Why Motivation Is Key for Second Language Learning Success
Why student motivation is key to foreign language learning success
Author: Christopher Merrifield
August 2008
"Acquisition requires meaningful interaction in the target language - natural communication - in which speakers are concerned not with the form of their utterances but with the messages they are conveying and understanding." Stephen Krashen.
The principles of L2 teaching philosophy has greatly changed from the ancient principles of the Grammar-Translation approach historically used for teaching Greek and Latin. All the teaching philosophies and subsequent methodologies are reactions to this limited due to three major drawbacks
1) L1 is translated to L2 which is highly inaccurate losing much of the sociocultural detail resulting in parrot fashion language production
2) Low exposure to the target langugue. No teaching is done in the target language meaning there is very little L2 exposure. Students don’t relate to the language well. There is no phatic communion taught.
3) Motivation. The classroom is difficult and stressful. Meaning little motivation.
4) Testing method. Students are assumed to have learned well when they can translate a text to their native language. This is a poor way to learn, translation doesn’t necessarily mean a student can produce or understand the language. Rather it means the student has a good memory! - Thuleen(1996)
Although this may seem to be out of place in today’s learning environment one should be reminded that this ancient philosophy of teaching has seen major success in oriental countries such as China, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan but this is arguably a cultural conditioning. However these countries via this method have found some success and great success in some cases putting serious contradiction to modern methods such as the Communicative AKA Functional-Notional Approach by Finocchiaro and Brumfit (1983), Total Physical Response by Asher (1979) and Community Language Learning by Curran and Charles
Author: Christopher Merrifield
August 2008
"Acquisition requires meaningful interaction in the target language - natural communication - in which speakers are concerned not with the form of their utterances but with the messages they are conveying and understanding." Stephen Krashen.
The principles of L2 teaching philosophy has greatly changed from the ancient principles of the Grammar-Translation approach historically used for teaching Greek and Latin. All the teaching philosophies and subsequent methodologies are reactions to this limited due to three major drawbacks
1) L1 is translated to L2 which is highly inaccurate losing much of the sociocultural detail resulting in parrot fashion language production
2) Low exposure to the target langugue. No teaching is done in the target language meaning there is very little L2 exposure. Students don’t relate to the language well. There is no phatic communion taught.
3) Motivation. The classroom is difficult and stressful. Meaning little motivation.
4) Testing method. Students are assumed to have learned well when they can translate a text to their native language. This is a poor way to learn, translation doesn’t necessarily mean a student can produce or understand the language. Rather it means the student has a good memory! - Thuleen(1996)
Although this may seem to be out of place in today’s learning environment one should be reminded that this ancient philosophy of teaching has seen major success in oriental countries such as China, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan but this is arguably a cultural conditioning. However these countries via this method have found some success and great success in some cases putting serious contradiction to modern methods such as the Communicative AKA Functional-Notional Approach by Finocchiaro and Brumfit (1983), Total Physical Response by Asher (1979) and Community Language Learning by Curran and Charles
References: Asher, James J, (1979) Learning Another Language Through Actions. San Jose, California: AccuPrint,. Bruner, J (1966). Toward a Theory of Instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Bruner, J (1973). Going Beyond the Information Given. New York: Norton. Curran. & Charles A. (1976) Counseling-Learning in Second Languages. Apple River, Illinois: Apple River Press. Chomsky, N. (1968). Language and Mind publ. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York, MacMillan. Dollinger, Stephen J. Greening, Leilani. Radtake, Robert C. (2001). Vol. 30. Personality and individual differences: Reading too much between the lines : illusory correlation and the word association implications test. England, & Grosse (1995). Speaking of Business - Functional use of language 'plan and give speeches '. Finocchiaro, M. & Brumfit, C. (1983). The Functional-Notional Approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Fred, Genese. (2000). Brain Research: Implications for second language learning. McGill University. U.S. Dept. of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Library of Education. Hinkel, E. (1999). Culture in second language teaching and learning. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Krashen, Stephen D. (1987). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Prentice-Hall International. Krashen, S.D. & Terrel, T.D. (1983). The Natural Approach: Language acquisition in the Classroom. Piaget, J. (1972). Development and learning. In LAVATTELLY, C. S. e STENDLER, F. Reading in child behavior anddevelopment. New York: Hartcourt Brace Janovich, Skehan, P Skinner, Burrhus Frederick. (1957). Verbal Behavior, Acton, Massachusetts: Copley Publishing Group, pp. 1 Snow, C.E Stern S. (1980). Drama in second language learning from a psycholinguistic perspective. Language learning 30(1): 77 – 97 Stern, Paul, C Stewart, E. (1972). p.16. American cultural patterns: A cross cultural perspective. Yarmouth, ME Intercultural Press. Thuleen, Nancy. (1996). "The Grammar-Translation Method." Website Article. 24 October 1996. . Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Vygotsky, L. S. (1985). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: The M.I.T. Press.