Affect in Language Learning
Lector universitar doctor Teodora POPESCU
Universitatea « 1 Decembrie 1918 » Alba Iulia
This paper presents the issue of affect and its role in language learning. Different affective
factors will be taken into consideration, as well as their relevance to the process of learning
English: motivation, attitudes and beliefs, anxiety, learning styles and the learning environment.
Introduction
Recent research in psychology has underlined the importance of emotionality in the individual’s
life, demonstrating a close relationship between success in life and non-cognitive aspects of human
intelligence, such as affective, personal and social factors. The concept of emotional intelligence
has emerged, by which we understand an ability, capacity, or skill to perceive, assess, and manage
the emotions of one's self, of others, and of groups.
Among different models that have been suggested, we would like to mention Goleman’s theory,
according to which emotional intelligence may be divided into five competencies, i.e.:
- The ability to identify and name one's emotional states and to understand the link between
emotions, thought and action. (self-awareness)
- The capacity to manage one's emotional states — to control emotions or to shift undesirable
emotional states to more adequate ones. (self-control)
- The ability to enter into emotional states (at will) associated with a drive to achieve and be
successful. (motivation)
- The capacity to read, be sensitive to, and influence other people's emotions. (empathy)
- The ability to enter and sustain satisfactory interpersonal relationships. (social skills)
(Goleman, 1995)
This research has also been seminal in the field of language learning, and Stern’s assertion that
“the affective component contributes at least as much and often more to language learning than the
cognitive skills” (Stern, 1983: 386) is supported by a series of recent cross-disciplinary research
revealing that affective variables have significant influence on language achievement. Damasio
(1994) explains that emotions are a part of reason on the neurobiological level, and LeDoux
considers emotion and cognition as partners: “minds without emotions are not really minds at all”
(1996: 25).
Schumann (1975) offers a very good overview of early literature on affective factors and the
problem of age in SLA1 research, and Arnold and Brown (1999) provide a more contemporary
perspective from the view of the language learner as an individual (anxiety, inhibition,
extroversion/introversion, self-esteem, motivation - which can be either extrinsic or intrinsic,
learner styles) and as a participant in a socio-cultural situation (empathy, classroom transactions,
cross-cultural processes).
In the following we will analyse affect in second language learning starting from Stern’s (1983:
383) three broad concepts of affect (attitudes, motivation and personality), to which we will add
1
SLA = Second Language Acquisition
beliefs, anxiety, learning styles (personality) and the learning environment.
Towards a definition of affect
Among various definitions provided by specialist literature we will turn our attention to the
most relevant ones. Arnold (1999) defines affect in terms of “aspects of emotion, feeling, mood or
attitude which condition behaviour”, whereas Dickinson (1987: 25) characterises it as being
concerned with the learner’s attitude towards the target language and its users, and with his/her
emotional responses. Stevick (1999: 44) propounds the following interpretation (1982):
One’s ‘affect’ towards a particular thing or action or situation or experience is how that
thing or that action or that situation or that experience fits in with one’s needs or
purposes, and its resulting effect on one’s emotions … affect is a term that refers to the
purposive and emotional sides of a person’s reactions to what is going on. (Stevick,
1999: 55)
Motivation
It is a matter of common knowledge that motivation “is a very important, if not the most
important factor in language learning” (Van Lier, 1996: 98), without which even ‘gifted’ individuals
cannot accomplish long-term goals, whatever the curricula and whoever the teacher. Therefore, the
concept of language learning motivation has become pivotal to a number of theories of L2
acquisition, and motivation has been widely accepted by teachers and researchers as one of the key
factors influencing the rate and success of second/foreign language (L2) learning, often
compensating for deficiencies in language aptitude and learning. It could be said that all other
factors involved in L2 acquisition presuppose motivation to a certain degree.
The first studies on motivation in the field of second language learning were carried out by
Gardner and Lambert (1959), who suggested an integrative-instrumental duality (Gardner et al.,
1976: 199), widely accepted and confirmed by subsequent studies. Their ten-year-long research
program (1972), which proved that success in language attainment was dependent on the learner’s
affective reactions toward the target linguistic-cultural group (in addition to aptitude) paved the way
for the future study of motivation in SLA.
Later on, in the 1980s the learning situation itself received more attention and Dörnyei
identified three sets of motivational components (1994: 276):
a) course-specific motivational components (syllabus, teaching materials, teaching method,
learning task);
b) teacher-specific motivational components (teacher personality, teaching feedback,
relationship with the students);
c) group-specific motivational components (dynamics of the learning group, goal-orientedness,
norm and reward system, group cohesion, classroom goal structures).
Another broader definition is provided by Heckhausen (cited in Tremblay & Gardner, 1995:
505-506):
The observed goal-directedness of the behaviour, the inception and completion of a
coherent behavioural unit, its resumption after an interruption, the transition to a new
behavioural sequence, the conflict between various goals and its resolution, all of these
represent issues in motivation. (Heckhausen, 1991: 9)
Nevertheless, Van Lier (1996: 100) underlines the fact that the meaning of motivation depends
on the perception of human nature that is used, in which context, Deci and Ryan (1985) distinguish
between mechanistic and organismic theories, the former seeing the human organism as passive
(e.g. behaviourism), and the latter seeing it as active (being volitional and initiating behaviours).
Recent educational theory has rather favoured the second interpretation, with Gardner (1985)
describing motivation to learn an L2 as “the extent to which the individual works or strives to learn
the language because of a desire to do so and the satisfaction experienced in this activity” (1985:
10). In this definition we will find
i)
effort expended to achieve a goal;
ii)
a desire to learn the language;
iii)
satisfaction with the task of learning the language.
Gardner and Smythe’s (1975: 222) original model of motivation comprises four main components:
i)
group-specific attitudes;
ii)
learners’ motives for learning the target language;
iii)
affective factors (Stern’s “Generalized Attitudes”);
iv)
extrinsic and instrinsic motivation (Stern’s “Attitudes towards the learning situation”).
Motivation has often been labelled extrinsic or intrinsic “depending on whether the stimulus for the
behaviour originated outside or inside the individual” (Van Lier, 1996: 101):
Extrinsic motivation is like borrowed money, an investment which may eventually pay
off, whereas intrinsic motivation is like money you own. Being very highly motivated is
like having a lot of money, and like money, motivation can be wasted or well-spent. …
In education, motivation is organismic energy-capital to be spent in the learning market.
Some of it we bring with us as a genetic endowment, but we may need to learn how to
invest it. Some of it we borrow from adults and peers in the form of extrinsic stimuli
and coercion. (Van Lier, 1996: 101-102)
Intrinsic motivation is defined in terms of drive theories, by which Van Lier understands
“certain basic, psychological needs which are innate in the human being” (1996: 108). Deci and
Ryan (1991), on the other hand, see intrinsic motivation as voluntary and spontaneous, independent
of reinforcement or biological drives, and needing no external reward, i.e. ‘a non-derivational
motivational force’. Van Lier propounds two layers of intrinsic motivation:
i)
a basic, organismic motivation consisting of intentionality, affect and effort;
ii)
a specifically human motivation, grafted onto this organismic one, consisting of
consciousness and choice (hence, deliberation) (1996: 100).
Another categorisation was that of integrative vs instrumental motivation, a view
characterised by Crookes and Schmidt (1991) as social-psychological rather than educational,
lacking clarity by associating other affective factors with motivation. Van Lier also argues that
the emphasis on long-term goals does not allow for the short-term factors operating in the
immediate learning context.
Dörnyei’s (1990) findings are also worth mentioning; the factors that he identified as leading to
increased motivation are an interest in foreign languages, cultures and people; a desire to broaden
one’s view and avoid provincialism and a desire for new stimuli and challenges. Dörnyei (1994)
proposes a three-level categorisation of motivation (Language level, Learner level, Situation level)
and Williams and Burden (1997:121) present a three-stage model of interdependent factors acting
within the social context. According to this model, “decision to act” is central, interacting in a
dynamic manner with internal factors (significant others, the nature of the interaction with
significant others, the learning environment, the broader context) and external factors (intrinsic
interest of activity, perceived value of activity, sense of agency, mastery, self-concept, attitudes,
other affective states, developmental age and stage, gender):
… making decisions to act is a central component of motivation. These decisions will
be influenced by a number of different causes. If people attach a high value to the
outcome of an activity, they will be more likely to be motivated to perform it. People
also need to be aroused, often by curiosity or interest, and to sustain their arousal.
(Williams & Burden, 1997: 136)
Among other findings on factors that influence motivation in language learning one may mention
the contributions brought by different authors, drawing on theories from general psychology: i)
needs theory; ii) instrumentality theories; iii) equity theories; and iv) reinforcement theories.
(Oxford & Shearin, 1996)
The consensus on the essential role of motivation has lead to further research in order to
conceptualise and assess motivational variables. One thing that should be borne in mind is that the
aspect of motivation researchers are focusing on is likely to represent only a part of a more intricate
psychological construct. Dörnyei (1998) sees a need for a process-oriented perception of
motivation, with a description of the various stages. This might include planning, intentionformulation, appraisal of the situation, generation of concrete tasks, prioritising between multiple
tasks, enactment of intentions, and evaluation of outcomes.
An important idea was propounded by Dickinson, who argues that concepts central to autonomy
(learner independence, learner responsibility, learner choice, plus decision making, critical
reflection and detachment) are all important in cognitive motivation, and sustains that selfinstruction leads to increased empathy between teacher and learners and among learners, producing
a more cohesive and supportive group of learners, which is motivating in several ways, but in
particular is likely to lead to a reduction in inhibition (Dickinson, 1987: 33).
Dickinson (1995: 168) also mentions that motivation to learn and learning effectiveness can be
increased in learners who take responsibility for their own learning, who understand and accept that
their learning success is a result of effort, and that failure can be overtaken with greater effort and
better use of strategies. Learners who are interested in the learning tasks and the learning outcomes
for their own sake, and who focus on learning outcomes rather than performance outcomes (Dweck,
1986) display increased motivation.
Research has also revealed the crucial importance of the teacher in fostering student motivation.
Dörnyei underlined the fact that “teacher skills in motivating learners should be seen as central to
teaching effectiveness”, and expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of relevant practical teaching
strategies, arguing that educational-oriented motivation articles in the 1990s “typically contained
summaries of relevant classroom-specific motives [but did not offer] a sufficiently serviceable
guide to practitioners.” He therefore designed a set of “Ten Commandments for Motivating
Language Learners” (1998: 131)
1. Set a personal example with your own behaviour.
2. Create a pleasant, relaxed atmosphere in the classroom.
3. Present the task properly.
4. Develop a good relationship with the learners.
5. Increase the learner’s linguistic self-confidence.
6. Make the language classes interesting.
7. Promote learner autonomy.
8. Personalise the learning process.
9. Increase the learners’ goal-orientedness.
10. Familiarise learners with the target language culture.
He was not the only researcher who has endeavoured to provide practitioners with meaningful
advice. Oxford and Shearin (1996:139) also offer practical suggestions for teachers:
1. Teachers can identify why students are studying the new language.
 Teachers can find out actual motivations (motivation survey).
 Information on motivation can be passed on to the next class in a portfolio.
 Teachers can determine which parts of L2 learning are especially valuable for the
students.
2. Teachers can help shape students’ beliefs about success and failure in L2 learning.
 Students can learn to have realistic but challenging goals.
 Teachers can learn to accept diversity in the way students establish and meet their goals,
based on differences in learning styles.
3. Teachers can help students improve motivation by showing that L2 learning can be an
exciting mental challenge, a career enhancer, a vehicle to cultural awareness and friendship
and a key to world peace.
4. Teachers can make the L2 classroom a welcoming, positive place where psychological needs
are met and where language anxiety is kept to a minimum.
5. Teachers can urge students to develop their own intrinsic rewards through positive self-talk,
guided self-evaluation, and mastery of specific goals, rather than comparison with other
students. Teachers can thus promote a sense of greater self-efficacy, increasing motivation to
continue learning the L2. (Adapted from Oxford & Shearin (1996:139)
It nevertheless true that teachers are left to rely on suggestions and contribute themselves to the
enhancement of students’ motivation. Knowing one’s students’ own needs and addressing them
accordingly is more important than resorting to some ‘recipes’ provided by others. It is important
for practitioners to make room for motivation as an instructional goal when designing and
implementing their syllabi.
Attitudes and Beliefs
Another important facet of the learning process is that of students’ attitudes to learning and the
perceptions (and beliefs) which determine them. These may have “a profound influence on …
learning behaviour” (Cotterall, 1995b: 195) and on learning outcomes (Reid & Hresko, 1982), due
to the fact that successful learners develop insightful beliefs about language learning processes,
their own abilities and the use of effective learning strategies (Anstey, 1988), which have a
facilitative effect on learning. Successful students tend to develop a more active and autonomous
attitude that allows them to take charge of their learning. Conversely, mistaken or uninformed
beliefs about language learning may be conducive to dependence on less effective strategies,
resulting in indifference toward learning, poor cognitive performance (Reid & Hresko, 1982;
Anstey, 1988), classroom anxiety (Horwitz et al. 1986) and a negative attitude to autonomy (Victori
& Lockhart, 1995: 225).
It is important that teachers recognise and respect students’ attitudes, beliefs, and expectations
and help them overcome any harmful perceptions and obstacles (Mantle-Bromley, 1995: 383), as
well as enhancing students’ awareness of their personal weaknesses and strengths and of their taskand strategic knowledge (Wenden, 1987b; Gradman & Hanania, 1992; Victori, 1992). It has been
proved that students’ beliefs which differ from those of the teacher can lead to frustration,
dissatisfaction with the course, unwillingness to perform communicative activities, and to lack of
confidence in the teacher, at the same time prejudicing achievement.
There have been numerous definitions given to attitudes and beliefs, starting from dictionary
definitions to those given by psychologists and education researchers.
According to Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913), “attitude is seen as “a complex
mental orientation involving beliefs and feelings and values and dispositions to act in certain ways”,
whereas Collins Cobuild Student’s Dictionary states that: “Your attitude to something is the way
you think and feel about it”. Psychological theories on attitudes refer to an evaluative, emotional
reaction (i.e. the degree of like or dislike associated with the attitudinal object) comprising three
components: affect, cognition2, and behaviour3, these components undergoing change when there is
“dissonance” or disagreement between them (Rajecki 1990; Zimbardo & Lieppe 1991).
By beliefs we generally understand “mental constructions of experience” (Sigel, 1985: 351,
cited in White 1999:443) that are held to be true and that guide behaviour (White 1999:443). Beliefs
about language learning (metacognitive knowledge, according to Flavell 1979) represent “general
assumptions that students hold about themselves as learners, about factors influencing language
learning and about the nature of language learning and teaching” (Victori & Lockhart 1995:224),
and reflection on these beliefs has been termed ‘metacognition’ by cognitive psychologists, though
the definition of this concept is still under debate (Brown et al. 1983).
Research into the relationship between attitudes and second language achievement was carried out
as early as the 1950s by Gardner and Lambert, and later by Schumann (1975), who found a number
2
3
What a person knows about the attitudinal object (including beliefs).
Intentions or actions related to the attitudinal object.
of contributory factors:
a. language shock (leading to feelings of dissatisfaction, frustration or guilt);
b. culture shock (resulting in feelings of alienation or anxiety and rejection of native speaker
values);
c. language stress (shame and loss of self-esteem resulting from a perceived deficiency in
language); and
i) anxiety (due to the infantile persona necessarily projected by the language learner).
Sauvignon (1976) points out that teachers also have attitudes and beliefs about language learning,
and that these affect their teaching:
Not until we have taken a hard critical look at the attitudes and motivation of teachers,
both individually and as a profession, will we be ready to determine what obstacles lie
in the way of creating the kinds of learning environments which would be most helpful
to our students. (Sauvignon, 1976: 296)
At the same time it was found that students have different needs, preferences, beliefs, learning
styles, and educational backgrounds, and that imposition of change upon these factors can lead to
negative reactions, although the importance of student awareness of, and reflection on language
learning beliefs (metacognitive knowledge), learning styles, learning preferences and expectations
has only recently begun to receive attention in second language research.
Wenden (1991b: 12-3) stated that adults and children form “self-schemata” concerning capabilities
and limitations, degree of personal control over academic achievement, reasons for success and
failure at different tasks, and expectancies for the future, which influence how they approach a
problem. These schemata and other beliefs about language learning have various origins:
a. the mother culture;
b. the family;
c. classroom/social peers;
d. repetitive experiences; and
e. self-fulfilling (often negative) prophecies.
They are often related to past experiences, but they also contribute to future behaviour,
supportive beliefs helping to overcome problems and thus sustaining motivation, and negative
beliefs (including negative teacher beliefs) contributing to decreased motivation. Students are also
immediately influenced by their perception of success in learning and by their levels of expectancy,
realistically high levels helping to build confidence, and low (or unrealistically high) expectations
helping to build incompetence (Puchta, 1999: 257). Research on self-esteem has demonstrated “a
clear link between an individual’s judgement of his or her own competence and that individual’s
actual performance on school-related tasks” (Hagen et al. 1982), although Cotterall (1999: 510)
sees a need for further research into learner beliefs about ability, self-efficacy and self-esteem.
It is therefore essential for us to pay attention to people’s variables, such as intentions,
attributions, expectancies, perceptions and beliefs about learning abilities, which learners bring to
the classroom. We need to design and implement our lessons on the language-learning process
which would incorporate attitude-change methods. If need be, we should change curricula in order
to maintain and improve students’ attitudes and beliefs. It is essential that he help students get rid of
ineffective and harmful preconceived notions on language learning. Specialists have suggested
ways in which this can be carried out. Thus, Bassano (1986: 15) offers teachers six steps towards
dealing with student beliefs:
a. become aware of students’ past classroom experiences and their assumptions about language
learning;
b. build students’ confidence;
c. begin where the students are and move slowly;
d. show them achievement;
e. allow for free choice as much as possible; and
f. become aware of the students’ interests and concerns, their goals and objectives.
Furthermore, Morgan (1993) considers that four aspects of classroom persuasion should be borne in
mind when attempting to change attitudes:
a. learning content should require active learner involvement;
b. the classroom environment should be one of “change or novelty” (1993:73);
c. students need to struggle with complex material and reach their own conclusions; and
d. students should become aware of their attitudes toward language and culture (cf. MantleBromley, 1995: 373-4).
All these ideas are valuable for the practitioner whose aim is that of changing students’ counterproductive beliefs and attitudes towards language learning.
Anxiety
It has been confirmed by research that ‘language anxiety’ exists indeed and that it has a
considerable effect on second language learning (MacIntyre and Gardner, 1991b). It has been
underlined that there is some reciprocity between anxiety and proficiency, such that “even in
optimum conditions, students can experience destructive forms of anxiety” (Reid 1999: 297).
Nevertheless, this effect is complex and difficult to appraise (Phillips 1992:2), although research
(and the experience of teachers) points out that language learning contexts are especially susceptible
to anxiety arousal (MacIntyre and Gardner, 1989; MacIntyre, 1995: 90). Campbell and Ortiz (1991:
159) reckoned that up to half of all language students experience debilitating levels of language
anxiety; whereas Horwitz (Horwitz et al. 1986) assessed that language anxiety can determine
students to defer language study or to change their majors. For this reason, language anxiety has
been greatly researched, as specialists believe that an understanding of its causes and investigation
into how to reduce language anxiety will lead to improved learner performance and learning
satisfaction by releasing tensions and diminishing demands on cognitive processing space (Eysenck
1979). Oxford (1999) also investigated whether language anxiety is a short-term or lasting
characteristic, whether it is harmful or beneficial, which factors correlate with language anxiety, and
how anxiety can be identified in the language classroom.
In order to address the issue of anxiety one has to pay heed to psychological aspects of learning.
Psychological definitions of anxiety refer to a “transitory emotional state or condition characterised
by feelings of tension and apprehension and heightened autonomic nervous system activity”
(Spielberger 1972: 24), a state which can have both negative and positive effects, and which
motivates and facilitates as well as disrupts and inhibits cognitive actions such as learning.
As far as second language learning is concerned, by language anxiety we understand “the
apprehension experienced when a situation requires the use of a second language with which the
individual is not fully proficient”, this apprehension being characterised by “derogatory self-related
cognitions …, feelings of apprehension, and physiological responses such as increased heart rate”
(1993a: 5). Such feelings of tension and apprehension related to second language contexts are also
described by Williams & Burden (1997: 92) who underline that anxiety is “highly situation specific
and itself affected by a number of other factors”
Liebert and Morris (1967) mentioned “worry” and “emotionality” among cognitive and
affective components of anxiety. The former was described by Sarason (1986) as “distressing
preoccupations and concerns about impending events” (1986:21), often taking the form of
distraction, self-related cognition such as excessive self-evaluation, worry over potential failure, and
concern over the opinions of others (Eysenck 1979). Such outcomes often affect task performance
negatively, which has itself been the subject of much research into language anxiety, results of
which suggest that anxiety is conducive to cognitive interference in performing specific tasks
(Schwarzer 1986).
Three related performance anxieties were identified by Horwitz et al. (1986:127):
a) communication apprehension;
b) test anxiety;
c) fear of negative evaluation.
Eysenck (1979) offers a reconceptualization of anxiety in terms of this interference, stating that the
anxious students have their attention shared between task-related cognition and self-related
cognition:
worry and other task-irrelevant cognitive activities associated with anxiety always
impair the quality of performance. The major reason for this is that the task-irrelevant
information ... competes with task-relevant information for space in the processing
system. (Eysenck 1979: 364)
MacIntyre & Gardner (1991a) assert that the lower the language learning stage, the less anxiety
is to be found. This tends to develop later, if language learning experiences have been negative.
Given the tendency of language classrooms to promote anxiety (Horwitz et al. 1986), promoting a
low-stress language learning environment must play an important role in designing and conducting
language courses. This end may be achieved by encouraging realistic expectations about accuracy
and errors (Foss & Reitzel 1988), offering training in affective strategies, to help students manage
anxiety and improve performance (Oxford & Crookall 1989), reassuring students that they are not
alone in their affective reactions and that these feelings are normal, and showing that the
teacher/evaluator understands the tension caused by being anxious not to appear anxious to the
class/teacher.
Apparently, the most negative effects of anxiety upon learner performance are those of course
grades and standardised proficiency tests. It has been suggested, nevertheless, that more subtle
effects of language anxiety on specific processes involved in language acquisition and
communication should also be studied, such as the development of oral skills, even though students
show most interest in developing their ability to communicate verbally in the target language
(Lindenau, 1987).
Another element that needs to be taken into consideration is that of learner-perceptions. These
are extremely important in the matter of reducing language anxiety, and studies of students’
negative correlations between anxiety and output quality indicate that anxious students have more
difficulty expressing themselves and tend to underestimate their level of ability (“self-derogation”)
compared with more relaxed students (“self-enhancement”) (MacIntyre & Gardner 1994). As a
result, teachers need to identify anxious students (Horwitz et al. 1986:128) as well as any elements
of the classroom environment which might lead to this reaction.
In conclusion, language educators should strive to promote a non-threatening learning
environment and “user-friendly” oral exams which students could prepare for well in advance, in
order to prevent negative interactions between language anxiety and other personality variables
such as learning styles, motivation, and personality types. Teachers themselves could eventually
discover and apply the most effective techniques in controlling anxiety.
Learning Styles
Although there has been some overlapping between learning styles and learning strategies in
terms of definitions (Reid, 1995: viii) learning styles have gained their rightful place in any review
of affect in the classroom, having their origin in habitual (in addition to biological) attributes, and
thus being prone to change and extension (Davidman, 1981):
[Learning strategies are] … external skills that students use, often consciously, to
improve their learning … that students can be taught [and] that can enhance or expand
their existing learning styles. Learning styles, in contrast, are internally based
characteristics, often not perceived or used consciously, that are the basis for the intake
and understanding of new information … students can identify their preferred learning
styles and stretch those styles by examining and practising various learning strategies.
(Reid, 1995: viii)
It has been suggested that learning (i.e. “the process whereby knowledge is created through
the transformation of experience”, Kolb 1984: 38) is influenced by learning styles, and that in
the case of students capable to employ multiple learning styles, this effect is positive
(Cronbach & Snow 1977; Stewart 1981; Eliason 1989: 27). Reid (1995: xiii) advances a
number of statements for learning styles:
1. every person, students and teacher alike, has a learning style and learning strengths and
weaknesses;
2. learning styles exist on wide continuums, although they are often described as
opposites;
3. learning styles are value-neutral; that is, no one style is better than others;
4. students must be encouraged to ‘stretch’ their learning styles so that they will be more
empowered in a variety of learning situations;
5. students’ learning strategies are often linked to their learning styles;
6. teachers should allow their students to become aware of their learning strengths and
weaknesses. (Adapted from Reid 1995: xiii)
In discussing learning styles it has been agreed that cognition, affect and personality are equally
important. Reid’s (1995: viii) has defined them as “an individual’s natural, habitual, and preferred
way(s) of absorbing, processing, and retaining new information and skills”; Keefe (1979: 4) has
distinguished “cognitive, affective and physiological traits that are relatively stable indicators of
how learners perceive, interact with, and respond to the learning environment”; Scarcella (1990:
114) has referred to “cognitive and interactional patterns which affect the ways in which students
perceive, remember, and think”, whereas Ehrman & Oxford (1990: 311) speak of “preferred or
habitual patterns of mental functioning and dealing with new information”.
Reid’s has offered a comprehensive summary of all these definitions, identifying three major
learning styles:
1. Cognitive Learning Styles: Field-Independent/Dependent Learning Styles (FI/D);
Analytic/Global Learning Styles; Reflective/Impulsive Learning Styles.
2. Sensory Styles: Perceptual Learning Styles (Auditory Learners, Visual Learners, Tactile
Learners, Kinaesthetic Learners and Haptic Learners); Environmental Learning Styles
(Physical Learners, Social Learners).
3. Personality Learning Styles (Affective/Temperament Styles): Myers-Briggs Temperament
Styles
(Extroversion/Introversion,
Sensing/Perception,
Thinking/
Feeling,
Judging/Perceiving); Tolerance of Ambiguity Styles (Tolerant Learners/ Intolerant
Learners); Right-and Left-Hemisphere Learners.
Another important factor in learning styles can be the tolerance of ambiguity, by which we
understand the willingness to adapt to apparently ambiguous situations or ideas - cf. Ausburn &
Ausburn (1978)
Different aspects were taken into consideration by different researchers. Thus, the concept of
cognitive style mapping was investigated by Hill (1971), whereas Witkin, Moore, Oltman,
Goodenough, Friedman, Owen, & Raskin (1977) wrote about field independent (analytic) versus
field dependent (global) approaches to experiencing the environment and processing information.
Similarly, Dunn & Dunn (1979) identify perceptual learning modalities:

visual learning: reading, studying charts;

auditory learning: listening to lectures, audiotapes, etc.;

kinaesthetic learning: experiential learning - total physical involvement with a
learning situation;

tactile learning: “hands-on” learning, such as building models or doing laboratory
experiments.
Further categorisations of learning modalities were provided by Kagan (1966) and Kagan &
Messer (1975), who described a conceptual tempo (reflectivity versus impulsivity in learning), by
Gregorc (1979a; 1979b), who proposed concrete sequential, abstract sequential, abstract random,
and concrete random learning styles, and by Kolb (1976, 1984), who also identified four adaptive
learning modes constituting a natural learning sequence of cyclic and interactive stages, continuing
at ever deeper and more complex levels: concrete experience (CE), reflective observation (RO),
abstract conceptualisation (AC) and active experimentation (AE).
Learners are differing individuals and this is what we should never overlook. Eliason appropriately
concluded on learning styles and their implications for language learning and teaching:
… we may very well find that the most important outcome for learning-styles
assessment and information dissemination is not whether we label ourselves and our
students as visual or kinaesthetic, … or as accommodators or divergers, but rather
whether we are able to acknowledge and celebrate the various types and processes we
and our students bring to the classroom, while continuing to both accommodate and
diverge. (Eliason 1989: 32)
After all, learner styles are all a matter of awareness and acceptance. It is widely accepted
now that “the perceptual and social activity of the learner, and particularly the verbal and nonverbal interaction in which the learner engages, are central to an understanding of learning …
They are learning in a fundamental way”(Van Lier, 2000: 246).
As a conclusion to this section, we may reassert that the classroom as a learning
environment contains learners with their own personal histories, values, assumptions, beliefs,
rights, duties, obligations and learning styles, and the learning task (or whatever unit of
learning is chosen) can only be a question of perceiving and using linguistic affordances (Van
Lier 2000:252) as appropriate, stimulated by a climate of cooperative social interaction which
“produces new, elaborate, advanced psychological processes that are unavailable to the
organism working in isolation” (Vygotsky, 1989: 61).
The learning environment
It has been rightfully stated that “without a positive learning atmosphere, students may well
gain little or nothing from new curricular infusions”. (Mantle-Bromley, 1995: 383) Besides
regarding the learner as a thinking individual, educators have also drawn attention to the necessity
of a constructive learning “climate” (Fraser, 1986: 182) as a valuable means to learning and a
worthwhile end in itself. Legutke & Thomas (1991) underlined the importance of trust in creating
this “constructive” environment:
A learning environment conducive to growth includes an atmosphere of trust, forms of
interaction between partners, learning situations which stimulate encounters, and above
all, learning arrangements which allow for creative ways of exploration by making
contact with both the world inside the learner and the world outside. (Legutke &
Thomas 1991:43)
Comparatively, Sano et al. (1984) consider learning as dependent on:
… warm-hearted interaction between teachers and learners, as well as among learners
themselves. This friendly interaction is, in our opinion, the most essential factor in
successful language learning. (Sano et al, 1984: 171)
Pine & Boy (1977) have drawn a list of factors that influence and facilitate learning as far as the
classroom environment is concerned. According to them, learning is facilitated in an atmosphere …:
1. … which encourages people to be active;
2. … that facilitates the individual’s discovery of the personal meaning of ideas;
3. … that emphasises the uniquely personal and subjective nature of learning;
4. … in which difference is good and desirable;
5. … that consistently recognises the right to make mistakes;
6. … that tolerates ambiguity;
7. … in which evaluation is a co-operative process with emphasis on self-evaluation;
8. … which encourages openness of self rather than concealment of self;
9. … in which people are encouraged to trust in themselves as well as in external sources;
10. … in which people feel they are respected;
11. … in which people feel they are accepted;
12. … which allows confrontation.
13. … in which the teacher creates conditions by which he loses the teaching function.
14. … in which instruction is carefully personalised in an attempt to meet the individual needs,
interests, and abilities of students.
Moreover, Pine & Boy (1977) also stress that learning is facilitated in an environment …:
15. … in which the materials provided are perceived as meaningful and relevant to the student;
16. … in which there is freedom to peruse personal interests, raise questions, make decisions,
explore, and discover;
17. … in which provocative interest centres and materials that demand interaction and constant
investigation are provided to help bring about self-initiated learning;
18. … in which an attitude of competitiveness need not exist;
19. … in which the student has the freedom to make mistakes and still feel competent;
20. … in which opportunities are provided for the student to grow socially, emotionally, and
intellectually though working as an individual, and as part of a wide variety of group and peer
learning situations;
21. … in which respect, trust, love, and concern for one another are nurtured;
22. … in which the teacher’s role is facilitator of learning.
Conclusion
We have reviewed some of the affective factors that influence the language learning process in
order to understand how negative emotions can be overcome, since anxiety, fear, stress, anger,
depression, and negative reactions can harm the learning environment, making teaching techniques
useless.
As Dickinson (1987: 26) has noted, a self-instructional mode can contribute to control affective
factors through fostering empathy, reducing inhibition, and increasing self-assessment and
individualisation.
Teachers should be strive to promote learning environments “which are cognitively and
affectively expanding, … which enable the learner to become a more adequate and knowledgeable
person” (Pine & Boy, 1977: iii), and which acknowledge the place of affect in that process.
Furthermore, affective approach to teaching should be adopted in order to develop a truly reflective
teaching practice. According to Stanley (1999) this is possible, as:
1. Teachers tend to have emotional reactions during teaching-learning situations.
2. Teachers are the agents of their reflective processes.
3. Teachers learn reflection through relationship. (Stanley, 1999: 123)
Teachers have to raise student awareness of affective factors and then allow student to express
their needs, beliefs and perceptions. This student-centred approach entails a learning climate of trust
and clarity, which should be considered as an indispensable goal, governing teachers’ choices and
preceding the learning process, though depending on this very process for its achievement.
Finally, this humanistic view on teaching and learning presupposes that teachers turn into
language-resource counsellors who will effectively contribute to students’ education towards the
betterment of human condition.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Arnold, J. & Brown, H.D. (1999). A map of the terrain. In J. Arnold (Ed.). Affect in Language Learning.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1-24.
Arnold, J. (Ed.). (1999). Affect in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crookes, G. & Schmidt, R. (1991). Motivation: reopening the research agenda. Language Learning, 41,
469-512.
Deci, E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-determination in Human Behavior. New
York: Plenum Press.
Deci, E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (1991). A motivational approach to the self: integration in personality. In R.A.
Dienstbier (Ed.). Perspectives on motivation. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1990. Vol. 38.
Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. 237-88.
Dickinson, L. & Wenden, A. (Eds.). (1995). Autonomy, self-direction and self-access in language
teaching and learning. Special issue of System, 23/2.
Dickinson, L. (1987). Self-Instruction in Language Learning. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
Dickinson, L. (1995). Autonomy and motivation: a literature review. System, 23/2, 165-174.
Dörnyei, Z. (1990). Conceptualizing motivation in foreign-language learning. Language Learning, 40/1,
45-78.
Gardner, R.C. & Lambert, W.E. (1972). Attitudes and Motivation in Second-Language Learning.
Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Gardner, R.C. & Smythe, P.C. (1975). Motivation and second language acquisition. Canadian Modern
Language Review. 31, 218-230.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Heckhausen, H. (1977). Achievement motivation and its constructs: a cognitive model. Motivation and
Emotion, 1, 283-329.
Legutke, M & Thomas. H. (1991) Process and Experience in the Language Classroom. Harlow:
Longman.
Oxford, R.L. & Shearin, J. (1996). Language learning motivation in a new key. In Oxford, R.L. (Ed.).
Language Learning Motivation: Pathways to the New Century. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
121-44.
Sano, M., Takahashi, M. & Yoneyama, A. (1984). Communicative language teaching and local needs.
English Language Teaching Journal, 38/3, 170-177.
Schumann, J.H. (1975). Affective factors and the problem of age in second language acquisition.
Language Learning, 25/2, 209-235.
Stern, H.H. (1983). Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stevick, E.W. (1999). Affect in learning and memory: from alchemy to chemistry. In J. Arnold (Ed.).
Affect in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 43-57.
Van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the Language Curriculum: Awareness, Autonomy, and Authenticity.
London: Longman.
Van Lier, L. (2000). From input to affordance: Social-interactive learning from an ecological
perspective. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.). (2000). Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 245-60.
Victori, M. & W. Lockhart (1995) Enhancing metacognition in self-directed language learning. System
23/2, 223-234.
Voller, P. (1997) Does the teacher have a role in autonomous language learning? In P. Benson, & P.
Voller. Autonomy and Independence in Language Learning. Harlow: Longman, 98-113.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Wenden, A. L. (1991a). Learner Strategies in Language Learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Wenden, A. L. (1991b). Learner Strategies for Learner Autonomy. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall.
White, C. (1999). Expectations and emergent beliefs of self-instructed language learners. System, 27.
443-57.
Williams, M. & Burden, R.L. (1997). Psychology for Language Teachers: A Social Constructivist
Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.