Good language learner studies

The good language learner (GLL) studies are a group of academic studies in the area of second language acquisition that deal with the strategies that good language learners exhibit. The rationale for the studies was that there is more benefit from studying the habits of successful language learners than there is from studying learners who fossilize at an early stage or stop studying altogether. It was thought that if the strategies of successful learners could be found then that knowledge could help learners who were not getting such good results.

The original studies were made in the 1970s, but petered out in the 1980s as researchers concentrated on individual learning strategies. However, some research on the topic has also been carried out in more recent years. The main body of GLL research investigated language learning in classroom situations. It found that good language learners could not be distinguished on the basis of observable behavior alone, although personality did seem to have an effect. It also found that teachers did not treat these learners differently from other students, although they could distinguish good language learners from learners who were not so effective.

Original studies

The first studies in the good language learner tradition were made by Joan Rubin and David Stern, both of which were completed in 1975. Both of these studies proposed similar lists of strategies that good language learners use. On the basis of this, a large-scale study was performed at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) which investigated 34 language learners with good learning habits. This study found a list of six different strategies, which were similar to those proposed by Rubin and Stern:

1. Good language learners find an appropriate style of learning.
2. Good language learners involve themselves in the language-learning process.
3. Good language learners develop an awareness of language as both system and communication.
4. Good language learners pay constant attention to expanding their language knowledge.
5. Good language learners develop the second language as a separate system.
6. Good language learners take into account the demands that second language learning imposes.

Later work

In spite of the flurry of interest in the GLL in the mid to late 70s, in the 80s and 90s interest moved more in the direction of socio/cultural influences and individual differences, as well as developing the concept of communicative competence into a communicative approach to language teaching.

In the new millennium, Norton and Toohey re-visited the GLL. Their new perspective emphasized the influence of situation, investment and identity on successful language learning.

Seven years later, Griffiths, harking back to Joan Rubin's original title, published "Lessons from Good Language Learners". Whereas the early work in the GLL field had tended to emphasize the role of strategies, Griffiths' work took a broader view and presented the GLL as a highly complex being involving many different variables, including motivation, age, style, personality, gender, metacognition, autonomy, beliefs, culture and aptitude. In addition, the target variables (including grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, function and skills) and some of the situational factors (including method and error correction practices) which learners must manage if they are to be successful were discussed.

A good language learner

Motivation

Motivation, or the effort learners put into learning a second language as a result of their desire or need to learn it (Ellis, 1997) , has been considered one of the important factors that contributes to success in language learning. A research conducted by Robert Gardner and his colleagues on the relationship between a learner’s attitudes toward the second or foreign language and success in his/her second language learning shows ample evidence that positive motivation has an important part to play in creating and enhancing learners’ willingness to keep learning (Lightbown and Spada, 2006) , which in its turn provides good opportunities for mastering a foreign language.

On a social and psychological continuum, motivation can be categorized into extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. According to Harmer (1994), extrinsic motivation deals with things inside the classroom that influences second language acquisition such as the physical conditions, the teacher and his methodology, as well as things that come from outside the classroom such as instrumental and integrative motivations. Meanwhile, intrinsic motivation refers to motivation that comes from inside an individual rather than from any external or outside rewards. The motivation comes from the pleasure one gets from the task itself or from the sense of satisfaction in completing or even working on a task.

Research has shown that intrinsic motivation seems to have superiority over intrinsic motivation in determining students’ learning outcomes. Maslow (1970), the most powerful rewards are those that are intrinsically motivated within the learner. In his analysis, Brown (2007) states that the role of intrinsic motivation can be observed in the teaching process through the skills. For example, teaching writing is intrinsically motivating when it is carried out as a thinking process in which learners develop their own ideas freely and openly, showing learners strategies of reading that enable them to bring their own information to the written word, or language experience approaches in which students create their own reading material for others in the class to read.

Learning strategies

Apart from some precious examples where a person has an accident and wakes up to be fluent in a foreign language, it is commonly observed that no one can master another language overnight. To be successful in this field, they need not only professional and personal support, but also a variety of proper strategies of their own to acquire each aspect of the target language well. Learning strategies, in this light, “account for how learners accumulate new L2 rules and how they automize existing ones”, consciously or subconsciously (Ellis, 1985, pp. 299-300). Looking at the definition in a more comparative perspective, learning strategies are different from communication strategies and production strategies, as these two concepts focus more on the effectiveness of language use, instead of the language acquisition that learning strategies aim at. (ibid.). Dr. Rebecca Oxford in her all-encompassing book ‘Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know’ furthered this comment with 12 key features of the notion as follows: 1) contribute to the main goal: communicative competence, 2) allow learners to become more self-directed, 3) expand the role of teachers, 4) are problem-oriented, 5) are specific actions taken by the learner, 6) involve many aspects of the learner, not just the cognitive, 7) support learning both directly and indirectly, 8) are not always observable, 9) are often conscious, 10) can be taught, 11) are flexible, and 12) are influenced by a variety of factors (Oxford, 1990, p. 7).

How to address the impacts of Mother tongue

In tune with Features 2 and 5 described above, regarding the impacts of the mother tongue upon the information intake of the L2 learners, are more illuminatingly defined as “specific actions taken by the learner to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and more transferable to new situations” (ibid., p. 6). Littlewood (1984) therefore nicely summarized from examining learner’s errors that L2 learning does not involve merely the repetition and formation of habits, and that instead there is “evidence that second language learners use creative strategies which are not dissimilar from those used by first language learners. The most important of these strategies seem to be generalisation, transfer and other forms of simplification.” (p. 35). Moreover, as Rod Ellis (1985) added to this inventory, language learning strategies can be more as varied as memorization, overgeneralization, inferencing, and prefabricated patterns in order for the learner to acquire this challenging subject in an easier and more successful way (p. 167).

How to accommodate Multiple Intelligences / Learning Styles

Carisma Dreyer in Griffiths (2008)’s ‘Lessons from good language learners’ made an enlightening insight into yet another important impact upon the efficacy of language learning, recognizing that: Whatever the basic personality, it would appear that any given individual can become a good language learner through style flexing or through strategies that take advantage of strengths. This is clear from the fact that there are high level language learners in a wide variety of personality categories. (Section 1, Chapter 6, p. 18) This is especially true with reference to the individual differences in multiple intelligences and learning styles.

           In the first place, it can be widely observed that not all language-smart learners opt for a foreign language course, and that not all award-winning language students have linguistic strengths as their most prominent traits. Howard Gardner, in agreement with this observation had the whole world astounded when proposing the idea of multiple intelligences in his book ‘Frames of mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences’. From his standpoint, intelligence should never be a single and static construct that limits itself to linguistic aptitude and logical reasoning (Gardner, 1983). With regard to the word “multiple”, Mary Ann Christison (1998) in one relevant journal article of hers briefly reported:

Having sketched the criteria for an intelligence, Gardner identified seven intelligences and has since added an eighth. The list is not meant to be final or exhaustive. The point is not the exact number of intelligences, but simply the plurality of the intellect. (p. 2) It would be sensible, then, for the language learners to apply some recommended strategies below (for a more detailed review, see Armstrong, 2009, pp. 72-98) to make the most of their own rainbows of intelligence and hence maximize their chances of learning success: Type of intelligence 5 common strategies of teaching/learning Linguistic Storytelling, brainstorming, tape recording, journal writing, and publishing Logical-Mathematical Calculations and quantifications, classifications and categorizations, Socratic questioning, heuristics, and science thinking Spatial Visualization, color cues, picture metaphors, idea sketching, and graphic symbols Bodily-kinesthetic Body answers, classroom theater, kinesthetic concepts, hands-on thinking, and body maps Musical Rhythms, songs, raps, and chants, discographies, supermemory music, musical concepts, and mood music Interpersonal Peer sharing, people sculptures, cooperative groups, board games, and simulations Intrapersonal One-minute reflection periods, personal connections, choice time, feeling-toned moments, and goal-setting sessions Naturalist Nature walks, windows onto learning, plants as props, pet-in-the-classroom, and eco-study Figure 1. Learning strategies for multiple intelligences - Adapted from Armstrong, T. (2009). Multiple intelligences in the classroom (3rd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

         In the second place, according to Dunn (1983, 1984),Reinert (1976) and Noel (2008), learners rarely select one form of channel when learning a second language, but rather a combination of more than one orientations. While visual learners prefer to have information presented visually, with pictures, flow charts, diagrams, and so forth, auditory learners tend to listen to lectures, make audiotapes; kinesthetic persons involve themselves in experiential learning, that is, total physical response with a learning situation; and tactile learners prefer hands-on activities, such as building models or touching the realia. Obviously, different students have different learning styles and prefer different modalities of learning, thus when their various needs are properly catered for, they are likely to learn better.
         At the same time, it is suggested by most researchers and educators, namely Davis et al. (1994), Oxford (1994), Murphy et al. (2004), that the ESL learners ought to be encouraged not only stick with the tips and strategies that matched their favourite learning channel, but to try the resources and activities from the other lists as well. In this case, it turned out that too much of a good thing could become a bad thing, which fits the phenomenon of “overroutinisation” to be avoided in teaching as well as in learning (Prabhu, 1990, p. 174). It is therefore vital that the successful language learners never restricts themselves to one favourite strategy only, excluding all others, as the author put it for a title of his article, 'There is no one best method, and no one method that is best for a particular context’ (ibid., p. 161).
           To cut the long story short, if a language learner wants to succeed, he/she should be one who is firm enough to tide over any difficulties that the process ensues, to stick to what he/she sets out to do at the beginning; a successful language learner is one who is flexible enough to make any necessary and timely changes in the way they learn their mother tongue, to adapt not only to the diversity that a new language environment offers, but to their own needs of intelligence types and learning styles as well; firmness and flexibility have prove to be the key elements to master another language through empirical verification as well as personal experience. The so-called “best strategy” for a successful language learner would be more impairing than empowering.

External factors

Teachers

According to Wilen, Hutchison, and Ishler (2008), students are able to be motivated by various instructional approaches. That is to say, when teachers flexibly use a variety of instructions, students can maintain their attention and increase their achievement. In addition, Truong (2002) points out that the way a teacher treats his/her students will also affect the students’ motivation.

Family

Among factors that have effects on extrinsic motivation, parents play a key role. According to Truong (2002), the attitude of parents towards the culture of target language community may either positively or negatively affects students’ motivation. In addition, if parents pay enough attention to students’ learning, their children may be motivated to get the best results.

Gardner (1985, as cited in Noels, 2001) claims that parental support is not directly related to achievement in the L2 but related to the willingness to persist at language study.

See also

• Individual variation in second language acquisition
• Interlanguage

References

• Griffiths, Carol, ed. (2008). Lessons from Good Language Learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521718141. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Hymes, D. (1972). "On communicative competence". In Pride, J. B.; Holmes, Janet (eds.). Sociolinguistics. Harmondsworth, U.K.: Penguin. pp. 269–293. ISBN 978-0140806656. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Johnson, Keith (1999). "Good language learner studies". Encyclopedic Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers. pp. 141–142. ISBN 9780631227670. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Littlewood, William (1981). Communicative Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521281546. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Naiman, N. (1978). The Good Language Learner. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. ISBN 9780774401517. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Norton, Bonny; Toohey, Kelleen (2001). "Changing perspectives on good language learners" (PDF). TESOL Quarterly. 35 (2): 307–322. Retrieved June 8, 2011. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Rubin, Joan (1975). "What the "Good Language Learner" Can Teach Us". TESOL Quarterly. 9 (1): 41–51. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Sewell, H. Douglas (2003-11-15). "The Good Language Learner" (PDF). Birmingham University. Retrieved 2011-03-07. {{cite web}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Skehan, Peter (1989). Individual Differences in Second-Language Learning. London: E. Arnold. ISBN 9780713166026. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Stern, H. H. (March 1975). "What Can We Learn from the Good Language Learner?". Canadian Modern Language Review. 31 (4): 304–318. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link)
• Thompson, Sandee (April 2005). "The 'Good Language Learner'" (PDF). Birmingham University. Retrieved 2011-03-07. {{cite web}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link)
• Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0674576285. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Widdowson, H. G. (1978). Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0194370776. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)