Offsetting the Affective Filter: A Classic
Grounded Theory Study of Post-Secondary
Online Foreign Language Learners
Barry Chametzky, B.S., M.A., M.A., M.Ed., Ph.D. Candidate
Northcentral University
School of Education
Prescott Valley, AZ
April 2013
Chairperson: Dr. Phillip Schnarrs
Committee Member: Dr. Adrian Zappala
1
Introduction

Educational tools may help learners …
◦ … understand the course material and
◦ …make important linguistic and cultural
connections.

Online learning is not like traditional
learning
◦ New challenges exist to overcome: But how?
2
Research Problem

Comprehending learner experiences is
vital for …
◦ … assimilation of material and
◦ … development of necessary skills

Not understanding learner experiences
poses a disadvantage (Arend, 2009)
3
Purpose
To discover a theory explaining learners’
patterns of behaviors
 To give a “theoretical foothold” (Glaser &
Strauss, 1965, p. 268) for action regarding
the perception of learners and the online
experience they had (Blake, 2008).

4
Theoretical Framework

Andragogy (Knowles, 1975, 1980)

Transformative learning theory (Mezirow,
1978)
5
Significance of the Study

Offer insights into the learning
experiences of learners
◦ Why do some learners not succeed?
6
Terms
Affective filter
 Code
 Grab
 Fit
 Target language
 Theoretical sampling

7
Literature Review

Positive experiences with technology
◦ Outperformance of traditional learners
◦ Comfort and enjoyment with reduced stress
◦ Inter- and intracultural “communicative competence”
(Blake, 2008, p. 71)
◦ Reflection

Negative experiences with technology
◦
◦
◦
◦
Unknown best practices (Tanaka-Ellis, 2010)
Rapid advances in technological tools (Lafford, 2009)
Learner impatience (Meister & Willyerd, 2010)
Complex environment (Salcedo, 2010)
8
Research Questions

What are the experiences that learners have in an
asynchronous, post-secondary, online foreign
language class?

How do these experiences affect foreign language
acquisition?

How do learners in an asynchronous, postsecondary, online foreign language class use
different technology in their class vis-à-vis foreign
language acquisition and its components such as
communication, construction of knowledge, and
development of cultural identity?
9
Participants and Materials
Interviews
 Observation
 Discussions and lectures
 Snowball sampling

10
Grand Tour Question

What were your experiences with foreign
language learning online?
11
Classic Grounded Theory

No predetermined theory

Advance ideas

Understand the issues
12
Data Analysis
Notes
 Data
 Abstracted codes were compared
 Memos
 Saturation


The core variable: Offsetting the affective
filter
13
Offsetting the Affective Filter: The
Theory

Anxiety occurs because …
◦ … the online learning environment is lessthan-ideal
◦ … misguided expectations exist
◦ … no proficiency
14
Offsetting the Affective Filter: The
Theory

The big picture
15
Offsetting the Affective Filter: The
Theory

Conditions
◦ Stepping out of the comfort zone
◦ Incompatibility
16
Offsetting the Affective Filter: The
Theory

Consequences
◦ Isolating
◦ Overloading
17
Offsetting the Affective Filter: The
Theory

Balancing
18
Offsetting the Affective Filter: The
Theory

Interacting
◦ Venting (because of misalignment)
◦ Verbalizing
◦ Communicating and clarifying
19
Offsetting the Affective Filter: The
Theory

Andragogic elements
◦ Valuing
◦ Self-directing
◦ Feeling motivated
20
Offsetting the Affective Filter: The
Theory

Comporting
◦
◦
◦
◦
Plodding through and accepting the situation
Focusing on coursework
Adapting
Giving up
21
Offsetting the Affective Filter: The
Theory

Responses to Research Questions
◦ RQ1: What are the experiences that learners have in an
asynchronous, post-secondary, online foreign language
class?
◦ RQ2: How do these experiences affect foreign language
acquisition?
◦ RQ3: How do learners in an asynchronous, postsecondary, online foreign language class use different
technology in their class vis-à-vis foreign language
acquisition and its components such as communication,
construction of knowledge, and development of cultural
identity?
22
Recommendations for Practice

Communicate more

Modify the environment

Add a 6th C to the ACTFL (2012)
requirements: Conation
23
Recommendations for Future
Research
Conduct a Formal Grounded Theory
 Investigate and develop new technology
 Examine the Personal Learning Lifecycle
(PLL)

• Becoming anew
• Conflicting
considerations
10.
Reintegration
• Modifying
oneself

6. Planning
7. Acquiring
8. Trying new
roles
9. Building skills
1. Disorienting
dilemma
2. Selfexamination
3 Assessment
4. Recognition
5. Exploration
• Making
discoveries
Quantitative study involving the FLCAS
24
Questions or Comments

Thank you.
25
References

ACTFL Proficiency guidelines – speaking, writing, listening, and reading. (2012). Retrieved from
http://www.actfl.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=4236

ACTFL Standards for foreign language learning: Executive summary. (1999). Retrieved from
http://www.actfl.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3324

Allen, I., & Seaman, J. (2010). Class differences: Online education in the United States, 2010. Needham, MA: The Sloan Consortium,
1-26. Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/class_differences

Allen, I., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the United States, 2010. Needham, MA: The
Sloan Consortium, 1-26. Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/class_differences

Anderson, L., & Williams, L. (2011). The use of new technologies in the French curriculum: A national survey. The French Review, 84(4),
764-781.

Arend, B. (2009). Encouraging critical thinking in online threaded discussions. The Journal of Educators Online, 6(1), 1-23. Retrieved from
http://www.thejeo.com/Archives/Volume6Number1/Arendpaper.pdf

Bertin, J-C., Gravé, P., & Narcy-Combes, J-P. (2010) Second language distance learning and teaching: Theoretical perspectives and
didactic ergonomics. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.

Blake, R. (2008). Brave new digital classroom: Technology and foreign language learning. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Bloom, B. S. (1984). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook 1: The cognitive domain. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Coryell, J. E., & Clark, M. C. (2009, Fall). One right way, intercultural participation, and language learning anxiety: A qualitative analysis
of adult online heritage and nonheritage [sic] language learners. Foreign Language Annals, 42(3), 483-504. Retrieved from
http://www.actfl.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=5012

Drewelow, I., & Theobald, A. (2007). A comparison of the attitudes of learners, instructors, and native French speakers about the
pronunciation of French: An exploratory study. Foreign Language Annals, 40(3), 491-520. Retrieved from
http://www.actfl.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3320

Egbert, J., Huff, L., McNeil, L., Preuss, C., & Sellen, J. (2009). Pedagogy, process and classroom context: Integrating teacher voice and
experience into research on technology-enhanced language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 93, Focus issue, 754-768. Retrieved
from http://mlj.miis.edu/index.htm

Garrett, N. (2009). Computer-assisted language learning trends and issues revisited: Integrating innovation. The Modern Language
Journal, 93, Focus issue, 719-740. Retrieved from http://mlj.miis.edu/index.htm
26
References

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1965). Awareness of Dying. Chicago: Aldine Publishing.

Glaser, B. (1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems, 12(4), 436-445. Retrieved from
http://ucpressjournals.com/journal.php?j=sp

Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. (1998). Doing grounded theory: Issues and discussions. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. (2001). The grounded theory perspective: Conceptualization contrasted with description. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. (2002b). Conceptualization: On theory and theorizing using grounded theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
1(2), 23-38. doi:10.1.1.120.9345

Goertler, S. (2009). Using computer-mediated communication (CMC) in language teaching. Die Unterrichtspraxis, 42(1), 74-84.
Retrieved from http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=0042-062X

Holton, J. (2010). The coding process and its challenges. The Grounded Theory Review, 9(1), 21-40. Retrieved from
http://www.groundedtheoryreview.com/download.htmHorsley, T. L. (2010, June). Innovative learning activity. Journal of Nursing
Education, 49(6), 363-365. doi:10.3928/01484834-20090521-02

Horsley, T. L. (2010, June). Innovative learning activity. Journal of Nursing Education, 49(6), 363-365. doi:10.3928/01484834-2009052102

Horwitz, E., Horwitz, M., & Cope, J. (1986) Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 125-132.
doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1986.tb05256.x

Kiliç-Çakmak, E., Karatas, S., & Ocak, M. (2009). An analysis of factors affecting community college students' expectations one-learning
[sic]. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10(4), 351-363. Retrieved from http://www.infoagepub.com/quarterly-review-of-distanceeducation.html

Knowles, M. (1975). Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. Chicago, IL: Follett Publishing Company.

Knowles, M. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy. Chicago, IL: Follett Publishing Company.

Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. California: Pergamon. Retrieved from
http://sdkrashen.com/SL_Acquisition_and_Learning/SL_Acquisition_and_Learning.pdf

Lafford, B. (2009). Toward an ecological CALL: Update to Garrett (1991). The Modern Language Journal, 93, Focus issue, 673-696.
Retrieved from http://mlj.miis.edu/index.htm

Lamy, M-N., & Pegrum, M. (2012). Special issue commentary: Hegemonies in call. Learning Language & Technology, 16(2), 1-3. Retrieved
from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/june2012/commentary.pdf
27
References

Lozanov, G. (1978). Suggestology and outlines of suggestopedy. Philadelphia, PA: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers.

Mavetera, N., & Kroeze, J. (2009). Practical considerations in grounded theory research. Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems,
9(32). Retrieved from http://sprouts.aisnet.org/9-32

Meister, J., & Willyerd, K. (2010). Looking ahead at social learning: 10 predictions. Retrieved from
http://www.astd.org/LC/2010/0710_meister.htm

Mezirow, J. (1978). Perspective transformation. Adult Education Quarterly, 28(2), 100-110. doi:10.1177/074171367802800202

Miller, G. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological
Review, 63(2), 81-97. doi:10.1037/h0043158

Nation, P. (2007). The four strands. Innovation in Language Learning & Teaching, 1(1), 2-13. doi:10.2167/illt039.0

Nsomwe-a-nfunkwa, B. (2010). Sharing the obstacles to distance education at the University of Kinshasa. Distance Learning, 7(4), 83-85.
Retrieved from http://www.infoagepub.com/index.php?id=89&i=59

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.

Pino, D. (2008). Web-based English as a second language instruction and learning: Strengths and limitations. Distance Learning, 5(2), 6571. Retrieved from http://www.infoagepub.com/index.php?id=89&i=59

Saadé, R., & Kira, D. (2009). Computer anxiety in e-learning: The effect of computer self-efficacy. Journal of Information Technology, 8,
177-191. Retrieved from http://informingscience.org/jite/documents/Vol8/JITEv8p177-191Saade724.pdf

Saba, F. (2011). Distance education in the United States: Past, present, future. Educational Technology. November-December 2011. pp.
11-18.

Saféris, F. (1986). La suggestopédie. Paris, France: Laffont.

Salcedo, C. S. (2010, February). Comparative analysis of learning outcomes in face-to-face foreign language classes vs. language lab and
online. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 7(2), 43-54. Retrieved from http://journals.cluteonline.com/index.php/TLC

Shen, L., Wang, M., & Shen, R. (2009). Affective e-learning using “emotional” data to improve learning in pervasive learning
environment. Education Technology & Society, 12(2), 176-189. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info/

Shrum, J., & Glisan, E. (2010). Teacher’s handbook: Contextualized language instruction. Boston, MA: Heinle.

Simmons, O. (2011). Why classic grounded theory. In V. Martin & A. Gynnild (Eds.), Grounded theory: The philosophy, method, and work
of Barney Glaser. (pp. 15-30). Boca Raton, FL: BrownWalker [sic] Press.
28
References
Spradley, J. (1979). The ethnographic interview. NY: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston. Retrieved from
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=2__Tt3FJm18C&oi=fnd&pg
=PA44&dq=spradley+%2B%22asking+descriptive+questions%22&ots=QNu
d4eW9IZ&sig=S1PuRYt3B8IBcLSfaUR8OvGXhY#v=onepage&q=spradley%20%2B%22asking%20descriptive%20questi
ons%22&f=false
 Tanaka-Ellis, N. (2010). Factors limiting learners' success in achieving task
outcomes in CALL. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 4(3), 213233. doi:10.1080/17501229.2010.513445
 Tomé, M. (2009, April). Enseignement des langues, communication et
compétences orales sur le web actuel. Revista de estudios franceses, 5, 347370. Retrieved from
http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=2938737
 U.S. Department of Education. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based
practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning
studies. Prepared by Means, B., Toyama,Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K.
Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/ppss/reports.html

29