Young learners and the motivational theories. Summary
Nov 7, 2016 1:09:43 GMT 8
Aaron David Screaton FTM likes this
Post by ellen on Nov 7, 2016 1:09:43 GMT 8
The article highlights various motivational studies and concentrates on the development of motivational theories throughout the last few decades. The paper starts by reviewing a few publications regarding the motivations of L2 learners in general; it then moves to discuss L2 motivational models for young learners in particular.
The first theory mentioned is Gardener’s and Lambert’s model of integrative orientation which was focused mainly on the socio-psychological variables of L2 language learning. The model was criticized later for neglecting of such factors as various intrinsic and extrinsic orientations of learners towards L2 learning, the age of the students and so on.
Later studies of the cognitive-situated period pay more attention to the learning context and the learner. These studies focus on the effect that the teacher, the content, and classroom tasks have on motivation. Even though the theories of this period were focused on the intrinsic motivation of the language classroom and provided a more comprehensive understanding of the motivational forces exerted upon the learner, they rather treated the orientations of learners as static, unchanging factors. Further studies have questioned this approach, in particular, the work of Ema Ushioda where she discussed the changes in motivation during the language learning. Her theory showed that positive experiences in the classroom on the early stages of language learning might motivate the process of engaging in learning rather than specific goals. Studies mentioned here make us think of differences in motivations that adults and young learners have and how those motivational forces are changing in the process of learning.
The article then discusses L2 motivation self-system which suggests that learners have an imaginary ‘ideal L2self’ and ‘ought-to L2 self’. The analysis of this model given in the paper shows that the idea of the ‘ideal L2self’ can hardly be applicable for early years’ learners as they usually don’t possess a vision of their future self. Also, the author argues that young learners are unaware of what they should be doing to please the parents, so the ‘ought-to L2 self’ idea is not applicable for young learners either.
The author then analyses the theories discussed in the paper and moves to a conclusion that positive experiences in early years can lead to a more developed motivation to study an L2.
Personally, I think that to consider learners’ views, motivations, experiences, and expectations of English learning is a high priority task for any teacher. The paper resonates with my experience. Those students who have had an unpleasant experience in the classroom and became unwilling to come to English class again (crying and stomping their feet in the lobby) is a perfect example of the statement that classroom environment and experiences can have a strong effect on learners’ motivation in future. The content of the article is of great importance for teachers also because it shows the role of the teacher in the classroom and the necessity of deep reflection on the needs of students and detailed preparation for classes.
The first theory mentioned is Gardener’s and Lambert’s model of integrative orientation which was focused mainly on the socio-psychological variables of L2 language learning. The model was criticized later for neglecting of such factors as various intrinsic and extrinsic orientations of learners towards L2 learning, the age of the students and so on.
Later studies of the cognitive-situated period pay more attention to the learning context and the learner. These studies focus on the effect that the teacher, the content, and classroom tasks have on motivation. Even though the theories of this period were focused on the intrinsic motivation of the language classroom and provided a more comprehensive understanding of the motivational forces exerted upon the learner, they rather treated the orientations of learners as static, unchanging factors. Further studies have questioned this approach, in particular, the work of Ema Ushioda where she discussed the changes in motivation during the language learning. Her theory showed that positive experiences in the classroom on the early stages of language learning might motivate the process of engaging in learning rather than specific goals. Studies mentioned here make us think of differences in motivations that adults and young learners have and how those motivational forces are changing in the process of learning.
The article then discusses L2 motivation self-system which suggests that learners have an imaginary ‘ideal L2self’ and ‘ought-to L2 self’. The analysis of this model given in the paper shows that the idea of the ‘ideal L2self’ can hardly be applicable for early years’ learners as they usually don’t possess a vision of their future self. Also, the author argues that young learners are unaware of what they should be doing to please the parents, so the ‘ought-to L2 self’ idea is not applicable for young learners either.
The author then analyses the theories discussed in the paper and moves to a conclusion that positive experiences in early years can lead to a more developed motivation to study an L2.
Personally, I think that to consider learners’ views, motivations, experiences, and expectations of English learning is a high priority task for any teacher. The paper resonates with my experience. Those students who have had an unpleasant experience in the classroom and became unwilling to come to English class again (crying and stomping their feet in the lobby) is a perfect example of the statement that classroom environment and experiences can have a strong effect on learners’ motivation in future. The content of the article is of great importance for teachers also because it shows the role of the teacher in the classroom and the necessity of deep reflection on the needs of students and detailed preparation for classes.