example) clescribe the implications of being an “ENBJ" or ‘an ISTP? and all the fourteen other combinations of types. Managess are aided in their understanding of employees by understanding their char- acter type. ISTJs, for example, make better behindthe-scenes workers on jobs that require meticulous precision, while ENFPs might be better at dealing with the public. Young people seeking 2 career can understand better haw certain oecupations might be more oF less suited co them by knowing their own character type. Lawrence (1984) stressed the impor- nce oF a ceacher's understanding the individual differences of learners in a classroom Es will excel in group work; Is will prefer individual work; SJs, are linear learners with a strong need for structure” (p. 52); NTs are good at paperand-pencil tests. The generalizations are many’ ‘What might all this have to do with the second language leaener? A few studies (Carrell, Prince, & Astika 1996; Ehrman 1989, 1990; Ehrman & (Oxford 1989, 1990, 1995; Moody 1988; Oxford & Ehrman 1988) have ‘sought to discover a link between Myers-Brigss types and second language learning, Notable among these is Ehrman anc! Oxford's (1990) stucly of sev- centy-nine forciga language learners at the Forciga Seevice Institute. They found that their subjects exhibited some differences in strategy use, depending on their MyersBriggs type. For example, extroverts (E) uscd social strategies consistently and easily, while introverts (D rejected them,158 crear 6 Resonaiy Factors Table 6.1. Myers-Briggs character types Extroversion ©) Sociabily Interction External Breach Eston Milley of elation Expenditure of energes inlet in extemal events o Sens Experience Pa Realise Respation ‘Actual Baonesnh ii foc Fiscal Sensibie Thinking Dhiecive Pris Poli ine Cierion frm impersona sawee tegen Santores Gitique Kosi ‘locaton Jidging Sete De a Fined Pan ahead kum one hie Closure Decision-making Planned Completed Bective Wap up Orang Deadline! Gott show on the road Introversion (| Teoria Gonceniation tra Depth Iris Lined relationships CComervation of energies terest ternal eaion Intuition (> Hunches futre Freciave Possible Head:in-louds Fama felon Ingen Imginative Feeling Sebjectve Values Social valves Esenuating circumstances trum Persson Personal Humane Harmon Good o bad Seprecaive Bevotion Perceiving ® Peni (Gather more data Flexible ‘Adapts you tarhichappet ‘Shen opilons ‘eestor hunting Span endl Senate Something wil tr “heres plenty of tne What caine Ler wait an ee ures 6 Personality Fctos 159 Sensing (S) students displayed a strong liking for memory strategies; intuitives (N) were better at compensation strategies, The T/F distinction yielded the most dramatic contrast: thinkers (T) commonly used metacog- nitive strategies and analysis, wile feelers (F rejected such strategies; and feelers used social strategies while thinkers did not. And judgers () rarely used the alfective strategies that the perceivers (P) found so useful These findings notwithstanding, we should not be too quick ro conclude that psy chological type can predict successful and unsuccessful learning, as the authors readily admit. tn another study, Ehrman (1989) outlined both the assets and the liabilities of exch side of the Myersrigas continuum (see ‘Table 6.2). Table 6.2. Assets and liabilities of Myers Briggs Types (Ehrman 1989) ‘Major Assets Associated with Each Preference Extraversion Willing to ake conversational risks Intoversion Concentstion ss sutiioney Sensing ord, systematic werk aero to deta close obsenaion inition Injeencing nd guessing rom cates, stractring on traning, concepluctizing and model-building. Thing Analysis, sel iscipline: insirumental motivation Feeling Iniegraive motivation, bonling with teachers, good _ rolstons lend to god st stom . Jung Systematic work get the job (whatever it ish done Perceiving ‘Speen, flexible, adaptable to change and new experiences ‘Major Liabilities Associated with Each Preference {Nole: Not all stodents showed these Hib Extoversion Dependent on outside stimulation and interaction Intrversion ‘Need to process ides before speaking sometimes led to Svoidance ol fingaistic risk in conversation Sensing Endre y ak of les sequence gl, aus strgtute in language or course Intuition Inaceuracy and missing important details, sought excessive complexity of dicourse Thinking Performance anxiety because self-esteem was atached to chiewemen excessive nee fr corr angus process! Feeling Discouraged if not appreciate, disrupted by lack of interpersinel harmony Judging Rigiclity, intolerance of ambiguous simul Porceiving Laziness, inconsistent pacing over the long haul160 onwme 6 Pesonaliy Frio It would appear that success in a second language depends on the “mobilization of (@) the strategies associated with one’s native learning style preferences (indicated by the four MBTI letters) and (b) the strategies asso- lated with the less preferred functions that are the opposites of the four letters of a person’ type” Ehrman & Oxford 1990: 323). In other words, heir strengths, and their weak: nesses, and effectively utilize strengths and compensate for weaknesses regardless of their"natural” preferences. successful learners know their preferences, MOTIVATION Motivation is probably the most frequently used catchall term for explaining the success or failure of virtually aay complex task. Its easy 10 assume that success in any task is due simply to the fet that someone is, “motivated” It fs easy in second language learning to claim that a learner will be successful with the proper motivation. Such claims are of course not erroneous, for countless studies and experiments in human learning have shown that motivation is a key w learning (eC DOruye! 1998). But these claims gloss over detailed understanding of exactly what motivation is and what the subcomponents of motivation are, What does it mean to sty that somone is motivated? How do you create, foster, and maintain Various definitions of motivation have been proposed over the course of decades of research. Following the historical schools of thought described in Chapter 1, three different perspectives emerge: 1. Troma bebavioristic perspective, motivation is seen in very matter of fact terms. It is quite simply the anticipation of reward Driven to acquire positive reinforcement, and driven by previons experiences of reward for behavior, we act accordingly to achieve further reinforcement. In this view, our acts ate likely 0 be at the mercy of external forces, 2, In cognitive terms, motivation places much more emphasis on the individual's decisions,"the choices people make as t0 what experiences or goals they will approach or avoid), and the degree of effort they will exert in that respect” (Keller 1983: 389). Some cognitive psychologists see underlying needs or drives as the compelling force behind our decisions. Ausubel (1968: 368-379), Jor example, identified six needs undergirding the construct of the need for exploration, for seving the other side ‘of the mountain; for probing the unlnown; . the need! for manipulation, for operating —to ‘urna 6 Penonaliy Factors 161 use Skinner's term—on the environment and causing change: . the need for activity, for movement and exer: ‘ise, both physical and mental; . the need for stfmulation, the need w be stime: lated by the environment, by other people, oF by ideas, thoughts, and feelings; €. the need for knnorledge, the need to process and internalize the results of exploration, manipul tion, activity, and stimulation, to resolve contr: ictions, to quest for solutions to problems and for self-consistent systems of knowledge: © finally, the need for ego enhancement, for the self to be known and to be accepted and approved of by others 3. A constructivist view of motivation places even further emphasis, (on social context as well as individual personal choices (Williams ‘8 Burden 1997; 120). Each person is motivated differently, and will cherefore act on his or her environment in ways that are unique. But these unique acts are always cartied out within a cul ‘ral and social milieu and cannot be completely separated trom that context, Several decades ago, Abraham Maslow (1970) viewed motivation as a construct in which ultimate attainment of goals was possible only by passing through @ hierarchy of needs, thece of which were solidly grounded in community, belonging, and social stanis. Maslow saw motivation as dependent on the ‘suisuetion first of fundamental physical necessities (aig, water, food), then of community, security, identity, and selFesteem, the fulfillment of which finally leads to seifctualtzation. ‘The “needs” concept of motivation in some ways helongs to all three schools of thought: the fulfillment of needs is rewarding, requires choices, and in many cases must be interpreted in a social context. Consider chil- dren who are motivated to learn to read. They are motivated because they perceive the value (reward) of reading, they meet the needs of exploration, stimulation, knowledge, selfesteem, and autonomy, and they do so in ‘widely varying ways and schedules and in the context of a Society that values literacy. On the other hand, you may be unmotivated to Fearn a for ign language because you fail to see the rewaruls, connect the learning, oily to superficial needs (e.g. fullilling a requirement), and see no poss Dillty of a social context in which this skill is useful. (See Table 6.3 for schematic representation of views of motivation.)162 caweren 6 Pesanlty Facors Table 6.3. Three views of mativation Bea ‘= anlcipation of reward Cotve Constructivist # Ben by basic human mci contest {sre to recehve postive "eds exploration. + comunty tenors ito eh) St tt and + exter, dvidal forces» age of elon expended + security oF incon tema Indl forces nema tractive inconta toces a contol ‘Motivation is something that can, like seltesteem, be global, situs tional, oF task-oriented. Learning @ foreign language requires some of all three levels of motivation. For example,a learner may possess high “global” motivation but low “task” motivation to perform well on, say, the written mode of the language. Motivation is also typically examined in terms of the intrinsic and extrinsic motives of the learner. Those who learn for their own selfperceived needs and goals are intrinsically motivated, and those ‘who pursue 4 goal only to receive an external reward from someone else are -xinsically motivated. (We will return to this extremely important con- cept.) Finally, stadies of motivation in second language acquisition often refer to the distinction between integrative and instrumental orientations, of the learner, which we now consider in the next section. Instrumental and Integrative Orientations One of the best-known and historically significant studies of motivation in second language learning was carried out by Robert Gardner and Wallace Lambert (1972). Over « period of twelve years they extensively studied for eign language learners in Canada, several parts of the United States, and the Philippines in an effort to determine how attitudinal and motivational Suc. tors affected language learning success. Motivation was examined as actor ofa number of different kinds of atitudes, Two different clusters of attitudes divided two basic types of what Gardner and Lambert at that ime identified as“instrumental and “integrative” motivation. The instrumental side of the dichotomy referred to acquiring 2 language as a means for attaining instrumental goals: furthering a career, reading technical material, translation, and so forth. The integrative side described learners who wished 10 integrate themselves into the culture of the second language group and become involved in social interchange in that group, It is important co digress here for a moment {0 npte that in 1972, instrumentality and integrativeness were referred to as types of motive: Hou. number of years later, Gardner and Maclatyre (1991) more appro- priately referred 19 the dichotomy as a case of orientation. That is, conor 6 Asn Factors 163 depending on whether a learner's context or orientation was (a) academic or career-related (instrumental), of (b) socially or culturally oriented Gate grative), different needs might be fulilled in learning 2 foreign language. ‘The importance of distinguishing orientation from motivation is that within either orientation, one can have either high or low motivation, One learner may be only mildly motivated to learn within, say,a career context, while another learner with the Sime orientation may be highly driven succeed, Gardner and Lambert (1972) and Spolsky (1969) found that integrae tiveness generally accompanied higher scores on proficiency tests in a for. cign language. The conclusion from these studies was that integrativeness ‘was indeed an important requirement for suecesstul language learning. But evidence quickly began 10 accumulate that challenged such a claim. Yasmeen Lukmani (1972) demonstrated that among Marathispeaking Indian students learning English in India, those with instrumental orienta- tons scored higher ia tests of English proficiency. Braj Kacheu (1977, 1992) noted that Indian English is but one example of a variety of Englishes, ‘wiles, especially be Gouutsics where English as become ai faternational language, can be acquired very successfully for instrumental purposes alone. In the face of claims and counterclaims about integrative and instru: ations, Au C1988) reviewed twenty-seven different studies of integrative-instcumental construct and concluded that both its theo- retical undespinnings and che instruments used to measure motivation were suspect, Because the dichotomy was based on notions about cultural beliefs, numerous ambiguities had crepe into the construct, making it diff cult to attribute foreign language success to certain presumably integrative or instrumental causes. Gardner and Macintyre (1993) disputed Au's claims with strong empirical support for the validity of their measures, Nevertheless, to further muddy che waters, even Gardner found that certain contexts point toward instrumental orientation as an effective context for language success (Gardner & Macintyre 1991), and that others favor an Integrative orientation (Gardner, Day, & Macintyre 1992). ‘Such variable findings in empirical investigations do not necessarily invalidate the integritive-instrumental construct, They point out once gain that there is no single means of learning a second language: some learners in some contexts are more successful in learning a language if they are integratively oriented, and others in different contexts beneft from an instrumental orientation. The findings also suggest that the two orienta tions are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Second language Tearning is rely taken up in contexts that are exclusively instrumental or exclusively integrative, Most situations involve a mixture of each orientation. For example, international students learning English in the United States for academic purposes may be relatively balanced in their desire to learn168 Qouuree 6 Pesonalty factors English both Jor academic (instrumental) purposes and to understand and become somewhat integrated with the culture and people of the United States, [A further perspective on the integeative-instrumental construct may de gained by regarding the two orientations simply as two out of a number Of possible orientations. Graham (1984) claimed that integrativeness was too broadly defined and suggested that some integrative orientations may be simply a modenite desire o socialize with or find out about speakers of the target language, while deeper, assimilative orientations may describe 4 more profound need to identify almost exclusively with the target lan guage culture, possibly aver a long-term period, Likewise, instrumentality ‘ight describe an academic orientation, on the one hand, and a career oF business orientation, on the other. Motivational intensity, then, can have varying degrees within any one of these four orientations or contexts, and possibly more, Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation Yet another, but arguably the most powerlul, dimension of the whole mot vation construct in general is the degree 0 which learners are intrinsi- cally or extrinsically motivated to succeed in a task, Baward Deci (1975: 23) defined intrinsic motivation: Inteinsically motivated activities are ones for which there is no apparent reward except the activity itself People seem to engiige in the activities for their own sake and not because they lead (0 aan extsinsic reward. . .. Inttinsically motivated behaviors are aimed at bringing about certain internally rewarding, conse ‘quences, namely clings of competence and selfdetermination, Extrinsically motivated behaviors.on the other hand, are cartied out in anticipation of a reward from outside and beyond the self. Typical extrinsic rewards are money, prizes, grades, and even certain types oF positive feed back. Behaviors initiated solely €© avoid punishment are also extrinsically motivated, even though mumerous intrinsic benefits can ultimately accrue {0 those who, instead, view punishment avoidance as a challenge that can build theie sense of competence and selfletermination, Which form of motivation is more powerful? Our growing stockpile of esearch on motivation (see Dérnyei 1998; Doenyet & Csizér 1998; Crookes & Schmidt 1991; Brown 1990) strongly favors intrinsic orientations, espe lally for long-term setention. Jean Piaget (1972) and others pointed out ‘dat human beings universally view incongruity, uncertainty, and “disequi- Iibrium"as motivating. In other words, we seek out a rexsonable challenge. wwe 6 Posonall cts 165 “Then we initiate behaviors intended 0 conquer the challenging situation. Incongruity is not itself motivating, but optimal incongruity-—or what Krashen (1985) called "i+1" (Gee Chapter 10)~presents enough of a possi: bility of being resolved that we will pursue that resolution, Maslow (1970) claimed! that intrinsic motivation is clearly superior to extrinsic, According to his hierarchy of needs discussed above, we are ult mately motivated (© achieve “selEactualization’ once our basic physical, safety, and community needs are met, Regarlless of the presence or absence of extrinsic rewards, we will strive for selfesteem and fulfillment. Jerome Bruner (1966b), praising the “autonomy of selfreward, claimed that one of the most effective ways to help both children and adults think and lenea isto free them from the control of rewards and pun- ishments. One of the principal weaknesses of extrinsieally driven behavior is its addictive narnre. Once captivated, as it were, by the lure of an imam diate prize or praise, our dependency on those tangible rewards increase ‘even to the point that cheie withdrawal can then extinguish the dest earn, Ramage (1990), for example, found that foreign language high school students wh were interested in continuing their study beyond the college enttance requirement were positively and intrinsically motivated to suc ceed. In contist, those who were in the classes only to fulfil entrance requirements exhibited low motivation and weaker performance, Ic is important to distinguish the intrinsic-extrinsie construct from Gardner's integrative-instrumental orientation. While many instances of intrinsic motivation may indeed rarn out to be fategritive, some may not For example, one could, for highly developed intrinsic purposes, wish to learn a second language in order to advance i academic program, Likewise, one could develop a positive alfect toward the speakers of a second language for extrinsic reasons, such as parent reinforcement of a teacher's encouragement. Kathleen Batley (1986) illus: trated the relationship berween the pwo dichotomies with the dlagram in Table 6.4 ‘The intrinsic-extrinsic continuum in motivation is applicable to for. eign language chissrooms around the world, Regardless of the cultural bbcliefs and attitudes of learners and teachers, intsinsic and extrinsic factors can be easily identified, Dérnyel and Csizér (1998), for example, in a survey ‘of Hungarian teachers of English, proposed a taxonomy of factors by whieh teachers could motivate their learners, They cited factors such. as devel: ‘oping a rckuionship with learners, building learners’ self-confidence and asstonomy, personalizing the learning process, and inereasing learners’ goal- orientation, These all fall into the intsinsic side of motivation. Our ultimate quest in this language teaching business is, of course, fo see to it that our pedagogical tools can harness the power of intrinsically motivated fearners who ate striving for excellence, autonomy, and selFactualization. sureer oF to succeed in an166, were 6 Personal Factors Table 6.4, Motivational dichotomies Intrinsic Extrinsic Integrative 1 leamer wishes to iezogate withthe L2 Someone else wishes the L2 Teamer to know the 12 for culture (eg, for Integrative reasons (eg, Immigeation or Japanese parents send Kids marriage) S Jopanseansige Instrumental 12 eamer wishes to achieve goals utilizing 12 teg, fora career), External power wants L2 leamer 8 learn Ue. Corperation sends Japanese businessman to U.S. for language traising) ‘THE NEUROBIOLOGY OF AFFECT Ie would not be appropriate to engage in a dncussion of personaly and langage leesing without touching on the neuroogieal fuses offer ‘he lst pat othe twentieth century Sew sguican advances in the empiri sty ofthe ban through sch techniques a poston emission tomography (PED and mantic resonance imaging GR. Using such technigues, some conncetions have been made between alfecity and mentaVerotional processing in general (Schumann 1998), a6 well second lange sequlstion i particular, "Neurobiology. ncding ne roanatomy, neurochemistry and neurophysiology, informs several ares Or imterest for lngsge aquisition stats fr example platy Ineo an ering” @chemann 199928), oti Schumann's (19971998, 1999) workin this area has singled out ection of he tetporl bes ofthe human br, the anda, major player in the eelatonsip of ae o language earning The sy ca ise nor yo mae an apa of smut oer word you see of hea ott something, he amygdala helps you decide wheter or not your perception ove feta leva to your needs or gal, manageable (you ea potently cope wi 1). and com pate with your own sci norms an selfconcep.o,when each a 2 oreigh langage cls sent ats you to petfomm someting thai Tees sy oo complex, your reaction of fear and anxiety mes that he amyl hts sent neal siglo he eso the ran ndcting hat he me | ore 6 Personality Fictrs 167 stimulus is (00 novel, unpleasant, unmanageable at the moment, and a ‘potential threat to self-esteem. ‘Schumann (1999) examined a number of foreign language motivation scales in terms of their neurobiological properties. He noted how certain ‘questions about motivation refer to pleasantness ("I enjoy learning English very much”), goal relevance (Studying French can be important to me becanse it will allow me to ..."),coping potential ("I never feel quite sure of myself when ...-), and nosmvself compatibility (Being able to speak English will acd to my social status”). His Conclusion: “positive appraisals of the language learning situation , enhance language learning and nega tive apprnisals inbibit second language learning"(p. 32). Research in the near future on the neurobiology of affect is likely ro enlighten our current understanding of the physiology of the brain and its cfiect on human behavior, Even more specifically, we can look forward to verifying what we now hypothesize to be important connections between affect and second language acquisition MEASURING AFFECTIVE FACTORS “The measurement of affective fuctors has for many decales posed a per- plexing problem, Most tests of personality are paperand-pencil tests that ask for a selfrating of some kind, Ia typical tests, for example,” My friends hhave ao confidence in me" and “I am generally very patient with people” are items on which a subject agrees or disagrees in order to measure esteem and empathy, respectively. Such tests present three problems. 1, The most important issue in measuring affectivity is the problem of validity. Because most tests use a self-rating method, one can justifiably ask whether or not seltperceptions are accurate. True, ‘external assessments that involve interview, observation, indirect measures, and multiple methods (Campbell & Fiske 1959) have been shown t be more accurate, but often only at great expense, ln Gardner and Macirtyre's (1993) study of a Farge battery of selfcheck tests of affective variables, the validity of such tests was upheld. We can conclude, cautiously, that paperandepencil selérat: ings may be valid if G@) the tests have been widely validated previ ously, and cb) wwe do not rely on oaly one instrument or method to identify a level of affectivity 2. A second related problem in the measurement of affective vs ables lies in what has been called the “selfflattery” syndrome (Oller 1981b, 1982). In genecal, test takers will try to discern “right” answers to questions (that is, answers that make them look168 exneren 6 Personality Factors “good” or that do not "damage" them), even though test directions say there are no right or wrong answers. In so doing, perceptions Of self are likely to be considerably biased toward what the test taker perceives as a highly desirable personality type. 5. Finally, tests of selfesteem, empathy, motivation, and other factors ‘can be quite culturally ethnocentric, using concepts and cefer- ‘ences that are difficult to interpret cross culturally, One izem. testing empathy, for example, requires the subject to agree or dis agree with the following statement: Disobedience to the govern- ‘ment is sometimes justified.” In societies where one never under any circumstances eritieizes the government, sich an item is absurd. An extroversion test asks whether you like to "stay late” at parties or go home early Even the concept of party” carries cu {ural connotations that may not be understood by all test takers, oo A plausible conchision to the study of affective factors in second lan guage acquisition contains both a word of caution andl a challenge to fur- ther research, Caution is in order lest we assuine that current methods of ‘measurement are highly reliable and valid instruments, But the challenge for teachers and researchers is 10 maintain the quest for identifying those personality fuctors that are significant for the acquisition of a second lan guage, and to continue (0 Bnd effective means for infusing those findings into our classroom pedagony. wna Aosonwliy facies 169 In the Classroom: Putting Methods into Perspective ‘Throughout the twentieth century, the language teaching profession was involved in @ search. That search was for what has popularly been called *methads,” or ideally, a single method, generalizable across widely varying audiences, that vould successfully teach stu- dents a foreign language in the classroom. Historical accounts of the profession tend therefore to describe a succession of methods, each Of which is more or less discarded in due course as anew method takes its place. The first four of these end-of-chapter vignettes on classroom practice provided a brief sketch of that hundred-year “methodical” history. From the revolutionary turn-of-the-century methods ‘espoused by Francols Gouin and Charies Berlitz, through yet another revolution—the Audiolingual Method—in the middie of the twentieth century, and through the spirited “designer” methods of the seven- tes, we are now embarking on @ new century. But now methods, as distinct, theoretically unified clusters of teaching practices pracum- ably appropriate for a wide variety of audiences, are no longer the ‘object of our search, Instead, the last Few years of the twentieth cen- tury were characterized by an enlightened, dynamic approach to lan- guage teaching in which teachers and curriculum developers were Searching for valid communicative, interactive techniques suitable for specified learners pursuing specific goals in specific contexts. In order to understand the current paradigm shift in language teaching, it will be useful to examine what Is meant by some com- monly used terms~words like method, approach, technique, proce- dure, etc. What Is @ method? Four decades ago Edward Anthony (1963) gave us a definition that has withstood the test of time. His concept of method was the second of three hierarchical elements, ‘namely, approach, method, and technique. An. approach, according to Anthony, Is a set of assumptions dealing with the nature of lan- ‘guage, learning, and teaching. Method is an overall plan for sys- ‘tematic presentation of language based upon a selected approach. Techniques are the specific activities manifested in the classroom, which are consistent with a method and therefore in harmony with an approach as well ‘To this day, Anthony's terms are stil in common use among lan- ‘guage teachers. A teacher may, for example, at the approach level, affirm the ultimate importance of learning’ in a relaxed state of ‘mental awareness just above the threshold of consciousness. The method that follows might resemble, say, Suggestopedia Techniques could include playing Baroque music while reading a pas- sage in the foreign language, getting students to sit in the yoga position while listening to a list of words, learners adopting a new fname in the classroom, or role-playing that new person. ‘A couple of decades later, Jack Richards and Theodore Rodgers