Name: 李莹亮

Number：10211657

Course: Second Language Acquisition

(Mid-term)

The key issues in individual learner differences and SLA

The key issues in individual learner differences and SLA that the author aims to

address to are:

First, identification and classification of learner factors that may affect SLA;

Second, descriptions and explanations of different learner factors and their

effects on SLA;

Third, characteristics of “good language learner” based on the study of learner

factors.

Before looking into the individual learner factors, attentions should be paid to the

two different aspects of SLA that are possibly affected by those factors, namely the

route of SLA which learners pass through, and the rate and ultimate success of SLA

which concern the efficiency and level of proficiency of learners. There is controversy

about whether learner factors will influence to route of acquisition whereas the claim

of individual vary in the rate and ultimate success is not controversial.

1. Identification and classification of learner factors

The identification and classification of learner factors has been problematic

because of the main difficulty of the impossibility of observing directly factors, such

as aptitude or anxiety. Nevertheless, since each factor is a complex of features which

could be overlapping, different researchers employ different approach to classify them

and therefore in different terms.

The author proposes a classification known as personal factors and general factors:

1) Personal factors: group dynamics, attitudes to the teacher and course materials,

individual learning techniques, etc.

2) General factors: age, intelligence and aptitude, cognitive style, attitude and

motivation, personality, etc.

Personal factors are highly idiosyncratic features of each learner’s way of L2

learning, while the general factors are variables that all learners more or less have and

they differ in the extent of how they are realized. Both personal and general factors

have social (external), cognitive and affective (internal) aspects and therefore each

factor involves these three factors in different degree.

2. Descriptions and explanations of different learner factors and their effects on

SLA

1) Personal factors

The research methodology of observing personal factors are in two ways – first,

studies of dairies kept by learners; second, questionnaires and interviews with

individual learners.

Group dynamics

It seems to be important of group dynamics in classroom SLA. Researchers have

found that group dynamics, such as comparison with other learners and

competitiveness, can serve as a stimulus for learning, whereas collective rejection of

pressure and acceptance of failure depress performance.

Bailey (1983) proposes a model of the relationship between self-image and

learning. Unsuccessful self-image will result in debilitating anxiety, which impairs

learning, or in facilitating anxiety, which therefore enhances L2. When learners have

successful self-images, they tend to continue displaying efforts and then L2 will be

improved.

Attitudes to the teacher and course materials

Students may hold different view about what kind of teacher and teaching

materials. Some prefer teachers to have strict teaching style and tight learning task,

while some tend to believe democratic ones who give them more space for a personal

agenda are better. As for the course material, adult learners are inclined to have a

variety of books which they can choose for themselves.

Individual learning techniques

There are mainly two types of learner: those involved in studying L2, and those in

obtaining L2 input. The first group of learners is reported to use some techniques

when dealing with vocabulary. For example, they will prepare and memorize word

list, learn words in context, practice vocabulary, etc. The second type prefers getting

contact with L2, such as communicating with native speakers, watching TV, or

travelling to a country where L2 is used.

2) General factors

Age

There is a general belief that children are better learners than adults. However, a

noticeable disagreement exists in the conclusions of researchers.

As the effects of age is concern, it is necessary to observe from two aspects: the

route of SLA and the rate and ultimate success of SLA. First, a consensus has been

reached that age does not affect the route of acquisition by both longitudinal and

cross-sectional studies conducted by scholars. They find that a similar order of

morpheme and grammatical items is followed by subject of different ages.

Second, the rate and success of SLA appear to be significantly influenced by the

age factor. When it comes to the rate, some evidences are demonstrated that older

learners perform better. However, it should be modified: first, a study shows that

adolescents progress more rapid than children and adults; second, age factor is more

likely to affect morphology and syntax instead of pronunciation. Moreover, the

success of SLA is related to the exposure length and starting age of L2. The number

of year’s exposure tend to have a greater effect on overall communicative fluency,

while the starting age influence is strongly felt in native-like pronunciation

achievement.

Three theories which attempt to explain the effects of age are discussed in the

book. First, the critical period hypothesis (CPH) proposes that there is a period of

natural and effortless language acquisition. During this period, the brain remains

plasticity. Then with the beginning of puberty, this plasticity will disappear because of

the lateralization of language function concentrates in the left hemisphere. However,

the CPH is based on the false assumption that children out-perform adults in language

acquisition, which some studies prove to be inadequate. And it is possible that there

might be multiple critical period accounting for different language functions.

Second, the cognitive explanations suggest that younger children perceive

language as a tool of communication while the older learners comprehend it as a

formal system. Children lack flexible thinking and social attitude due to an absence of

meta-awareness, which leads to automatic and “open” language acquisition. In

contrast, adults, who possess strong meta-awareness, have developed abstract thinking

and hold stronger attitude towards the L2 which serve as a block to natural

acquisition. The cognitive explanations can explain adolescents’ being the best

learners, for they can both “pick up” language like children and supplement it with

conscious learning. But the problem with them is still the same of the CPH.

Third, the affective explanations also explore the possibilities of age difference.

Brown (1980a) states that SLA is related to four stages of acculturation: (1) initial

excitement; (2) cultural shock; (3) cultural stress with a gradual recovery; and (4)

assimilation or adaptation. Stage 3 is the crucial one. Younger learners are less culture

bounded and therefore are more likely to go through the stages. However, this is also

based on the false assumption. A more convincing explanation offered by Neufield

(1978) distinguishes the “primary” and “secondary” levels of language. Primary

levels consist of basic lexicon and grammar as well as pronunciation. Second levels

include complex grammatical structures and language styles. Adults acquire the

primary levels more rapidly while children are more likely to achieve the secondary

levels because of the need to be accepted by their peer groups.

Intelligence and aptitude

Intelligence is the general academic or reasoning ability which is often referred to

as the “g” factor. It seems to be not essential to L1 acquisition according to the fact

that all children except those who are extremely retarded can acquire their L1

grammar competence. Cummins (1979) suggested that there are two independent sets

of language ability – cognitive/academic language ability (CALA) and basic

interpersonal communication skills (BICS). This distinction explains many research

findings of the effects of intelligence. CALA is more likely to influence the classroom

formal study whereas BICS may be a more powerful predicator of naturalist SLA

emphasizing communication. Furthermore, there is no evidence that intelligence

affects the route of SLA and it limits to the rate of SLA.

Aptitude, on the other hand, involves the specific cognitive qualities that are

important for language study. Linguists use some tests to measure aptitude through

the way of discrimination of meaningful sounds, association of sounds and written

symbols and identification of grammatical rules. However, aptitude here is defined as

the CALA rather than involving BICS. The effects are measured in terms of

proficiency levels or achievement scores. And some researches find a strong

relationship between aptitude and proficiency. Yet two sets of doubts remain. It is not

clear that whether aptitude exist and if so, what cognitive processes are subsumed

under it. Another set of doubt is about what aspect is affected – acquisition or

learning. Krashen (1981a) argues that aptitude only relate to formal learning, which

indicates that aptitude does not play a major role in communication skills. Again, like

other factors, aptitude may also have effects on the rate and success of SLA rather

than on the route, especially in the case of classroom SLA.

Cognitive style

Cognitive style refers to the manner in which people perceive, conceptualize,

organize, and recall information. It is usually presented as two poles of a continuum:

field dependence and field independence. Field dependents tend to recognize the field

as a whole and have greater social skills, while field independents are able to perceive

particular items and are less skilled in interpersonal relationships. Besides, it is

suggested that the former type facilitates naturalistic SLA and the latter leads to

success in classroom SLA. Nonetheless, scholars reach in different conclusion of the

effects of cognitive style. Some finds field dependence/independence has little effects

on language learning, while others demonstrate a relationship between cognitive style

and certain language function such as imitation and listening and it is presented in

certain age groups. Some possible explanations are that cognitive style may be age-

related, and also not a significant factor in SLA. Moreover, some researchers find that

field dependents produce different errors from field independents; and cognitive style

may interact with other learner factors. It is once again worth noticing that the

influence of cognitive style also limits to the rate of SLA.

Attitudes and motivation

Different linguists provide different definitions and classifications of attitude and

motivation. Schumann (1978) lists attitude as a social factor and motivation as an

affective factor. Brown (1981) refers to attitude as a set of beliefs towards L2 group

and towards learner’s own culture. He also identifies three types of motivation: global

motivation, situational motivation, and task motivation.

The most extensive research is conducted by Gardner and Lambert. Where

motivation, “the overall goal/orientation”, is concerned, two types of orientation are

distinguished: integrative motivation and instrumental motivation. Learners with the

integrative motivation wish to be identified with the L2 culture; and this type is

associated with “additive bilingualism”, which learners want to maintain their mother

tongue. On the contrary, instrumental motivation occurs when learners possess

functional goals for L2, such as finding jobs or passing an examination; and this kind

of orientation is linked to “subtractive bilingualism”, because learners of this type are

likely to lose their mother tongue or fail to acquire certain linguistic functions.

Attitudes are investigated as well, which are further classified into three kinds:(1)

attitude towards L2 community; (2) attitude towards the L2; and (3) attitude towards

language learning in general.

The empirical studies of the effects of attitudes and motivation by Gardner and

Lambert can be concluded in four points: first, attitudes/motivation help to determine

the proficiency levels; second, the most successful learners may display both great

aptitude and a high level of motivation; third, integrative motivation facilitates

“foreign language” learning which is important in classroom, while instrumental

motivation is more effective in “second language” learning, which learners use

outside classroom; fourth, the level and type of motivation is significantly affected by

the learning context. To state it again, there is little doubt that motivation is a powerful

factor affecting the rate and success in SLA instead of the acquisition route.

Personality

The author mainly presents three groups of personality which individual

researchers have considered to be influential to SLA.

Extroversion/introversion are intuitively hypothesized as an important factor that

extroverted learner are inclined to learn more rapidly and more successful than

introverted ones owing to an intendancy to make contact with other users and receive

more inputs. However, there is no agreement in the effects of extroversion/

introversion. Some find this pair of personality has something to do with classroom

study and oral fluency whereas others find no relationship with proficiency.

Social skill is also involved in the investigation of the personality factor. Some

studies show that social skills control the amount of L2 exposure and then learners

with affluent interaction skills progress more rapidly. And with the passage of time,

the gap between skilled learners and unskilled ones grows greater. As the same time,

other researches suggest that these personality traits control the quality of interaction

in L2 rather than quantity of input.

Inhibition is associated with defensiveness which discourages the risk-taking

progress in L2. As Krashen (1981a) points out, with the onset of Formal Operation,

learners tend to increase self-consciousness and therefore lead to greater inhibition.

In general, the role of personality is not clear. It might be a factor only in the

acquisition of communication competence and affects simply the rate and success.

3. The “good language learner”

Basing on studies of personal and general factors, Ellis draws a list of the

characteristics which a good language learner will possess: (1) respond positively to

group dynamics; (2) seek all opportunity to use L2; (3) use all opportunities to

practice L2 and attend to meaning; (4) employ study techniques and attend to form;

(5) be an adolescent; (6) have analytic skill for linguistic features and monitor errors;

(7) possess strong motivations; (8) be prepared to take risks; (9) adapt to different

learning conditions.

To conclude, the key issues in individual learner differences and SLA are: first,

identification and classification of learner factors that may affect SLA; second,

descriptions and explanations; and third, characteristics of “good language learner”.

The study of individual variables, however, has been difficult as the result of the

vague concepts and complex interrelations of the factors. The main purpose of this

study is what the effects of individual factors are and how they relate to SLA.

Generally speaking, the route of SLA is unlikely to be affected by learner’s

differences, whereas they contribute to the rate and success of SLA.

Another issue that needs to be notice is the relationship between the two types of

factors and the then relationship with L2 proficiency. A reasonable model is provided

as the personal and general factors are mutually influential to each other, and

furthermore, they both relate to the L2 proficiency in a two-way manner.