Vol. 7. No. 2A-2September 2003
Return to Table of ContentsReturn to Main Page
The Effects of Affective Strategy Training in the ESL Classroom
Marian J. Rossiter
<marian.rossiter@ualberta.ca>
University of Alberta
Abstract
This paper presents the findings of an intervention designed to examine the
effects of affective strategy instruction on measures of second language
proficiency and of self-efficacy. The participants in this study were 31 adult
intermediate-level ESL learners registered in a full-time ESL program in a
post-secondary institution in Canada. Two classes participated in this study;
one received 12 hours of affective strategy training, and the second served as
a comparison group. At Weeks 1, 5, 10, and 15, learners completed two sets of
oral information-gap tasks: picture story narratives and object descriptions.
Prior to each task, they provided scalar judgments of their ability to provide
accurate descriptions. The data from the self-report questionnaires and from
the transcripts of the audio-tapes were used to analyse students' perceptions
of self-efficacy and their second language performance. The results are
discussed with respect to the context in which the training was conducted.
Introduction
Differential success in second or foreign language learning has been attributed
to individual differences such as intelligence, aptitude, personality,
motivation, and anxiety. The development of humanistic psychology, which sought
to establish a holistic approach to learners, led to an increased focus on
individuals' emotions and feelings. Maslow (1971), for instance, posited that
cognitive and aesthetic goals leading to self-actualization could not be
achieved unless human physiological needs, the need for safety and security, the
need for belonging, and the need for self-esteem had been satisfied. Rogers
(1969) argued that learning should be experiential and convergent with learner
goals and that it should take place in a supportive environment. [-1-]
In second language learning, this affective approach manifested itself in
methods such as Community Language Learning (Curran, 1972) and Suggestopedia
(Lozanov, 1979). A strong proponent of humanism in language teaching, Stevick
(1980) argued that " . . . [language learning] success depends less on
materials, techniques and linguistic analyses, and more on what goes on inside
and between the people in the classroom" (p. 4). In his affective filter
hypothesis, Krashen (1982) posited the existence of an internal barrier that
interfered with second language acquisition when learners were anxious or bored.
Schumann (1997, 2001), informed by recent developments in cognition research
(Damasio, 1994; LeDoux, 1996), proposed that the psychology and neurobiology of
stimulus appraisal (based on novelty, pleasantness, goal/need significance,
coping potential, and the self- and social image of the learner) determine the
extent to which second language learning is achieved. These theories regarding
the important role of affect in learning have resonated strongly with the
intuitions of many second and foreign language teachers.
Over the past three decades, research in second language acquisition has
confirmed hypotheses that language learning is indeed enhanced by attention to
affect. Gardner and colleagues (Gardner, 1985; Gardner & Clément, 1990; Gardner
& Lambert, 1972; Gardner & MacIntyre, 1993) conducted extensive investigations
of individual differences in language learning success; other studies (Horwitz,
Horwitz, & Cope, 1986; Horwitz & Young, 1991; MacIntyre & Gardner, 1989, 1991b)
examined the construct of language anxiety. Price (1991) interviewed learners
who reported debilitating anxiety caused by instructors who criticized their
pronunciation or focused on classroom performance rather than learning. Bailey's
(1983) diary of her French classroom experience indicated that competitiveness
and anxiety motivated her both to work harder on some occasions (facilitating
anxiety) and to avoid class on others (debilitating anxiety). Young's (1990)
research with language learners suggested that teachers who used humour and
created a friendly, supportive, and relaxed classroom atmosphere that encouraged
risk-taking were most helpful in alleviating foreign language anxiety and
facilitating learning.
The majority of studies that explored the relationship between affect and second
language performance were non-interventions (e.g., Brown, Cunha, Frota, &
Ferreira, 2001; Gardner, 1985; Gardner, Moorcroft, & MacIntyre, 1987; MacIntyre
& Gardner, 1989; Madsen, Brown, & Jones, 1991; Price, 1991; Young, 1991).
Although several laboratory experiments were conducted in this area (e.g.,
Gardner, Day, & MacIntyre, 1992; MacIntyre & Gardner, 1991a, 1994a, 1994b;
Steinberg & Horwitz, 1986; Stevick, 1999), few experimental classroom studies
focusing on affect have been documented. A series of interventions conducted by
Moskowitz (1981, 1999) with high school second and foreign language students
reported positive correlations between the use of humanistic exercises and
students' attitudes towards language learning, their classmates, and themselves.
Results of questionnaires administered to the teachers in this study also showed
improved attitudes toward their classes and enhanced self-concept and
self-awareness. Cohen, Weaver, and Li (1998) investigated the effects of a range
of speaking strategies on three tasks performed by university foreign language
students: a self-description, a story retelling, and a description of a favorite
city. Some of the many strategies considered by teachers and students in the
three experimental classes to be useful for the oral tasks were affective: deep
breathing, positive self-talk, visualization exercises, relaxation techniques,
taking one's emotional temperature, self-rewards, persistence, and risk-taking.
Superior results in overall speaking performance shown by the experimental group
on the city description task were attributed to the use of strategies, some of
which were affective; the effect of the affective strategy component alone,
however, could not be partialed out. As Chamot (2001) stated, there is a
continuing need for more intervention studies to determine the effects of
strategy training on language learning and proficiency. One of the issues that
the present study will examine is the effect of affective strategy instruction
on ESL learners' performance on oral tasks. [-2-]
Self-Efficacy
Research has shown that performance can be facilitated by the enhancement of
self-efficacy, "people's judgments of their capabilities to organize and execute
courses of action required to attain designated types of performances" (Bandura,
1986, p. 391). Perceptions of self-efficacy influence motivation: they determine
the goals individuals set, the effort they expend to achieve those goals, and
their willingness to persist in the face of failure (Bandura, 1986). These, in
turn, influence achievement (see, for example, Locke, 1996; Pintrich & De Groot,
1990; Schunk, 1984, 1991; Schunk & Gunn, 1985). Much research in the health
domain (e.g., treatment of phobias; see Bandura, 1997) and in L1 educational
contexts (Pajares, 1996; Schunk, 1995) has demonstrated the positive effects of
strategy instruction on self-efficacy.
A related construct is self-efficacy for learning, by which "participants judge
their capabilities for learning to solve types of problems, write types of
paragraphs, or answer types of questions, rather than their certainty for being
able to successfully perform those tasks" (Schunk, 1996, p. 8). Research from
mainstream education contends that
[s]trategy instruction can foster self-efficacy for learning. The belief that
one understands and can effectively apply a strategy that aids learning leads
to a greater sense of control over learning outcomes, which promotes
self-efficacy and motivation to apply the strategy. (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996,
p. 179)
Self-efficacy is requisite for successful language learning. A growing body of
literature developed by Clément and associates has established that a
closely-related construct, linguistic self-confidence, is an important component
of second/foreign language motivation (see, for example, Clément, Dörnyei, &
Noels, 1994; Clément, Gardner, & Smythe, 1977; Clément & Kruidenier, 1985;
Dörnyei & Clément, 2001; Gardner, Tremblay, & Masgoret, 1997; Noels & Clément,
1996). However, self-efficacy and self-confidence are not synonymous: as Dörnyei
(2001) explained, "self-efficacy is always specific to a concrete task whereas
self-confidence is usually used to refer to a generalized perception of one's
coping potentials, relevant to a range of tasks and subject domains." (p. 56)
Limited experimental research on task-specific self-efficacy and L2 strategy
instruction has been conducted to date. Two intervention studies (Chamot,
Barnhardt, El-Dinary, Carbonaro, & Robbins, 1993; Chamot, Robbins, & El-Dinary,
1993; for a summary, see Chamot, 1994) examined the effects of metacognitive,
cognitive, and social strategy instruction received by learners of Japanese,
Russian, and Spanish. Among other measures, students completed learning strategy
questionnaires in which they reported their frequency of strategy use in
performing specific L2 tasks, and self-efficacy questionnaires in which they
rated their perceptions of their ability to complete those particular tasks.
Positive relationships between the frequent use of learning strategies and
perceptions of self-efficacy were found in most groups; affective strategies,
however, were not included in the research design. An examination of the effects
of affective strategy instruction on self-efficacy is included in this study.
[-3-]
Enhancing Classroom Affect
An increasing number of materials have emerged over the years to enhance affect
in second language classrooms. Oxford (1990, p. 163) delineated three types of
affective strategies that can be used to regulate learner attitudes, motivation,
and emotions. These include strategies for anxiety reduction (using progressive
relaxation and deep breathing exercises, music, and laughter), for
self-encouragement (making positive statements, taking risks wisely, and
administering self-rewards), and for monitoring emotions (listening to the body,
completing a checklist, writing a language learning diary, and discussing
feelings with peers).
Numerous authors (e.g., Campbell & Ortiz, 1991; Crandall, 1999; Crookall &
Oxford, 1991; Foss & Reitzel, 1991; Hooper Hansen, 1998; Medgyes, 2002; Oxford,
1990; Oxford et al., 1990; Phillips, 1998; Rinvolucri, 1999) have described
activities for enhancing L2 learners' cognitive and affective experiences, such
as discussion of the ideal language learner, cooperative learning activities, an
'agony column' (in which learners reply to letters expressing language learning
difficulties), use of learner anxiety graphs, visualization, humour, cartoon
story telling, and rhythmic breathing exercises. These fall on a continuum from
more teacher-controlled to more student-controlled; although all can be taught
and encouraged by the teacher, the teacher has more control over some than
others. For example, the use of humour, music, visualization, and relaxation in
the classroom would likely be initiated by the teacher, whereas self-talk,
risk-taking, and monitoring are more student-regulated strategies.
This study was undertaken, using Oxford's (1990) taxonomy of affective
strategies, to determine what effects, if any, affective strategy instruction
(in relaxation, music, visualization, humour, positive self-talk, risk-taking,
and monitoring emotions) might have on learner performance and self-efficacy in
speaking tasks. A quasi-experimental non-equivalent comparison-group design was
used, in which one group of adult ESL learners received 12 hours of affective
strategy instruction and the second served as a comparison group. All
participants interacted with an interlocutor to complete oral information-gap
tasks (narrative description, object description) on three occasions, at
five-week intervals. The following questions formed the basis for this research:
Does affective strategy training lead to improved L2 performance (success,
speech rate, message abandonment)?
Does affective strategy training lead to a greater sense of task self-efficacy
and self-efficacy for learning?
Method
Participants
ESL Students
The participants (16 men, 15 women) were intermediate ESL learners assessed at
Canadian Language Benchmark 7 (Pawlikowska-Smith, 2000) and registered in
full-time ESL classes in a post-secondary institution. They ranged in age from
19 to 59 years (mean = 35 years), came from varied first language backgrounds,
and had been in English-speaking Canada for an average of 4.3 years. Demographic
details appear in Table 1. [-4-]
Table 1 Demographic factor Comparison group Affective strategy group
Number of participants 16 15
Sex 7 male, 9 female 9 male, 6 female
Age Mean = 35y
(range 19y - 59y) Mean = 35y
(range 21y - 56y)
First languages 1113
Length of residence in Canada Mean = 5y
(range 5m - 27y) Mean = 3.5y
(range 9m - 15y)
Level of education
University 75
High school 86
< High school 14
Interlocutor
The interlocutor who participated in the dyadic speaking tasks with the students
over both terms was a trained ESL teacher and M.Ed. graduate student with ESL
teaching experience and native speaker proficiency in English.
Teachers
The teacher of the comparison group was a trained ESL instructor registered in a
TESL Master's program who had taught ESL/EFL for 5 years. The treatment group
was taught by a second instructor who had 13 years of ESL/EFL teaching
experience, a B.A. in TESL, and a M.Ed. in Instructional Technology with a TESL
focus. This teacher, unfortunately, was unable to teach for the entirety of the
term due to pre-scheduled annual holidays. However, he completed the affective
strategy instruction. The role of the substitute teacher, who joined the study
after the immediate post-test, was limited: he was instructed simply to
reinforce the use of the affective strategies already taught, based on material
that I provided to him.
I used the Communicative Orientation of Language Teaching (COLT) Observation
Scheme (Spada & Fröhlich, 1995) to observe the teachers of the comparison and
treatment groups at the beginning of term and weekly thereafter. In all, I
observed 12 hours of the comparison classes, 12 hours of the affective strategy
condition with the principal instructor, and 9 hours of the affective strategy
condition with the substitute teacher. The course content was consistent over
both terms, as the teachers used the same core curriculum and textbooks, as well
as a communicative approach to teaching.
I provided the teacher of the comparison group with an overview of the research
project before her course began, but I did not identify the focus of the
instruction to be presented in the following term, in order to discourage
experimental treatment diffusion. I discussed the treatment in full with the
teacher of the affective strategies group prior to the beginning of his course.
I also provided him with some background reading (Dörnyei & Malderez, 1997;
Oxford, 1990; Scarcella & Oxford, 1992), and answered questions. In addition to
an explanation of the study and background reading, the substitute teacher who
taught the last half of the affective strategies group received a summary and
handouts of the affective strategy lessons that had been presented earlier in
the term. He was given a weekly calendar listing the strategies to be reinforced
in each of the weeks to follow. I suggested that he examine his lesson plans at
the beginning of each week, decide which strategies would best complement which
lesson, incorporate the strategy reinforcement, and note the date on which this
was done. The instructor received all the necessary handouts for the group
discussions and other activities to be completed in class. [-5-]
The comparison group instructor recorded 8 hours of general classroom
instruction and provided me with a copy of all daily lesson plans for the
regular curriculum; these provided a framework for the integration of affective
strategies into the treatment group curriculum. In the affective strategy
condition, the principal instructor audiotaped 10 hours of strategy and general
class instruction; the substitute teacher taped 1 hour of strategy
reinforcement. During the affective strategy training, the instructor provided
details outlining the date and length of each lesson, the engagement of the
students (on a 5-point scale ranging from very low to very high), difficulties
encountered, and other comments. I kept in close contact with the instructor
during this period by telephone and by electronic mail. The substitute teacher
had the class complete all of the handouts provided for classroom activities;
these were returned to me.
Strategy Instruction
The affective strategy instruction included consciousness-raising activities and
training in relaxation (e.g., Moskowitz, 1978), visualization (e.g., Arnold,
1999), positive self-talk (e.g., Oxford, 1990), humour (e.g., Mr. Bean videos),
risk-taking (Brown, 1989), and monitoring emotions (e.g., Oxford, 1990) (for an
overview, see Table 2). The instructor received all lesson plans, overhead
transparencies, and handouts in advance and discussed them with me. He
integrated the lessons into the course. In order not to bias response to the
lessons, I was not present during any of these classes.
Table 2 Strategy (Oxford, 1990) Sample activity
Lowering your anxiety Speaking strategies (Weaver & Cohen, 1997)
Relaxation exercises (Moskowitz, 1978)
Music, visualization (Arnold, 1999)
Humour: Video: The Best of Mr. Bean; summary of the movie Patch Adams;
reading: "Laughter is good for you" (adapted from Feltman, 1992)
Encouraging yourself Speaking strategies (Weaver & Cohen, 1997)
Positive self-talk (adapted from Powell, 1997)
Discussing and taking risks (Brown, 1989)
Taking your emotional temperature Speaking strategies (Weaver & Cohen,
1997)
Feelings checklist (Oxford, 1990)
Language learning journal (Nunan, 1996)
SLL advice column (Crookall & Oxford, 1991)
[-6-]
Visualization was chosen as a focus for one lesson. In this introductory lesson,
learners participated in a Think-Pair-Share activity, brainstorming situations
in which visualization is used (e.g., sports psychology, health therapy). A
discussion of the benefits of using and practising mental imagery followed
(e.g., to enhance performance, to reduce stress). The students were guided
through a practice visualization rehearsal in which they were asked to imagine a
girl walking down a road, and then to imagine her appearance, her manner, and
her journey (adapted from Arnold, 1999, p. 275). Debriefing followed. Next, with
soft music playing in the background, learners participated in a longer exercise
in which they were led through a relaxation exercise (Moskowitz, 1978, p. 179).
Then they took a mental walk up a mountain to a meeting with a master teacher
who inspired them with renewed confidence and insights on how to excel in
learning English (Arnold, 1999, p. 278). Arnold (1999) maintains that this type
of exercise can enhance self-esteem and self-efficacy: "In a relaxed state, the
mind is receptive to a restructuring of one's self-image and the appraisal of
one's abilities; [Neuro-Linguistic Programming] has shown that if you can
imagine yourself doing something, you are more likely to be able to do it" (pp.
273-274). Visualization was incorporated into other lessons focusing on
impromptu speeches, the reduction of exam anxiety, and the use of laughter.
Speaking Tasks
Learner descriptions of picture stories and objects were collected at pre-test,
immediate post-test, and delayed post-test administrations. At each of these,
two separate speaking tasks were administered: a picture narration task and an
object description task. At the pre-test, the participants described one picture
story; at the immediate post-test, a different story; and at the delayed
post-test, two new stories. At each task administration, they also described
three new objects. For each task, the learner and the interlocutor were seated
at a table, facing each other and separated by a low barrier that permitted eye
contact but prevented them from viewing each other's stimuli.
Picture Stories
The participants received oral and written instructions before each narrative
administration. They were asked to describe to the listener the story
illustrated in a set of eight pictures. I explained that the listener had the
same pictures, in a different order. I asked the learners to describe the
pictures as fully as possible so that the listener could put them in the correct
order.
The first picture story presented (Rollet & Tremblay, 1975) shows a man and a
woman who moved to the country, became overwhelmed by the physical demands of
rural life, and eventually returned to a less difficult life in the city. The
second (see Munro & Derwing, 1994) was the story of two unsuccessful hunters who
went looking for deer in a forest. The third narrative (Munro & Derwing, 1998)
depicted the misadventures of two travelers who mistakenly exchanged suitcases.
The final picture story (Heyer, 1997) was about a lottery winner who recruited
friends to recover his lost ticket. [-7-]
Real-World Objects
At each administration of the object description task, the participants were
asked to examine and to describe their object as fully as possible to enable the
listener, who had four other very similar objects (e.g., a variety of combs), to
identify it (see Yule, 1997).
Self-Report Instruments
Self-Efficacy Scales
Learners examined each picture story carefully and then used a scale ranging
from 0% to 100% to rate their self-efficacy for accurately completing each set
of tasks (Pintrich & De Groot, 1990). After examining a sample object, they used
a similar scale to estimate their ability to provide 1, 2, and 3 accurate
descriptions in one minute (see Locke, Frederick, Lee, & Bobko, 1984). On both
tasks, learners estimated their perception of self-efficacy for learning to
perform the task well (see Schunk, 1996). Schunk (1996, p. 8) cites test-retest
reliability coefficients ranging from r = .79 (mathematics; Schunk, Hanson, &
Cox, 1987) to r = .92 (paragraph composition; Schunk & Swartz, 1993) for
self-efficacy measures administered in educational contexts.
Usefulness of Strategy Instruction Scales
Following the immediate post-test, learners in the affective strategies
condition assessed the value of the strategy instruction that they had received.
On a 5-point scale (ranging from 1 = not at all to 5 = a lot), they indicated
the degree to which affective strategy practice had been of use to them in
classroom activities, in the experiment, and in real life situations.
Procedure
This research was conducted in compliance with the ethical standards of both my
university and the host institution. Data were collected from all 31
participants at Weeks 1, 5, and 10 of the study. Learners left their classroom
one by one for a period of 30-40 minutes to complete the speaking tasks in a
quiet room in the school. An unobtrusive omni-directional microphone was placed
in front of the student, and a low barrier allowed only eye contact with the
listener. The interlocutor's responses to the student were limited to such
questions as "Can you tell me more?" or "Is it this one?" From my position at
one end of the table, I gave instructions, operated the tape recorder, passed
stimuli to the participant, and made notes of students' comments, non-verbal
behavior, and words that might not have recorded clearly.
Data Analysis
I transcribed the data and calculated speech rate in words per minute (excluding
fillers such as "um" or "er") for the narrative task. Success was calculated
using baseline data collected from nine native speakers (see Derwing, 1989).
Their renditions of the picture story were used to identify the most pivotal
elements in each frame of the picture stories (see Tomlin, 1984). I awarded
participants one point for each essential element of a narrative frame
mentioned; in addition, they received five points for communicating their
understanding of the overall intention or gist of the narrative. The success
scores were then transformed to percentages. An external assessor and I
double-coded the message abandonment strategies in all the narrative and object
descriptions of 5 of the 31 participants in these two groups; that is, for 16%
of the data reported here. Pearson correlations for inter-rater reliability were
r = .837 on the narratives and r = .871 on the object descriptions. I derived a
global task self-efficacy rating for each picture story by averaging the
responses on each task scale (see Pintrich & De Groot, 1990); the scores from
the two narratives at Time 3 were averaged to compute a single score for each
variable for that administration. [-8-]
In the object description task, I counted the number of words (excluding
fillers) to the point of successful identification by the interlocutor, or to
the end of the description if the listener was unable to identify the object.
Speech rates were calculated and instances of message abandonment were counted
for each object. A success score (1 or 0) was awarded for each of the three new
objects presented at a given administration, and an overall success score (%)
was calculated for each set of objects. Task self-efficacy was calculated by
averaging the judgments made on each task set, as in the narratives.
Results
Teacher Evaluation of Student Response to Instruction
The 12 hours of affective strategy lessons that were taught by the teacher were
generally well received by the students. The mean rating of learner involvement
indicated by the instructor was 4.1 (mode = 5) on a 5-point scale. The students
were reported to have been less engaged (mean = 2.3) in the relaxation and
visualization exercises; in the first mental imagery lesson (described above),
it was reported that the "students weren't interested in visualizing".
Furthermore, following the introductory visualization rehearsal (a girl going
for a walk) there were "lots of snickers, sexual imagery, joking", which had not
been anticipated by either the researcher or the teacher. In a later lesson on
coping with exam anxiety, learners were asked to visualize themselves thoroughly
prepared for an exam and doing their very best (in contrast to what they had
just seen in the video Mr. Bean Takes an Exam). The instructor noted that the
"students enjoyed the video and the brainstorming, but they didn't like the
visualizing". On another occasion, it was reported that "students [had] a hard
time taking the relaxation music seriously"; one student rose, walked over to
the tape recorder, and turned it off abruptly, exclaiming that he couldn't think
with the music playing. These two particular aspects of the strategy training
(visualization and relaxation) were judged to be the least effective overall and
confirm Arnold's (1999) caution that " . . . when working with any
affect-related area in the language class, it is wise to remember that nothing
will be right for all the students all the time" (p. 276).
Usefulness of Affective Strategy Instruction
During the immediate post-test following the affective strategy instruction,
participants were asked to evaluate how helpful they perceived the affective
strategies to be in classroom activities, in the experimental tasks, and in real
life, using a scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (a lot). The mean score for
usefulness of affective strategy instruction for classroom activities was 4.20
(mode = 5); for the experiment, the mean was 3.73 (mode = 3); and for real life
purposes, it was 4.13 (mode = 5). [-9-]
Statistical Analyses
Analyses of variance (ANOVA) for repeated measures were conducted to test for
between-group differences in success, speech rate, task self-efficacy, and
self-efficacy for learning responses. As parametric procedures are not
appropriate for frequency data (see Hatch & Lazaraton, 1991), between-group
differences in the frequency of message abandonment were examined using
Mann-Whitney U tests. In order to control for experiment-wise error, the alpha
level for significance was adjusted to p < .01 in the parametric analyses.
Results showed that there were no significant between-group differences on any
of the dependent variables and no significant interactions on either the
narrative or the object description task. Figures 1 through 10 show the mean
group scores for each of the measures.
Figure 1 Narrative speech rate: Group means.
Figure 2 Narrative success: Group means.
[-10-]
Figure 3 Narrative self-efficacy: Group means.
Figure 4 Narrative self-efficacy for learning: Group means.
Figure 5 Object speech rate: Group means.
[-11-]
Figure 6 Object success: Group means.
Figure 7 Object self-efficacy: Group means.
Figure 8 Object self-efficacy for learning: Group means.
[-12-]
Figure 9 Narrative message abandonment: Group means.
Figure 10 Object message abandonment: Group means.
Discussion and Conclusion
Teacher Evaluation of Student Response to Instruction
The instructor noted no problems with the delivery of the majority of the
affective strategy lessons. However, as noted above, some of the students
evidently found it difficult to become fully engaged in the relaxation and
visualization exercises. These were novel activities to many of the learners,
and they may have felt varying degrees of discomfort in closing their eyes and
trying to relax and to use their imagination freely in a formal ESL classroom.
These particular activities would perhaps also not have appealed to learners
from all cultures, or to those with limited attentional resources. The topics
used in visualization must be very carefully chosen to motivate learners and to
avoid triggering reactions that disrupt the lessons, but the effects of topics
cannot always be foreseen. [-13-]
Usefulness of Affective Strategy Instruction, Time 2
The learners perceived the affective strategy instruction to be most beneficial
in classroom activities and for real life purposes. The mean usefulness rating
for the experimental tasks (narrative and object descriptions) was lower. It
could be that by the second administration of the experimental tasks, learners
felt more comfortable with the interlocutor, the researcher, and the context,
and that their familiarity with the set procedures and the lack of time pressure
lessened their need for affective strategies.
Statistical Analyses
The results of this study show that instruction in affective strategies
(relaxation techniques, positive self-talk, the use of humour, risk-taking, and
self-rewards) provided no significant between-group benefit for L2 performance
(speech rate, success, message abandonment) or perceptions of self-efficacy
(task self-efficacy, self-efficacy for learning) measured in the narrative task
or in the object description task. It is possible that learners' appraisals of
self-efficacy and self-efficacy for learning are relatively stable; unless they
receive pertinent informational feedback to change these appraisals, their
ratings are likely to remain relatively fixed.
The lack of significant between-group differences can, I believe, be attributed
in large part to the particular nature of the ESL classes in this study. Most of
the participants were relatively recent refugees to Canada and/or had been out
of school for many years; furthermore, they spent 25 hours a week with the same
teacher and the same peers. In order to create an effective learning
environment, the teachers of both conditions strove to develop a sense of
community, to establish a relaxed environment, and to encourage learners to
achieve their linguistic goals. I reviewed one third of the lesson tapes
provided by the comparison group teacher, as well as all of the instructor's
lesson plans and the classroom observation notes I had made. The former showed
affective factors that were part and parcel of her regular ESL classes: humour
(joke of the day, entertaining videos, humourous quotes), music (weekly songs,
gesture and music to reinforce vocabulary), encouragement, positive self-talk
("Stand up and pat yourself on the back. Tell yourself, 'You're doing a good
job! Keep it up!'"), empathy, and the development of strong group cohesion
(rotating group membership, coffee and cake sessions). These factors were also
present in the strategy treatment class in the five weeks prior to instruction.
Moreover, in both groups, the communicative nature of the courses and the
incorporation of small group and pair activities encouraged cooperation and the
development of a sense of community that doubtless contributed further to a
positive learning setting. It is likely that the relaxed and encouraging
atmosphere established in the two groups provided an optimal affective
environment for learning. The new affective strategies (e.g., relaxation,
risk-taking, self-rewards) that were introduced to the treatment group may have
served to raise learners' consciousness and to reinforce the positive affective
threshold that already existed in that class, but they do not appear to have
offered significant additional benefits to learners in terms of second language
speaking performance or self-efficacy. [-14-]
Perhaps if this study had been conducted with a comparison class taught by an
adult ESL instructor with little or no concern for the social context and
instructor-learner interactions, affective strategy training might have had
significant effects on the speaking tasks. I believe, however, that I would have
been hard pressed to find such an instructor in my community. Many ESL programs
across Canada offer federally-funded Language Instruction for Newcomers to
Canada (LINC) classes; one of the primary goals of these classes is to
facilitate learners' integration into Canadian society. As a result, most
programs aim to promote not only second language learning but also the
social-emotional growth of their learners, and this is naturally carried over
into other ESL classes being offered. This practice differs from the findings of
a study by Brandl (1987), in which the majority of instructors indicated that
they deliberately induced anxiety in order to intimidate students into
performing. The attention to affect in the classes in this study, I believe, is
representative of ESL classes in that institution, in the community at large,
and throughout the country.
This research is limited by the use of intact classes, small sample sizes, and
heterogeneous classes. However, this is the reality of the ESL field in many
settings. Ultimately, the effects of affective strategy instruction must be of
practical significance to daily second language classrooms. In this particular
context, they were not.
As noted above, most of the research on affective strategies consists of
theoretical or correlational studies based solely on learners' perceptions; very
few interventions have been documented. Recommendations (e.g., Ellis & Sinclair,
1989; Oxford, 1990) that extensive strategy instruction be conducted in ESL
classes need to be reconsidered; the results of this study suggest that teachers
should not devote valuable time to the ongoing development of affective
strategies. Rather, once strong group cohesion and a positive, supportive
learning environment have been firmly established, instructors should focus on
teaching meaningful language and content in response to learners' needs and
interests. Classrooms that combine these elements offer both affective--and
effective--learning experiences to second language learners.
References
Arnold, J. (1999). Visualization: language learning with the mind's eye. In J.
Arnold (Ed.), Affect in language learning (pp. 260-278). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Bailey, K. M. (1983). Competitiveness and anxiety in adult second language
learning: Looking at and through the diary studies. In H. Seliger and M. Long
(Eds.), Classroom-oriented research in second language acquisition. Rowley MA:
Newbury House.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive
theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman &
Company.
Brandl, K. (1987). Ecclecticism in teaching communicative competence.
Unpublished master's thesis, University of Texas, Austin, TX.
Brown, H. D. (1989). A practical guide to language learning: A fifteen-week
program of strategies for success. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Brown, H. D., Cunha, M. I. A., Frota, S. de F. N., & Ferreira, A. B. F. (2001).
The development and validation of a Portuguese version of the motivated
strategies for learning questionnaire. In Z. Dörnyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.),
Motivation and second language acquisition. (Technical Report #23, pp. 257-280).
Honolulu: University of Hawai'i, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.
[-15-]
Campbell, C. M., & Ortiz, J. A. (1991). Helping students overcome foreign
language anxiety: A foreign language anxiety workshop. In E. K. Horwitz & D. J.
Young (Eds.), Language anxiety: From theory and research to classroom
implications (pp. 153-168). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Chamot, A. U. (1994). A model for learning strategies instruction in the foreign
language classroom. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown University Round Table on
Languages and Linguistics (pp. 323-336). Washington, DC: Georgetown University
Press.
Chamot, A. U. (2001). The role of learning strategies in second language
acquisition. In M. P. Breen (Ed.), Learner contributions to language learning:
New directions in research (pp. 45-43). New York: Longman.
Chamot, A.U., Barnhardt, S., El-Dinary, P. B., Carbonaro, G., & Robbins, J.
(1993). Methods for teaching learning strategies in the foreign language
classroom and assessment of language skills for instruction. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED365157)
Chamot, A. U., Robbins, J., & El-Dinary, P. B. (1993). Learning strategies in
Japanese foreign language instruction. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED370346)
Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K. (1994). Motivation, self-confidence and
group cohesion in the foreign language classroom. Language Learning, 44,
417-448.
Clément, R., Gardner, R. C., & Smythe, P. C. (1977). Motivational variables in
second language acquisition: A study of francophones learning English. Canadian
Journal of Behavioural Scienc, 9, 123-133.
Clément, R., & Kruidenier, B. G. (1985). Aptitude, attitude and motivation in
second language proficiency: A test of Clément's model. Journal of Language and
Social Psychology, 11, 203-232.
Cohen, A. D., Weaver, S. J., & Li, T-Y. (1998). The impact of strategies-based
instruction on speaking a foreign language. In A. D. Cohen, Strategies in
learning and using a second language (pp. 107-156). New York: Longman.
Crandall, J. A. (1999). Cooperative language learning and affective factors. In
J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in language learning (pp. 226-245). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Crookall, D., & Oxford, R. (1991). Dealing with anxiety: Some practical
activities for language learners and teacher trainees. In E. K. Horwitz & D. J.
Young (Eds.), Language anxiety: From theory and research to classroom
implications (pp. 141-150). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Curran, C. A. (1972). Counseling-learning: A whole-person model for education.
New York: Grune & Stratton.
Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes' error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain.
New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons.
Derwing, T. M. (1989). Information type and its relation to nonnative speaker
comprehension. Language Learning, 39, 157-172.
Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and research motivation. Harlow, UK: Longman.
Dörnyei, Z., & Clément, R. (2001). Motivational characteristics of learning
different target languages: Results of a nationwide survey. In Z. Dörnyei & R.
Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition. (Technical Report
#23, pp. 399-432). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i, Second Language Teaching &
Curriculum Center.
Dörnyei, Z., & Malderez, A. (1997). Group dynamics and foreign language
teaching. System, 25, 65-81. [-16-]
Ellis, G., & Sinclair, B. (1989). Learning to learn English: A course in learner
training. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Feltman, J. (Ed.). (1992). The prevention how-to dictionary of healing remedies
and techniques. Emmaus, PA: Rodale Press.
Foss, K. A., & Reitzel, A. C. (1991). A relational model for managing second
language anxiety. In E. K. Horwitz & D. J. Young (Eds.), Language anxiety: From
theory and research to classroom implications (pp. 129-140). Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and language learning: The role of
attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R. C., & Clément, R. (1990). Social psychological perspectives on
second language acquisition. In H. Giles & W. P. Robinson (Eds.), Handbook of
language and social psychology (pp. 495-517). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
Gardner, R. C., Day, J. B., & MacIntyre, P. D. (1992). Integrative motivation,
induced anxiety, and language learning in a controlled environment. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, 14, 197-214.
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second
language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Gardner, R. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (1993). A student's contributions to
second-language learning: Part II. Affective variables. Language Teaching, 26,
1-11.
Gardner, R. C., Moorcroft, R., & MacIntyre, P. (1987). The role of anxiety in
second language performance of language dropouts. (Research Bulletin No. 657).
London, ON: University of Western Ontario.
Gardner, R. C., Tremblay, P. F., & Masgoret, A-M. (1997). Towards a full model
of second language learning: An empirical investigation. Modern Language
Journal, 81, 344-362.
Hatch, E., & Lazaraton, A. (1991). The research manual: Design and statistics
for applied linguistics. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Heyer, S. (1997). Easy true stories: A picture-based beginning reader. New York:
Longman.
Hooper Hansen, G. H. (1999). Learning by heart: A Lozanov perspective. In J.
Arnold (Ed.), Affect in language learning (pp. 211-225). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. C., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom
anxiety. Modern Language Journal, 70, 125-132.
Horwitz, E. K., & Young, D. J. (1991). Language anxiety: From theory and
research to classroom implications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition.
Oxford: UK: Pergamon Press.
LeDoux, J. E. (1996). The emotional brain. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Locke, E. A. (1996). Motivation through conscious goal setting. Applied &
Preventive Psychology, 5, 117-124.
Locke, E. A., Frederick, E., Lee, C., & Bobko, P. (1984). Effect of
self-efficacy, goals, and task strategies on task performance. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 69, 241-251.
Lozanov, G. (1979). Suggestology and outlines of suggestopedy. New York: Gordon
and Breach.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1989). Anxiety and second-language learning:
Toward a theoretical clarification. Language Learning, 39, 251-275.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1991a). Language anxiety: Its relation to
other anxieties and to processing in native and second languages. Language
Learning, 41, 513-534. [-17-]
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1991b). Methods and results in the study of
anxiety and language learning: A review of the literature. Language Learning,
41, 85-117.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1994a). The effects of induced anxiety on
cognitive processing in second language learning. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 16, 1-17.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1994b). The subtle effects of language
anxiety on cognitive processing in the second language. Language Learning, 44,
283-305.
Madsen, H. S., Brown, B. L., & Jones, R. L. (1991). Evaluating students'
attitudes toward second-language tests. In E. K. Horwitz & D. J. Young (Eds.),
Language anxiety: From theory and research to classroom implications (pp.
65-86). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Maslow, A. H. (1971). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.
Medgyes, P. (2002). Laughing matters: Humour in the language learning classroom.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Moskowitz, G. (1978). Caring and sharing in the foreign language class. Rowley,
MA: Newbury House.
Moskowitz, G. (1981). Effects of humanistic techniques on attitude,
cohesiveness, and self-concept of foreign language students. Modern Language
Journal, 65, 149-157.
Moskowitz, G. (1999). Enhancing personal development: Humanistic activities at
work. In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in language learning (pp. 177-193). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M. (1994). Evaluations of foreign accent in
contemporaneous and read material. Language Testing, 11, 254-266.
Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M. (1998). The effects of speaking rate on learner
evaluations of native and foreign-accented speech. Language Learning, 48,
159-182.
Noels, K. A., & Clément, R. (1996). Communication across cultures: Social
determinants and acculturative consequences. Canadian Journal of Behavioural
Science, 28, 214-228.
Nunan, D. (1996, Fall). Learner strategy training in the classroom: An action
, research study. TESOL Journal, 6, 35-41.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should
know. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Oxford, R. L., Crookall, D., Cohen, A., Lavine, R., Nyikos, M., & Sutter, W.
(1990). Strategy training for language learners: Six situational case studies
and a training model. Foreign Language Annals, 22, 197-216.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of
Education Research, 66, 543-578.
Pawlikowska-Smith, G. (2000). Canadian language benchmarks 2000: English as a
second language – for adults. Ottawa, ON: Centre for Canadian Language
Benchmarks. http://www.language.ca
Phillips, E. M. (1998). Decreasing language anxiety: Practical techniques for
oral activities. In D. J. Young (Ed.), Affect in foreign language and second
language learning: A practical guide to creating a low-anxiety classroom
atmosphere (pp. 124-143). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill College.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated
learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 82, 33-40.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in Education: Theory,
research, and applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Powell, T. J. (1997). Free yourself from harmful stress. Montreal, PQ: Reader's
Digest Association (Canada). [-18-]
Price, M. L. (1991). The subjective experience of foreign language anxiety:
Interviews with highly anxious students. In E. K. Horwitz & D. J. Young (Eds.),
Language anxiety: From theory and research to classroom implications (pp.
101-108). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Rinvolucri, M. (1999). The humanistic exercise. In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in
language learning (pp. 194-210). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rogers, C. R. (1969). Freedom to learn. Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill.
Rollet, G., & Tremblay, R. (1975). Speaking and writing with comic strips.
Montreal, QC: Centre Educatif et Culturel.
Scarcella, R. C., & Oxford, R. L. (1992). The tapestry of language learning: The
individual in the communicative classroom. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Schumann, J. H. (1997). The neurobiology of affect in language. Malden, MA:
Blackwell. (Technical Report #23, pp. 399432). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i,
Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.
Schumann, J. H. (2001). Learning as foraging. In Z. Dornyei & R Schmidt (Eds.),
Motivation and second language acquisition (Technical Report #23, pp. 21-28).
Honolulu: University of Hawai'i, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.
Schunk, D. H. (1984). Self-efficacy perspective on achievement behavior.
Educational Psychologist, 19, 48-58.
Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational
Psychologist, 26, 207-231.
Schunk, D. H. (1995). Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In J. E.
Maddux (Ed.), Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and
application (pp. 281-303). New York: Plenum Press.
Schunk, D. H. (1996, April). Self-efficacy for learning and performance. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, New York. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED394663)
Schunk, D. H., & Gunn, T. P. (1985). Modeled importance of task strategies and
achievement beliefs: Effect on self-efficacy and skill development. Journal of
Early Adolescence, 5, 247-258.
Schunk, D. H., Hanson, A. R., & Cox, P. D. (1987). Peer-model attributes and
children's achievement behaviors. Journal of Educational Pscyhology, 79, 54-61.
Schunk, D. H., & Swartz, C. W. (1993). Goals and progress feedback: Effects on
self-efficacy and writing achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18,
337-354.
Spada, N., & Fröhlich, M. (1995). Communicative orientation of language teaching
observation scheme (COLT): Coding conventions and applications. Sydney,
Australia: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research.
Steinberg, F. S., & Horwitz, E. K. (1986). The effect of induced anxiety on the
denotative and interpretive content of second language speech. TESOL Quarterly,
20, 131-136.
Stevick, E. W. (1980). Teaching languages: A way and ways. Rowley, MA: Newbury
House.
Stevick, E. W. (1999). Affect in learning and memory: From alchemy to chemistry.
In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in language learning (pp. 43-57). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Tomlin, R. (1984). The treatment of foreground-background information in the
on-line descriptive discourse of second language learners. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 6, 115-142. [-19-]
Weaver, S. J., & Cohen, A. D. (1997). Strategies-based instruction: A
teacher-training manual. Minneapolis, MN: Center for Advanced Research on
Language Acquisition, University of Minnesota.
Young, D. J. (1990). An investigation of students' perspectives on anxiety and
speaking. Foreign Language Annals, 23, 539-553.
Young, D. J. (1991). The relationship between anxiety and foreign language oral
proficiency ratings. In E. K. Horwitz & D. J. Young (Eds.), Language anxiety:
From theory and research to classroom implications (pp. 57-63). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Yule, G. (1997). Referential communication tasks. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Acknowledgements
I gratefully acknowledge the funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities
Research Council of Canada that supported this research. I thank the
administration, teachers, and students who participated in this study, and Julia
Ichikawa for her assistance throughout. I am indebted to Tracey Derwing, Leila
Ranta, Ron Thomson, and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and
suggestions. I am grateful also to Murray Munro and Marilyn Abbott for their
assistance.
About the Author
Marian J. Rossiter, PhD, is Assistant Professor and TESL Coordinator in the
Department of Educational Psychology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta,
Canada T6G 2G5.
© Copyright rests with authors. Please cite TESL-EJ appropriately.
Editor's Note: Dashed numbers in square brackets indicate the end of each
page for purposes of citation.
Return to Table of ContentsReturn to TopReturn to Main Page
[-20-]
